This media feed generated by the Geofeed at http://geofeedr.com/New-York-City. Media credits are posted below each item.

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: United States Courthouse http://flic.kr/p/9cJKaK Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. This imposing-neo-classical skyscraper, begun in 1933, was the last building designed by the noted American architect Cass Gilbert, who died in 1934 while the courthouse was under construction. It was completed by his son, Cass Gilbert, Jr. Gilbert was born in 1853 in Zanesville, Ohio, studied at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and then joined the prestigious firm of McKim, Mead & White as Stanford White's personal assistant. In 1882, he left New York to open his own architectural office in St. Paul, Minnesota, where his best known work was the State Capitol, designed in 1896 and completed in 1903. After he won the competition of 1905 for the United States Custom House at Bowling Green—now a designated New York City Landmark—he moved back to this city. With the completion of the Woolworth Building in 1913—then and for many years the tallest building in the world—he gained international fame. The innovations necessary for the construction of such a high building reflected his lifelong interest in structural techniques. Among his best known later buildings are the West Virginia State Capitol, the Detroit Public Library, the United States Chamber of Commerce and the United States Supreme Court in Washington, D. C., the New York County Lawyers' Association Building, another New York City Landmark, and the New York Life Insurance Building. Gilbert felt that the key to good architecture was proportion. By this he meant not only the ratio of various elements to each other, but also the amount of decoration, and a style that was appropriate to the building's function. It was not then considered inappropriate for a commercial skyscraper, such as the Woolworth Building, to be a neo-Gothic structure—it was, after all, a "cathedral of commerce"—but it was generally assumed that a government building, such as a state capitol or a courthouse, should be classical in style. This solution to the problem of the skyscraper worked very well in the design of the United States Courthouse. As seen from a distance, it is the tower of the building, with its golden pyramidal roof, that dominates. From Foley Square, the monumental colonnade at the entrance is the dominant architectural feature, in the tradition of the adjoining New York County Courthouse and the Municipal Building. Interestingly enough, this colonnade theme is repeated in the arrangement of stilts supporting the new annex to the United States Courthouse located on Police Plaza. Following the principles of classical architecture, the building is divided into three parts, reflecting the principal features of a column: the base, the shaft, and the capital. The base of the courthouse Is irregularly shaped, express ing the shape of the lot. The back of the building, toward Cardinal Place, is rounded, and the facades on Pearl Street and Police Plaza each have a pair of engaged columns flanked by pilasters. These are all narrow streets, however, and it is the colonnaded portico on the Foley Square front of the building that forms the visual base of the entire composition. Here, the building projects slightly forward, emphasizing the base in relation to the shaft or tower above it. The portico, approached by a broad flight of steps, is supported by a colonnade consisting of ten four-story high unfluted Corinthian columns and is flanked by piers framed by pilasters. A frieze above bears the Inscription "United States Court House." This entablature, adorned with guilloche motifs above the piers t each end, is surmounted by a dentiled cornice and a low attic story pierced by square windows separated by carved pilasters. At each end of the attic story there is a man's head carved in bas-relief. A bronze flagpole rises above the Reenter of this base section of the building. The square main tower is set back from this base and rises twenty stories above it. The first sixteen stories are given vertical emphasis by the shafts on each side, which separate the tiers of windows. The windows are separated horizontally from each other by rectangular spandrel panels. Surmounting the seventeenth story, a dentiled cornice sets off the three stories above it, which are treated as a unit. The lowest of these three floors, with small square windows, acts as a visual base for the other two which have high round-arched windows surmounted by small square ones, separated and enhanced by two-story pilasters. The end bays at the corners are of solid masonry pierced by slit windows. This section is crowned by a pierced stone parapet with urns at the corners emphasizing the setback of the tower section above it. The setback portion, supporting the pyramidal roof, rises behind the parapet and in its enrichment may be considered the capital of the columnar form. Five bays on each side provide depth: the windows are separated by three-story high, engaged Ionic columns with paired pilasters lending solidity to the corners. A shallow cornice and low attic story crowns the topmost section of the tower with eagles at the corners connected by simple low parapets. These elements form the' base for the pyramidal roof which is adorned with gold leaf. At the base of the roof, a small pedimented dormer lends emphasis at the center of each side, while three tiers of diminutive dormers adorn the upper portions of the sides. The pyramidal roof is crowned by a small gold-leafed lantern which has a railing at its base and is crowned by corner finials and a steep roof with an oblong finial. FINDINGS AND DESIGNATIONS On the basis of a careful consideration of the history, the architecture and other features of this building, the Landmarks Preservation Commission finds that the United States Courthouse has a special character, special historical and aesthetic interest and value as part of the development, heritage and cultural characteristics of New York City. The Commission further finds that, among its important qualities, the United States Courthouse is one of the most imposing skyscrapers of the 1930s, that it was designed in the neo-classical governmental style of the period by the architect Cass Gilbert, best remembered for the Woolworth Building, that the main shaft of the courthouse rises above an impressive portico which provides an architectural focus for Foley Square, and that it is in the tradition of the adjoining government buildings, the New York County Courthouse and the Municipal Building. - From the 1975 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: United States Courthouse http://flic.kr/p/9cMQh7 Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. This imposing-neo-classical skyscraper, begun in 1933, was the last building designed by the noted American architect Cass Gilbert, who died in 1934 while the courthouse was under construction. It was completed by his son, Cass Gilbert, Jr. Gilbert was born in 1853 in Zanesville, Ohio, studied at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and then joined the prestigious firm of McKim, Mead & White as Stanford White's personal assistant. In 1882, he left New York to open his own architectural office in St. Paul, Minnesota, where his best known work was the State Capitol, designed in 1896 and completed in 1903. After he won the competition of 1905 for the United States Custom House at Bowling Green—now a designated New York City Landmark—he moved back to this city. With the completion of the Woolworth Building in 1913—then and for many years the tallest building in the world—he gained international fame. The innovations necessary for the construction of such a high building reflected his lifelong interest in structural techniques. Among his best known later buildings are the West Virginia State Capitol, the Detroit Public Library, the United States Chamber of Commerce and the United States Supreme Court in Washington, D. C., the New York County Lawyers' Association Building, another New York City Landmark, and the New York Life Insurance Building. Gilbert felt that the key to good architecture was proportion. By this he meant not only the ratio of various elements to each other, but also the amount of decoration, and a style that was appropriate to the building's function. It was not then considered inappropriate for a commercial skyscraper, such as the Woolworth Building, to be a neo-Gothic structure—it was, after all, a "cathedral of commerce"—but it was generally assumed that a government building, such as a state capitol or a courthouse, should be classical in style. This solution to the problem of the skyscraper worked very well in the design of the United States Courthouse. As seen from a distance, it is the tower of the building, with its golden pyramidal roof, that dominates. From Foley Square, the monumental colonnade at the entrance is the dominant architectural feature, in the tradition of the adjoining New York County Courthouse and the Municipal Building. Interestingly enough, this colonnade theme is repeated in the arrangement of stilts supporting the new annex to the United States Courthouse located on Police Plaza. Following the principles of classical architecture, the building is divided into three parts, reflecting the principal features of a column: the base, the shaft, and the capital. The base of the courthouse Is irregularly shaped, express ing the shape of the lot. The back of the building, toward Cardinal Place, is rounded, and the facades on Pearl Street and Police Plaza each have a pair of engaged columns flanked by pilasters. These are all narrow streets, however, and it is the colonnaded portico on the Foley Square front of the building that forms the visual base of the entire composition. Here, the building projects slightly forward, emphasizing the base in relation to the shaft or tower above it. The portico, approached by a broad flight of steps, is supported by a colonnade consisting of ten four-story high unfluted Corinthian columns and is flanked by piers framed by pilasters. A frieze above bears the Inscription "United States Court House." This entablature, adorned with guilloche motifs above the piers t each end, is surmounted by a dentiled cornice and a low attic story pierced by square windows separated by carved pilasters. At each end of the attic story there is a man's head carved in bas-relief. A bronze flagpole rises above the Reenter of this base section of the building. The square main tower is set back from this base and rises twenty stories above it. The first sixteen stories are given vertical emphasis by the shafts on each side, which separate the tiers of windows. The windows are separated horizontally from each other by rectangular spandrel panels. Surmounting the seventeenth story, a dentiled cornice sets off the three stories above it, which are treated as a unit. The lowest of these three floors, with small square windows, acts as a visual base for the other two which have high round-arched windows surmounted by small square ones, separated and enhanced by two-story pilasters. The end bays at the corners are of solid masonry pierced by slit windows. This section is crowned by a pierced stone parapet with urns at the corners emphasizing the setback of the tower section above it. The setback portion, supporting the pyramidal roof, rises behind the parapet and in its enrichment may be considered the capital of the columnar form. Five bays on each side provide depth: the windows are separated by three-story high, engaged Ionic columns with paired pilasters lending solidity to the corners. A shallow cornice and low attic story crowns the topmost section of the tower with eagles at the corners connected by simple low parapets. These elements form the' base for the pyramidal roof which is adorned with gold leaf. At the base of the roof, a small pedimented dormer lends emphasis at the center of each side, while three tiers of diminutive dormers adorn the upper portions of the sides. The pyramidal roof is crowned by a small gold-leafed lantern which has a railing at its base and is crowned by corner finials and a steep roof with an oblong finial. FINDINGS AND DESIGNATIONS On the basis of a careful consideration of the history, the architecture and other features of this building, the Landmarks Preservation Commission finds that the United States Courthouse has a special character, special historical and aesthetic interest and value as part of the development, heritage and cultural characteristics of New York City. The Commission further finds that, among its important qualities, the United States Courthouse is one of the most imposing skyscrapers of the 1930s, that it was designed in the neo-classical governmental style of the period by the architect Cass Gilbert, best remembered for the Woolworth Building, that the main shaft of the courthouse rises above an impressive portico which provides an architectural focus for Foley Square, and that it is in the tradition of the adjoining government buildings, the New York County Courthouse and the Municipal Building. - From the 1975 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Municipal Building http://flic.kr/p/9cMQPA Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The Municipal Building is an impressive Classical skyscraper, rising to a height of 25 stories with a tower above. It represents an effort made by the City, through the use of noted architects and sculptors, to achieve an imposing building of real beauty. The great freestanding screen of columns across the front, enframing a Classical triumphal arch, is truly monumental in scale. This large building is ingeniously designed to bridge Chambers Street by means of a handsome barrel-vaulted passageway. It also is notable that such a large building has been able to utilize such a small site so effectively. The open area at the south Side, where the building is raised on stilts, equals in concept many contemporary structures. The Commission finds that, among its important qualities, the Municipal Building is a handsome structure built with fine materials and having many beautiful details, that it represents a bold solution of a difficult problem where a limited site is utilized to best advantage, while providing great openness at ground floor level and a splendid passage for Chambers Street through the building, and that the Municipal Building is one of the few monumental skyscrapers of the early part of the Twentieth Century. - From the 1966 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Potter Building http://flic.kr/p/9cMPyQ Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Summary The eleven-story Potter Building was commissioned by Orlando B. Potter, a prominent figure in New York politics with prime commercial real estate holdings in Manhattan, and constructed in 1883-86 to the design ofN.G. Starkweather, an architect who had formerly practiced in Baltimore and Washington, D.C. Built to replace Potter's World Building, destroyed by fire in January 1882, the Potter Building had the most advanced fireproofing then available. With its vertically-expressed design executed in red brick and brownstone-colored terra cotta above a cast-iron-clad base, and picturesque, flamboyant fusion of Queen Anne, neo-Grec, Renaissance Revival, and Colonial Revival motifs, the Potter Building was distinguished stylistically from most downtown buildings. Several aspects of the Potter Building make it today one of New York's most significant surviving tall office buildings of the period prior to the full development of the skyscraper. Its brickwork is among the handsomest in New York City. An early building to employ extensive exterior architectural terra cotta, it is a rare survivor of that period of development of terra cotta in New York. The highly sculpted terra cotta, produced by the Boston Terra Cotta Co., was employed in a notable "constructive" manner in the loadbearing walls. The Potter Building is also an important surviving example of a New York office building with interior framing mostly of iron, as well as one of the earliest surviving examples of an office building having a C-shaped plan with a major light court facing the street. Its significance is enhanced by the fact that its original design is nearly intact (except for alterations to the commercial base and light court), and its visibility is heightened by its prominent location facing City Hall Park and by its three fully articulated facades. Orlando B. Potter Orlando Bronson Potter commissioned the Potter Building in 1882. A Massachusetts lawyer, Potter (1823-1894) moved to New York City in 1853 to assist in the development of a sewing machine business; he was president of the Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Co. until 1876. A prominent figure in New York Democratic politics, he achieved recognition by developing a plan for a national banking system and currency that was adopted by Congress in 1863, served as a U.S. Representative in 1883-85, and was a member of the Rapid Transit Commission in 1890-94. Potter became extremely wealthy, due largely to his commercial real estate holdings in Manhattan (worth an estimated six million dollars at his death) upon which he concentrated after 1876. Besides purchasing existing structures, Potter commissioned a number of notable buildings, among them: 444 Lafayette Street (1875-76, Griffith Thomas); 746-750 Broadway (1881-83, Starkweather & Gibbs); Potter Building (1883-86, N.G. Starkweather), 35-38 Park Row; 808 Broadway (1888, Renwick, Aspinwall & Russell), adjacent to Grace Church; and 4-8 Astor Place (1890, Francis H. Kimball). In 1886, Potter founded the New York Architectural Terra Cotta Co. with his son-in-law Walter Geer. At the time of his sudden death in January 1894, Potter was thought to have been the wealthiest man in New York City to have died intestate. The Architect The Potter Building was designed by Norris Garshom Starkweather. Born in Vermont the son of a farmer-carpenter, N.G. Starkweather (18181885) was apprenticed to a builder in 1830 and fifteen years later became a contractor on his own in Massachusetts. By the mid-1840s he had established an architectural practice, moving by the mid-1850s to Philadelphia where he specialized in church designs. The construction of the Gothic Revival style First Presbyterian Church (1854-59; spire completed 1874 by Edmund G. Lind), Baltimore, Starkweather's finest church, was apparently the reason for his relocation to Baltimore in 1856. The 273-foot spire of the church, built of masonry, necessitated "the most massive and scientifically arranged iron framework ever done in this country, or in any other, to our knowledge," according to a contemporary account.5 Achieving some renown for his ecclesiastical and institutional commissions in the Gothic Revival, Italianate, and Romanesque Revival styles, Starkweather also designed some of the most notable Italianate style villas in Maryland and Virginia.6 By 1860 he opened an office in Washington, D.C., and after the Civil War became the partner of Thomas M. Plowman in the architectural and engineering firm of Starkweather & Plowman (1868-71). Starkweather continued to be listed in Washington directories until 1881, though nothing is known of his career during the period following the Panic of 1873. His letterhead in 1877 read "Architect, Engineer, and Superintendent, All kinds of House Decorations Promptly Attended to." Baltimore architect George Frederick reminisced that "after an erratic career . . . [Starkweather] moved to New York." Arriving in New York City by the middle of 1880, Starkweather was a partner of Robert Napier Anderson in the firm of Starkweather & Anderson, "architects and superintendents," at 106 Broadway. From 1881 until about 1884 he was the partner of Charles E. Gibbs; the office of Starkweather & Gibbs in 1881 was in the World Building, owned by O.B. Potter, at 37 Park Row. Besides the Potter Building, only two other commissions by Starkweather in New York City are known, both with Gibbs: the previously-mentioned 746-750 Broadway (1881-83), also for Potter, and the Second Avenue Methodist Episcopal Church (1882-83, demolished) at 321 East 118th Street, a Victorian Gothic style composition with flanking asymmetrical towers, executed in brick and terra cotta. Starkweather died in New York in December 1885, prior to the completion of the Potter Building, and was buried in Bridgeport, Conn. The Tall Office Building in New York City in the 1880s During the nineteenth century, commercial buildings in New York City developed from four-story structures modeled on Italian Renaissance palazzi to much taller skyscrapers. Made possible by technological advances, tall buildings challenged designers to fashion an appropriate architectural expression. Between 1870 and 1890, nine- and ten-story buildings transformed the streetscapes of lower Manhattan between Bowling Green and City Hall. During the building boom following the Civil War, building envelopes continued to be articulated largely according to traditional palazzo compositions, with mansarded and towered roof profiles. The period of the late 1870s and 1880s was one of stylistic experimentation in which commercial and office buildings in New York incorporated diverse influences, such as the Queen Anne, Victorian Gothic, Romanesque, and neo-Grec styles, French rationalism, and the German Rundbogenstil, under the leadership of such architects as Richard M. Hunt and George B. Post. New York's tallest buildings — including the seven-and-one-half-story Equitable Life Assurance Co. Building (186870, Gilman & Kendall and George B. Post) at Broadway and Cedar Street, the ten-story Western Union Building (1872-75, George B. Post) at Broadway and Liberty Street, and the ten-story Tribune Building (1873-75, Richard M. Hunt) on Park Row, all now demolished — incorporated passenger elevators, iron floor beams, and fireproof building materials. Cage construction, employed in the 1880s in tall buildings in New York and Chicago, was characterized by the Record and Guide as "a frame work of iron or steel columns and girders which carry the floors only, and do not carry the outer walls. In the cage construction the outer walls are independent walls, from the foundation to the extreme top, sustaining themselves only, and therefore, the walls are made less in thickness than if they had to bear the floors as in ordinary buildings such walls would have to do."12 Ever taller skyscrapers were permitted by the increasing use and refinement of the metal skeleton frame, in which the metal columns and girders support both the floors and the outer (curtain) walls.13 In addition, several hybrid structural forms were used in tall buildings, such as the combination of both masonry and metal for interior vertical supports. Fireproofing was of paramount concern as office buildings grew taller, and by 1881-82 systems had been devised to "completely fireproof' them. While tall buildings in New York City often had interior light courts,15 George B. Post is credited as one of the first architects to introduce and popularize major light courts that faced the street, a solution to providing office towers with maximum light and air, in the Post Building (1880-81, demolished), 16-18 Exchange Place, and Mills Building (1881-83, demolished), 59 Exchange Place, both of which had C-shaped plans.16 The Potter Building utilized the successful design, construction, fireproofing, and planning techniques of these earlier buildings. Park Row: "Newspaper Row" The vicinity of Park Row, Nassau Street, and Printing House Square,18 roughly from the Brooklyn Bridge to Ann Street, was the center of newspaper publishing in New York City from the 1840s through the 1920s, while Beekman Street became the center of the downtown printing industry. Beginning in the 1870s, this area was redeveloped with tall office buildings, most associated with the newspapers, and Park Row (with its advantageous frontage across from City Hall Park and the U.S. Post Office) and adjacent Nassau Street acquired a series of important late-nineteenth-century structures: Tribune Building (1873-75, Richard M. Hunt, demolished), 154-170 Nassau Street; Morse Building (1878-80, Silliman & Farnsworth; 1900-02, Bannister & Schell), 140 Nassau Street; Temple Court Building (1881-83, Silliman & Farnsworth; 1889-90, James Farnsworth), 7 Beekman Street; Potter Building (1883-86); New York Times Building (1888-89, George B. Post; 1904-05, Robert Maynicke), 40 Park Row; World (Pulitzer) Building (1889-90, George B. Post, demolished), 53-63 Park Row; American Tract Society Building (1894-95, R.H. Robertson), 150 Nassau Street; and Park Row Building (1896-99, R.H. Robertson), 15 Park Row. Construction of the Potter Building The Potter Building's lot, at Park Row and Beekman Street, had been the location of the Brick Presbyterian Church (1767, John McComb, Sr.). When the church built a new edifice uptown, the church site was divided into two lots; the building erected on the northern lot housed the New York Times. Orlando B. Potter, with Boston friends John and Uriah Ritchie, purchased the southern lot in 1857 for around $350,000, and put up a five-story Italianate style stone structure (first known as the Park Building) that became the home of the New York World (founded in 1860). Potter became the sole owner of this building in 1867.22 Destroyed by a fire on January 31, 1882, in which several people died, the World Building (as it was then known) "made itself notorious the country over for burning up in the shortest time on record."23 The Real Estate Record & Guide speculated that "the ground is so valuable that it will no doubt be immediately built upon, and a structure will take its place that will vie with the several superb buildings in its neighborhood."24 Potter, understandably determined to replace the World Building with a structure having the most advanced fireproofing then available, had suffered heavy financial loss in the fire.25 The Record & Guide announced on February 18, 1882, that Mr. O.B. Potter proposes to erect on the site of the structure so recently destroyed by fire . . . one of the largest office buildings yet erected in New York. Mr. Potter proposes to have this building absolutely fireproof inside as well as outside . . . The building will be eleven stories high, the fronts being constructed of pressed brick and terra cotta . . . It is proposed to fit up the first floor for banking houses, while the upper stories will be devoted to offices for lawyers and general business purposes. It is the intention of the owner to make this structure an ornament to the neighborhood and in keeping with the numerous handsome buildings by which it will be surrounded.26 Costs, however, delayed construction until the next year.27 The Record & Guide finally indicated in April 1883 that foundation work on Potter's building had commenced: "The structure is to be made absolutely fire-proof. A furnace will be put up on the premises to test the various building materials that Mr. Potter has under consideration. Mr. Starkweather's plans have been adopted, and the work will be pushed as rapidly as good building will permit."28 The World Building fire had occurred while Potter's 746-750 Broadway building was under construction, and the firms working on that project were retained for the construction of the Potter Building.29 The day after architect N.G. Starkweather filed his plans for the Potter Building, the New York Times announced that the eleven-story office building, with ground-story commercial spaces, was to cost $700,000, and that "the materials used in the construction of the walls and front will be the best bricks, pressed bricks, terra cotta, and iron . . . The roof and floor beams will be of rolled iron, and all floors, except the basement, will be laid on iron girders."30 The Record & Guide in March 1884 reported that "the Potter building is going forward rapidly."31 Five companies apparently supplied the exterior cast iron and interior structural ironwork for the building (New York City Iron Works, J.M. Duclos & Co., H.W. Adams & Co., Lehigh Iron Co., and Jackson Architectural Iron Works), while Thomas Armstrong was the mason.32 The Fireman's Herald thought that "the new structure will be famous as the result of much thought and many experiments in order to put up an ideal fireproof building, and it will endure for ages . . . The work is not done by contract, but by the day, and every detail undergoes inspection."33 In addition, there was a bricklayers' strike in 1884,34 thus the estimated cost of the project in May 1885 rose to 1.2 million dollars. Construction was completed at the end of June 1886. Today the Potter Building is recognized as an important and rare surviving example of an 1880s fireproofed New York office building with interior framing mostly of iron. The independent exterior brick walls vary in thickness from forty inches on the ground story to twenty inches on the upper stories. Interior hollow cast-iron structural columns are encased in wire netting covered with "lime water," fire brick, and plaster; flanged wrought-iron joists, set into the brick walls, carry wrought-iron beams; flat-arch tile fireproofing ("a specially constructed brick of the best fire-resisting qualities"),35 between and encasing the joists, is coated with plaster; and floors are laid with concrete and pieces of stone and brick. In each of the building's wings (to the east and west of the light court) an interior masonry wall is set perpendicular to the court, for additional floor support and bracing of the building.36 The Fireman's Herald opined that "on the floors and ceilings depend the whole theory and practice of fire-proofing." King's Handbook of New York in 1892 called the Potter Building "one of the most substantially constructed and absolutely fireproof among the office buildings in the metropolis."38 Besides the eleven above-ground stories, the building has two basement stories; four passenger elevators were originally located in a lobby that extended through the north end of the building. Design of the Potter Building The Potter Building, designed by a non-New York architect with a picturesque, flamboyant fusion of Queen Anne, neo-Grec, Renaissance Revival, and Colonial Revival motifs, was distinguished stylistically from most downtown Manhattan office buildings. The vertically- expressed design, executed in red brick and brownstone-colored terra cotta above a cast-ironclad base, is organized by continuous piers flanking paired fenestration. The northernmost bay on both the Park Row and Nassau Street facades is narrower, corresponding functionally to the interior elevator halls. Articulation on all three facades is similar, the walls elaborated by ornamental terracotta capitals, pediments, segmental arches, panels, and corbelling. The building's brickwork, incorporating molding and patterns, is among the handsomest in New York City. The quadrilateral shape of the lot and the acute angle created by the juncture of Park Row and Beekman Street were skillfully adapted into the design, which features a dramatic, colossal three-quarter-round column terminating in a pinnacle on this primary corner. The roofline is further punctuated by finials and broken scroll pediments with urns. Several elements of the Potter Building can be seen in Starkweather's earlier work, such as an overall picturesqueness, exploitation of a dramatic corner, the use of prominent pinnacles and pediments, and elaboration of windows. The Potter Building provided an interesting contrast with its adjacent neighbors, the slightly earlier Temple Court and Morse Buildings. Contemporary comment on the Potter Building was decidedly mixed (as it was with most prominent tall buildings of the late nineteenth century in New York). A critic with the Record & Guide in 1885 was particularly scathing, stating that "there is not an interesting or refined piece of detail in the whole building . . . All the good work that has been done in recent architecture has been thrown away on the designer of the Potter building, which is coarse, pretentious, overloaded and intensely vulgar."39 Interestingly, this critic also viewed unfavorably the verticality of the design (a hallmark of later favorable criticism on the progression of skyscraper design): There is no effort visible anywhere to broaden the fronts and keep them down. There is not an emphatic horizontal line anywhere, with the single exception of the main cornice. Even the demarcation between the principal divisions is not brought out, while the vertical lines are everywhere emphasized so as to make the building look spindling.40 Carpentry and Building in 1885 remarked, how ever, that one of the most conspicuous new buildings in the lower part of New York City is the Potter Building . . . noticeable to the casual visitor particularly on account of its hight [sic], and also on account of the combined use of iron and brick on the outside walls . . . A prominent feature of the building is the extensive use of terra-cotta . . . The front of the principal story and the story immediately above it are of cast iron. Iron trimmings are also used in some of the stories above these, and a judicious combination of iron with brick, and iron with terra-cotta, is a marked feature of the exterior treatment.41 King's Handbook in 1892 thought that "the really noble proportions of the Potter Building, and the impressive character of its architecture, make it one of the great and illustrious monuments of commercial success in the Empire City."42 And in 1899 the History of Architecture and the Building Trades of Greater New York found that the building "as a design is unusual and perhaps excessive in detail, but has great interest in the disposition of its masses." The Potter Building is an early example, and one of the earliest surviving, of a New York office building having a C-shaped plan with a major light court facing the street (here Beekman Street). The Record & Guide noted that the court was "similar to those of the Post and Mills buildings," while the Fireman's Herald thought the building "is so divided that it looks almost like two buildings."44 Today the Potter Building is one of New York's most notable surviving tall office buildings of the period prior to the full development of the skyscraper. Its significance is enhanced by the fact that its original design is nearly intact (except for alterations to the commercial base and light court). Its visibility is heightened by its prominent location on Park Row facing City Hall Park and by its three fully articulated facades. The Potter Building and Architectural Terra Cotta in New York City While there were several attempts in the 1850s to employ terra cotta for architectural ornament in New York,46 it was after the Chicago and Boston fires of 1871-72 that terra cotta began to be used as a significant interior and exterior building material in the United States. Walter Geer observed that "by these fires it was conclusively demonstrated that fire-proof buildings could not be made of unprotected stone or iron, and that only brick and terra-cotta walls were practically fire-proof. This increased use of brick work, and of terra-cotta as a constructive and decorative material in connection with brick work, revived the demand for the manufacture of this material in or near New York."47 Advantages seen in terra cotta for both exterior architectural ornament and interior fireproofing included its fireproof properties, strength, durability, lower cost and weight in shipping and handling, the relative ease w ith which elaborate decoration could be molded, and the retention over time of crisp ornamental profiles compared to stone. In the 1870s and early 1880s architectural terra cotta was often a color that matched stone (commonly brownstone, buff or red) that could be employed in pleasant juxtaposition with brick, or as a substitute for brownstone. The Record & Guide remarked that during this period "terra cotta is most generally used for the trimming and ornamentation of buildings, taking the form of panels, courses, friezes, small tiles, roofing tiles and paving blocks." George B. Post was the leader in New York City in the use of exterior terra cotta, in his designs for the Braem House (1878-80, demolished), 15 East 37th Street;49 Long Island Historical Society (1878-81), 128 Pierrepont Street, Brooklyn, for which a contemporary said "the material has been employed, for the first time in the United States, both for the building material and for all decorative details";50 New York Produce Exchange (1881-84, demolished), 2 Broadway; and Mills Building. Among other contemporary architects who employed terra cotta were Silliman & Farnsworth, in the Morse Building, then considered the first prominent New York office building to employ exterior terra cotta (though it was used sparingly for architectural details, in conjunction with molded red and black brick), and Temple Court Building; and Kimball & Wisedell, designers of the Casino Theater (1881-82, demolished), 1400 Broadway, an early New York building having highly intricate, exotic terra-cotta ornament. The Potter Building was an early and significant building to employ extensive exterior architectural terra cotta. (King's Handbook in 1892 claimed, inaccurately, that it was "the first building erected in this city which was elaborately o rname nted w ith te rra c otta."51) To day the building is a rare survivor of that period of development of terra cotta in New York. The terra cotta on the Potter Building, highly sculpted in comparison to the lower relief terra-cotta panels and more judicious use of terra cotta found more typically on contemporary buildings, was produced by the Boston Terra Cotta Co.52 One of the first terra cotta firms on the East Coast, the Boston company featured the Potter Building in its 1885 catalogue, declaring that the terra cotta was "used constructively -- fully demonstrating the great bearing strength (when properly set) of the work made by the Boston Terra Cotta Co." The term "constructively" refers to the manner in which the terra cotta was fully integrated into the exterior brick bearing walls of the Potter Building. Some 540 tons of terra cotta were employed in the Potter Building, which was further called in 1888 an example of the best use of terra-cotta, both for constructive and ornamental purposes . . . No building yet erected in this country is more solidly constructed, and the weight supported by the piers and arches is simply enormous. If stone had been used in place of terra-cotta, the weight to be supported would have been more than doubled, and the risk and cost of handling would have been greatly increased, to say nothing about the first-cost of stone work, as heavily carved and richly ornamented as the terra-cotta work used in this building.5 James Taylor (1839-1898), "the father of American terra cotta,"55 was superintendent of the Boston Terra Cotta Co. during construction of the Potter Building. First rising to superintendent of J.M. Blashfield's terra cotta works in Stamford, England, Taylor left and later superintended the Chicago Terra-Cotta Works in 1870-76, the period during which Chicago was the leading location for American terra cotta manufacturing. He advised the establishment of the A. Hall & Sons Fire Brick Works in 1877 (Perth Amboy Terra Cotta Co. after 1879) in New Jersey. After the owner of the Chicago firm collaborated with the Boston Fire Brick Co. after 1876, to meet the demand for terra cotta on the East Coast, this plant subsequently became the Boston Terra Cotta Co. in 1880 and Taylor became superintendent there. Geer reported that Taylor "was frequently in New York supervising the setting of the terra cotta [for the Potter Building], and had numerous opportunities of meeting Mr. Potter, who always personally looked after the construction of his buildings." O.B. Potter decided to organize his own firm, the New York Architectural Terra Cotta Co., which was launched in January 1886 with Walter Geer and his father, Asahel Clarke Geer; Taylor was superintendent until he retired in 1893. Ill-starred to say the least, Potter saw his new terra cotta works in Long Island City totally destroyed by fire in July 1886 (it was immediately rebuilt).58 The company, the only major architectural terra cotta firm in New York City, became one of the largest such manufacturers in the United States, remaining in business until bankruptcy in 1932. Walter Geer credited George B. Post and Orlando B. Potter as the two men most responsible for the promotion of terra cotta in New York City, praising Potter for having "employed terra cotta largely in all of the numerous buildings which he erected, and [who] did much by his example, and also by his advocacy of the material on all occasions, to promote and encourage its use."59 Early Tenants King's Handbook mentioned that there were two hundred offices in the Potter Building, "including those of several newspaper and periodical publishers, insurance and other companies, lawyers and professional men."61 Among its newspaper tenants were the editorial and business offices of The Press, a popular penny newspaper founded in 1887 with ties to the Republican party, and the New York-Observer, the oldest American religious newspaper, started in 1823 and previously located in the World Building until the fire. Other tenants included Peter Adams Co. and Adams & Bishop Co., manufacturers of fine papers for printing, maps, photography, etc.; the Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association, established in 1881 and the then-largest assessment insurance firm in the world;62 the business offices of Otis Brothers & Co., manufacturers of elevators since 1855 and the leading maker of passenger elevators; the New York Architectural Terra Cotta Co. offices; and O.B. Potter himself, on the top floor. Later History After Orlando B. Potter's death in 1894, the Potter Building was conveyed to the O.B. Potter Trust (Estate of Orlando B. Potter),64 then in 1913 to O.B. Potter Properties, Inc. Frederick Potter (1856-1923), a lawyer who had assisted his father with family real estate since 1880, became administrator of the estate and later served as president of O.B. Potter Properties.65 The firm sold the Potter Building in 1920 to Aronson Investing Co., Inc., "relinquished in the best interests of the [Potter] Estate with the changes brought about in the city's development."66 O.B. Potter's daughter, Blanche, stated that, due to financial worries in 1919, the family sold some of its real estate, including the Potter and Empire Buildings.67 In 1923 the Potter Building was conveyed to Parbee Realty Corp., then to Gening Realty Corp. in 1929, to 38 Park Row Corp. in 1931, and back to Parbee in 1932. Seaman's Bank for Savings foreclosed on the property in March 1941, holding it until 1945, when it was purchased by Beepark Estates, Inc. (later Beepark Realty Co.). The majority of twentieth-century office tenants were lawyers and accountants. The 38 Park Row Corp. acquired the building in 1954 and held it until 1973, when it was sold to Pace College, which intended to demolish four adjacent buildings for the construction of a large office tower on Park Row. After this scheme fell through, Pace sold the Potter Building in 1979 to 38 Park Row Associates, a joint venture of the East River Savings Bank with the BOMA, Ltd., partnership (Martin J. Raynes and Robert Stang, principals). The building was converted into a cooperative with loft apartments and the property was conveyed to the 38 Park Row Residence Corp. in 1981. Description The eleven-story (plus two basement stories) Potter Building has three principal facades, on Park Row, Beekman Street, and Nassau Street; the C-shaped plan of the building allows for a major light court (now altered) above the third story on Beekman Street. The building, of fireproofed construction with mostly iron framing, is clad in cast iron on the two stories of the base, and red brick and brownstone-colored terra cotta on the upper stories. Articulation on the three facades is similar, organized by continuous piers alternating with paired fenestration; there is a high degree of ornamentation in the cast iron, brick, and terra cotta. A colossal three-quarter-round column is placed on the acute primary corner of Park Row and Beekman Street. Windows have one-over-one double-hung wood sash (there are some exterior storm windows). An exterior restoration, performed in 1992-93 by Siri & Marsik, architects, with Henry Restoration, included overall repointing, patching of the terra cotta with Jahn mortar, and some brick replacement. Base The two-story base is clad in cast iron. The entire ground story was originally capped by spandrel panels with segmental arches with bosses, while the second story is capped by spandrel panels with pediments. Shopfronts were originally framed with thin cast-iron colonnettes, and had a display window (some had additional projecting display cases) and a doorway (with a transom) to the right, surmounted by a two-part transom. Historic photographs indicate that doors and entrance transoms were of the multi-pane Queen Anne style. All of the shopfronts have been altered several times over the years, and no historic fabric survives. Shopfronts are currently framed in metal with rolldown gates. Base: Park Row The northernmost bay of the ground story was originally the entrance to the elevator lobby; it had shallow steps, columns supporting a heavy broken scroll pediment, and double doors. This entrance received a surround with a veneer of polished granite, the entrance steps were removed, and a shop was installed in the former entrance and western portion of the elevator lobby. The ground-story spandrel panels, originally with segmental arches, were covered by cast-stone panels (1941, Hardie Phillip, Alt. 2119-41). Base: Beekman Street The center of this facade corresponds to the light court above: the ground story originally had an entrance through a triple-arched portico with a projecting pediment supported by bracketed columns (the entrance was altered in 1912, later converted into a shop, and the portico was removed); the second story has three windows flanked by colonnettes. This is the only facade with its original ground-story spandrel panels with segmental arches exposed. A Duclos & Co. iron founder's plate is located on the first pier at the southwest corner of the building. Base: Nassau Street The northernmost bay of the ground story was originally the entrance to the elevator lobby; it is now the residential entrance, with metal and glass doors and transom (1980). The ground-story spandrel panels, originally with segmental arches, were covered with cast-stone panels in 1941. Midsection The midsection consists of seven stories, the ninth story acting as a transition to the upper section. The spandrels above the third, fifth, sixth, and seventh stories are ornamented by corbelling, and the fourth and eighth stories by segmental arches, all of terra cotta. The piers of the eighth story have heavy terra-cotta stylized composite capitals, the corner column at Park Row and Beekman Street having an eagle. The ninth story is capped by a bracketed terra-cotta cornice. Window sills are cast iron. Beekman Street: Light Court The center section of the Beekman Street facade is the light court. On the third story (below the court) are three windows flanked by cast-iron colonnettes, surmounted by a cast-iron pediment with an acroterion. A T-shaped fire escape was added across the center of the court in 1916-18. The fire escape was extended to the roof, enclosed with parged masonry walls, and braced with steel beams (1979-81). The remaining light court configuration is thus an enclosed interior light court to the north (not visible from the street) and an exposed southern portion, within which extends the enclosed stairway. The northernmost sections of the side walls of this latter (southern) portion of the court still exposed are clad in cream brick. Upper Section The two-story upper section has corbelled spandrels above the tenth story and segmental-arched windows with segmental terra-cotta hoods on the eleventh story. Alternate bays are surmounted by pediments. The roofline is punctuated by finials, broken scroll pediments with urns, and a prominent pinnacle above the primary corner column. The roof has later penthouse and service structures. - From the 1996 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Brooklyn Bridge http://flic.kr/p/9cMSM1 Brooklyn, New York City, New York, United States In legend and story, in painting and photo, in poetry and prose, the Brooklyn Bridge has inspired and evoked more praise and comment than any other bridge in America. The first to span the East River, this beautiful suspension Bridge is even today the most picturesque of all the bridges spanning the rivers and harbors of New York. The majestic stone towers with their buttresses and pointed Gothic arches are a remarkably clear statement of structural design and stand in sharp contrast to the graceful sloping sweep of the cables. It is a milestone in the history of American engineering. This great structure, with its arcaded stone approaches, was the longest suspension bridge in the world from the time of its completion in 1883 until 1903. It has an overall length of 6,016 feet, and the Bridge itself is 133 feet above mean high water. It was structural triumph attributable to the genius of John Roebling, the designer, and to the construction skill of his son, Washington Roebling. One of the ingenious methods introduced by the Roeblings in the construction of the Bridge was the pulley-and-reel system which made possible the spinning of the great cables supporting the Bridge. The great masonry pylons and the Gothic arched towers which carry the cables, arc a visual expression of the vital function they perform in carrying the four great cables from shore to shore. Due to the diminution of buttresses as they go up the towers, Ne notice the general pylon effect of sloping or battered walls, -, crowned by II cavetto type cornice, producing an almost Egyptian effect. - From the 1967 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Brooklyn Bridge http://flic.kr/p/9cMSrU Brooklyn, New York City, New York, United States In legend and story, in painting and photo, in poetry and prose, the Brooklyn Bridge has inspired and evoked more praise and comment than any other bridge in America. The first to span the East River, this beautiful suspension Bridge is even today the most picturesque of all the bridges spanning the rivers and harbors of New York. The majestic stone towers with their buttresses and pointed Gothic arches are a remarkably clear statement of structural design and stand in sharp contrast to the graceful sloping sweep of the cables. It is a milestone in the history of American engineering. This great structure, with its arcaded stone approaches, was the longest suspension bridge in the world from the time of its completion in 1883 until 1903. It has an overall length of 6,016 feet, and the Bridge itself is 133 feet above mean high water. It was structural triumph attributable to the genius of John Roebling, the designer, and to the construction skill of his son, Washington Roebling. One of the ingenious methods introduced by the Roeblings in the construction of the Bridge was the pulley-and-reel system which made possible the spinning of the great cables supporting the Bridge. The great masonry pylons and the Gothic arched towers which carry the cables, arc a visual expression of the vital function they perform in carrying the four great cables from shore to shore. Due to the diminution of buttresses as they go up the towers, Ne notice the general pylon effect of sloping or battered walls, -, crowned by II cavetto type cornice, producing an almost Egyptian effect. - From the 1967 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: United States Courthouse http://flic.kr/p/9cMQsq Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. This imposing-neo-classical skyscraper, begun in 1933, was the last building designed by the noted American architect Cass Gilbert, who died in 1934 while the courthouse was under construction. It was completed by his son, Cass Gilbert, Jr. Gilbert was born in 1853 in Zanesville, Ohio, studied at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and then joined the prestigious firm of McKim, Mead & White as Stanford White's personal assistant. In 1882, he left New York to open his own architectural office in St. Paul, Minnesota, where his best known work was the State Capitol, designed in 1896 and completed in 1903. After he won the competition of 1905 for the United States Custom House at Bowling Green—now a designated New York City Landmark—he moved back to this city. With the completion of the Woolworth Building in 1913—then and for many years the tallest building in the world—he gained international fame. The innovations necessary for the construction of such a high building reflected his lifelong interest in structural techniques. Among his best known later buildings are the West Virginia State Capitol, the Detroit Public Library, the United States Chamber of Commerce and the United States Supreme Court in Washington, D. C., the New York County Lawyers' Association Building, another New York City Landmark, and the New York Life Insurance Building. Gilbert felt that the key to good architecture was proportion. By this he meant not only the ratio of various elements to each other, but also the amount of decoration, and a style that was appropriate to the building's function. It was not then considered inappropriate for a commercial skyscraper, such as the Woolworth Building, to be a neo-Gothic structure—it was, after all, a "cathedral of commerce"—but it was generally assumed that a government building, such as a state capitol or a courthouse, should be classical in style. This solution to the problem of the skyscraper worked very well in the design of the United States Courthouse. As seen from a distance, it is the tower of the building, with its golden pyramidal roof, that dominates. From Foley Square, the monumental colonnade at the entrance is the dominant architectural feature, in the tradition of the adjoining New York County Courthouse and the Municipal Building. Interestingly enough, this colonnade theme is repeated in the arrangement of stilts supporting the new annex to the United States Courthouse located on Police Plaza. Following the principles of classical architecture, the building is divided into three parts, reflecting the principal features of a column: the base, the shaft, and the capital. The base of the courthouse Is irregularly shaped, express ing the shape of the lot. The back of the building, toward Cardinal Place, is rounded, and the facades on Pearl Street and Police Plaza each have a pair of engaged columns flanked by pilasters. These are all narrow streets, however, and it is the colonnaded portico on the Foley Square front of the building that forms the visual base of the entire composition. Here, the building projects slightly forward, emphasizing the base in relation to the shaft or tower above it. The portico, approached by a broad flight of steps, is supported by a colonnade consisting of ten four-story high unfluted Corinthian columns and is flanked by piers framed by pilasters. A frieze above bears the Inscription "United States Court House." This entablature, adorned with guilloche motifs above the piers t each end, is surmounted by a dentiled cornice and a low attic story pierced by square windows separated by carved pilasters. At each end of the attic story there is a man's head carved in bas-relief. A bronze flagpole rises above the Reenter of this base section of the building. The square main tower is set back from this base and rises twenty stories above it. The first sixteen stories are given vertical emphasis by the shafts on each side, which separate the tiers of windows. The windows are separated horizontally from each other by rectangular spandrel panels. Surmounting the seventeenth story, a dentiled cornice sets off the three stories above it, which are treated as a unit. The lowest of these three floors, with small square windows, acts as a visual base for the other two which have high round-arched windows surmounted by small square ones, separated and enhanced by two-story pilasters. The end bays at the corners are of solid masonry pierced by slit windows. This section is crowned by a pierced stone parapet with urns at the corners emphasizing the setback of the tower section above it. The setback portion, supporting the pyramidal roof, rises behind the parapet and in its enrichment may be considered the capital of the columnar form. Five bays on each side provide depth: the windows are separated by three-story high, engaged Ionic columns with paired pilasters lending solidity to the corners. A shallow cornice and low attic story crowns the topmost section of the tower with eagles at the corners connected by simple low parapets. These elements form the' base for the pyramidal roof which is adorned with gold leaf. At the base of the roof, a small pedimented dormer lends emphasis at the center of each side, while three tiers of diminutive dormers adorn the upper portions of the sides. The pyramidal roof is crowned by a small gold-leafed lantern which has a railing at its base and is crowned by corner finials and a steep roof with an oblong finial. FINDINGS AND DESIGNATIONS On the basis of a careful consideration of the history, the architecture and other features of this building, the Landmarks Preservation Commission finds that the United States Courthouse has a special character, special historical and aesthetic interest and value as part of the development, heritage and cultural characteristics of New York City. The Commission further finds that, among its important qualities, the United States Courthouse is one of the most imposing skyscrapers of the 1930s, that it was designed in the neo-classical governmental style of the period by the architect Cass Gilbert, best remembered for the Woolworth Building, that the main shaft of the courthouse rises above an impressive portico which provides an architectural focus for Foley Square, and that it is in the tradition of the adjoining government buildings, the New York County Courthouse and the Municipal Building. - From the 1975 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Brooklyn Bridge http://flic.kr/p/9cMRzJ Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. In legend and story, in painting and photo, in poetry and prose, the Brooklyn Bridge has inspired and evoked more praise and comment than any other bridge in America. The first to span the East River, this beautiful suspension Bridge is even today the most picturesque of all the bridges spanning the rivers and harbors of New York. The majestic stone towers with their buttresses and pointed Gothic arches are a remarkably clear statement of structural design and stand in sharp contrast to the graceful sloping sweep of the cables. It is a milestone in the history of American engineering. This great structure, with its arcaded stone approaches, was the longest suspension bridge in the world from the time of its completion in 1883 until 1903. It has an overall length of 6,016 feet, and the Bridge itself is 133 feet above mean high water. It was structural triumph attributable to the genius of John Roebling, the designer, and to the construction skill of his son, Washington Roebling. One of the ingenious methods introduced by the Roeblings in the construction of the Bridge was the pulley-and-reel system which made possible the spinning of the great cables supporting the Bridge. The great masonry pylons and the Gothic arched towers which carry the cables, arc a visual expression of the vital function they perform in carrying the four great cables from shore to shore. Due to the diminution of buttresses as they go up the towers, Ne notice the general pylon effect of sloping or battered walls, -, crowned by II cavetto type cornice, producing an almost Egyptian effect. - From the 1967 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Brooklyn Bridge http://flic.kr/p/9cMRfj Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. In legend and story, in painting and photo, in poetry and prose, the Brooklyn Bridge has inspired and evoked more praise and comment than any other bridge in America. The first to span the East River, this beautiful suspension Bridge is even today the most picturesque of all the bridges spanning the rivers and harbors of New York. The majestic stone towers with their buttresses and pointed Gothic arches are a remarkably clear statement of structural design and stand in sharp contrast to the graceful sloping sweep of the cables. It is a milestone in the history of American engineering. This great structure, with its arcaded stone approaches, was the longest suspension bridge in the world from the time of its completion in 1883 until 1903. It has an overall length of 6,016 feet, and the Bridge itself is 133 feet above mean high water. It was structural triumph attributable to the genius of John Roebling, the designer, and to the construction skill of his son, Washington Roebling. One of the ingenious methods introduced by the Roeblings in the construction of the Bridge was the pulley-and-reel system which made possible the spinning of the great cables supporting the Bridge. The great masonry pylons and the Gothic arched towers which carry the cables, arc a visual expression of the vital function they perform in carrying the four great cables from shore to shore. Due to the diminution of buttresses as they go up the towers, Ne notice the general pylon effect of sloping or battered walls, -, crowned by II cavetto type cornice, producing an almost Egyptian effect. - From the 1967 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Manhattan Bridge from the Brooklyn Bridge http://flic.kr/p/9cMSXw Brooklyn, New York City, New York, United States

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Brooklyn Bridge http://flic.kr/p/9cMRSY Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. In legend and story, in painting and photo, in poetry and prose, the Brooklyn Bridge has inspired and evoked more praise and comment than any other bridge in America. The first to span the East River, this beautiful suspension Bridge is even today the most picturesque of all the bridges spanning the rivers and harbors of New York. The majestic stone towers with their buttresses and pointed Gothic arches are a remarkably clear statement of structural design and stand in sharp contrast to the graceful sloping sweep of the cables. It is a milestone in the history of American engineering. This great structure, with its arcaded stone approaches, was the longest suspension bridge in the world from the time of its completion in 1883 until 1903. It has an overall length of 6,016 feet, and the Bridge itself is 133 feet above mean high water. It was structural triumph attributable to the genius of John Roebling, the designer, and to the construction skill of his son, Washington Roebling. One of the ingenious methods introduced by the Roeblings in the construction of the Bridge was the pulley-and-reel system which made possible the spinning of the great cables supporting the Bridge. The great masonry pylons and the Gothic arched towers which carry the cables, arc a visual expression of the vital function they perform in carrying the four great cables from shore to shore. Due to the diminution of buttresses as they go up the towers, Ne notice the general pylon effect of sloping or battered walls, -, crowned by II cavetto type cornice, producing an almost Egyptian effect. - From the 1967 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Manhattan Bridge from the Brooklyn Bridge http://flic.kr/p/9cMS81 Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog.

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: City Hall http://flic.kr/p/9cMQ67 Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The New York City Hall is the most beautiful city hall in the United states. It was designed in competition in the Federal Style of architecture with considerable French influence. It is basically C-shaped in plan with two end wings projected forward at the front. This fine marble building consists of two stories above a high basement. At the center an attic story rises above the main roof level and is surmounted by a handsome domed cupola. In front of the central section, of the building, an imposing porch with columns rises above a sweeping flight of stairs which approach it from three sides. The roof of the porch, with a railing (balustrade), forms an open deck in front of five large arched windows set between columns. The great size of these second floor windows relative to the masonry surrounding them is reminiscent of the famous French palace greenhouses (orangeries) and represents a radical piece of design for this country in Federal times. Historically, City Hall is important as the building which, for over one hundred and fifty years, has been the seat of City government. Through its doors have passed all the great personages most intimately connected with the development of this City. Many portraits of these notables adorn its walls today. In addition it has done honor to the dead. The bodies of Lincoln and Grant have lain in state within its walls. The architectural importance of this building is to be found in its superb proportions and in the beautiful French detail of its exterior and central rotunda. This part of the design may be attributed to the French architect in producing this masterpiece. The more strictly Federal detail of the handsome interior rooms has been attributed to McComb and is typical of the Federal work being designed in this country at that time. - From the 1966 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Woolworth Building http://flic.kr/p/9cMPPJ Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The Woolworth Building, one of New York's best known tall buildings, is among the most famous skyscrapers in the United States. The tallest building in the world on its completion in 1913, Cass Gilberts graceful. Gothic-style, terra-cotta clad, sixty-story tower became the prototype for the tall romantic skyscraper that permanently transformed the skyline of New York and become the most potent image of twentieth- century urban America. Built as the headquarters of F. W. Woolworth' s "five-and-ten" empire, the Woolworth Building became a symbol not just of Woolworth's personal success, but also of the new twentieth-century phenomenon of mass commerce. At its grand opening, during which President Wilson in Washington pushed a button to signal the lighting of the structure in New York, the Rev. S. Parkes Cadman christened the Woolworth Building the "Cathedral of Commerce. " The Woolworth Building stands as a watershed in the history of the American skyscraper. It is both the culmination of the early development of the tall office building that began before 1880. and the model -- in terms of height, profile, corporate symbolism. and romantic presence -- for the skyscrapers of the great building boom of the post-World War I era that culminated in the Chrysler and Empire State Buildings. Although long since stripped of its "world ' s tallest" title, the Woolworth Building remains one of the great symbols of twentieth-century America, and one of New York's and the country's outstanding landmarks. The \oloolworth Building is a 60-story skyscraper, rising 792 feet above street level. It occupies the entire blockfront along the western side of Broadway between Park Place and Barclay Street. The 30-story tower rises above a 30-story base. The base presents three unbroken elevations, on Barclay Street, Broadway, and Park Place, and divides into two wings on its western face. The tower meets the lot line on Broadway, but is narrower than and does not extend as far west as the base beneath it. The tower has two setbacks, creating three sections of progressively smaller dimensions, and culminates in a pyramidal roof and four tourelles. The elevations of the base and tower are divided into continuous vertical bays of windows and spandrels. In the tower and the portion of the base directly beneath it, there are three bays comprising respectively two, three and two tiers of windows. The bays in the base, north and south of the tower, on Broadway comprise three tiers of windows; the base elevations on Barclay Street and Park Place west of the tower are divided into six two-window-wide bays, the bay furthest to the west being slightly narrower than the rest. This is the basic organizational pattern for the entire exterior. The first four stories are set apart from the rest of the building base in design and material. Unlike the upper stories, they are faced in Redford limestone above a seven-foot water-table in polished Rockport (Me.) granite,62 The three facades of the base are divided into three-story entrance and window bays, with a one-story attic level above. The width of these bays matches that of the window and spandrel bays in the base and tower above. Only the fourth story of the base of the western elevation is visible; it is plain. The first four stories of the Broadway elevation focus on the three-story Tudor-arched entrance portal which is flanked on either side by two bays, one narrower and one wider and each divided into a storefront and two bands of windows. The entrance arch and flanking narrow bays are grouped into a triumphal arch designed by the elaborately carved stone balcony and related ornament projecting out over them. The motifs of the carving are Gothic in inspiration. The balcony includes narrow panels with shields separating wide panels of Gothic tracery over the entrance and wide panels with stylized flowers over the flanking bays; the center panel supports a large eagle holding a shield. From either side of the entrance arch descends an elaborately carved niche with Gothic tracery and at its base a carved coiled serpent. Similar deep relief Gothic tracery with fanciful grotesques link the balcony with the arches of the entrance and flanking bays. The entrance is through a Tudor-arched portal set within a shallow depressed arch. The depressed arch is outlined by a course of trefoil tracery; within each of the two spandrels between the depressed and the Tudor arch is a carved reclining figure in high relief. The portal arch is a complex form, with a wide intrados flanked on either side, at a 450 angle, by archivolts. The intrados is adorned with Gothic tracery. The archivolt facing the street is comprised of a series of small connected niches; the bottom niche at either side frames a carved treetrunk, the niche at the apex frames an owl with spread wings, and each of the twenty remaining niches frames a grotesque allegorical figure. The inner archivolt is similarly comprised of niches, with tree-trunks at the base and an owl at the apex, but with abstract foliage in the intervening niches. An identical archivolt frames the facing lobby entrance. The entrance itself consists of a large Tudor-arched window above a revolving door with flanking side doors. The revolving door is new, but retains its original configuration. Between the window and the archivolt is a flat band of strapwork and ornamental marble squares. The window frame, and the wide bandcourse separating the window from the doorway below, consists of highly ornamental Gothic tracery cast in bronze. The glass of the window is divided into three large vertical bays, each subdivided into nine panels of twenty-one panes each; this is its original configuration. Both the narrow and the wide bays flanking the entrance on Broadway consist of a depressed-arch masonry opening with two stories of window bands above a storefront. The window bands on each story of the inner, narrow, bays contain three single-pane windows, while those in the outer bays contain five single-pane windows. Each depressed-arch masonry opening is adorned with an elaborate carved wreath surround, whose forms include swags and bunches of grapes. The upper and lower window bands are separated by a wide bronze band of Gothic tracery; the mullions separating each single-pane window from its neighbor has superimposed over it a slender bronze rod. This is their original configuration. The horizontal bronze bands at either end of the Broadway elevation are now obscured by a modern sign. The storefronts in each bay are separated from the windows above by a broad bronze panel adorned with trefoil tracery. All the storefronts have been replaced. Six angled piers are carried down into the base; two end in the carved niches flanking the entrance, while four others end in corbels carved as allegorical human faces. The faces apparently represent, from south to north, the four continents of Africa, America, Europe, and Asia (similar to the four allegorical statues of the continents adoring Gilbert's earlier Custom House at Bowling Green). - From the 1983 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Municipal Building http://flic.kr/p/9cMQDs Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The Municipal Building is an impressive Classical skyscraper, rising to a height of 25 stories with a tower above. It represents an effort made by the City, through the use of noted architects and sculptors, to achieve an imposing building of real beauty. The great freestanding screen of columns across the front, enframing a Classical triumphal arch, is truly monumental in scale. This large building is ingeniously designed to bridge Chambers Street by means of a handsome barrel-vaulted passageway. It also is notable that such a large building has been able to utilize such a small site so effectively. The open area at the south Side, where the building is raised on stilts, equals in concept many contemporary structures. The Commission finds that, among its important qualities, the Municipal Building is a handsome structure built with fine materials and having many beautiful details, that it represents a bold solution of a difficult problem where a limited site is utilized to best advantage, while providing great openness at ground floor level and a splendid passage for Chambers Street through the building, and that the Municipal Building is one of the few monumental skyscrapers of the early part of the Twentieth Century. - From the 1966 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: City Bank-Farmers Trust Company Building http://flic.kr/p/9cJG4B Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Summary One of the most prominent features of the Lower Manhattan skyline, the fifty-nine-story City Bank-Farmers Trust tower is among New York City's tallest skyscrapers. Designed by the architectural firm of Cross & Cross in the restrained modern style once known as "Modern Classic," it was built in 1930-31 to be the Wall Street headquarters of one of the country's largest financial institutions, which survives today as Citibank. The steel-framed tower is sheathed in granite and limestone, making it, on completion, the world's tallest stone-faced building. Its lower portion is both massive, especially in contrast to the narrow streets, and dramatically vertical, organized around widely spaced giant piers which rise to freestanding stylized heroic figures said to represent "giants of finance." The main entrance, located on Exchange Place, is distinguished by its round arch surrounded by eleven coins of carved granite representing the various countries in which National City Bank had offices. Decorative doors of nickel silver with bronze trim and a variety of carved forms, many designed by British sculptor David Evans, adorn the lower floors. The slender, square tower with chamfered corners, rising slightly askew to the irregularly shaped base, today remains a commanding presence in the skyline of lower Manhattan, and one of the most noteworthy of the era's skyscrapers. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS City Bank-Farmers Trust, the National City Bank, and the Canadian Bank of Commerce No. 20 Exchange Place was built to house the head offices of one of Wall Street's new banking conglomerates, the City Bank-Farmers Trust Co., along with a branch of the National City Bank of New York and a branch of the Canadian Bank of Commerce.1 The City Bank-Farmers Trust Company was the product of a merger of two long-established banking firms: the National City Bank of New York and the Farmers Loan and Trust Company. The Canadian Bank of Commerce was a tenant in a building demolished to make way for the new tower and had been located on the site since as early as 1872. The National City Bank of New York, which survives today as Citibank, is among the country's largest and oldest banks, tracing its origins to the First Bank of the United States, founded in 1791, of which it was the New York branch. That branch was reorganized in 1812 as the City Bank of New York by Col. Samuel Osgood, the country's first Postmaster General and Treasury Commissioner. Moses Taylor, who took control of the bank after the financial panic of 1837, had it chartered in 1865 as a national bank, and renamed it the National City Bank of New York.3 By 1893, led by president James Stillman, the bank had become the city's largest, and the following year the country's largest. By 1920, it had b ecome the first American bank with assets totalling one billion dollars. During the 1920s, the National City Bank of New York became the country's first full-service bank; among many innovations, it was the first major bank to offer interest on savings accounts. Expanding dramatically during that decade, the National City Bank acquired the Commercial Exchange Bank, the Second National Bank, and the People's Trust Company of Brooklyn before merging with the Farmers' Loan and Trust Company in 1929. The Farmers Loan and Trust Company, founded in 1822, was the first trust company to be organized in New York, and is said to be the first "company of record to be incorporated for the purpose of executing trusts."4 Beginning as a fire insurance carrier, the company moved into agricultural loans, and grew enormously in the following two decades as farms expanded in New York State following the opening of the Erie Canal. After the Civil War, the Farmers Loan and Trust Company turned to railroad trust mortgages. By the turn of the century the company had established offices overseas, and in 1918 the company joined the Federal Reserve System. The Canadian Bank of Commerce was founded in 1867, the year of Canada's confederation, by Toronto businessman William McMaster.5 By the time of the First World War it had 379 branches, and during the 1920s almost doubled that number by acquiring the Bank of Hamilton and then the Standard Bank of Canada. Today, known as the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, it is Canada's second largest bank. The Site and Wall Street Banks The site of No. 20 Exchange Place is a small, irregular four-sided plot occupying the entire block bounded by Exchange Place, William Street, Beaver Street, and Hanover Street. This block lay within the original Dutch settlement of Nieuw Amsterdam, and is shown in part in the so-called Castello Plan, the earliest reliable surviving map of the colony.6 By the late nineteenth century, this block had become associated with the banking houses of Wall Street. Exchange Place itself was named for the old Merchants Exchange on Wall Street, which backed onto Exchange Place and was one of Wall Street's most important institutions; that building also served later as the U.S. Custom House. Maps of the area from 1899 show that while the blocks to the south of Hanover Square were still occupied by small loft buildings, the block now occupied by 20 Exchange Place had been redeveloped with larger structures, including two owned by the Farmers Loan & Trust Company.7 Wall Street had become almost exclusively a street of banks and exchanges as early as the 1820s. At first these institutions tended to move into former dwellings, but by the mid- 1840s most of them had erected new Greek Revival bank buildings. At mid-century many financial institutions responded to the increasing demand from private bankers and insurance companies eager to locate in the Wall Street area by replacing their earlier bank buildings with Italianate commercial palaces containing both banking rooms and several office floors. In the twentieth century, banks on Wall Street began to build skyscraper headquarters, notably the Bank of New York at 48 Wall Street, the Manhattan Company (predecessor of the Chase Manhattan Bank) at 40 Wall Street, Bankers Trust at 14 Wall Street, and the Irving Trust Company at 1 Wall Street. In 1907, the National City Bank acquired the old Merchants Exchange Building at 55 Wall Street, to capitalize on its historic connections to Wall Street and the financial world. Instead of demolishing the structure, the bank commissioned the prominent firm of McKim, Mead & White to double the building's size while maintaining something of its original architectural character. In 1929, following its merger with the Farmers Loan and Trust Company, National City Bank expanded its offices again, but instead of replacing 55 Wall Street with a skyscraper, the Bank acquired most of the block directly across Exchange Place from the rear of its still relatively new and prestigious headquarters building at 55 Wall Street,8 and began planning its new skyscraper headquarters at 20 Exchange Place. The new and old buildings were then connected by an enclosed pedestrian bridge (no longer in existence) over Exchange Place. The newly-named City Bank Farmers Trust Company hired the eminent architectural firm of Cross & Cross to design the new skyscraper. Cross & Cross The firm of Cross & Cross was formed in 1907 by broth ers John Walter Cross (1878-1951) and Eliot Cross (18 84-1949). John, who studied architecture at Columbia, and then at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris, served as the firm's chief designer. Eliot took charge of the real-estate end of the business.10 In 1922 he organized the real estate investment firm of Webb and Knapp, and served as chairman of the board until he retired in 1947.11 Both firms, Cross & Cross and Webb and Knapp, had offices in the Knapp Building, 385 Madison Avenue, previously two buildings combined into one and altered to designs by Cross & Cross in 1923. The building commissions of Cross & Cross fall into three general categories: 1) smaller-scaled buildings including private residences, churches, clubs, neighborhood bank branches, and schools; 2) hotel and apartment buildings; and 3) tall office buildings. The firm's early design work reflects John Cross's architectural education in the French Beaux-Arts tradition, as at the Church of Notre Dame, at Morningside Drive and West 114th Street, designed in 1914 and modeled on the church of the Invalides, one of the most famous eighteenth-century buildings in Paris.12 Their designs for other small-scale work, and for hotels and apartment buildings, tended to the eighteenth-century English style, either Georgian or Adamesque. Their designs for tall office buildings initially drew inspiration from Classical or Gothic ornamental patterns, but in the late 1920s moved in the general direction of Art Deco. In the late 1920s, the office buildings of Cross & Cross began to show the influence ofmodern design. The first to begin to do so was the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company B uilding, begun in 1929 in a "Modern Classic" style. Two bank, office and storage buildings designed for the Centrum corporation, the real-estate arm of the Central Hanover Bank & Trust, at 271 Church Street and 335 Greenwich Street (both 1930), continued the evolution of their design in a modernist direction. The culmination of this tendency in the work of Cross & Cross came in the RCA Victor Building (1929-31, later known as the General Electric Building) at 570 Lexington Avenue, a designated New York City Landmark, which is one of New York's finest Art Deco skyscrapers. Design and construction of the tower Contender for "world's tallest building": The design for No. 20 Exchange Place went through several versions, ranging from a moderately short office building to the tallest building in the world, before taking final shape as the city's fourth tallest, a 60-story tower. The late 1920s saw a spate of announcements of office buildings intended to wrest the title of "world's tallest building" away from the Woolworth Building (completed in 1913). When City Bank-Farmers Trust filed plans in October 1929 for a 66-story building 846.4 feet high,14 it staked a claim to the title.15 The new skyscraper was to be a set-back building with a "tower eighty feet square rising from the twenty-eighth floor. The tower will taper off from the fiftieth floor and at the top will be an illuminated globe fifteen feet in diameter, supported by four eagles of heroic size. The general style will be conservative modern." Within a month of filing, however, a proposed merger of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company with the Corn Exchange Bank, which would have created the world's wealthiest bank, fell through, a victim of the stock market crash.17 The following year City Bank-Farmers Trust scaled back the plans of its tower to 685 feet 7 1/8 inches.18 When it opened in February 1931, though no longer in the running for the title of "world's tallest," 20 Exchange Place claimed the lesser distinction of being the tallest building with a predominantly stone facade. Engineering feat: Despite its substantial size, the new tower was completed in less than a year, an especially noteworthy achievement considering the special difficulties the site presented to its builder, the George A. Fuller Company, and the foundation and tower engineers, Moran & Proctor.20 Site conditions including quicksand, water, and old foundations created the need for heavy cross-lot bracing, while the building's unusual shape required heavy steel construction. The excavation took the lower basement to 40 feet below water level, dug out of solid rock. Other structural feats included the accommodation of what was called the largest pneumatic tube communication system ever devised for a banking house.21 The form and style of the tower: The style and ornament of the tall slender tower of 20 Exchange Place have been called Art Deco. Although the design reflects the general trends of late 1920s skyscrapers, the building has a minimum of specifically "Art Deco" ornament. Similarly stylized versions of classical forms were sometimes referred to as "Modern Classic."22 Cross & Cross believed that the building's design fell into no particular stylistic category, and wrote about its design in terms sugge sting a familiarity with Modern architectural theory: The architects hold no brieffor any particular architectural style and have been at some pains to clothe the structure in material and form to serve as a frank expression of the mechanical and economic forces involved and at the same time to express, with some degree of originality, the place of the building in the life of its location.23 An important part of the design conception was the architects' insistence on fine materials. Unlike other tall buildings of the 1920s conceived originally with stone facades but executed, for reasons of economy, in brick or terra-cotta, 20 Exchange Place is sheathed almost completely in stone: Mohegan Granite at the base, and Alabama Rookwood veined gray limestone on all the upper stories.24 They also used, instead of bronze, an unusual alloy of nickel, white in color, known as nickel silver, "[f]or the first time in a major structure," according to contemporary accounts, specifically to avoid "colored metal" in the building. The contrast with the architects' profusely ornamental Art Deco design for the almost contemporary RCA Victor (later General Electric) Building at 570 Lexington Avenue is striking. The two buildings share a strong vertical emphasis and a sculptural approach to massing. City Bank-Farmers Trust has no profusion of Art Deco ornament, but like the RCA Victor Building it relies for effect on its profile, the richness of its materials, and -- if to a lesser extent -- the architects' much noted high quality ornament. The crowning eagles and lantern of the original proposal did not survive in the final version. The building is adorned, however, by programmatic sculpture and reliefs symbolizing the banking companies it was built to house, ranging from representations of industry and the professions to the coinage of countries where the banks had branches. Contemporary assessment: On the opening of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company Building, the New York Times called it a "magnificent building," and noted that it "has been called one of the handsomest buildings, architecturally, in the city."26 Parker Chase, in his 1932 book New York The Wonder City, wrote: Everything in connection with this monumental building expresses beauty, completeness and grandeur. ...every detail of this colossal structure is right up to the minute. The building throughout is the very last word in all that spells DELUXE.... No one visiting New York should fail to visit the "City Bank Farmers Trust" edifice -- this magnificent and beautiful pile of marble, stone, and masonry is one of the sights of the city. Description The form of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company building (Fig. 1) follows the basic configuration mandated by zoning regulations. Filling out the block at street level, it rises through a series of setbacks to a slender tower. Because the site is irregularly shaped, so is the building's lower portion. The tower, however, is square in plan, with chamfered corners, and rises askew to the base. The transition from the irregular base to the square tower is accomplished by manipulating the shape of the third setback at the twenty-first story and creating sympathetic facade verticals to ease the transition between the symmetries of the lower and tower elevations. Seen in the skyline, the tower appears as a regular geometric form rising dramatically from a low, bulky base. Framed with steel, the building is sheathed in Mohegan granite at the basement and carved entrances, in Alabama Rookwood limestone above, and in limestone and brick in the tower. The elevations are framed by vertical piers; at the base some spandrels are of blue pearl granite and others of aluminum. The tower has spandrels of aluminum. Many of the spandrels have applied medallions. The windows are steel-framed with one-over-one sash. The ornamental scheme is largely confined to the building's lower portion, especially the entrances and the setbacks. Much of the ornament, including pilaster caps, cornices, and nickel silver grilles, is the work of British sculptor David Evans. (Fig. 2) This designation does not include the building's interior spaces. Base The basement level of the building is faced in granite, and terminates in an overscaled molding. Set into the basement are square openings with grilles, some of nickel silver and others of carved stonework. The names of each street are carved into the stone at the corners. (Fig. 3) Exchange Place entrance: The main entrance to the building, at 20 Exchange Place, is a round-arched portal of carved Mohegan granite. (Fig. 4) Its chief adornment is a series of eleven carved granite replicas of coins, which represent countries with branches of the National City Bank, set on a background of abstract foliate forms. Above and to either side of the portal are large medallions, to the right a seal of the National City Company (Fig. 5), and to the left a seal of the National City Bank (Fig. 6). The entrance, approached by several steps, is set behind a deep reveal, to which a modern set of revolving doors has been added at the location of the original doors; windows above the doors fill in the arch. There is a non-historic stainless steel grille on the left within the entranceway, and on the right an original nickel silver door with abstract geometric detailing. A period light fixture hangs from the apex of the reveal, from a stone soffit of intersecting triangles. The portal is flanked by illuminated signs with the building's address; the nickel silver framing appears to be original. A flagpole is set above the Exchange Place entrance at the fifth floor level. William Street entrance: At the corner of William Street and Exchange Place is an entrance set in a carved reveal leading to a rotunda and the former senior officers' room of City Bank-Farmers Trust. The four doors are of nickel silver, a white alloy of nickel, zinc and copper, with bronze trim. (Fig. 8) Both the two round doors in the center and the two flanking flat doors include a series of panels representing various forms of transportation. The panels in the center doors show historic transportation methods including sailing ships, hot air balloons, and steam locomotives. Those on the sides show modern transportation, including airplanes, ocean liners, and diesel engines. Two nickel silver panels above the doors include in their ornamentation two allegorical figures in bronze, one with a cornucopia suggesting abundance, the other with a lock and key suggesting the prudence of banking. They are surrounded by a variety of animal figures and abstract floral forms. Four owls stand on the top of the panels. The glass panes above, in the upper half of the entranceway, are set into a nickel silver framework trimmed in bronze, including still more symbols of industry, including scales, hourglasses, sheaves of wheat, and mechanical gears. Above the entrance is another large stone medallion, this one showing the seal of the City-Bank-Farmers Trust Company. There is a flagpole above the fourth-floor level. Beaver and William Street entrance: A similar but less elaborate set of doors with scenes of transportation survives at the corner of Beaver and William Streets. (Fig. 9) Here there are only two doors, not four; they repeat the scenes of the modern transportation series. Panels above with ornamental patterns centering on sheaves of wheat have been removed. Beaver Street entrance: The rear entrance to the tower, in the middle of the Beaver Street facade, is through three round-arched openings. (Fig. 10) Above the middle opening is another stone medallion. (Fig. 11) Within the middle archway is a service entrance. Above the door is a carved bison head flanked by reliefs of coiled snakes. (Fig. 12) In each flanking arch is a set of four doors, framed in nickel silver, with marble transoms and multi-pane windows set in decorative nickel silver framing. Hanover Street entrance: The Hanover Street entrance set in a carved reveal (Fig. 13) leads to the branch office originally created for the Canadian Bank of Commerce. The nickel silver entrance doors with bronze trim repeat the design of the doors at William Street almost exactly, with the one exception that in the nickel silver grilles above the doors with scenes of transportation, in place of the allegorical figures suggesting abundance and prudence there are two caducei, ancient Greek symbols of commerce. The entrance itself is set within a round-arched double-height opening with ornate framing. There is a triple flagpole above this entrance. The remainder of the main double-height level is punctuated by large square-headed window openings with heavy stone lintels. (Fig. 14) Each lintel has a replica of an historic coin in its center. (Fig. 15) Each window opening has a deeply recessed multi-pane window set in decorative nickel silver framing, protected by a nickel silver grille. (Fig. 16) Each grille includes in its ornament a figure representing one of the professions set in a square panel at either end of the grille, flanking a long panel with a fasces -- a tied bundle of sticks. Each set of large window openings, whether one on Hanover, three on Exchange Place, or five on William Street, is flanked by two much narrower and shorter openings, each with a simple nickel silver grille at the base and a keystone at its top center. Above this level of openings runs a series of small, plain square-headed windows, at the level of the large stone medallions above the entrances. A final level of larger, square-headed windows in deep openings encircles the building; it is topped by a band of abstract geometric panels. (Fig. 17) Above all this rise the largely unadorned elevations of the remainder of the base, and the tower. Setbacks At the nineteenth-floor setback, a set of fourteen enormous sculptural heads, representing "giants of finance,"28 and apparently modeled on Greek and Assyrian sources, stare down at the street. (Fig. 18) Not all piers end in these heads, just those that visually line up with the tower above. Flanking piers end at the seventeenth floor and have large statues of eagles perched atop them. Tower The tower, which has little ornament, is defined by broader and slenderer piers, faced with brick, framing uninterrupted vertical bays of paired windows and spandrels. The windows are one-over-one double-hung steel sash. The top level of spandrels are aluminum, rather than stone. Two levels of horizontal ashlar bands wrap around the dark brick center bays, visually binding the tower. Tall arches at the top support a double-tiered crown. Communications equipment has been placed on top of the tower. Throughout the building, such symbols of modern industry as airplanes, ocean-liners, and even a portrait of the skyscraper itself29 are interwoven with traditional designs in pilaster caps and panels. Subsequent history Surviving the stock-market crash of 1929 thanks to its size and organization, the National City Bank of New York continued on through the Depression and World War II. It was renamed the First National City Bank of New York in 1955, in 1962 became the First National City Bank, and in 1976 became Citibank, part of the larger Citicorp. The City Bank-Farmers Trust, which had been a State-chartered affiliate of the nationally chartered City Bank, has gone out of existence. Citibank headquarters remained at 20 Exchange Place until 1956, when it moved to midtown Manhattan. Even so, Citibank owned 20 Exchange Place until 1979, and remained a tenant in the building until 1989.30 The Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce closed its branch and offices at 20 Exchange Place in 1989, consolidating its operations in its midtown location at 425 Lexington Avenue. Today 20 Exchange Place is a commercial office building, owned by the West World Holding Company, Inc. - From the 1996 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 94 Greenwich Street House http://flic.kr/p/9cJD48 Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Financial District, Manhattan The Federal style rowhouse at No. 94 Greenwich Street in Lower Manhattan was constructed c.1799-1800 as an investment property, right after this block was created through landfill and Greenwich and Rector Streets had been laid out. At the time, this was the most fashionable neighborhood for New York’s social elite and wealthy merchant class. The owner of No. 94 was Augustine Hicks Lawrence, a prominent stock and insurance broker, banker, and commission merchant, who served as director of a number of banks and companies, as well as an assistant alderman and alderman in 1809-16. What makes this house highly significant is that it is among only five surviving houses of Manhattan’s most elite neighborhood of the post-Revolutionary War era, the others including the Watson House (1793, 1806), 7 State Street, and Dickey House (1809-10), 67 Greenwich Street, both designated New York City Landmarks. No. 94 Greenwich Street is among the relatively rare extant Manhattan houses of the Federal period and style, is one of the oldest houses in Manhattan, and is one of only seven pre-1810 houses located south of Chambers Street, the oldest section of New York City. As constructed, the house was three-and-a-half stories with a high peaked gambrel roof (probably with dormers) – the outline of the original roofline is still visible on the Rector Street facade. It features Flemish bond brickwork and splayed lintels on the second and third stories, those on the Rector Street facade are marble with double keystones, while the Greenwich Street facade has splayed brick lintels. By 1810, No. 94 had become a boardinghouse for merchants and professional men (many of them prominent), housed a porterhouse by 1837, and was listed as a hotel in 1841. The building was raised one full story prior to 1858, and has a two-story rear addition dating from c. 1853/1873. The building remained in the possession of Lawrence family descendants until 1921, and has housed a variety of commercial tenants. Despite alterations, the 94 Greenwich Street House is recognizable as a grand early Federal style rowhouse, made particularly notable by its height, corner location with two primary facades, the visible outline of the original gambrel roofline on the Rector Street facade, and its splayed marble lintels with double keystones (a feature typical of the earliest surviving Federal style houses in Manhattan). The No. 94 Greenwich Street House was originally constructed at three-and-a-half stories with a high peaked gambrel roof facing Rector Street (probably with dormers) – the outline of the original roofline is still visible. This original portion features Flemish bond brickwork and splayed lintels on the second and third stories, those on the Rector Street facade are marble with double keystones (with a tooled finish), while the Greenwich Street facade has splayed brick lintels. All sills are stone. The building was raised one full story (with flat stone lintels on the Greenwich Street facade) probably c. 1845-58. In 1899, three new windows were cut into the Rector Street facade: the narrowest windows on the second and third stories, and the second bay from the corner on the second-story Rector Street facade. Brick patching has occurred over the years, and tie rods were installed above the second and third stories. Small sections of fire escape were placed at the northernmost bay of the building (in common with the adjacent building) on the Greenwich Street facade, as well as the rear facade. Areas of brickwork were replaced in 2008: at the building’s corner on the second through fourth stories; the area between the storefront and the second-story sills; the upper portion of the Rector Street facade (with new metal flashing); and parts of the rear facade (with segmentally-arched openings with brick lintels). The original six-over-six and three-over-six double-hung wood sash windows, with original molded wooden frames (with shutter pintles) on the second and third stories, and simpler wooden frames on the fourth story, survived until 2008, when they were replaced by plastic windows with fake muntins and plastic frames. The original cornices were wood; new molded metal cornices were installed on the Greenwich Street and rear facades in 2008. A metal bulkhead, visible at the rear of the building, dates from prior to 1929; it has recent metal sheathing. The roof was re-clad and/or painted yellow in 2008. Ground Story: There is no historic evidence of the original condition of the ground story, but the earliest evidence of a commercial storefront dates from 1837. The residential entrance has apparently always been on Rector Street. Currently, there are continuous non-historic metal-and-glass storefronts along both major facades, except for a parged area at the western end of the original portion of the building, which has two non-historic metal doors. - From the 2009 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Federal Reserve http://flic.kr/p/9cMNCQ Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. This enormous building occupies an entire city block; it is fourteen stories high and has five stories below grade. The remarkable stone exterior is reminiscent of an early Italianate Renaissance palace with the horizontal and vertical joints of the stones deeply grooved (rusticated). The wrought iron window grilles and lanterns represent some of the finest craftsmanship of this Century. The importance of the Federal Reserve Bank Building lies in its vast size, fortress-like appearance, fine proportions and in the superb quality of its construction. It set a precedent for many later banks which were influenced by its design. This bank is housed in a building worthy of its pre-eminent position in the financial life of New York City and of the entire country. The question has been raised by the owner as to whether this building should be designated by New York City as a Landmark. The Commission is cognizant of the jurisdictional question. Nevertheless, it is very important for the Government of New York City to state officially its deep concern that this building be preserved. There should be no uncertainty about this. The Commission would be negligent if it failed to act in this situation. At some time in the future this building may be in jeopardy. Our designation will be especially helpful in alerting New York City's elected representatives in Washington of the importance of saving the building. At present, the Commission's specialists can be of service in providing advice so that the architectural integrity of this building is maintained. Indeed a fine relationship already exists with many local representatives of the Federal Government. - From the 1965 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: One Chase Manhattan Plaza http://flic.kr/p/9cJGFz Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Faced with shimmering panels of natural color and black-enameled aluminum, H-shaped mullions and glass, One Chase Manhattan Plaza is among the largest and most important 20 century skyscrapers in New York City. The project was designed by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (hereafter SOM), with J. Walter Severinghaus as partner in charge, Gordon Bunshaft overseeing the development of the design, and Jacques E. Guiton as lead designer. It was one of the leading architectural firms working in the International Style and had been responsible for such pioneering modern works as Lever House (1950-52) and the Fifth Avenue branch of the Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company (1953-54). Chase merged with the Bank of the Manhattan Company in 1955 and the new headquarters was planned to consolidate 8,700 employees under a single roof. David Rockefeller played a leading role in the project; as executive vice president he convinced Chase to remain downtown and hire SOM, resulting in an 813-foot-tall slab-like tower that dramatically altered the skyline and character of the financial district. At that time, few buildings had been constructed downtown since the early 1930s and One Chase Manhattan Plaza signaled a new start for this historic area. Not only did it stand out sharply from its older masonry neighbors, but the planning of the site, incorporating an irregularly shaped 2½ acre plaza, established a welcome break from the narrow, twisting streets that characterize much of the neighborhood. Construction started in 1957 and the tower was mostly complete by 1961. The south plaza and basement levels were dedicated in 1964, incorporating a “Sunken Garden” by the sculptor Isamu Noguchi. Resting 16 feet below the plaza, this serene work of art is visible from above and through curved glass windows that separate it from the bank’s main branch located on the concourse level. Architecture critic Ada Louise Huxtable praised the design in the New York Times: “These are ambitious structures of character and quality, surrounded by the most expensive urban luxury money can buy – space. In a remarkable duality of purpose, reconcilable only in this commercial age, they aspire to the dual role of company trademark and work of art.” The structure was also described in Architectural Forum as “a milestone, perhaps even an end point in the development of the American skyscraper.” As hoped, One Chase Manhattan Plaza did lay significant groundwork for a downtown renaissance in the 1960s, leading to construction of a succession of corporate towers immediately west, from the Marine Midland Bank Building in 1967, to the World Financial Center complex in 1985-88. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS Few buildings have had as significant an impact on the character of lower Manhattan as One Chase Manhattan Plaza. Completed in 1964, it was one of the financial district’s first buildings to boldly reflect the aesthetic and planning strategies of 20 century European modernism, often called the International Style. Rising at the north end of a 2½ acre plaza, the 813-foot-tall tower symbolized the bank’s long-standing commitment to the area, leading to the eventual creation of the World Trade Center (1962-73) and the World Financial Center (mid-1980s). Chase Manhattan Bank and David Rockefeller Chase National Bank merged with the Bank of the Manhattan Company in April 1955, making it the second largest financial institution in the nation, with $8 billion in assets and 87 domestic branches. Both shared strong ties to lower Manhattan and had been founded a short distance from the site. The Bank of Manhattan, for instance, first served depositors in 1799 where 40 Wall Street stands today and Chase was founded at 104 Broadway, near Cedar Street, by banker and publisher John Thompson in 1877. Named for Salmon P. Chase, secretary of the U. S. Treasury under President Abraham Lincoln, it grew to become the largest bank in the world by 1930. In the late 1940s, however, National City Bank and the Bank of America National Trust and Savings (later Citibank and Bank of America) surpassed Chase and the New York Times commented that following such success it was not easy for the bank “to take a back seat, much less than stay in it.” Six months following the merger, in November 1955, Chase Manhattan Bank announced plans to erect a new headquarters. John J. McCloy was the bank’s president (1953-55), and later, chairman (195660). Trained as a lawyer, he had been assistant secretary of war under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and headed the World Bank from 1947 to 1949. To supervise the project, in January 1955 he promoted David Rockefeller (b. 1915) to executive vice president for planning and development. Rockefeller had first joined the bank as a manager in 1946. His parents, John D. Rockefeller, Jr. and Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, were major philanthropists, having played leading roles in the creation of many familiar New York City structures, such as Riverside Church, Rockefeller Center, and the Museum of Modern Art. David Rockefeller remained associated with Chase for most of his career, becoming its president in 1960, and chairman of the board and chief executive officer in 1969. He received a gold medal from the Downtown Association in 1956 for his role in planning the new headquarters and also helped found the Downtown-Lower Manhattan Association in 1958. Under his leadership, this organization helped plan the South Street Seaport, the World Trade Center, and Battery Park City. According to Rockefeller, it was he who convinced McCloy to hire a “qualified outside firm,” Ebasco Services Incorporated, to evaluate the bank’s real estate needs. This consultant prepared several surveys and reports in 1954 and 1955, concluding that a long-term solution was needed – one that would consolidate various banking operations in a single structure. Chase owned seven buildings in the vicinity and Ebasco determined most of these facilities to be substandard. Though the 1954 report did not take a position on where a new headquarters should be erected, it noted the operational advantages of remaining downtown, as well as the current value of the bank’s property. A subsequent report evaluated two sites: the “Broad Street block” (bounded by Broad, Wall and William Streets and Exchange Place), as well as the block that Chase would ultimately purchase. Rockefeller worked closely with William Zeckendorf (1905-1976), a long-time family advisor, to find an ideal location. A prominent real estate developer and broker, he assembled the site of the United Nations and sold it to the United Nations Organizing Committee which received an $8.5 million gift from John D. Rockefeller for this purchase. He also built such ambitious commercial and residential complexes as Roosevelt Field on Long Island, Mile High Center in Denver, and Kips Bay Plaza in Manhattan. Though Chase contemplated the purchase of various sites, both downtown and elsewhere, it was the pending sale of the block directly north of the bank’s Pine Street headquarters, bounded by Cedar, Nassau, Liberty, and William Streets, that helped finalize their decision. The 60,000 square foot site had been occupied by a Romanesque Revival style structure (Charles W. Clinton, begun 1882) and six other buildings erected by the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York. Vacant since 1950 when the firm moved to Broadway and 55 Street, the block was currently owned by the Guaranty Trust Company of New York. At a hastily-convened meeting with Chase executives at the bank’s headquarters in February 1955, Zeckendorf recounted saying: There is only one logical musical chair open and available to you – I pointed out the window . . . The Mutual Life site is under negotiation for sale and you have no time. You must bid for it today. As one of the largest sites available in the area, the bank acted without delay, paying $4.67 million. Chase continued to claim there were “no definite plans for a new head office” but decisive action had been taken and a contract was signed in May 1955 to begin demolition of the entire north block. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill SOM was selected to design Chase Manhattan Plaza in spring 1955. Founded in Chicago in 1936, this architectural firm was responsible for many prominent corporate structures in the United States, including a recently-completed branch of the Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company (1953-54, a designated New York City Landmark) located at the southwest corner of Fifth Avenue and 43 Street. This aluminum-and-glass walled structure drew strong praise from both architectural critics and depositors, which reportedly tripled in number during the first year of operation. Rockefeller said it was his close friend architect Wallace K. Harrison who “unhesitatingly recommended” SOM. This recollection contrasts sharply with that of Nathaniel A. Owings, who later claimed the firm pursued the job independently and without direct invitation. Architectural Forum reported: Hearing rumors, SOM partners swung into action, called Senior Partner Nat Owings in from San Francisco to ask for a meeting with David Rockefeller. According to Chase Manhattan Magazine, the complex was planned by 4 of the 13 general partners at SOM: Gordon Bunshaft (1909-1990), Edward Mathews (c. 1903-1980), Owings (1903-84), and J. Walter Severinghaus (1905-87). Each member of the firm had different responsibilities and though Owings was one of the firm’s founding members, it was Severinghaus who headed the project, with Bunshaft as partner in charge of design. Bunshaft, who supervised many projects simultaneously, assigned it to Jacques E. Guiton (b. 1913-?), who prepared the preliminary scheme in collaboration with Roy O. Allen (d. 1992) during the summer of 1955. Guiton recalled that he was: . . . dumbfounded when, in June of 1955, one of the partners told me I was going to be the project designer for a new job: the headquarters of Chase Manhattan Bank. Trained in Paris at the Ecole des Beaux Arts, Guiton immigrated to the United States in 1948. Briefly employed by the New York architects Leonard Schulze and Walker & Poor, he developed a strong interest in work by French architect Le Corbusier and when he found himself jobless in 1950 decided to approach Bunshaft. Initially, he worked as a draftsman but after designing Chase Manhattan Plaza he worked on the master plan for the Tunis airport in Tunisia, an unbuilt printing plant for the Cleveland Plain Dealer, as well as buildings for various American universities. Following his retirement in 1981, he authored two books: The Ideas of Le Corbusier on Architecture and Planning (1981) and A Life in Three Lands: Memoirs of an Architect (1991). As lead designer, Guiton developed at least two massing schemes that were presented to the board of directors in September 1955. These plans were prepared in consultation with Owings, who later “claimed credit for the idea of placing a skyscraper on a small part of a downtown lot.” Rockefeller, however, emphasized Zeckendorf’s contributions: Nat [Owings] and I spent many hours with Bill Zeckendorf discussing the two very different alternatives … The second, the one Bill Zeckendorf had envisioned from the beginning, was to combine the two parcels by closing the section of Cedar Street between them and erecting one building – not another massive, hulking office building but a shimmering skyscraper set on a large open plaza. Though only slightly smaller in terms of square footage than the scheme that proposed separate buildings on each block, it fulfilled Ebasco’s recommendation that the new headquarters be “definitive and dramatic.” To create an uninterrupted plaza would require the closing of Cedar Street and the approval of the City Planning Commission, headed by chairman Robert Moses. Rockefeller and Moses had been acquainted since the 1930s and he remembered his presentation being an “easy sale . . . Once we had his okay, other approvals came easily.” When a preliminary plan was introduced to the press in November 1955, the New York Times and other newspapers compared the project to “Rockefeller Center – plaza and all”– and it was presumed that Cedar Street would be closed and become the site of the plaza. Furthermore, it was “believed that the building would not have the customary setbacks.” New details were revealed in December 1955, including a related plan for 750 units of housing sponsored under Title 1 of the Federal Housing Act along several blocks of Water Street, south of Coenties Slip, as well as 1,000-car garage, one block east of the site, between Pearl and Water Streets. President and chairman of the executive committee J. Stewart Baker told stockholders that the bank: . . . benefitted from the imaginative attitude of New York City authorities toward the redevelopment of the downtown area . . . We have found that the overall concept of our project fits in admirably with their own plans, and they have indicated their willingness to assist us in solving the difficult legal and physical problems involved in our project. Relatively few buildings had been erected in lower Manhattan since 1930. Aside from office buildings at 99 Church Street (1951, demolished) and 161 William Street (Sylvan Bien, 1952), the most notable structures tended to be associated with transit, namely the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel (1941-50). Financed with public funds, these projects improved automobile access to the area and anticipate the city’s strong support for Chase Manhattan Plaza. Mayor Robert Wagner claimed that a coordinated response would assure “the continued supremacy of lower Manhattan as the financial and business center of the world.” On February 8, 1956, SOM filed plans (NB 21-56) with the Department of Buildings, estimating the cost of construction at $50 million. A considerably higher estimate of $75 million appeared in the New York Times, which may have also included the cost of the plaza. Though much of this figure would be offset by the sale of various structures in the area owned by the bank, in the end the cost of the new headquarters and plaza was significantly more, at least $138 million. Design One Chase Manhattan Plaza combines three main components: a 60-story tower, a 2½ acre plaza, and a 6-story base, of which 5 floors are beneath grade. To create an uninterrupted site, stretching from Pine to Liberty Street, the City Planning Commission agreed to close a section of Cedar Street, and in exchange, Chase ceded four 8-to-15-foot wide strips of land to enlarge the bordering streets and sidewalks. The bank also agreed to cover the cost of relocating utility lines. It was highly unusual for the city to close a public street for private, commercial use. Such closings had only been previously granted when the public benefits were viewed as substantial, as in the case of the New York Central Railroad and Grand Central Depot (c. 1871, altered) and the Pennsylvania Railroad with Pennsylvania Station (190310, altered). SOM completed its design in early 1956, as both the Seagram Building (Ludwig Mies van de Rohe, with Philip Johnson and Kahn & Jacobs, a designated New York City Landmark and Interior, 1955-58) in Manhattan and SOM’s Inland Steel Building (1955-58) in Chicago began construction. Both International Style projects had a significant impact on Chase Manhattan Plaza, influencing the overall shape of the tower, the elegant rectilinear treatment of the glass and metal exteriors, and the structure’s relationship to its site. While some earlier New York City apartment complexes had been built in open, park-like spaces to increase tenant access to light and air, Seagram was the first office building in New York City erected as a free-standing tower. Located at the far end of a deep plaza behind twin pools, it quickly became a symbol of corporate sophistication and success. Chase Manhattan Plaza’s tower was positioned on part of the north block, leaving the rest of the site open. Whereas the current zoning code encouraged set-back, ziggurat-like forms that generally filled entire parcels, a rarely-utilized rule permitted office buildings of unlimited height when all or a portion of the structure covered 25% of the site. Douglass Haskell, writing in Architectural Forum in November 1956, praised SOM’s design and, in particular, the slab-like tower’s uncomplicated form: . . . it will restore to New York some of the leadership which that metropolis lost when it misled the whole country into building wedding-cake skyscrapers with the setback abomination. All 60 floors would be the same size, meaning the upper floors would be as large and desirable as those beneath it. This was especially important to the bank, which planned to lease the upper half of the building to outside tenants. Each floor measures 280 by 106 feet, totaling almost 30,000 square feet. This amount exceeded the site coverage permitted by law and Chase applied for a variance (347-56BZ) from the Board of Standards and Appeals. Severinghaus and other executives testified that it was of “vital importance to the efficiency of the applicant’s main office operations” and that the benefits to the downtown area would greatly outweigh the increased mass. Their request was granted unanimously in February 1957, resulting in 27.30% site coverage, adding about 700 square feet per floor. The architects envisioned Chase Manhattan Plaza as a prominent addition to the lower Manhattan skyline. At 813 feet, it was the third tallest building in the financial district, surpassed by only 40 Wall Street (927 feet, a designated New York City Landmark) and the Cities Service Building (950 feet). What it lacked in relative height, however, it made up in volume and Chase would become the largest office building erected in New York City in the past quarter century. To maximize the amount of useable space, SOM employed an unusual system of external three-by-five-foot piers, keeping the number of interior columns to a minimum and concealing the rest within a central elevator and service core. According to the New York Times, this technique was “not entirely new” but had never been used in such large structures before, especially office buildings. Projecting from the north and south facades, these large perimeter piers carry much of the building’s weight and reflect the firm’s increased interest in structural expression. Whereas earlier SOM designs used crisp glass curtain walls to disguise and envelop the structure, in both the Inland Steel Building (1955-58) in Chicago – which began construction shortly before Chase unveiled its model – and here, the main piers are visible and project outside the floor plates, forming a free-standing colonnade at the base where the lobby is recessed sharply from the floors above. By employing this innovative system, SOM created deep floors of unusual openness. Such arrangements were favored by both owners and tenants. Walls can be positioned freely and the large peripheral columns project outside rather than inside the space. Jane Jacobs wrote in 1957 that: The Chase Manhattan plan is ideal; the client decided that the expense of exterior columns and 40 foot spans was justified by space economy and flexibility. The south side of each floor is actually 10 feet deeper than the north, allowing the larger offices to face the plaza, where there are dramatic vistas and greater afternoon light. “Triple bank layouts” such as these were not uncommon but it was somewhat unusual for this arrangement to be asymmetrical.. Chase was also the first building with a glass curtain wall to exceed 800 feet. It has 8,800 plate glass windows, each measuring approximately five-by-eight feet. At the 11, 31, and 51 floors, however, the fenestration is visibly interrupted by mechanical equipment. Hidden behind both metal louvers and glass, this machinery allowed it to be the “largest fully air-conditioned building in New York.” Above the 60 floor, massive cooling fans are disguised by a 4-story-tall roof enclosure that functions, in a way, as the building’s crown. This prominent feature grows out of the floors below, framed by thin vertical mullions and large perimeter piers, to create the appearance of a box-like, flat roof. At Lever House (1950-52, a designated New York City Landmark), SOM had built one of the first all-glass curtain walls in New York City, but it was Emery Roth & Sons who were first to combine this technique with prefabricated aluminum spandrel panels. Examples that directly precede Chase include the 26-story National Distillers Building at 99 Park Avenue (1952-54), between 39 and 40 Streets, and the Davies Building, 460 Park Avenue (1952-54), at the northwest corner of 57 Street. To evaluate the elevations for Chase, SOM erected a single-story mock-up in Roosevelt Field, Long Island, in 1957, testing both aluminum and stainless steel elements. Though both materials “performed well,” Architectural Forum reported: The final decision to use aluminum was made jointly by the architect and client, based partly on their preference for the appearance of the aluminum finish, partly on the comparative cost, and partly on the longer-than-usual guarantee which was offered by the aluminum producers. The General Bronze Corporation engineered and manufactured the ¼ inch thick aluminum panels, some as tall as 13 feet, which enclose the perimeter piers, as well as the extruded H-shaped aluminum mullions that flank the windows. Between the floors both natural-color and smaller black-porcelain-enameled panels were inserted. To permit “equal on-center spacing of vertical elements,” the panels and windows closest to the perimeter piers are partially concealed and appear less wide. At the base of the tower, adjoining the plaza, is the main lobby. This 30-foot-tall space is enclosed by plate glass windows that permit views into and through the block-long interior. From outside, one could originally see a mezzanine level occupied by loan officers (removed early 1990s) and the elevator banks, as well as the south facade of the neo-Renaissance facade of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (1924, a designated New York City Landmark) across Liberty Street and other neighboring structures. Such transparency appealed strongly to Rockefeller who later called SOM’s aluminum-andglass branch for the Manufacturer’s Hanover Trust Company: . . . a small architectural gem . . . the door to the giant vault – usually the sacred and secret core of the bank, hidden away in the bowels of the building – was visible from the street! But it was the light, almost ethereal quality of the building that caught everyone’s attention. Visible from all sides, Chase’s lobby is a grand and understated room, with a minimum of architectural detail. As in the lobby of the Seagram Building, the space is dominated by the textured surface of travertine walls that enclose six banks of elevators. The plaza was intended to be one of the project’s most dramatic and distinctive features. It isolates the tower from its older masonry neighbors and the empty space functions as an elegantly minimal forecourt or, as Architectural Forum described it, a “front yard.” Originally constructed with white marble terrazzo paving and enclosed by a solid parapet of white marble travertine that was personally selected by Bunshaft in Tivoli, Italy, the L-shaped plaza levels the sloping site and conceals six floors of operations that would have been difficult to fit into a single floor of the tower, including an auditorium seating 800, the world’s largest bank vault, and a staff cafeteria with the capacity to serve an estimated 10,000 meals a day. The bank’s main branch or head office was placed on the concourse level. Though set beneath the plaza, this spacious public branch receives natural light from a large oval well, ringed by a glazed barrier. With a diameter of 60 feet, it is positioned on the west side of the south plaza, slightly south of where Cedar Street originally ran. Sixteen feet deep, Severinghaus wrote: This feature had developed as a solution to the problem of where to put the public banking area, which was too large to be housed in the tower. The obvious location was under the plaza, but due to the adjacent street levels this was essentially a basement floor, which connoted secondary space. The introduction of the circular well brought light into the banking room and made it into prime first-floor space. Chase promoted its new headquarters as a successor to Rockefeller Center and it seems likely that the circular well was inspired by the sunken rectangular plaza located at the west end of Channel Gardens, between West 50 and 51 Streets. Both features contain fountains and works of art and were conceived to bring light and people to the lower floors. Isamu Noguchi, the artist who later created the “Sunken Garden,” served as a consultant on the plaza’s design. Early schemes, dating from 1956, included square- and rectangular-shaped wells in which a spiral staircase at the southwest corner served as a dramatic entrance to the bank. In 1957, however, the stairs were removed and the rectangle became a circle. Noguchi is often credited with this decision, which produces a gentle contrast between the tower’s gridded elevations and the open well. Visible to the public, Architectural Forum called it a “show window where bank tellers could look out through the curved glass windows and see gardens.” As originally built, the raised plaza was reached from three marble staircases, each with a different design. The widest and most elaborate stairs is located to the south and adjoins Pine Street. Due to the sloping site, it was designed with a second set of deep cantilevered risers to the east. The west stairs is located near the intersection of Nassau Street and Cedar Street and consists of two elements: a staircase that narrows slightly as it descends to the concourse level and behind it, a wider staircase, which rises onto the plaza. The east stairs descend to where William Street meets Cedar. In early proposals, it paralleled William Street but was likely reoriented to encourage east-west movement by pedestrians through the plaza from what remained of Cedar Street. Construction of the Tower Construction began in January 1957 and proceeded in two interconnected campaigns. The tower was completed in 1961 and the south plaza in 1964. It was an immensely complicated job, involving a great number of contractors and architectural consultants. At each and every stage, the bank found ways to generate media attention. For instance, Walter F. Hough, a long-time employee, “operated the controls of a power shovel to lift the first scoop of earth.” Work on the 2½ acre foundations by the Foundation Company of New York; George M. Brewster and Son, Inc. of New Jersey, and the Joseph Miele Construction Co., of New Jersey, began in March 1957 and was completed in November 1958. Excavations, said to be the largest in New York City history, reached a depth of 90 feet and the foundation engineers Moran, Proctor, Mueser & Rutlege developed an innovative system that allowed work in the open (without caissons), injecting gel into sand. The Turner Construction Company of New York served as general contractor and was responsible for erecting the tower. Weiskopf & Pickworth were the structural engineers. It has 53,000 ton steel frame that was manufactured by the Bethlehem Steel Company. At peak, nearly 1,800 construction workers were active on site. Work began in December 1958 and the structure was topped out less than a year later, in September 1959, as executives and two hundred invited guests watched the ceremonial hoisting of the United States flag by a steelworker from the Mohawk tribe wearing a headdress on closed circuit television. The curtain wall was finished in March 1960. Though a small number of staff began to occupy the building later that year, due to four city-wide strikes by construction workers, the move did not start until January 1961. The South Plaza and the “Sunken Garden” One Chase Manhattan Plaza was formally dedicated on March 17, 1961. At the time, a row of nine mature Hawthorne trees had been planted in circular pits along Nassau Street but work on the south plaza had not yet begun and guests in attendance were required to pass “wreckers demolishing seven adjoining buildings” on the south block. This spacious plaza was mostly complete in December 1963 and staff began to move into what was called the “Plaza Banking Office” in January 1964. To celebrate this milestone, a public party was held on May 7, 1964, enlivened by a band, tumblers, clowns and refreshments. Mayor Robert Wagner attended the noon-time ceremony, as did thousands of area workers. The south plaza’s most conspicuous feature is Isamu Noguchi’s “Sunken Garden.” At the urging of Bunshaft, the bank had begun to develop a major collection of contemporary art “to enrich and enliven bare walls and large spaces.” While the majority of pieces were privately displayed, this unique sculptural work was commissioned for public view. This type of patronage was not uncommon in the late 1950s when large, often colorful, pieces of abstract art were frequently introduced into office building lobbies, bank interiors, restaurants and airline terminals. Born in California in 1904, Noguchi studied in Paris with the Romanian sculptor Constantin Brancusi during the 1920s. His earliest public work in New York City is located in Rockefeller Center (begun 1931, a designated New York City Landmark, with some designated interiors). Titled News, this stainless steel relief depicts the work of the Associated Press. In subsequent years, he moved away from representational imagery, producing a varied group of stone sculptures with a Japanese spirit, as well as 14 gardens. Bunshaft and Noguchi were frequent collaborators and became close friends. Their earliest project was an unexecuted raised garden for Lever House, followed by a group of square courtyards at the Connecticut General Life Insurance Company Headquarters (1957), near Hartford. Work on the “Sunken Garden” began in 1961, during the period when Noguchi was planning a courtyard and sculptures for the Beinecke Library at Yale University. These commissions share many characteristics; neither can be entered and, like the Zen Gardens he and Bunshaft visited during a trip to Kyoto a year earlier, were conceived for contemplation. Enclosed by large glass windows, both can be viewed from above or in the round. While both incorporate patterned paving, they differ in shape, form, and materials. The Beinecke courtyard features a level rectangular base, but the garden at Chase was, according to the artist: “sculpturally treated – like the wild and surging shell of the sea and rising out or floating on it would be elemental rocks.” Noguchi selected seven black basalt rocks of various sizes taken from the bed of the Uji River near Kyoto, Japan. Reportedly weighing one to seven tons, he told the Herald Tribune in 1963: I wish the entire garden to be considered as a modern work of sculpture . . . the rocks I found in Japan for this garden contain a levitating as well as a gravitating quality. Some of them will seem to soar, others, remain close to the earth. Noguchi supervised the engineering and installation, overseeing 25 construction workers. The undulating surface is raised slightly above the floor in the bank branch and incorporates 27,000 four-inch-square grayish-white granite blocks from Vermont, as well as three fountains of varying character and intensity. A press release reported that these water features were: . . . made up of 45 vertical pipes which can produce a massive spray, a bubbling effect, or anything in between. The pipes are set in angular “concentric” patterns, with the three inner-most pipes marking the points of an equilateral triangle. The other two fountains consist of two intermediate-size stones, each drilled with two holes – for filling and drainage. These weep holes wet the stone with steady but imperceptable [sic] flow of water. Circular basins were designed to hold seasonal displays of water lilies, flowers, and plants. Such features, it was hoped, would “lend color and contrast to the basic design.” Water that spills out of the garden runs into a circular drainage trough, ringed by terrazzo panels similar to those originally used in the plaza. In addition, one of the curved glass panels that separate the garden from the bank pivots to allow gardeners and maintenance workers to enter the well. Shortly after completion, several goldfish were introduced by “some passer-by.” It became a novelty and a popular addition to Noguchi’s garden and the bank staff decided to add more. The New York Times reported in July 1964: But what people liked best . . . were the 100 large goldfish that flirted with the fountain’s currents. At noontime, fish-watchers often stood two or three deep. These fish, however, quickly died – apparently victims of the brass piping and copper found in the numerous pennies pitched into the pool. While the fountains continue to function during warm months, in recent decades the amount of water filling the garden, as well as the botanical displays, has been limited. Reception From the first public announcement that Chase Manhattan Bank would remain in the financial district to the completion of the south plaza in 1964, the building’s construction attracted considerable attention from local newspapers, professional journals, and general interest magazines. The bank published a “souvenir issue” of The Chase Manhattan News and a dozen “young ladies” were hired by the public relations department to lead clients and other visitors through the building. One of the most memorable views of the building that circulated was made by photographer Erich Locker. Widely used in advertisements and titled “The Chase Manhattan Tower at Dawn,” it depicted the new headquarters like a gleaming white knight rising to save the financial district. Most articles focused on the project’s size and its intended impact on lower Manhattan. The New York Times reported enthusiastically on the bank’s plans as early as 1955, saying it “would bring a touch of beauty to an area where heavy columned buildings have long been symbolic of high finance.” The plaza was anticipated to be “an oasis in the canyons.” As construction progressed, stories addressed Rockefeller’s wise leadership, as well as the use of supporting columns as “bold vertical accents” on the exterior. When the building opened in May 1961, Time magazine claimed the “new building unmistakably bears the Rockefeller touch” and the New York Times called it “New York’s newest landmark . . . A new peak in the skyline.” Shortly later, a nine-image photo essay was accompanied by captions that praised the bank for “bringing space, sunlight and beauty” to the city’s “stern, forbidding financial district” and when the plaza was formally opened, Mayor Robert Wagner was quoted as saying it was “an example of New York City’s endless renaissance.” Architecture critic Ada Louise Huxtable addressed the building in two related New York Times articles in late 1960. Both were written with an eye to the wider architectural context, comparing the bank’s headquarters to the Time-Life Building (Harrison & Abramowitz & Harris, 1956-60), as well as the Union Carbide Building (SOM, 1956-60). Huxtable wrote that these towers shared “a still too-rare esthetic excellence” and that “These are the kind of monumental undertakings that would make a Pharaoh or Roman emperor blush, and turn the Medici green with envy.” Her second essay described how few Manhattan buildings are deserving of the word “beauty” and how Chase Manhattan Plaza was an “impressive building with superbly integrated plaza, it carries the double promise of corporate efficiency and a more enduring value: significant civic beauty.” In 1962, critic Wolf von Eckardt wrote in the New Republic that while SOM’s design was “not sensationally original,” it was “another quiet triumph.”Sociologist William Whyte, writing for New York Magazine in 1974, called the plaza one of the city’s “great processional spaces” and the Daily News listed the building as having one of Manhattan’s ten best lobbies. Paul Goldberger, who succeeded Huxtable as architecture critic at the New York Times, was less enthusiastic. Writing in 1979, he appreciated the building’s impact on the surrounding neighborhood but criticized the plaza and its failed architectural “progeny.” Subsequent History At the time of completion, the building was 99% occupied. The bank filled the lower half of the building and the rest of the floors were leased to 61 outside tenants, with 2,500 employees. Most were involved in the financial industry, including E. F. Hutton, Fuji Bank, and Cravath Swaine & Moore. In addition, the Wall Street Club, a private luncheon club with historic links to Chase and its predecessors, operated a dozen dining rooms on the 59 floor. During the building’s first decade, the owners faced several challenges, including a fire in the sub-basement in 1962, “popping windows” in 1964, and a bombing in the bank’s international department on the 16 floor protesting the Vietnam War in November 1969. The 40-foot-tall Group of Four Trees (not part of designation), by the French artist Jean Dubuffet (1901-1985), was installed in the south plaza near the east stairs in 1971 and dedicated in October 1972. Chase began renovating the complex in 1991, following a late 1980s asbestos abatement. Not only were major tenants planning to relocate, but the bank was moving some of its back office operations to MetroTech Center in Brooklyn. Michael McCarthy (d. 2002) at SOM supervised the $30 million job, which began with the cleaning of the aluminum exterior. The terrazzo in the plaza was then replaced with granite pavers and the solid marble perimeter wall with glass. A fourth entrance was also added, a wide staircase in the west plaza, near the corner of Nassau and Liberty Streets. Work was completed by January 1994. Two years later, following a merger with Chemical Bank, the bank’s executive offices were moved to 270 Park Avenue, between 47 and 48Streets. In 2008, the south plaza was named to honor David Rockefeller and a small plaque was installed in the pavement, near the Dubuffet sculpture. The bank is currently known as J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and the building continues to be used by both bank employees and outside tenants. Description One Chase Manhattan Plaza occupies an irregularly-shaped site in lower Manhattan, bordered by Liberty Street, William Street, Pine Street (in part), and Nassau Street (in part). To the southwest is 20 Pine Street, a 1920s office building that has been converted to apartments. It is not part of the designation. The main elements in the complex include the aluminum and glass tower, as well as an extensive plaza with a circular sunken garden by Isamu Noguchi. Both the plaza’s gray granite paving and outer glass walls with stainless steel fittings are non-historic and date from the mid-1990s. Oriented from east to west, the 60-story tower rises on the northern part of the site, between the former path of Cedar Street and Liberty Street. The base of the tower is glazed and recessed from the above floors. The light-colored surface visible beneath the tower’s second floor has seams that align with the silver and black mullions that frame the large glass panels that enclose the lobby. The east and west elevations have four evenly-spaced aluminum-clad columns with a matte finish, two that are recessed at the plaza level and two that extend outside it, as part of the perimeter colonnade that extends from and continues along the north and south elevations. These projecting piers meet the facade and rise without interruption to the roof. Each bay contains six windows, flanked by H-shaped aluminum mullions . At most floors, the mullions extend over a black enameled aluminum panel, a vertical window, and an aluminum panel, but at the lowest level there is an additional aluminum panel that reads as a base. The four elevations are divided into four sections by horizontal ventilation louvers at the 11, 31 and 51floors. The uppermost section contains mechanical equipment and is disguised by metal roof enclosure, suggesting a crown. The lobby’s west elevation faces Nassau Street and contains two glazed revolving doors, flanked by security cameras set below the tower. The north doors are probably non-historic. The south elevation faces Pine Street and has two glazed revolving doors, near the east and west ends. The west doors are probably non-historic. Above these doors signs indicate: “ONE CHASE MANHATTAN PLAZA.” Between the two entrances, glass panels have been altered to create a third entrance, flanked by metal railings that extend onto the south plaza. The west plaza faces Nassau Street. The north corner stairs are not original. Added in the 1990s, both the risers and walls that flank the stairs are gray granite. To the south, adjoining the building at 20 Pine Street and aligned with Cedar Street, are two sets of staircases, a narrow staircase enclosed with glass walls that descends to the concourse level, and a wider staircase, with white marble cantilevered steps, extending from the north edge of the west plaza to 20 Pine Street, that rises east onto the south plaza. These staircases have non-historic aluminum handrails. There are seven historic circular white marble benches that enclose planting beds in the west plaza, as well as a red cedar totem pole by Ken Mowatt (1980, not part of the designation). The north plaza (currently closed to the public) is connected to the east and west plazas and visible from Liberty Street. This narrow triangular space incorporates two raised non-historic concrete planting beds, dating from the 1990s. The west planting bed features a continuous bench. The south plaza incorporates the former route of Cedar Street, and extends south to Pine Street. Along Pine Street, near William Street, is a wide marble staircase with cantilevered risers that ascends in two sections. To the west (left) of the stairs is non-historic ramp with glass walls, as well as a tree set into a square pit. To the east (right) of the stairs are a pair of historic aluminum flagpoles. Between the flagpoles is a non-historic “Downtown Manhattan” information sign. The plaza’s “Sunken Garden” is sited in a circular well between the south stairs and a raised cantilevered marble planting bed that is original and adjoins the east facade of 20 Pine Street. The 60-foot diameter garden is well preserved; it was designed to be viewed from the plaza and is ringed by the original glass panels, with stainless steel fittings. In the pavement of the plaza, close to the walls that enclose the circular well, are numerous round brass drains that empty via white spouts that are visible below the granite panels, beneath the plaza. Below, at the concourse level, the bank branch has curved glass walls framed with aluminum moldings that align with the seams that divide the white terrazzo pavement that encircles the fountain. The fountain itself incorporates black basalt rocks of various dimensions and undulating granite block pavers. At the south plaza’s east edge are twelve trees, aligned in two rows, from north to south, planted in circular pits. Between each row are four non-historic circular granite benches. North of the trees, aligned with Cedar Street, is a staircase that descends east, to William Street. Though the placement is original, the materials are non-historic, particularly on the south side, where the wall rises to become a sign for the bank, trimmed the aluminum and glass panels. The Jean Dubuffet sculpture (not part of the designation) is aligned with the staircase to be visible from both Nassau and William Streets. On the east side of the tower is a small rectangular plaza, overlooking William and Liberty Streets. Paved in non-historic granite, the east plaza adjoins the east stairs and is enclosed with non-historic glass walls. The east entrance to the concourse level is located close to where Cedar Street meets William Street. Set below the plaza level and aligned with the former path of Cedar Street, it contains two glazed revolving doors that flank a pair of glass doors. Above the doors, on a black background, are silver capital letters that spell: “ONE CHASE MANHATTAN PLAZA.” To either side of this recessed entrance are projecting polished black granite pillars that disguise ventilation equipment. Due to the slope of William Street, the groups of pillars on the north side are taller than those to the south, where a pair of black emergency exits adjoin the sidewalk. Liberty Street rises to the west and here the base of the building is used mainly for service needs. At the east end, near William Street, is a row of projecting polished black granite pillars, as well as seven black doors that function as emergency exits. In addition, from east to west, there is: a wide aluminum roll-down garage door flanked by metal traffic signals, painted yellow; a pair of black doors with rectangular windows and an aluminum handle; a pair of black doors with aluminum trim and thin vertical windows; two original glazed revolving doors that flank a fixed glass panel. These doors are flanked by non-historic handicap access entrances to either side. At the east and west of ends of Liberty Street, attached to granite walls, are non-historic signs on raised rectangular aluminum panels. - From the 2009 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: New York Stock Exchange http://flic.kr/p/9cML9A Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The New York Stock Exchange Building has been the home of the nation's principal securities market since 1903, the year of its completion. As a financial institution, the New York Stock Exchange has played a central role in American economic development. The building, designed by George B. Post, one of America's most prominent 19th-century architects, symbolizes the strength and security of the nation's financial community and the position of New York as its center. The design with its giant portico, colonnades, and sculpture imparts a sense of austerity and massiveness coupled with security, in keeping with the wishes of the clients. The building Continues to create a powerful presence for the Exchange in Mew York City and in the nation. History of the New York Stock Exchange New York City has long served as a financial market. Security transactions in the city may date back as far as 1725 when wheat, tobacco, and slaves, as well as securities were bought and sold in an auction market at the foot of Wall Street.1 From this time on, Wall Street remained the locus of financial activity in the city. In 1792 stock dealers and auctioneers were meeting each weekday noon at 22 Wall Street; according to tradition, at about the same time brokers began meeting under an old buttonwood tree at 68 Wall Street. This activity coincided with creation of the federal government system under the United States Constitution; speculation in Revolutionary War bonds and First Bank of the United States stock were the major transactions. By the end of 1792, security brokers had signed the Buttonwood Tree Agreement, leading to the formal organization of what was to become the New York Stock Exchange. The brokers made their first indoor headquarters at the newly-built Tontine Coffee House at the corner of Wall and Water streets in 1793. In 1817, after adopting a new name, the "New York Stock and Exchange Board," and writing a new constitution that brought new regularity to securities trading and made the board an exclusive organization, the members moved their offices to 40 Wall Street. The New York Stock and Exchange Board remained there until 1819; following this time the Exchange Board moved three times before settling into a somewhat permanent home at the Merchants' Exchange Building in 1827, staying there until a fire in 1835 destroyed the building. Despite the loss of its headquarters and the effects of the Panic of 1836-37, the Exchange Board endured. Temporary sites served until the Exchange Board moved into the Second Merchants' Exchange in 1842, remaining until 1854. The Cotton Exchange Building was headquarters in 1854-56 and the lord's Court Building served from 1856 to 1865, when the Exchange finally located on the present Broad Street site. By the middle of the 19th century, New York had eclipsed Philadelphia as the financial center of the nation, and the Exchange Board had developed into the nation's principal securities market. The Civil War was particularly beneficial for the prosperity of the Board as the speculative market grew dramatically. The Board adopted its present name, the New York Stock Exchange, in January 1863, purchased land for a new building that October, and moved into the completed building on Broad Street in December 1865. The period immediately after the Civil War saw an era of rapid growth for the United States with the settlement of the West, the building of the railroads, and the development of mass production techniques in manufacturing. The Exchange expanded with the economy, aided by such technological advances as the electric stock ticker (1867) and the telephone (1878) which linked the trading floor with brokers' offices and their customers. Although prosperity was interspersed with periods of national financial panic, the Exchange remained solvent. As the nation recovered from the Panic of 1893, the Exchange continued to grow. Annual securities sales volume rose to 265 million shares in 1901. Government investigations of the Exchange in 1909 and 1912, helped lead to the passage of the Federal Reserve Act of 19 13. The beginning of World War I led to further difficulties as European investors sold their American stocks to raise cash. Following the war the Stock Exchange entered a great period of growth and prosperity arising from several factors: "the United States' emergence as unquestionably the strongest country in the world and the possessor of an incomparable production system; an extensive U.S. foreign loan policy that made America a great creditor nation; the government's pro-business posture; the continuing growth and development of new industries; and the 'easy money' policy that the Federal Reserve banks adopted in 1927.The public entered the market in great numbers, and common stock trading soared. The Great Crash on October 29, 1929, brought a dramatic end to this speculative period, helping to trigger the Great Depression. Senate investigations in 1933-34 of the Stock Exchange and general securities market practices resulted in legislation subjecting all stock exchanges to extensive government control. While this marked the beginning of a period of "controlled capitalism," the signlficance of the New York Stock Exchange was not diminished during World War II it gained supremacy as the major institution of the world's major financial center as America became the world's most powerful nation. The position that the New York Stock Exchange gained early in the 19th century as the nation's principal securities market continues to be retained. The Stock Exchange Building and Its Architect The construction of the New York Stock Exchange Building coincided with the renewed prosperity of the turn of the century. The old Broad Street building was inadequate, and additional space was required. Several of the best-known architects of the city were asked to participate in a competition, the program of which was prepared with the assistance of Professor William Ware of Columbia University and Charles W. Clinton of Clinton & Russell. George B. Post, one of America's most prominent 19th-century architects was selected to design the new building. Demolition of the old building began in May 1901, the business of the Exchange relocating temporarily to the Produce Exchange Building; the cornerstone of the new building was laid on September 9, 1901; and the new building was occupied on April 22, 1903. George Browne Post (1837-1913) was born in New York City, educated at Churchill's School, and New York University, graduating as 3. civil engineer in 1858. Working in the office of Richard Morris ^-^Hunt until 1860, he formed a partnership with Charles D. Gambrill. Establishing his own practice in 1868, he soon made a reputation as one of the two or three architects in the vanguard of skeleton construction in commercial architecture. Winston Weisman writes, "His career started in a most dramatic fashion with participation in the conception of the first skyscraper, or elevator building, the Equitable [New York, with Arthur Gilman and Edward Kendall, 1868-70], and was followed by the taller Western Union [New York, 1873-75] His Mills Building [New York, 1881-83] was the first modern office building, his Produce Exchange [New York, 1881-85] a magnificent achievement in architectural engineering and utilitarian design. He soon won the admiration and acclaim of critic and client alike.in addition to the Produce Exchange, Post also designed the Cotton Exchange Building, New York (1883-85), and the Montreal Stock Exchange Building, demonstrating his success with this building type. By the beginning of the 20th century Post had both the experience and the prestige to take on such a challenging commission as the New York Stock Exchange Building. Post's Roman-inspired neo-classical design replaced the Stock Exchange's Second Empire building of 1863-65. By the end of the 19th century, the classical idiom had established itself as the mode for financial institutions. Its vocabulary was seen to imbue a building with an austerity and massiveness which were to symbolize the security and strength of the institution. In the Stock Exchange commission style took on a crucial programmatic meaning for the client. Post's use of classical sources earlier in his career, offer interesting precedents for his Stock Exchange design. The upper level of the main facade in Post's compeition drawing for the Dry Dock Savings Bank (1873) is very close in spirit to the main facade of the ""New York Stock Exchange. A colossal order topped by a pediment with an attic level above and a balustraded basement-Like level below is emp oyed as the crowning motif on the Dry Dock Savings Bank; in the Stock Exchange Post incorporates the entire facade into this motif. The use of a pediment crowning at colossal order appears again in Post's World or Pulitzer Building (1889-90). Here Post employs what is essentially a temple front to clothe the exterior of the building, placing fenestration in between the columns, thereby forming one large window or screen. Post's Manufacturers and Liberal Arts Building at the Chicago World's Columbian Exposition (1893) displayed both his engineering talents and his ability to use a classical vocabulary on a very large scale. The Bank of Pittsburgh of the following year is also defined by a temple front. In this building the pediment is supported by colossal columns, forming a portico. The pediment with figural sculpture illustrates Post's interest in orchestrating sculpture and architecture together in a way that offers variety and invention to his facades while enhancing their stylistic integrity. Post's design and engineering talents were both required to meet the demands of the new Stock Exchange Building. According to one contemporary account, "the improvements demanded by the brokers with one accord were: more space, more facility and convenience for the transaction of business, more light upon the Board Room [trading] floor, and better ventilation. Unless these improvements were affected to a very marked degree in the new building, it was a foregone conclusion that the latter would prove a mammoth failure regardless of other qualities." The problem was further complicated by the difficulties of the site. The lot was irregularly contoured, located on a hill rising to the north and northwest; the streets bounding the lot were at disparate levels because of the irregular contour; and subsoil conditions were peculiar. Moreover, the great safe deposit vault had to be safely placed in the interior. Post's winning design successfully met the challenges of program and site. Especially praised were the two great facades on Broad Street and New Street. Montgomery Schuyler wrote, "It was a very bold, but also a very just thing to do to make the whole front into this single sash frame, to use colossal Corinthian columns as the mullions of an opening embracing the whole elevation." P.C. Stuart commended the facades as "fulfilling] to a remarkable degree the practical requirements of lighting,. . .aesthetically they were no less successful, the unity of their design expressing the single great room within in a way that could not be misunderstood by any intelligent observer. An important element of the building is the figural sculpture, designed by John Qunicy Adams Ward (1830-1910) and executed by Paul Wayland Bartlett (1865-1925) placed in the pediment on the Broad Street facade.ward was one of America's most renowned 19th-century °culptors and especially commended for his bronze portrait statues of notable Americans. Bartlett was a promising young sculptor who later designed similar figural groups for the House of Representatives wing of the U.S. Capitol (1909) and the New York Public library (1915). Ward's composition was designed in 1903 as the building was nearing completion, but the marble figures were not actually carved until 1908-09. They depict "integrity Protecting the Works of Mm." Integrity is a female figure with outstretched arms accompanied by two children. To her right are a mechanic and his helper depicting Motive Power and figures depicting Scientific and Mechanical Appliances. To her left are a farmer and his wife depicting Agriculture and figures depicting Mining. Wayne Craven has described the iconography as "thoroughly American"; its subjects are the sources of 19th-century American prosperity and in turn the prosperity of the New York Stock Exchange. The style of the figures is classical--in contrast to Ward's more usual naturalistic style--in keeping with the symmetrical and severe classical nature of Post's design.^^ Description The New York Stock Exchange Building occupies a midblock site south of Wall Street which extends through the block from Broad Street to New Street. Because of the width of Broad Street, that' facade may be seen to better advantage, and it is the dominant one in the composition. This facade, executed in marble, is carefully designed to present a massive, austere, and symmetrical effect, yet to mitigate the irregularities of the site. The major portion of the facade is organized into the dominant portico. This is set on a two-story podium with a granite water table, organized into seven bays, which varies in height with the slope of the street. A cornerstone is inscribed "MCMI." At street level are seven flat-arched openings, five with doors and two center ones which are blind. Each opening has a lintel adorned with an elaborate fruit and flower swag and is surmounted by a handsome balustraded balcony carried on console brackets. Round-arched window openings with oak-leaf adorned bracketed keystones rise behind the balconies. The portico above is formed by six colossal fluted Corinthian columns, 52-1/2 feet high, flanked by unfluted Corinthian pilasters. Behind the colonnade is the much-praised glass curtain wall, measuring 96 feet wide and 50 feet high, placed to light the trading floor. Wrought- iron balustrades are placed between the columns. The glass panes of the curtain wall are framed in dark bronze. The columns continue up to an entablature with a frieze with leaves and flowers bearing the inscription "New York Stock Exchange." The pediment above is surrounded by a dentilled and modillioned cornice with an acanthus leave band in the rake of the pediment. The pediment opening is filled by Ward's sculptural group. The marble facing continuing up beyond the pediment is set in large panels. To the south of the portico is a relatively narrow bay extending the height of the Broad Street facade. This indicates the presence of an entrance lobby and stairway which were designed to provide access to offices adjacent to the major trading rooms. Because of the constraints of the site. Post found it more expeditious to create this asymmetrical arrangement. At street level a large double-height arched opening contains an entrance flanked by pilasters with Ionic capitals with swags. The lintel above the entrance is inscribed "Stock Exchange." A balustraded balcony above sets off the arch with its swag and cornucopia-adorned bracketed keystone. The doors themselves have been changed, and the original window ^t the second level has been removed and the opening filled in. Above the arch are simple paired window openings rising the height of the bay. Those at the third floor level are now blind. The entire Broad Street facade is surmounted by a shallow cornice composed of an egg and dart molding and regularly spaced carved lions heads, setting off a balustraded parapet. The New Street facade, while simpler, is a complementary part of the design, and its composition is related to the Broad Street facade. It too has a two-story podium with a granite water table, which varies in height with the slope of the street, but here the marble facing is rusticated instead of smooth. There are seven round-arched window openings, the northernmost above a service entrance. This facade is also dominated by a Corinthian colonnade above the podium, but the columns are unfluted. Smooth and rusticated Corinthian pilasters flank the colonnade. The glass curtain wall with bronze-framed panes behind the colonnade was also placed to light the trading floor. Wrought-iron balusters are placed at the base of the curtain wall between the columns. Above an entablature with a paneled frieze is a two-story attic level with double-height windows flanked by pilasters. Wrought-iron balconies mark the separation between the floor levels. A simple cornice surmounts the entire New Street facade. Conclusion The New York Stock Exchange continued to expand its facilities after Post's building was completed in 1903, building the 23-story building at 11 Wall street to the designs of Trowbridge & Livingston in 1922, and also moving into the building at 20 Broad Street constructed in 1954. Neither of these two later buildings is a part of this designation. Today Post's design continues to impart a sense of,austerity and massiveness coupled with security, in keeping with the original wishes of the Stock Exchange. The building, still the symbol of one this country's most important financial institutions, creates a powerful presence for the Exchange in New York City and in the nation. - From the 1985 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: City Bank-Farmers Trust Company Building http://flic.kr/p/9cMLtA Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Summary One of the most prominent features of the Lower Manhattan skyline, the fifty-nine-story City Bank-Farmers Trust tower is among New York City's tallest skyscrapers. Designed by the architectural firm of Cross & Cross in the restrained modern style once known as "Modern Classic," it was built in 1930-31 to be the Wall Street headquarters of one of the country's largest financial institutions, which survives today as Citibank. The steel-framed tower is sheathed in granite and limestone, making it, on completion, the world's tallest stone-faced building. Its lower portion is both massive, especially in contrast to the narrow streets, and dramatically vertical, organized around widely spaced giant piers which rise to freestanding stylized heroic figures said to represent "giants of finance." The main entrance, located on Exchange Place, is distinguished by its round arch surrounded by eleven coins of carved granite representing the various countries in which National City Bank had offices. Decorative doors of nickel silver with bronze trim and a variety of carved forms, many designed by British sculptor David Evans, adorn the lower floors. The slender, square tower with chamfered corners, rising slightly askew to the irregularly shaped base, today remains a commanding presence in the skyline of lower Manhattan, and one of the most noteworthy of the era's skyscrapers. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS City Bank-Farmers Trust, the National City Bank, and the Canadian Bank of Commerce No. 20 Exchange Place was built to house the head offices of one of Wall Street's new banking conglomerates, the City Bank-Farmers Trust Co., along with a branch of the National City Bank of New York and a branch of the Canadian Bank of Commerce.1 The City Bank-Farmers Trust Company was the product of a merger of two long-established banking firms: the National City Bank of New York and the Farmers Loan and Trust Company. The Canadian Bank of Commerce was a tenant in a building demolished to make way for the new tower and had been located on the site since as early as 1872. The National City Bank of New York, which survives today as Citibank, is among the country's largest and oldest banks, tracing its origins to the First Bank of the United States, founded in 1791, of which it was the New York branch. That branch was reorganized in 1812 as the City Bank of New York by Col. Samuel Osgood, the country's first Postmaster General and Treasury Commissioner. Moses Taylor, who took control of the bank after the financial panic of 1837, had it chartered in 1865 as a national bank, and renamed it the National City Bank of New York.3 By 1893, led by president James Stillman, the bank had become the city's largest, and the following year the country's largest. By 1920, it had b ecome the first American bank with assets totalling one billion dollars. During the 1920s, the National City Bank of New York became the country's first full-service bank; among many innovations, it was the first major bank to offer interest on savings accounts. Expanding dramatically during that decade, the National City Bank acquired the Commercial Exchange Bank, the Second National Bank, and the People's Trust Company of Brooklyn before merging with the Farmers' Loan and Trust Company in 1929. The Farmers Loan and Trust Company, founded in 1822, was the first trust company to be organized in New York, and is said to be the first "company of record to be incorporated for the purpose of executing trusts."4 Beginning as a fire insurance carrier, the company moved into agricultural loans, and grew enormously in the following two decades as farms expanded in New York State following the opening of the Erie Canal. After the Civil War, the Farmers Loan and Trust Company turned to railroad trust mortgages. By the turn of the century the company had established offices overseas, and in 1918 the company joined the Federal Reserve System. The Canadian Bank of Commerce was founded in 1867, the year of Canada's confederation, by Toronto businessman William McMaster.5 By the time of the First World War it had 379 branches, and during the 1920s almost doubled that number by acquiring the Bank of Hamilton and then the Standard Bank of Canada. Today, known as the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, it is Canada's second largest bank. The Site and Wall Street Banks The site of No. 20 Exchange Place is a small, irregular four-sided plot occupying the entire block bounded by Exchange Place, William Street, Beaver Street, and Hanover Street. This block lay within the original Dutch settlement of Nieuw Amsterdam, and is shown in part in the so-called Castello Plan, the earliest reliable surviving map of the colony.6 By the late nineteenth century, this block had become associated with the banking houses of Wall Street. Exchange Place itself was named for the old Merchants Exchange on Wall Street, which backed onto Exchange Place and was one of Wall Street's most important institutions; that building also served later as the U.S. Custom House. Maps of the area from 1899 show that while the blocks to the south of Hanover Square were still occupied by small loft buildings, the block now occupied by 20 Exchange Place had been redeveloped with larger structures, including two owned by the Farmers Loan & Trust Company.7 Wall Street had become almost exclusively a street of banks and exchanges as early as the 1820s. At first these institutions tended to move into former dwellings, but by the mid- 1840s most of them had erected new Greek Revival bank buildings. At mid-century many financial institutions responded to the increasing demand from private bankers and insurance companies eager to locate in the Wall Street area by replacing their earlier bank buildings with Italianate commercial palaces containing both banking rooms and several office floors. In the twentieth century, banks on Wall Street began to build skyscraper headquarters, notably the Bank of New York at 48 Wall Street, the Manhattan Company (predecessor of the Chase Manhattan Bank) at 40 Wall Street, Bankers Trust at 14 Wall Street, and the Irving Trust Company at 1 Wall Street. In 1907, the National City Bank acquired the old Merchants Exchange Building at 55 Wall Street, to capitalize on its historic connections to Wall Street and the financial world. Instead of demolishing the structure, the bank commissioned the prominent firm of McKim, Mead & White to double the building's size while maintaining something of its original architectural character. In 1929, following its merger with the Farmers Loan and Trust Company, National City Bank expanded its offices again, but instead of replacing 55 Wall Street with a skyscraper, the Bank acquired most of the block directly across Exchange Place from the rear of its still relatively new and prestigious headquarters building at 55 Wall Street,8 and began planning its new skyscraper headquarters at 20 Exchange Place. The new and old buildings were then connected by an enclosed pedestrian bridge (no longer in existence) over Exchange Place. The newly-named City Bank Farmers Trust Company hired the eminent architectural firm of Cross & Cross to design the new skyscraper. Cross & Cross The firm of Cross & Cross was formed in 1907 by broth ers John Walter Cross (1878-1951) and Eliot Cross (18 84-1949). John, who studied architecture at Columbia, and then at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris, served as the firm's chief designer. Eliot took charge of the real-estate end of the business.10 In 1922 he organized the real estate investment firm of Webb and Knapp, and served as chairman of the board until he retired in 1947.11 Both firms, Cross & Cross and Webb and Knapp, had offices in the Knapp Building, 385 Madison Avenue, previously two buildings combined into one and altered to designs by Cross & Cross in 1923. The building commissions of Cross & Cross fall into three general categories: 1) smaller-scaled buildings including private residences, churches, clubs, neighborhood bank branches, and schools; 2) hotel and apartment buildings; and 3) tall office buildings. The firm's early design work reflects John Cross's architectural education in the French Beaux-Arts tradition, as at the Church of Notre Dame, at Morningside Drive and West 114th Street, designed in 1914 and modeled on the church of the Invalides, one of the most famous eighteenth-century buildings in Paris.12 Their designs for other small-scale work, and for hotels and apartment buildings, tended to the eighteenth-century English style, either Georgian or Adamesque. Their designs for tall office buildings initially drew inspiration from Classical or Gothic ornamental patterns, but in the late 1920s moved in the general direction of Art Deco. In the late 1920s, the office buildings of Cross & Cross began to show the influence ofmodern design. The first to begin to do so was the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company B uilding, begun in 1929 in a "Modern Classic" style. Two bank, office and storage buildings designed for the Centrum corporation, the real-estate arm of the Central Hanover Bank & Trust, at 271 Church Street and 335 Greenwich Street (both 1930), continued the evolution of their design in a modernist direction. The culmination of this tendency in the work of Cross & Cross came in the RCA Victor Building (1929-31, later known as the General Electric Building) at 570 Lexington Avenue, a designated New York City Landmark, which is one of New York's finest Art Deco skyscrapers. Design and construction of the tower Contender for "world's tallest building": The design for No. 20 Exchange Place went through several versions, ranging from a moderately short office building to the tallest building in the world, before taking final shape as the city's fourth tallest, a 60-story tower. The late 1920s saw a spate of announcements of office buildings intended to wrest the title of "world's tallest building" away from the Woolworth Building (completed in 1913). When City Bank-Farmers Trust filed plans in October 1929 for a 66-story building 846.4 feet high,14 it staked a claim to the title.15 The new skyscraper was to be a set-back building with a "tower eighty feet square rising from the twenty-eighth floor. The tower will taper off from the fiftieth floor and at the top will be an illuminated globe fifteen feet in diameter, supported by four eagles of heroic size. The general style will be conservative modern." Within a month of filing, however, a proposed merger of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company with the Corn Exchange Bank, which would have created the world's wealthiest bank, fell through, a victim of the stock market crash.17 The following year City Bank-Farmers Trust scaled back the plans of its tower to 685 feet 7 1/8 inches.18 When it opened in February 1931, though no longer in the running for the title of "world's tallest," 20 Exchange Place claimed the lesser distinction of being the tallest building with a predominantly stone facade. Engineering feat: Despite its substantial size, the new tower was completed in less than a year, an especially noteworthy achievement considering the special difficulties the site presented to its builder, the George A. Fuller Company, and the foundation and tower engineers, Moran & Proctor.20 Site conditions including quicksand, water, and old foundations created the need for heavy cross-lot bracing, while the building's unusual shape required heavy steel construction. The excavation took the lower basement to 40 feet below water level, dug out of solid rock. Other structural feats included the accommodation of what was called the largest pneumatic tube communication system ever devised for a banking house.21 The form and style of the tower: The style and ornament of the tall slender tower of 20 Exchange Place have been called Art Deco. Although the design reflects the general trends of late 1920s skyscrapers, the building has a minimum of specifically "Art Deco" ornament. Similarly stylized versions of classical forms were sometimes referred to as "Modern Classic."22 Cross & Cross believed that the building's design fell into no particular stylistic category, and wrote about its design in terms sugge sting a familiarity with Modern architectural theory: The architects hold no brieffor any particular architectural style and have been at some pains to clothe the structure in material and form to serve as a frank expression of the mechanical and economic forces involved and at the same time to express, with some degree of originality, the place of the building in the life of its location.23 An important part of the design conception was the architects' insistence on fine materials. Unlike other tall buildings of the 1920s conceived originally with stone facades but executed, for reasons of economy, in brick or terra-cotta, 20 Exchange Place is sheathed almost completely in stone: Mohegan Granite at the base, and Alabama Rookwood veined gray limestone on all the upper stories.24 They also used, instead of bronze, an unusual alloy of nickel, white in color, known as nickel silver, "[f]or the first time in a major structure," according to contemporary accounts, specifically to avoid "colored metal" in the building. The contrast with the architects' profusely ornamental Art Deco design for the almost contemporary RCA Victor (later General Electric) Building at 570 Lexington Avenue is striking. The two buildings share a strong vertical emphasis and a sculptural approach to massing. City Bank-Farmers Trust has no profusion of Art Deco ornament, but like the RCA Victor Building it relies for effect on its profile, the richness of its materials, and -- if to a lesser extent -- the architects' much noted high quality ornament. The crowning eagles and lantern of the original proposal did not survive in the final version. The building is adorned, however, by programmatic sculpture and reliefs symbolizing the banking companies it was built to house, ranging from representations of industry and the professions to the coinage of countries where the banks had branches. Contemporary assessment: On the opening of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company Building, the New York Times called it a "magnificent building," and noted that it "has been called one of the handsomest buildings, architecturally, in the city."26 Parker Chase, in his 1932 book New York The Wonder City, wrote: Everything in connection with this monumental building expresses beauty, completeness and grandeur. ...every detail of this colossal structure is right up to the minute. The building throughout is the very last word in all that spells DELUXE.... No one visiting New York should fail to visit the "City Bank Farmers Trust" edifice -- this magnificent and beautiful pile of marble, stone, and masonry is one of the sights of the city. Description The form of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company building (Fig. 1) follows the basic configuration mandated by zoning regulations. Filling out the block at street level, it rises through a series of setbacks to a slender tower. Because the site is irregularly shaped, so is the building's lower portion. The tower, however, is square in plan, with chamfered corners, and rises askew to the base. The transition from the irregular base to the square tower is accomplished by manipulating the shape of the third setback at the twenty-first story and creating sympathetic facade verticals to ease the transition between the symmetries of the lower and tower elevations. Seen in the skyline, the tower appears as a regular geometric form rising dramatically from a low, bulky base. Framed with steel, the building is sheathed in Mohegan granite at the basement and carved entrances, in Alabama Rookwood limestone above, and in limestone and brick in the tower. The elevations are framed by vertical piers; at the base some spandrels are of blue pearl granite and others of aluminum. The tower has spandrels of aluminum. Many of the spandrels have applied medallions. The windows are steel-framed with one-over-one sash. The ornamental scheme is largely confined to the building's lower portion, especially the entrances and the setbacks. Much of the ornament, including pilaster caps, cornices, and nickel silver grilles, is the work of British sculptor David Evans. (Fig. 2) This designation does not include the building's interior spaces. Base The basement level of the building is faced in granite, and terminates in an overscaled molding. Set into the basement are square openings with grilles, some of nickel silver and others of carved stonework. The names of each street are carved into the stone at the corners. (Fig. 3) Exchange Place entrance: The main entrance to the building, at 20 Exchange Place, is a round-arched portal of carved Mohegan granite. (Fig. 4) Its chief adornment is a series of eleven carved granite replicas of coins, which represent countries with branches of the National City Bank, set on a background of abstract foliate forms. Above and to either side of the portal are large medallions, to the right a seal of the National City Company (Fig. 5), and to the left a seal of the National City Bank (Fig. 6). The entrance, approached by several steps, is set behind a deep reveal, to which a modern set of revolving doors has been added at the location of the original doors; windows above the doors fill in the arch. There is a non-historic stainless steel grille on the left within the entranceway, and on the right an original nickel silver door with abstract geometric detailing. A period light fixture hangs from the apex of the reveal, from a stone soffit of intersecting triangles. The portal is flanked by illuminated signs with the building's address; the nickel silver framing appears to be original. A flagpole is set above the Exchange Place entrance at the fifth floor level. William Street entrance: At the corner of William Street and Exchange Place is an entrance set in a carved reveal leading to a rotunda and the former senior officers' room of City Bank-Farmers Trust. The four doors are of nickel silver, a white alloy of nickel, zinc and copper, with bronze trim. (Fig. 8) Both the two round doors in the center and the two flanking flat doors include a series of panels representing various forms of transportation. The panels in the center doors show historic transportation methods including sailing ships, hot air balloons, and steam locomotives. Those on the sides show modern transportation, including airplanes, ocean liners, and diesel engines. Two nickel silver panels above the doors include in their ornamentation two allegorical figures in bronze, one with a cornucopia suggesting abundance, the other with a lock and key suggesting the prudence of banking. They are surrounded by a variety of animal figures and abstract floral forms. Four owls stand on the top of the panels. The glass panes above, in the upper half of the entranceway, are set into a nickel silver framework trimmed in bronze, including still more symbols of industry, including scales, hourglasses, sheaves of wheat, and mechanical gears. Above the entrance is another large stone medallion, this one showing the seal of the City-Bank-Farmers Trust Company. There is a flagpole above the fourth-floor level. Beaver and William Street entrance: A similar but less elaborate set of doors with scenes of transportation survives at the corner of Beaver and William Streets. (Fig. 9) Here there are only two doors, not four; they repeat the scenes of the modern transportation series. Panels above with ornamental patterns centering on sheaves of wheat have been removed. Beaver Street entrance: The rear entrance to the tower, in the middle of the Beaver Street facade, is through three round-arched openings. (Fig. 10) Above the middle opening is another stone medallion. (Fig. 11) Within the middle archway is a service entrance. Above the door is a carved bison head flanked by reliefs of coiled snakes. (Fig. 12) In each flanking arch is a set of four doors, framed in nickel silver, with marble transoms and multi-pane windows set in decorative nickel silver framing. Hanover Street entrance: The Hanover Street entrance set in a carved reveal (Fig. 13) leads to the branch office originally created for the Canadian Bank of Commerce. The nickel silver entrance doors with bronze trim repeat the design of the doors at William Street almost exactly, with the one exception that in the nickel silver grilles above the doors with scenes of transportation, in place of the allegorical figures suggesting abundance and prudence there are two caducei, ancient Greek symbols of commerce. The entrance itself is set within a round-arched double-height opening with ornate framing. There is a triple flagpole above this entrance. The remainder of the main double-height level is punctuated by large square-headed window openings with heavy stone lintels. (Fig. 14) Each lintel has a replica of an historic coin in its center. (Fig. 15) Each window opening has a deeply recessed multi-pane window set in decorative nickel silver framing, protected by a nickel silver grille. (Fig. 16) Each grille includes in its ornament a figure representing one of the professions set in a square panel at either end of the grille, flanking a long panel with a fasces -- a tied bundle of sticks. Each set of large window openings, whether one on Hanover, three on Exchange Place, or five on William Street, is flanked by two much narrower and shorter openings, each with a simple nickel silver grille at the base and a keystone at its top center. Above this level of openings runs a series of small, plain square-headed windows, at the level of the large stone medallions above the entrances. A final level of larger, square-headed windows in deep openings encircles the building; it is topped by a band of abstract geometric panels. (Fig. 17) Above all this rise the largely unadorned elevations of the remainder of the base, and the tower. Setbacks At the nineteenth-floor setback, a set of fourteen enormous sculptural heads, representing "giants of finance,"28 and apparently modeled on Greek and Assyrian sources, stare down at the street. (Fig. 18) Not all piers end in these heads, just those that visually line up with the tower above. Flanking piers end at the seventeenth floor and have large statues of eagles perched atop them. Tower The tower, which has little ornament, is defined by broader and slenderer piers, faced with brick, framing uninterrupted vertical bays of paired windows and spandrels. The windows are one-over-one double-hung steel sash. The top level of spandrels are aluminum, rather than stone. Two levels of horizontal ashlar bands wrap around the dark brick center bays, visually binding the tower. Tall arches at the top support a double-tiered crown. Communications equipment has been placed on top of the tower. Throughout the building, such symbols of modern industry as airplanes, ocean-liners, and even a portrait of the skyscraper itself29 are interwoven with traditional designs in pilaster caps and panels. Subsequent history Surviving the stock-market crash of 1929 thanks to its size and organization, the National City Bank of New York continued on through the Depression and World War II. It was renamed the First National City Bank of New York in 1955, in 1962 became the First National City Bank, and in 1976 became Citibank, part of the larger Citicorp. The City Bank-Farmers Trust, which had been a State-chartered affiliate of the nationally chartered City Bank, has gone out of existence. Citibank headquarters remained at 20 Exchange Place until 1956, when it moved to midtown Manhattan. Even so, Citibank owned 20 Exchange Place until 1979, and remained a tenant in the building until 1989.30 The Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce closed its branch and offices at 20 Exchange Place in 1989, consolidating its operations in its midtown location at 425 Lexington Avenue. Today 20 Exchange Place is a commercial office building, owned by the West World Holding Company, Inc. - From the 1996 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: City Bank-Farmers Trust Company Building http://flic.kr/p/9cMMCh Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Summary One of the most prominent features of the Lower Manhattan skyline, the fifty-nine-story City Bank-Farmers Trust tower is among New York City's tallest skyscrapers. Designed by the architectural firm of Cross & Cross in the restrained modern style once known as "Modern Classic," it was built in 1930-31 to be the Wall Street headquarters of one of the country's largest financial institutions, which survives today as Citibank. The steel-framed tower is sheathed in granite and limestone, making it, on completion, the world's tallest stone-faced building. Its lower portion is both massive, especially in contrast to the narrow streets, and dramatically vertical, organized around widely spaced giant piers which rise to freestanding stylized heroic figures said to represent "giants of finance." The main entrance, located on Exchange Place, is distinguished by its round arch surrounded by eleven coins of carved granite representing the various countries in which National City Bank had offices. Decorative doors of nickel silver with bronze trim and a variety of carved forms, many designed by British sculptor David Evans, adorn the lower floors. The slender, square tower with chamfered corners, rising slightly askew to the irregularly shaped base, today remains a commanding presence in the skyline of lower Manhattan, and one of the most noteworthy of the era's skyscrapers. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS City Bank-Farmers Trust, the National City Bank, and the Canadian Bank of Commerce No. 20 Exchange Place was built to house the head offices of one of Wall Street's new banking conglomerates, the City Bank-Farmers Trust Co., along with a branch of the National City Bank of New York and a branch of the Canadian Bank of Commerce.1 The City Bank-Farmers Trust Company was the product of a merger of two long-established banking firms: the National City Bank of New York and the Farmers Loan and Trust Company. The Canadian Bank of Commerce was a tenant in a building demolished to make way for the new tower and had been located on the site since as early as 1872. The National City Bank of New York, which survives today as Citibank, is among the country's largest and oldest banks, tracing its origins to the First Bank of the United States, founded in 1791, of which it was the New York branch. That branch was reorganized in 1812 as the City Bank of New York by Col. Samuel Osgood, the country's first Postmaster General and Treasury Commissioner. Moses Taylor, who took control of the bank after the financial panic of 1837, had it chartered in 1865 as a national bank, and renamed it the National City Bank of New York.3 By 1893, led by president James Stillman, the bank had become the city's largest, and the following year the country's largest. By 1920, it had b ecome the first American bank with assets totalling one billion dollars. During the 1920s, the National City Bank of New York became the country's first full-service bank; among many innovations, it was the first major bank to offer interest on savings accounts. Expanding dramatically during that decade, the National City Bank acquired the Commercial Exchange Bank, the Second National Bank, and the People's Trust Company of Brooklyn before merging with the Farmers' Loan and Trust Company in 1929. The Farmers Loan and Trust Company, founded in 1822, was the first trust company to be organized in New York, and is said to be the first "company of record to be incorporated for the purpose of executing trusts."4 Beginning as a fire insurance carrier, the company moved into agricultural loans, and grew enormously in the following two decades as farms expanded in New York State following the opening of the Erie Canal. After the Civil War, the Farmers Loan and Trust Company turned to railroad trust mortgages. By the turn of the century the company had established offices overseas, and in 1918 the company joined the Federal Reserve System. The Canadian Bank of Commerce was founded in 1867, the year of Canada's confederation, by Toronto businessman William McMaster.5 By the time of the First World War it had 379 branches, and during the 1920s almost doubled that number by acquiring the Bank of Hamilton and then the Standard Bank of Canada. Today, known as the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, it is Canada's second largest bank. The Site and Wall Street Banks The site of No. 20 Exchange Place is a small, irregular four-sided plot occupying the entire block bounded by Exchange Place, William Street, Beaver Street, and Hanover Street. This block lay within the original Dutch settlement of Nieuw Amsterdam, and is shown in part in the so-called Castello Plan, the earliest reliable surviving map of the colony.6 By the late nineteenth century, this block had become associated with the banking houses of Wall Street. Exchange Place itself was named for the old Merchants Exchange on Wall Street, which backed onto Exchange Place and was one of Wall Street's most important institutions; that building also served later as the U.S. Custom House. Maps of the area from 1899 show that while the blocks to the south of Hanover Square were still occupied by small loft buildings, the block now occupied by 20 Exchange Place had been redeveloped with larger structures, including two owned by the Farmers Loan & Trust Company.7 Wall Street had become almost exclusively a street of banks and exchanges as early as the 1820s. At first these institutions tended to move into former dwellings, but by the mid- 1840s most of them had erected new Greek Revival bank buildings. At mid-century many financial institutions responded to the increasing demand from private bankers and insurance companies eager to locate in the Wall Street area by replacing their earlier bank buildings with Italianate commercial palaces containing both banking rooms and several office floors. In the twentieth century, banks on Wall Street began to build skyscraper headquarters, notably the Bank of New York at 48 Wall Street, the Manhattan Company (predecessor of the Chase Manhattan Bank) at 40 Wall Street, Bankers Trust at 14 Wall Street, and the Irving Trust Company at 1 Wall Street. In 1907, the National City Bank acquired the old Merchants Exchange Building at 55 Wall Street, to capitalize on its historic connections to Wall Street and the financial world. Instead of demolishing the structure, the bank commissioned the prominent firm of McKim, Mead & White to double the building's size while maintaining something of its original architectural character. In 1929, following its merger with the Farmers Loan and Trust Company, National City Bank expanded its offices again, but instead of replacing 55 Wall Street with a skyscraper, the Bank acquired most of the block directly across Exchange Place from the rear of its still relatively new and prestigious headquarters building at 55 Wall Street,8 and began planning its new skyscraper headquarters at 20 Exchange Place. The new and old buildings were then connected by an enclosed pedestrian bridge (no longer in existence) over Exchange Place. The newly-named City Bank Farmers Trust Company hired the eminent architectural firm of Cross & Cross to design the new skyscraper. Cross & Cross The firm of Cross & Cross was formed in 1907 by broth ers John Walter Cross (1878-1951) and Eliot Cross (18 84-1949). John, who studied architecture at Columbia, and then at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris, served as the firm's chief designer. Eliot took charge of the real-estate end of the business.10 In 1922 he organized the real estate investment firm of Webb and Knapp, and served as chairman of the board until he retired in 1947.11 Both firms, Cross & Cross and Webb and Knapp, had offices in the Knapp Building, 385 Madison Avenue, previously two buildings combined into one and altered to designs by Cross & Cross in 1923. The building commissions of Cross & Cross fall into three general categories: 1) smaller-scaled buildings including private residences, churches, clubs, neighborhood bank branches, and schools; 2) hotel and apartment buildings; and 3) tall office buildings. The firm's early design work reflects John Cross's architectural education in the French Beaux-Arts tradition, as at the Church of Notre Dame, at Morningside Drive and West 114th Street, designed in 1914 and modeled on the church of the Invalides, one of the most famous eighteenth-century buildings in Paris.12 Their designs for other small-scale work, and for hotels and apartment buildings, tended to the eighteenth-century English style, either Georgian or Adamesque. Their designs for tall office buildings initially drew inspiration from Classical or Gothic ornamental patterns, but in the late 1920s moved in the general direction of Art Deco. In the late 1920s, the office buildings of Cross & Cross began to show the influence ofmodern design. The first to begin to do so was the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company B uilding, begun in 1929 in a "Modern Classic" style. Two bank, office and storage buildings designed for the Centrum corporation, the real-estate arm of the Central Hanover Bank & Trust, at 271 Church Street and 335 Greenwich Street (both 1930), continued the evolution of their design in a modernist direction. The culmination of this tendency in the work of Cross & Cross came in the RCA Victor Building (1929-31, later known as the General Electric Building) at 570 Lexington Avenue, a designated New York City Landmark, which is one of New York's finest Art Deco skyscrapers. Design and construction of the tower Contender for "world's tallest building": The design for No. 20 Exchange Place went through several versions, ranging from a moderately short office building to the tallest building in the world, before taking final shape as the city's fourth tallest, a 60-story tower. The late 1920s saw a spate of announcements of office buildings intended to wrest the title of "world's tallest building" away from the Woolworth Building (completed in 1913). When City Bank-Farmers Trust filed plans in October 1929 for a 66-story building 846.4 feet high,14 it staked a claim to the title.15 The new skyscraper was to be a set-back building with a "tower eighty feet square rising from the twenty-eighth floor. The tower will taper off from the fiftieth floor and at the top will be an illuminated globe fifteen feet in diameter, supported by four eagles of heroic size. The general style will be conservative modern." Within a month of filing, however, a proposed merger of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company with the Corn Exchange Bank, which would have created the world's wealthiest bank, fell through, a victim of the stock market crash.17 The following year City Bank-Farmers Trust scaled back the plans of its tower to 685 feet 7 1/8 inches.18 When it opened in February 1931, though no longer in the running for the title of "world's tallest," 20 Exchange Place claimed the lesser distinction of being the tallest building with a predominantly stone facade. Engineering feat: Despite its substantial size, the new tower was completed in less than a year, an especially noteworthy achievement considering the special difficulties the site presented to its builder, the George A. Fuller Company, and the foundation and tower engineers, Moran & Proctor.20 Site conditions including quicksand, water, and old foundations created the need for heavy cross-lot bracing, while the building's unusual shape required heavy steel construction. The excavation took the lower basement to 40 feet below water level, dug out of solid rock. Other structural feats included the accommodation of what was called the largest pneumatic tube communication system ever devised for a banking house.21 The form and style of the tower: The style and ornament of the tall slender tower of 20 Exchange Place have been called Art Deco. Although the design reflects the general trends of late 1920s skyscrapers, the building has a minimum of specifically "Art Deco" ornament. Similarly stylized versions of classical forms were sometimes referred to as "Modern Classic."22 Cross & Cross believed that the building's design fell into no particular stylistic category, and wrote about its design in terms sugge sting a familiarity with Modern architectural theory: The architects hold no brieffor any particular architectural style and have been at some pains to clothe the structure in material and form to serve as a frank expression of the mechanical and economic forces involved and at the same time to express, with some degree of originality, the place of the building in the life of its location.23 An important part of the design conception was the architects' insistence on fine materials. Unlike other tall buildings of the 1920s conceived originally with stone facades but executed, for reasons of economy, in brick or terra-cotta, 20 Exchange Place is sheathed almost completely in stone: Mohegan Granite at the base, and Alabama Rookwood veined gray limestone on all the upper stories.24 They also used, instead of bronze, an unusual alloy of nickel, white in color, known as nickel silver, "[f]or the first time in a major structure," according to contemporary accounts, specifically to avoid "colored metal" in the building. The contrast with the architects' profusely ornamental Art Deco design for the almost contemporary RCA Victor (later General Electric) Building at 570 Lexington Avenue is striking. The two buildings share a strong vertical emphasis and a sculptural approach to massing. City Bank-Farmers Trust has no profusion of Art Deco ornament, but like the RCA Victor Building it relies for effect on its profile, the richness of its materials, and -- if to a lesser extent -- the architects' much noted high quality ornament. The crowning eagles and lantern of the original proposal did not survive in the final version. The building is adorned, however, by programmatic sculpture and reliefs symbolizing the banking companies it was built to house, ranging from representations of industry and the professions to the coinage of countries where the banks had branches. Contemporary assessment: On the opening of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company Building, the New York Times called it a "magnificent building," and noted that it "has been called one of the handsomest buildings, architecturally, in the city."26 Parker Chase, in his 1932 book New York The Wonder City, wrote: Everything in connection with this monumental building expresses beauty, completeness and grandeur. ...every detail of this colossal structure is right up to the minute. The building throughout is the very last word in all that spells DELUXE.... No one visiting New York should fail to visit the "City Bank Farmers Trust" edifice -- this magnificent and beautiful pile of marble, stone, and masonry is one of the sights of the city. Description The form of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company building (Fig. 1) follows the basic configuration mandated by zoning regulations. Filling out the block at street level, it rises through a series of setbacks to a slender tower. Because the site is irregularly shaped, so is the building's lower portion. The tower, however, is square in plan, with chamfered corners, and rises askew to the base. The transition from the irregular base to the square tower is accomplished by manipulating the shape of the third setback at the twenty-first story and creating sympathetic facade verticals to ease the transition between the symmetries of the lower and tower elevations. Seen in the skyline, the tower appears as a regular geometric form rising dramatically from a low, bulky base. Framed with steel, the building is sheathed in Mohegan granite at the basement and carved entrances, in Alabama Rookwood limestone above, and in limestone and brick in the tower. The elevations are framed by vertical piers; at the base some spandrels are of blue pearl granite and others of aluminum. The tower has spandrels of aluminum. Many of the spandrels have applied medallions. The windows are steel-framed with one-over-one sash. The ornamental scheme is largely confined to the building's lower portion, especially the entrances and the setbacks. Much of the ornament, including pilaster caps, cornices, and nickel silver grilles, is the work of British sculptor David Evans. (Fig. 2) This designation does not include the building's interior spaces. Base The basement level of the building is faced in granite, and terminates in an overscaled molding. Set into the basement are square openings with grilles, some of nickel silver and others of carved stonework. The names of each street are carved into the stone at the corners. (Fig. 3) Exchange Place entrance: The main entrance to the building, at 20 Exchange Place, is a round-arched portal of carved Mohegan granite. (Fig. 4) Its chief adornment is a series of eleven carved granite replicas of coins, which represent countries with branches of the National City Bank, set on a background of abstract foliate forms. Above and to either side of the portal are large medallions, to the right a seal of the National City Company (Fig. 5), and to the left a seal of the National City Bank (Fig. 6). The entrance, approached by several steps, is set behind a deep reveal, to which a modern set of revolving doors has been added at the location of the original doors; windows above the doors fill in the arch. There is a non-historic stainless steel grille on the left within the entranceway, and on the right an original nickel silver door with abstract geometric detailing. A period light fixture hangs from the apex of the reveal, from a stone soffit of intersecting triangles. The portal is flanked by illuminated signs with the building's address; the nickel silver framing appears to be original. A flagpole is set above the Exchange Place entrance at the fifth floor level. William Street entrance: At the corner of William Street and Exchange Place is an entrance set in a carved reveal leading to a rotunda and the former senior officers' room of City Bank-Farmers Trust. The four doors are of nickel silver, a white alloy of nickel, zinc and copper, with bronze trim. (Fig. 8) Both the two round doors in the center and the two flanking flat doors include a series of panels representing various forms of transportation. The panels in the center doors show historic transportation methods including sailing ships, hot air balloons, and steam locomotives. Those on the sides show modern transportation, including airplanes, ocean liners, and diesel engines. Two nickel silver panels above the doors include in their ornamentation two allegorical figures in bronze, one with a cornucopia suggesting abundance, the other with a lock and key suggesting the prudence of banking. They are surrounded by a variety of animal figures and abstract floral forms. Four owls stand on the top of the panels. The glass panes above, in the upper half of the entranceway, are set into a nickel silver framework trimmed in bronze, including still more symbols of industry, including scales, hourglasses, sheaves of wheat, and mechanical gears. Above the entrance is another large stone medallion, this one showing the seal of the City-Bank-Farmers Trust Company. There is a flagpole above the fourth-floor level. Beaver and William Street entrance: A similar but less elaborate set of doors with scenes of transportation survives at the corner of Beaver and William Streets. (Fig. 9) Here there are only two doors, not four; they repeat the scenes of the modern transportation series. Panels above with ornamental patterns centering on sheaves of wheat have been removed. Beaver Street entrance: The rear entrance to the tower, in the middle of the Beaver Street facade, is through three round-arched openings. (Fig. 10) Above the middle opening is another stone medallion. (Fig. 11) Within the middle archway is a service entrance. Above the door is a carved bison head flanked by reliefs of coiled snakes. (Fig. 12) In each flanking arch is a set of four doors, framed in nickel silver, with marble transoms and multi-pane windows set in decorative nickel silver framing. Hanover Street entrance: The Hanover Street entrance set in a carved reveal (Fig. 13) leads to the branch office originally created for the Canadian Bank of Commerce. The nickel silver entrance doors with bronze trim repeat the design of the doors at William Street almost exactly, with the one exception that in the nickel silver grilles above the doors with scenes of transportation, in place of the allegorical figures suggesting abundance and prudence there are two caducei, ancient Greek symbols of commerce. The entrance itself is set within a round-arched double-height opening with ornate framing. There is a triple flagpole above this entrance. The remainder of the main double-height level is punctuated by large square-headed window openings with heavy stone lintels. (Fig. 14) Each lintel has a replica of an historic coin in its center. (Fig. 15) Each window opening has a deeply recessed multi-pane window set in decorative nickel silver framing, protected by a nickel silver grille. (Fig. 16) Each grille includes in its ornament a figure representing one of the professions set in a square panel at either end of the grille, flanking a long panel with a fasces -- a tied bundle of sticks. Each set of large window openings, whether one on Hanover, three on Exchange Place, or five on William Street, is flanked by two much narrower and shorter openings, each with a simple nickel silver grille at the base and a keystone at its top center. Above this level of openings runs a series of small, plain square-headed windows, at the level of the large stone medallions above the entrances. A final level of larger, square-headed windows in deep openings encircles the building; it is topped by a band of abstract geometric panels. (Fig. 17) Above all this rise the largely unadorned elevations of the remainder of the base, and the tower. Setbacks At the nineteenth-floor setback, a set of fourteen enormous sculptural heads, representing "giants of finance,"28 and apparently modeled on Greek and Assyrian sources, stare down at the street. (Fig. 18) Not all piers end in these heads, just those that visually line up with the tower above. Flanking piers end at the seventeenth floor and have large statues of eagles perched atop them. Tower The tower, which has little ornament, is defined by broader and slenderer piers, faced with brick, framing uninterrupted vertical bays of paired windows and spandrels. The windows are one-over-one double-hung steel sash. The top level of spandrels are aluminum, rather than stone. Two levels of horizontal ashlar bands wrap around the dark brick center bays, visually binding the tower. Tall arches at the top support a double-tiered crown. Communications equipment has been placed on top of the tower. Throughout the building, such symbols of modern industry as airplanes, ocean-liners, and even a portrait of the skyscraper itself29 are interwoven with traditional designs in pilaster caps and panels. Subsequent history Surviving the stock-market crash of 1929 thanks to its size and organization, the National City Bank of New York continued on through the Depression and World War II. It was renamed the First National City Bank of New York in 1955, in 1962 became the First National City Bank, and in 1976 became Citibank, part of the larger Citicorp. The City Bank-Farmers Trust, which had been a State-chartered affiliate of the nationally chartered City Bank, has gone out of existence. Citibank headquarters remained at 20 Exchange Place until 1956, when it moved to midtown Manhattan. Even so, Citibank owned 20 Exchange Place until 1979, and remained a tenant in the building until 1989.30 The Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce closed its branch and offices at 20 Exchange Place in 1989, consolidating its operations in its midtown location at 425 Lexington Avenue. Today 20 Exchange Place is a commercial office building, owned by the West World Holding Company, Inc. - From the 1996 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Robert and Anne Dickey House http://flic.kr/p/9cJDV2 Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The large (nearly 41 by 62 feet), significantly intact Federal style town house at No. 67 Greenwich Street in lower Manhattan was constructed in 1809-10 when this was the most fashionable neighborhood for New York’s social elite and wealthy merchant class. As constructed, the house was 3-1/2 stories with a high peaked roof (probably with dormers), and featured Flemish bond brickwork, a brownstone base, splayed stone lintels with fluted keystones on the flat 4- bay front facade, and an elliptical 3-bay bow on the rear facade, a popular feature of the day, also with splayed lintels. Until 1820, this was the residence of merchant Robert Dickey and his wife, Anne. Typical of the period, Dickey conducted his business from the rear of the property on Lumber Street (later Trinity Place). From 1823 until 1919, the house was owned by Peter Schermerhorn, ship chandler and director of the Bank of New York, and his sons and heirs. Until 1832 it was leased to socially prominent tenants, and was the residence of builder Ezra Ludlow to 1841. It became a boardinghouse and in the 1850s served a number of other uses. 1872 alterations (still extant) to the building (then a tenement) performed by the distinguished architect Detlef Lienau included raising it to a full 4th story with a molded metal front cornice and replicating the rear elliptical bow, installing a pedimented hood over the front entrance, and replacing original lintels on the front facade’s 2nd- and 3rd- story outer bays with flat stone lintels like those on the 4th story. In 1922, a one-story commercial extension was built on Trinity Place. The Dickey House is one of only 5 surviving houses of Manhattan’s most elite neighborhood of the post-Revolutionary War era, which are among the relatively rare extant Manhattan houses of the Federal period and style, and is one of only 7 pre- 1810 houses located south of Chambers Street, the oldest section of New York City. The Dickey House is further distinguished as the grandest of these houses aside from the designated Watson House (1793, 1806), 7 State Street, and is the only remaining Federal style town house in Manhattan that has a bowed facade. No. 67 Greenwich Street is a nearly 41-foot-wide and 62-foot deep Federal style town house that was raised to a full 4th story (1872). It is clad in red brick (now painted), with Flemish bond on the 1st through the 3rd stories, and Common bond on the 4th story. Front (Greenwich Street) Facade Ground Story The brownstone base has a watertable, two small basement windows (one covered by a metal plate), and a basement entrance with metal steps, wrought-iron railings, and a door currently covered with wood and a metal gate. The windows are longer than those of the upper stories (the original splayed stone lintels with fluted keystones survived on all three windows into the 1960s, but have since been covered or possibly removed). The wide entrance (1872) has a bracketed and pedimented stone hood (partially altered), a small stoop with concrete steps and cheekwalls, and an inset doorway with wood and glass double doors, transoms, and angled walls with shop doors now covered by a metal gate and rolldown gate. Non-historic alterations on the 1st story include single-pane windows, a rolldown gate, lights, signage, and metal grilles. The areaway is bordered by brownstone blocks and has metal bulkhead doors and an iron grate. Upper Stories The flat 4-bay front facade has rectangular fenestration that diminishes in height from the 2nd to the 4th story. Original splayed stone lintels with fluted keystones appear in the central bays of the 2nd and 3rd stories. The other bays of the upper stories have flat stone lintels (1872). The stone sills project slightly. Windows are 6-over-6 double-hung wood sash on the 2nd story, and 2-over-2 above. Metal anchor bands have been installed (pre-1965) at the center and the north and south edges of the facade. A metal fire escape (pre-1939) was installed on the center bays of the upper stories. The facade is capped by a molded metal cornice (1872). Rear (Trinity Place) Facade Ground Story The original design of the rear extension (1922) has been altered over the years. The current non-historic storefront is clad in brick and wood siding, with windows with rolldown gates, double entrance doors with metal gates, and an awning. Mechanical equipment is visible on the roof. Upper Stories The upper portion of the rear facade has an elliptical bow on the three northernmost of the five bays. The 2nd and 3rd stories have original splayed stone lintels, while the 4th story has flat stone lintels (1872). The stone sills project slightly. Windows are 6-over-6 and 3-over-6 double-hung wood sash on the 2nd and 3rd stories, and 2-over-2 above. A small metal fire escape (pre-1939) was installed on the center bays of the 3rd and 4th stories. A metal ventilating pipe was installed between the northernmost bays. The facade is capped by a molded brick cornice (1872). Ventilating pipes are visible on the roof. - From the NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 94 Greenwich Street House http://flic.kr/p/9cJDiR Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Financial District, Manhattan The Federal style rowhouse at No. 94 Greenwich Street in Lower Manhattan was constructed c.1799-1800 as an investment property, right after this block was created through landfill and Greenwich and Rector Streets had been laid out. At the time, this was the most fashionable neighborhood for New York’s social elite and wealthy merchant class. The owner of No. 94 was Augustine Hicks Lawrence, a prominent stock and insurance broker, banker, and commission merchant, who served as director of a number of banks and companies, as well as an assistant alderman and alderman in 1809-16. What makes this house highly significant is that it is among only five surviving houses of Manhattan’s most elite neighborhood of the post-Revolutionary War era, the others including the Watson House (1793, 1806), 7 State Street, and Dickey House (1809-10), 67 Greenwich Street, both designated New York City Landmarks. No. 94 Greenwich Street is among the relatively rare extant Manhattan houses of the Federal period and style, is one of the oldest houses in Manhattan, and is one of only seven pre-1810 houses located south of Chambers Street, the oldest section of New York City. As constructed, the house was three-and-a-half stories with a high peaked gambrel roof (probably with dormers) – the outline of the original roofline is still visible on the Rector Street facade. It features Flemish bond brickwork and splayed lintels on the second and third stories, those on the Rector Street facade are marble with double keystones, while the Greenwich Street facade has splayed brick lintels. By 1810, No. 94 had become a boardinghouse for merchants and professional men (many of them prominent), housed a porterhouse by 1837, and was listed as a hotel in 1841. The building was raised one full story prior to 1858, and has a two-story rear addition dating from c. 1853/1873. The building remained in the possession of Lawrence family descendants until 1921, and has housed a variety of commercial tenants. Despite alterations, the 94 Greenwich Street House is recognizable as a grand early Federal style rowhouse, made particularly notable by its height, corner location with two primary facades, the visible outline of the original gambrel roofline on the Rector Street facade, and its splayed marble lintels with double keystones (a feature typical of the earliest surviving Federal style houses in Manhattan). The No. 94 Greenwich Street House was originally constructed at three-and-a-half stories with a high peaked gambrel roof facing Rector Street (probably with dormers) – the outline of the original roofline is still visible. This original portion features Flemish bond brickwork and splayed lintels on the second and third stories, those on the Rector Street facade are marble with double keystones (with a tooled finish), while the Greenwich Street facade has splayed brick lintels. All sills are stone. The building was raised one full story (with flat stone lintels on the Greenwich Street facade) probably c. 1845-58. In 1899, three new windows were cut into the Rector Street facade: the narrowest windows on the second and third stories, and the second bay from the corner on the second-story Rector Street facade. Brick patching has occurred over the years, and tie rods were installed above the second and third stories. Small sections of fire escape were placed at the northernmost bay of the building (in common with the adjacent building) on the Greenwich Street facade, as well as the rear facade. Areas of brickwork were replaced in 2008: at the building’s corner on the second through fourth stories; the area between the storefront and the second-story sills; the upper portion of the Rector Street facade (with new metal flashing); and parts of the rear facade (with segmentally-arched openings with brick lintels). The original six-over-six and three-over-six double-hung wood sash windows, with original molded wooden frames (with shutter pintles) on the second and third stories, and simpler wooden frames on the fourth story, survived until 2008, when they were replaced by plastic windows with fake muntins and plastic frames. The original cornices were wood; new molded metal cornices were installed on the Greenwich Street and rear facades in 2008. A metal bulkhead, visible at the rear of the building, dates from prior to 1929; it has recent metal sheathing. The roof was re-clad and/or painted yellow in 2008. Ground Story: There is no historic evidence of the original condition of the ground story, but the earliest evidence of a commercial storefront dates from 1837. The residential entrance has apparently always been on Rector Street. Currently, there are continuous non-historic metal-and-glass storefronts along both major facades, except for a parged area at the western end of the original portion of the building, which has two non-historic metal doors. - From the 2009 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: First National City Bank http://flic.kr/p/9cJGma Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The First National City Bank is an outstandingly handsome bank building, executed in granite and designed in a truly monumental scale. Occupying an entire city block, this imposing building impresses many observers even more than its higher neighbors. Despite its unified appearance, this remarkable building represents two stages or periods in its construction. The great monolithic Ionic columns of the lower colonnade belong to the Greek Revival period of architecture of the 1830s' while the very attractive upper colonnade represents an addition of the early part of the Twentieth Century. The upper colonnade is traditionally correct as it superimposes Corinthian columns above Ionic, in accordance with Classic precedent. The placing of one colonnade upon another is a familiar theme derived from Classical Greek and Roman architecture, as seen in the Coliseum in Rome with three tiers and in various Forums, or market places, with two tiers. Here the attic story also forms a conspicuous part of the architectural design, and therefore the building recreates a Renaissance theme of such architects as Andrea Palladio. His Sixteenth Century Palazzo Bonin Thiene at Vicenza is a fine prototype for the bank. The lower portion of the bank was built for the Merchants Exchange as a fireproof building replacing the old Exchange building burned in the Great Fire of 1835. The new Merchants Exchange was designed by Isaiah Rogers, architect of several fine Greek Revival hotels both here and in other cities. In 1862 this building became the United States Custom House. "When the Custom House finally moved to the Battery, the National City Bank saved this building by acquiring it. The upper portion of the building represents the skillful addition made for the National City Bank in 1907 by McKim, Mead & White, the outstanding firm of architects of that day. As one of the few truly monumental Classical buildings of this City, the First National City Bank is important as an example of great commercial power, visibly expressed in stone and mortar. It is also a remarkably successful example of how a former generation preserved one of our most notable buildings. This was accomplished by doubling its size while successfully maintaining good proportions and adhering to the formal traditions of Classical architecture. Testimony in Favor of Designation At the public hearing, the representative of the New York Chapter of the American Institute of Architects said, "The lower portion of this monumental structure represents the epitome of Greek Reviv.il in our City for a building of such large size. With its Ionic colonnade above a strong base, and crowned with a Corinthian colonnade and attic type windows by which the design is not compromised but rather enhanced, this building has great strength and dignity..., This entire building, inside and out, is a fine Landmark. It should be retained by all means. - From the 1965 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: City Bank-Farmers Trust Company Building http://flic.kr/p/9cJEwV Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Summary One of the most prominent features of the Lower Manhattan skyline, the fifty-nine-story City Bank-Farmers Trust tower is among New York City's tallest skyscrapers. Designed by the architectural firm of Cross & Cross in the restrained modern style once known as "Modern Classic," it was built in 1930-31 to be the Wall Street headquarters of one of the country's largest financial institutions, which survives today as Citibank. The steel-framed tower is sheathed in granite and limestone, making it, on completion, the world's tallest stone-faced building. Its lower portion is both massive, especially in contrast to the narrow streets, and dramatically vertical, organized around widely spaced giant piers which rise to freestanding stylized heroic figures said to represent "giants of finance." The main entrance, located on Exchange Place, is distinguished by its round arch surrounded by eleven coins of carved granite representing the various countries in which National City Bank had offices. Decorative doors of nickel silver with bronze trim and a variety of carved forms, many designed by British sculptor David Evans, adorn the lower floors. The slender, square tower with chamfered corners, rising slightly askew to the irregularly shaped base, today remains a commanding presence in the skyline of lower Manhattan, and one of the most noteworthy of the era's skyscrapers. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS City Bank-Farmers Trust, the National City Bank, and the Canadian Bank of Commerce No. 20 Exchange Place was built to house the head offices of one of Wall Street's new banking conglomerates, the City Bank-Farmers Trust Co., along with a branch of the National City Bank of New York and a branch of the Canadian Bank of Commerce.1 The City Bank-Farmers Trust Company was the product of a merger of two long-established banking firms: the National City Bank of New York and the Farmers Loan and Trust Company. The Canadian Bank of Commerce was a tenant in a building demolished to make way for the new tower and had been located on the site since as early as 1872. The National City Bank of New York, which survives today as Citibank, is among the country's largest and oldest banks, tracing its origins to the First Bank of the United States, founded in 1791, of which it was the New York branch. That branch was reorganized in 1812 as the City Bank of New York by Col. Samuel Osgood, the country's first Postmaster General and Treasury Commissioner. Moses Taylor, who took control of the bank after the financial panic of 1837, had it chartered in 1865 as a national bank, and renamed it the National City Bank of New York.3 By 1893, led by president James Stillman, the bank had become the city's largest, and the following year the country's largest. By 1920, it had b ecome the first American bank with assets totalling one billion dollars. During the 1920s, the National City Bank of New York became the country's first full-service bank; among many innovations, it was the first major bank to offer interest on savings accounts. Expanding dramatically during that decade, the National City Bank acquired the Commercial Exchange Bank, the Second National Bank, and the People's Trust Company of Brooklyn before merging with the Farmers' Loan and Trust Company in 1929. The Farmers Loan and Trust Company, founded in 1822, was the first trust company to be organized in New York, and is said to be the first "company of record to be incorporated for the purpose of executing trusts."4 Beginning as a fire insurance carrier, the company moved into agricultural loans, and grew enormously in the following two decades as farms expanded in New York State following the opening of the Erie Canal. After the Civil War, the Farmers Loan and Trust Company turned to railroad trust mortgages. By the turn of the century the company had established offices overseas, and in 1918 the company joined the Federal Reserve System. The Canadian Bank of Commerce was founded in 1867, the year of Canada's confederation, by Toronto businessman William McMaster.5 By the time of the First World War it had 379 branches, and during the 1920s almost doubled that number by acquiring the Bank of Hamilton and then the Standard Bank of Canada. Today, known as the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, it is Canada's second largest bank. The Site and Wall Street Banks The site of No. 20 Exchange Place is a small, irregular four-sided plot occupying the entire block bounded by Exchange Place, William Street, Beaver Street, and Hanover Street. This block lay within the original Dutch settlement of Nieuw Amsterdam, and is shown in part in the so-called Castello Plan, the earliest reliable surviving map of the colony.6 By the late nineteenth century, this block had become associated with the banking houses of Wall Street. Exchange Place itself was named for the old Merchants Exchange on Wall Street, which backed onto Exchange Place and was one of Wall Street's most important institutions; that building also served later as the U.S. Custom House. Maps of the area from 1899 show that while the blocks to the south of Hanover Square were still occupied by small loft buildings, the block now occupied by 20 Exchange Place had been redeveloped with larger structures, including two owned by the Farmers Loan & Trust Company.7 Wall Street had become almost exclusively a street of banks and exchanges as early as the 1820s. At first these institutions tended to move into former dwellings, but by the mid- 1840s most of them had erected new Greek Revival bank buildings. At mid-century many financial institutions responded to the increasing demand from private bankers and insurance companies eager to locate in the Wall Street area by replacing their earlier bank buildings with Italianate commercial palaces containing both banking rooms and several office floors. In the twentieth century, banks on Wall Street began to build skyscraper headquarters, notably the Bank of New York at 48 Wall Street, the Manhattan Company (predecessor of the Chase Manhattan Bank) at 40 Wall Street, Bankers Trust at 14 Wall Street, and the Irving Trust Company at 1 Wall Street. In 1907, the National City Bank acquired the old Merchants Exchange Building at 55 Wall Street, to capitalize on its historic connections to Wall Street and the financial world. Instead of demolishing the structure, the bank commissioned the prominent firm of McKim, Mead & White to double the building's size while maintaining something of its original architectural character. In 1929, following its merger with the Farmers Loan and Trust Company, National City Bank expanded its offices again, but instead of replacing 55 Wall Street with a skyscraper, the Bank acquired most of the block directly across Exchange Place from the rear of its still relatively new and prestigious headquarters building at 55 Wall Street,8 and began planning its new skyscraper headquarters at 20 Exchange Place. The new and old buildings were then connected by an enclosed pedestrian bridge (no longer in existence) over Exchange Place. The newly-named City Bank Farmers Trust Company hired the eminent architectural firm of Cross & Cross to design the new skyscraper. Cross & Cross The firm of Cross & Cross was formed in 1907 by broth ers John Walter Cross (1878-1951) and Eliot Cross (18 84-1949). John, who studied architecture at Columbia, and then at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris, served as the firm's chief designer. Eliot took charge of the real-estate end of the business.10 In 1922 he organized the real estate investment firm of Webb and Knapp, and served as chairman of the board until he retired in 1947.11 Both firms, Cross & Cross and Webb and Knapp, had offices in the Knapp Building, 385 Madison Avenue, previously two buildings combined into one and altered to designs by Cross & Cross in 1923. The building commissions of Cross & Cross fall into three general categories: 1) smaller-scaled buildings including private residences, churches, clubs, neighborhood bank branches, and schools; 2) hotel and apartment buildings; and 3) tall office buildings. The firm's early design work reflects John Cross's architectural education in the French Beaux-Arts tradition, as at the Church of Notre Dame, at Morningside Drive and West 114th Street, designed in 1914 and modeled on the church of the Invalides, one of the most famous eighteenth-century buildings in Paris.12 Their designs for other small-scale work, and for hotels and apartment buildings, tended to the eighteenth-century English style, either Georgian or Adamesque. Their designs for tall office buildings initially drew inspiration from Classical or Gothic ornamental patterns, but in the late 1920s moved in the general direction of Art Deco. In the late 1920s, the office buildings of Cross & Cross began to show the influence ofmodern design. The first to begin to do so was the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company B uilding, begun in 1929 in a "Modern Classic" style. Two bank, office and storage buildings designed for the Centrum corporation, the real-estate arm of the Central Hanover Bank & Trust, at 271 Church Street and 335 Greenwich Street (both 1930), continued the evolution of their design in a modernist direction. The culmination of this tendency in the work of Cross & Cross came in the RCA Victor Building (1929-31, later known as the General Electric Building) at 570 Lexington Avenue, a designated New York City Landmark, which is one of New York's finest Art Deco skyscrapers. Design and construction of the tower Contender for "world's tallest building": The design for No. 20 Exchange Place went through several versions, ranging from a moderately short office building to the tallest building in the world, before taking final shape as the city's fourth tallest, a 60-story tower. The late 1920s saw a spate of announcements of office buildings intended to wrest the title of "world's tallest building" away from the Woolworth Building (completed in 1913). When City Bank-Farmers Trust filed plans in October 1929 for a 66-story building 846.4 feet high,14 it staked a claim to the title.15 The new skyscraper was to be a set-back building with a "tower eighty feet square rising from the twenty-eighth floor. The tower will taper off from the fiftieth floor and at the top will be an illuminated globe fifteen feet in diameter, supported by four eagles of heroic size. The general style will be conservative modern." Within a month of filing, however, a proposed merger of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company with the Corn Exchange Bank, which would have created the world's wealthiest bank, fell through, a victim of the stock market crash.17 The following year City Bank-Farmers Trust scaled back the plans of its tower to 685 feet 7 1/8 inches.18 When it opened in February 1931, though no longer in the running for the title of "world's tallest," 20 Exchange Place claimed the lesser distinction of being the tallest building with a predominantly stone facade. Engineering feat: Despite its substantial size, the new tower was completed in less than a year, an especially noteworthy achievement considering the special difficulties the site presented to its builder, the George A. Fuller Company, and the foundation and tower engineers, Moran & Proctor.20 Site conditions including quicksand, water, and old foundations created the need for heavy cross-lot bracing, while the building's unusual shape required heavy steel construction. The excavation took the lower basement to 40 feet below water level, dug out of solid rock. Other structural feats included the accommodation of what was called the largest pneumatic tube communication system ever devised for a banking house.21 The form and style of the tower: The style and ornament of the tall slender tower of 20 Exchange Place have been called Art Deco. Although the design reflects the general trends of late 1920s skyscrapers, the building has a minimum of specifically "Art Deco" ornament. Similarly stylized versions of classical forms were sometimes referred to as "Modern Classic."22 Cross & Cross believed that the building's design fell into no particular stylistic category, and wrote about its design in terms sugge sting a familiarity with Modern architectural theory: The architects hold no brieffor any particular architectural style and have been at some pains to clothe the structure in material and form to serve as a frank expression of the mechanical and economic forces involved and at the same time to express, with some degree of originality, the place of the building in the life of its location.23 An important part of the design conception was the architects' insistence on fine materials. Unlike other tall buildings of the 1920s conceived originally with stone facades but executed, for reasons of economy, in brick or terra-cotta, 20 Exchange Place is sheathed almost completely in stone: Mohegan Granite at the base, and Alabama Rookwood veined gray limestone on all the upper stories.24 They also used, instead of bronze, an unusual alloy of nickel, white in color, known as nickel silver, "[f]or the first time in a major structure," according to contemporary accounts, specifically to avoid "colored metal" in the building. The contrast with the architects' profusely ornamental Art Deco design for the almost contemporary RCA Victor (later General Electric) Building at 570 Lexington Avenue is striking. The two buildings share a strong vertical emphasis and a sculptural approach to massing. City Bank-Farmers Trust has no profusion of Art Deco ornament, but like the RCA Victor Building it relies for effect on its profile, the richness of its materials, and -- if to a lesser extent -- the architects' much noted high quality ornament. The crowning eagles and lantern of the original proposal did not survive in the final version. The building is adorned, however, by programmatic sculpture and reliefs symbolizing the banking companies it was built to house, ranging from representations of industry and the professions to the coinage of countries where the banks had branches. Contemporary assessment: On the opening of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company Building, the New York Times called it a "magnificent building," and noted that it "has been called one of the handsomest buildings, architecturally, in the city."26 Parker Chase, in his 1932 book New York The Wonder City, wrote: Everything in connection with this monumental building expresses beauty, completeness and grandeur. ...every detail of this colossal structure is right up to the minute. The building throughout is the very last word in all that spells DELUXE.... No one visiting New York should fail to visit the "City Bank Farmers Trust" edifice -- this magnificent and beautiful pile of marble, stone, and masonry is one of the sights of the city. Description The form of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company building (Fig. 1) follows the basic configuration mandated by zoning regulations. Filling out the block at street level, it rises through a series of setbacks to a slender tower. Because the site is irregularly shaped, so is the building's lower portion. The tower, however, is square in plan, with chamfered corners, and rises askew to the base. The transition from the irregular base to the square tower is accomplished by manipulating the shape of the third setback at the twenty-first story and creating sympathetic facade verticals to ease the transition between the symmetries of the lower and tower elevations. Seen in the skyline, the tower appears as a regular geometric form rising dramatically from a low, bulky base. Framed with steel, the building is sheathed in Mohegan granite at the basement and carved entrances, in Alabama Rookwood limestone above, and in limestone and brick in the tower. The elevations are framed by vertical piers; at the base some spandrels are of blue pearl granite and others of aluminum. The tower has spandrels of aluminum. Many of the spandrels have applied medallions. The windows are steel-framed with one-over-one sash. The ornamental scheme is largely confined to the building's lower portion, especially the entrances and the setbacks. Much of the ornament, including pilaster caps, cornices, and nickel silver grilles, is the work of British sculptor David Evans. (Fig. 2) This designation does not include the building's interior spaces. Base The basement level of the building is faced in granite, and terminates in an overscaled molding. Set into the basement are square openings with grilles, some of nickel silver and others of carved stonework. The names of each street are carved into the stone at the corners. (Fig. 3) Exchange Place entrance: The main entrance to the building, at 20 Exchange Place, is a round-arched portal of carved Mohegan granite. (Fig. 4) Its chief adornment is a series of eleven carved granite replicas of coins, which represent countries with branches of the National City Bank, set on a background of abstract foliate forms. Above and to either side of the portal are large medallions, to the right a seal of the National City Company (Fig. 5), and to the left a seal of the National City Bank (Fig. 6). The entrance, approached by several steps, is set behind a deep reveal, to which a modern set of revolving doors has been added at the location of the original doors; windows above the doors fill in the arch. There is a non-historic stainless steel grille on the left within the entranceway, and on the right an original nickel silver door with abstract geometric detailing. A period light fixture hangs from the apex of the reveal, from a stone soffit of intersecting triangles. The portal is flanked by illuminated signs with the building's address; the nickel silver framing appears to be original. A flagpole is set above the Exchange Place entrance at the fifth floor level. William Street entrance: At the corner of William Street and Exchange Place is an entrance set in a carved reveal leading to a rotunda and the former senior officers' room of City Bank-Farmers Trust. The four doors are of nickel silver, a white alloy of nickel, zinc and copper, with bronze trim. (Fig. 8) Both the two round doors in the center and the two flanking flat doors include a series of panels representing various forms of transportation. The panels in the center doors show historic transportation methods including sailing ships, hot air balloons, and steam locomotives. Those on the sides show modern transportation, including airplanes, ocean liners, and diesel engines. Two nickel silver panels above the doors include in their ornamentation two allegorical figures in bronze, one with a cornucopia suggesting abundance, the other with a lock and key suggesting the prudence of banking. They are surrounded by a variety of animal figures and abstract floral forms. Four owls stand on the top of the panels. The glass panes above, in the upper half of the entranceway, are set into a nickel silver framework trimmed in bronze, including still more symbols of industry, including scales, hourglasses, sheaves of wheat, and mechanical gears. Above the entrance is another large stone medallion, this one showing the seal of the City-Bank-Farmers Trust Company. There is a flagpole above the fourth-floor level. Beaver and William Street entrance: A similar but less elaborate set of doors with scenes of transportation survives at the corner of Beaver and William Streets. (Fig. 9) Here there are only two doors, not four; they repeat the scenes of the modern transportation series. Panels above with ornamental patterns centering on sheaves of wheat have been removed. Beaver Street entrance: The rear entrance to the tower, in the middle of the Beaver Street facade, is through three round-arched openings. (Fig. 10) Above the middle opening is another stone medallion. (Fig. 11) Within the middle archway is a service entrance. Above the door is a carved bison head flanked by reliefs of coiled snakes. (Fig. 12) In each flanking arch is a set of four doors, framed in nickel silver, with marble transoms and multi-pane windows set in decorative nickel silver framing. Hanover Street entrance: The Hanover Street entrance set in a carved reveal (Fig. 13) leads to the branch office originally created for the Canadian Bank of Commerce. The nickel silver entrance doors with bronze trim repeat the design of the doors at William Street almost exactly, with the one exception that in the nickel silver grilles above the doors with scenes of transportation, in place of the allegorical figures suggesting abundance and prudence there are two caducei, ancient Greek symbols of commerce. The entrance itself is set within a round-arched double-height opening with ornate framing. There is a triple flagpole above this entrance. The remainder of the main double-height level is punctuated by large square-headed window openings with heavy stone lintels. (Fig. 14) Each lintel has a replica of an historic coin in its center. (Fig. 15) Each window opening has a deeply recessed multi-pane window set in decorative nickel silver framing, protected by a nickel silver grille. (Fig. 16) Each grille includes in its ornament a figure representing one of the professions set in a square panel at either end of the grille, flanking a long panel with a fasces -- a tied bundle of sticks. Each set of large window openings, whether one on Hanover, three on Exchange Place, or five on William Street, is flanked by two much narrower and shorter openings, each with a simple nickel silver grille at the base and a keystone at its top center. Above this level of openings runs a series of small, plain square-headed windows, at the level of the large stone medallions above the entrances. A final level of larger, square-headed windows in deep openings encircles the building; it is topped by a band of abstract geometric panels. (Fig. 17) Above all this rise the largely unadorned elevations of the remainder of the base, and the tower. Setbacks At the nineteenth-floor setback, a set of fourteen enormous sculptural heads, representing "giants of finance,"28 and apparently modeled on Greek and Assyrian sources, stare down at the street. (Fig. 18) Not all piers end in these heads, just those that visually line up with the tower above. Flanking piers end at the seventeenth floor and have large statues of eagles perched atop them. Tower The tower, which has little ornament, is defined by broader and slenderer piers, faced with brick, framing uninterrupted vertical bays of paired windows and spandrels. The windows are one-over-one double-hung steel sash. The top level of spandrels are aluminum, rather than stone. Two levels of horizontal ashlar bands wrap around the dark brick center bays, visually binding the tower. Tall arches at the top support a double-tiered crown. Communications equipment has been placed on top of the tower. Throughout the building, such symbols of modern industry as airplanes, ocean-liners, and even a portrait of the skyscraper itself29 are interwoven with traditional designs in pilaster caps and panels. Subsequent history Surviving the stock-market crash of 1929 thanks to its size and organization, the National City Bank of New York continued on through the Depression and World War II. It was renamed the First National City Bank of New York in 1955, in 1962 became the First National City Bank, and in 1976 became Citibank, part of the larger Citicorp. The City Bank-Farmers Trust, which had been a State-chartered affiliate of the nationally chartered City Bank, has gone out of existence. Citibank headquarters remained at 20 Exchange Place until 1956, when it moved to midtown Manhattan. Even so, Citibank owned 20 Exchange Place until 1979, and remained a tenant in the building until 1989.30 The Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce closed its branch and offices at 20 Exchange Place in 1989, consolidating its operations in its midtown location at 425 Lexington Avenue. Today 20 Exchange Place is a commercial office building, owned by the West World Holding Company, Inc. - From the 1996 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Robert and Anne Dickey House http://flic.kr/p/9cMKru Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The large (nearly 41 by 62 feet), significantly intact Federal style town house at No. 67 Greenwich Street in lower Manhattan was constructed in 1809-10 when this was the most fashionable neighborhood for New York’s social elite and wealthy merchant class. As constructed, the house was 3-1/2 stories with a high peaked roof (probably with dormers), and featured Flemish bond brickwork, a brownstone base, splayed stone lintels with fluted keystones on the flat 4- bay front facade, and an elliptical 3-bay bow on the rear facade, a popular feature of the day, also with splayed lintels. Until 1820, this was the residence of merchant Robert Dickey and his wife, Anne. Typical of the period, Dickey conducted his business from the rear of the property on Lumber Street (later Trinity Place). From 1823 until 1919, the house was owned by Peter Schermerhorn, ship chandler and director of the Bank of New York, and his sons and heirs. Until 1832 it was leased to socially prominent tenants, and was the residence of builder Ezra Ludlow to 1841. It became a boardinghouse and in the 1850s served a number of other uses. 1872 alterations (still extant) to the building (then a tenement) performed by the distinguished architect Detlef Lienau included raising it to a full 4th story with a molded metal front cornice and replicating the rear elliptical bow, installing a pedimented hood over the front entrance, and replacing original lintels on the front facade’s 2nd- and 3rd- story outer bays with flat stone lintels like those on the 4th story. In 1922, a one-story commercial extension was built on Trinity Place. The Dickey House is one of only 5 surviving houses of Manhattan’s most elite neighborhood of the post-Revolutionary War era, which are among the relatively rare extant Manhattan houses of the Federal period and style, and is one of only 7 pre- 1810 houses located south of Chambers Street, the oldest section of New York City. The Dickey House is further distinguished as the grandest of these houses aside from the designated Watson House (1793, 1806), 7 State Street, and is the only remaining Federal style town house in Manhattan that has a bowed facade. No. 67 Greenwich Street is a nearly 41-foot-wide and 62-foot deep Federal style town house that was raised to a full 4th story (1872). It is clad in red brick (now painted), with Flemish bond on the 1st through the 3rd stories, and Common bond on the 4th story. Front (Greenwich Street) Facade Ground Story The brownstone base has a watertable, two small basement windows (one covered by a metal plate), and a basement entrance with metal steps, wrought-iron railings, and a door currently covered with wood and a metal gate. The windows are longer than those of the upper stories (the original splayed stone lintels with fluted keystones survived on all three windows into the 1960s, but have since been covered or possibly removed). The wide entrance (1872) has a bracketed and pedimented stone hood (partially altered), a small stoop with concrete steps and cheekwalls, and an inset doorway with wood and glass double doors, transoms, and angled walls with shop doors now covered by a metal gate and rolldown gate. Non-historic alterations on the 1st story include single-pane windows, a rolldown gate, lights, signage, and metal grilles. The areaway is bordered by brownstone blocks and has metal bulkhead doors and an iron grate. Upper Stories The flat 4-bay front facade has rectangular fenestration that diminishes in height from the 2nd to the 4th story. Original splayed stone lintels with fluted keystones appear in the central bays of the 2nd and 3rd stories. The other bays of the upper stories have flat stone lintels (1872). The stone sills project slightly. Windows are 6-over-6 double-hung wood sash on the 2nd story, and 2-over-2 above. Metal anchor bands have been installed (pre-1965) at the center and the north and south edges of the facade. A metal fire escape (pre-1939) was installed on the center bays of the upper stories. The facade is capped by a molded metal cornice (1872). Rear (Trinity Place) Facade Ground Story The original design of the rear extension (1922) has been altered over the years. The current non-historic storefront is clad in brick and wood siding, with windows with rolldown gates, double entrance doors with metal gates, and an awning. Mechanical equipment is visible on the roof. Upper Stories The upper portion of the rear facade has an elliptical bow on the three northernmost of the five bays. The 2nd and 3rd stories have original splayed stone lintels, while the 4th story has flat stone lintels (1872). The stone sills project slightly. Windows are 6-over-6 and 3-over-6 double-hung wood sash on the 2nd and 3rd stories, and 2-over-2 above. A small metal fire escape (pre-1939) was installed on the center bays of the 3rd and 4th stories. A metal ventilating pipe was installed between the northernmost bays. The facade is capped by a molded brick cornice (1872). Ventilating pipes are visible on the roof. - From the NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: City Bank-Farmers Trust Company Building http://flic.kr/p/9cJFCT Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Summary One of the most prominent features of the Lower Manhattan skyline, the fifty-nine-story City Bank-Farmers Trust tower is among New York City's tallest skyscrapers. Designed by the architectural firm of Cross & Cross in the restrained modern style once known as "Modern Classic," it was built in 1930-31 to be the Wall Street headquarters of one of the country's largest financial institutions, which survives today as Citibank. The steel-framed tower is sheathed in granite and limestone, making it, on completion, the world's tallest stone-faced building. Its lower portion is both massive, especially in contrast to the narrow streets, and dramatically vertical, organized around widely spaced giant piers which rise to freestanding stylized heroic figures said to represent "giants of finance." The main entrance, located on Exchange Place, is distinguished by its round arch surrounded by eleven coins of carved granite representing the various countries in which National City Bank had offices. Decorative doors of nickel silver with bronze trim and a variety of carved forms, many designed by British sculptor David Evans, adorn the lower floors. The slender, square tower with chamfered corners, rising slightly askew to the irregularly shaped base, today remains a commanding presence in the skyline of lower Manhattan, and one of the most noteworthy of the era's skyscrapers. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS City Bank-Farmers Trust, the National City Bank, and the Canadian Bank of Commerce No. 20 Exchange Place was built to house the head offices of one of Wall Street's new banking conglomerates, the City Bank-Farmers Trust Co., along with a branch of the National City Bank of New York and a branch of the Canadian Bank of Commerce.1 The City Bank-Farmers Trust Company was the product of a merger of two long-established banking firms: the National City Bank of New York and the Farmers Loan and Trust Company. The Canadian Bank of Commerce was a tenant in a building demolished to make way for the new tower and had been located on the site since as early as 1872. The National City Bank of New York, which survives today as Citibank, is among the country's largest and oldest banks, tracing its origins to the First Bank of the United States, founded in 1791, of which it was the New York branch. That branch was reorganized in 1812 as the City Bank of New York by Col. Samuel Osgood, the country's first Postmaster General and Treasury Commissioner. Moses Taylor, who took control of the bank after the financial panic of 1837, had it chartered in 1865 as a national bank, and renamed it the National City Bank of New York.3 By 1893, led by president James Stillman, the bank had become the city's largest, and the following year the country's largest. By 1920, it had b ecome the first American bank with assets totalling one billion dollars. During the 1920s, the National City Bank of New York became the country's first full-service bank; among many innovations, it was the first major bank to offer interest on savings accounts. Expanding dramatically during that decade, the National City Bank acquired the Commercial Exchange Bank, the Second National Bank, and the People's Trust Company of Brooklyn before merging with the Farmers' Loan and Trust Company in 1929. The Farmers Loan and Trust Company, founded in 1822, was the first trust company to be organized in New York, and is said to be the first "company of record to be incorporated for the purpose of executing trusts."4 Beginning as a fire insurance carrier, the company moved into agricultural loans, and grew enormously in the following two decades as farms expanded in New York State following the opening of the Erie Canal. After the Civil War, the Farmers Loan and Trust Company turned to railroad trust mortgages. By the turn of the century the company had established offices overseas, and in 1918 the company joined the Federal Reserve System. The Canadian Bank of Commerce was founded in 1867, the year of Canada's confederation, by Toronto businessman William McMaster.5 By the time of the First World War it had 379 branches, and during the 1920s almost doubled that number by acquiring the Bank of Hamilton and then the Standard Bank of Canada. Today, known as the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, it is Canada's second largest bank. The Site and Wall Street Banks The site of No. 20 Exchange Place is a small, irregular four-sided plot occupying the entire block bounded by Exchange Place, William Street, Beaver Street, and Hanover Street. This block lay within the original Dutch settlement of Nieuw Amsterdam, and is shown in part in the so-called Castello Plan, the earliest reliable surviving map of the colony.6 By the late nineteenth century, this block had become associated with the banking houses of Wall Street. Exchange Place itself was named for the old Merchants Exchange on Wall Street, which backed onto Exchange Place and was one of Wall Street's most important institutions; that building also served later as the U.S. Custom House. Maps of the area from 1899 show that while the blocks to the south of Hanover Square were still occupied by small loft buildings, the block now occupied by 20 Exchange Place had been redeveloped with larger structures, including two owned by the Farmers Loan & Trust Company.7 Wall Street had become almost exclusively a street of banks and exchanges as early as the 1820s. At first these institutions tended to move into former dwellings, but by the mid- 1840s most of them had erected new Greek Revival bank buildings. At mid-century many financial institutions responded to the increasing demand from private bankers and insurance companies eager to locate in the Wall Street area by replacing their earlier bank buildings with Italianate commercial palaces containing both banking rooms and several office floors. In the twentieth century, banks on Wall Street began to build skyscraper headquarters, notably the Bank of New York at 48 Wall Street, the Manhattan Company (predecessor of the Chase Manhattan Bank) at 40 Wall Street, Bankers Trust at 14 Wall Street, and the Irving Trust Company at 1 Wall Street. In 1907, the National City Bank acquired the old Merchants Exchange Building at 55 Wall Street, to capitalize on its historic connections to Wall Street and the financial world. Instead of demolishing the structure, the bank commissioned the prominent firm of McKim, Mead & White to double the building's size while maintaining something of its original architectural character. In 1929, following its merger with the Farmers Loan and Trust Company, National City Bank expanded its offices again, but instead of replacing 55 Wall Street with a skyscraper, the Bank acquired most of the block directly across Exchange Place from the rear of its still relatively new and prestigious headquarters building at 55 Wall Street,8 and began planning its new skyscraper headquarters at 20 Exchange Place. The new and old buildings were then connected by an enclosed pedestrian bridge (no longer in existence) over Exchange Place. The newly-named City Bank Farmers Trust Company hired the eminent architectural firm of Cross & Cross to design the new skyscraper. Cross & Cross The firm of Cross & Cross was formed in 1907 by broth ers John Walter Cross (1878-1951) and Eliot Cross (18 84-1949). John, who studied architecture at Columbia, and then at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris, served as the firm's chief designer. Eliot took charge of the real-estate end of the business.10 In 1922 he organized the real estate investment firm of Webb and Knapp, and served as chairman of the board until he retired in 1947.11 Both firms, Cross & Cross and Webb and Knapp, had offices in the Knapp Building, 385 Madison Avenue, previously two buildings combined into one and altered to designs by Cross & Cross in 1923. The building commissions of Cross & Cross fall into three general categories: 1) smaller-scaled buildings including private residences, churches, clubs, neighborhood bank branches, and schools; 2) hotel and apartment buildings; and 3) tall office buildings. The firm's early design work reflects John Cross's architectural education in the French Beaux-Arts tradition, as at the Church of Notre Dame, at Morningside Drive and West 114th Street, designed in 1914 and modeled on the church of the Invalides, one of the most famous eighteenth-century buildings in Paris.12 Their designs for other small-scale work, and for hotels and apartment buildings, tended to the eighteenth-century English style, either Georgian or Adamesque. Their designs for tall office buildings initially drew inspiration from Classical or Gothic ornamental patterns, but in the late 1920s moved in the general direction of Art Deco. In the late 1920s, the office buildings of Cross & Cross began to show the influence ofmodern design. The first to begin to do so was the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company B uilding, begun in 1929 in a "Modern Classic" style. Two bank, office and storage buildings designed for the Centrum corporation, the real-estate arm of the Central Hanover Bank & Trust, at 271 Church Street and 335 Greenwich Street (both 1930), continued the evolution of their design in a modernist direction. The culmination of this tendency in the work of Cross & Cross came in the RCA Victor Building (1929-31, later known as the General Electric Building) at 570 Lexington Avenue, a designated New York City Landmark, which is one of New York's finest Art Deco skyscrapers. Design and construction of the tower Contender for "world's tallest building": The design for No. 20 Exchange Place went through several versions, ranging from a moderately short office building to the tallest building in the world, before taking final shape as the city's fourth tallest, a 60-story tower. The late 1920s saw a spate of announcements of office buildings intended to wrest the title of "world's tallest building" away from the Woolworth Building (completed in 1913). When City Bank-Farmers Trust filed plans in October 1929 for a 66-story building 846.4 feet high,14 it staked a claim to the title.15 The new skyscraper was to be a set-back building with a "tower eighty feet square rising from the twenty-eighth floor. The tower will taper off from the fiftieth floor and at the top will be an illuminated globe fifteen feet in diameter, supported by four eagles of heroic size. The general style will be conservative modern." Within a month of filing, however, a proposed merger of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company with the Corn Exchange Bank, which would have created the world's wealthiest bank, fell through, a victim of the stock market crash.17 The following year City Bank-Farmers Trust scaled back the plans of its tower to 685 feet 7 1/8 inches.18 When it opened in February 1931, though no longer in the running for the title of "world's tallest," 20 Exchange Place claimed the lesser distinction of being the tallest building with a predominantly stone facade. Engineering feat: Despite its substantial size, the new tower was completed in less than a year, an especially noteworthy achievement considering the special difficulties the site presented to its builder, the George A. Fuller Company, and the foundation and tower engineers, Moran & Proctor.20 Site conditions including quicksand, water, and old foundations created the need for heavy cross-lot bracing, while the building's unusual shape required heavy steel construction. The excavation took the lower basement to 40 feet below water level, dug out of solid rock. Other structural feats included the accommodation of what was called the largest pneumatic tube communication system ever devised for a banking house.21 The form and style of the tower: The style and ornament of the tall slender tower of 20 Exchange Place have been called Art Deco. Although the design reflects the general trends of late 1920s skyscrapers, the building has a minimum of specifically "Art Deco" ornament. Similarly stylized versions of classical forms were sometimes referred to as "Modern Classic."22 Cross & Cross believed that the building's design fell into no particular stylistic category, and wrote about its design in terms sugge sting a familiarity with Modern architectural theory: The architects hold no brieffor any particular architectural style and have been at some pains to clothe the structure in material and form to serve as a frank expression of the mechanical and economic forces involved and at the same time to express, with some degree of originality, the place of the building in the life of its location.23 An important part of the design conception was the architects' insistence on fine materials. Unlike other tall buildings of the 1920s conceived originally with stone facades but executed, for reasons of economy, in brick or terra-cotta, 20 Exchange Place is sheathed almost completely in stone: Mohegan Granite at the base, and Alabama Rookwood veined gray limestone on all the upper stories.24 They also used, instead of bronze, an unusual alloy of nickel, white in color, known as nickel silver, "[f]or the first time in a major structure," according to contemporary accounts, specifically to avoid "colored metal" in the building. The contrast with the architects' profusely ornamental Art Deco design for the almost contemporary RCA Victor (later General Electric) Building at 570 Lexington Avenue is striking. The two buildings share a strong vertical emphasis and a sculptural approach to massing. City Bank-Farmers Trust has no profusion of Art Deco ornament, but like the RCA Victor Building it relies for effect on its profile, the richness of its materials, and -- if to a lesser extent -- the architects' much noted high quality ornament. The crowning eagles and lantern of the original proposal did not survive in the final version. The building is adorned, however, by programmatic sculpture and reliefs symbolizing the banking companies it was built to house, ranging from representations of industry and the professions to the coinage of countries where the banks had branches. Contemporary assessment: On the opening of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company Building, the New York Times called it a "magnificent building," and noted that it "has been called one of the handsomest buildings, architecturally, in the city."26 Parker Chase, in his 1932 book New York The Wonder City, wrote: Everything in connection with this monumental building expresses beauty, completeness and grandeur. ...every detail of this colossal structure is right up to the minute. The building throughout is the very last word in all that spells DELUXE.... No one visiting New York should fail to visit the "City Bank Farmers Trust" edifice -- this magnificent and beautiful pile of marble, stone, and masonry is one of the sights of the city. Description The form of the City Bank-Farmers Trust Company building (Fig. 1) follows the basic configuration mandated by zoning regulations. Filling out the block at street level, it rises through a series of setbacks to a slender tower. Because the site is irregularly shaped, so is the building's lower portion. The tower, however, is square in plan, with chamfered corners, and rises askew to the base. The transition from the irregular base to the square tower is accomplished by manipulating the shape of the third setback at the twenty-first story and creating sympathetic facade verticals to ease the transition between the symmetries of the lower and tower elevations. Seen in the skyline, the tower appears as a regular geometric form rising dramatically from a low, bulky base. Framed with steel, the building is sheathed in Mohegan granite at the basement and carved entrances, in Alabama Rookwood limestone above, and in limestone and brick in the tower. The elevations are framed by vertical piers; at the base some spandrels are of blue pearl granite and others of aluminum. The tower has spandrels of aluminum. Many of the spandrels have applied medallions. The windows are steel-framed with one-over-one sash. The ornamental scheme is largely confined to the building's lower portion, especially the entrances and the setbacks. Much of the ornament, including pilaster caps, cornices, and nickel silver grilles, is the work of British sculptor David Evans. (Fig. 2) This designation does not include the building's interior spaces. Base The basement level of the building is faced in granite, and terminates in an overscaled molding. Set into the basement are square openings with grilles, some of nickel silver and others of carved stonework. The names of each street are carved into the stone at the corners. (Fig. 3) Exchange Place entrance: The main entrance to the building, at 20 Exchange Place, is a round-arched portal of carved Mohegan granite. (Fig. 4) Its chief adornment is a series of eleven carved granite replicas of coins, which represent countries with branches of the National City Bank, set on a background of abstract foliate forms. Above and to either side of the portal are large medallions, to the right a seal of the National City Company (Fig. 5), and to the left a seal of the National City Bank (Fig. 6). The entrance, approached by several steps, is set behind a deep reveal, to which a modern set of revolving doors has been added at the location of the original doors; windows above the doors fill in the arch. There is a non-historic stainless steel grille on the left within the entranceway, and on the right an original nickel silver door with abstract geometric detailing. A period light fixture hangs from the apex of the reveal, from a stone soffit of intersecting triangles. The portal is flanked by illuminated signs with the building's address; the nickel silver framing appears to be original. A flagpole is set above the Exchange Place entrance at the fifth floor level. William Street entrance: At the corner of William Street and Exchange Place is an entrance set in a carved reveal leading to a rotunda and the former senior officers' room of City Bank-Farmers Trust. The four doors are of nickel silver, a white alloy of nickel, zinc and copper, with bronze trim. (Fig. 8) Both the two round doors in the center and the two flanking flat doors include a series of panels representing various forms of transportation. The panels in the center doors show historic transportation methods including sailing ships, hot air balloons, and steam locomotives. Those on the sides show modern transportation, including airplanes, ocean liners, and diesel engines. Two nickel silver panels above the doors include in their ornamentation two allegorical figures in bronze, one with a cornucopia suggesting abundance, the other with a lock and key suggesting the prudence of banking. They are surrounded by a variety of animal figures and abstract floral forms. Four owls stand on the top of the panels. The glass panes above, in the upper half of the entranceway, are set into a nickel silver framework trimmed in bronze, including still more symbols of industry, including scales, hourglasses, sheaves of wheat, and mechanical gears. Above the entrance is another large stone medallion, this one showing the seal of the City-Bank-Farmers Trust Company. There is a flagpole above the fourth-floor level. Beaver and William Street entrance: A similar but less elaborate set of doors with scenes of transportation survives at the corner of Beaver and William Streets. (Fig. 9) Here there are only two doors, not four; they repeat the scenes of the modern transportation series. Panels above with ornamental patterns centering on sheaves of wheat have been removed. Beaver Street entrance: The rear entrance to the tower, in the middle of the Beaver Street facade, is through three round-arched openings. (Fig. 10) Above the middle opening is another stone medallion. (Fig. 11) Within the middle archway is a service entrance. Above the door is a carved bison head flanked by reliefs of coiled snakes. (Fig. 12) In each flanking arch is a set of four doors, framed in nickel silver, with marble transoms and multi-pane windows set in decorative nickel silver framing. Hanover Street entrance: The Hanover Street entrance set in a carved reveal (Fig. 13) leads to the branch office originally created for the Canadian Bank of Commerce. The nickel silver entrance doors with bronze trim repeat the design of the doors at William Street almost exactly, with the one exception that in the nickel silver grilles above the doors with scenes of transportation, in place of the allegorical figures suggesting abundance and prudence there are two caducei, ancient Greek symbols of commerce. The entrance itself is set within a round-arched double-height opening with ornate framing. There is a triple flagpole above this entrance. The remainder of the main double-height level is punctuated by large square-headed window openings with heavy stone lintels. (Fig. 14) Each lintel has a replica of an historic coin in its center. (Fig. 15) Each window opening has a deeply recessed multi-pane window set in decorative nickel silver framing, protected by a nickel silver grille. (Fig. 16) Each grille includes in its ornament a figure representing one of the professions set in a square panel at either end of the grille, flanking a long panel with a fasces -- a tied bundle of sticks. Each set of large window openings, whether one on Hanover, three on Exchange Place, or five on William Street, is flanked by two much narrower and shorter openings, each with a simple nickel silver grille at the base and a keystone at its top center. Above this level of openings runs a series of small, plain square-headed windows, at the level of the large stone medallions above the entrances. A final level of larger, square-headed windows in deep openings encircles the building; it is topped by a band of abstract geometric panels. (Fig. 17) Above all this rise the largely unadorned elevations of the remainder of the base, and the tower. Setbacks At the nineteenth-floor setback, a set of fourteen enormous sculptural heads, representing "giants of finance,"28 and apparently modeled on Greek and Assyrian sources, stare down at the street. (Fig. 18) Not all piers end in these heads, just those that visually line up with the tower above. Flanking piers end at the seventeenth floor and have large statues of eagles perched atop them. Tower The tower, which has little ornament, is defined by broader and slenderer piers, faced with brick, framing uninterrupted vertical bays of paired windows and spandrels. The windows are one-over-one double-hung steel sash. The top level of spandrels are aluminum, rather than stone. Two levels of horizontal ashlar bands wrap around the dark brick center bays, visually binding the tower. Tall arches at the top support a double-tiered crown. Communications equipment has been placed on top of the tower. Throughout the building, such symbols of modern industry as airplanes, ocean-liners, and even a portrait of the skyscraper itself29 are interwoven with traditional designs in pilaster caps and panels. Subsequent history Surviving the stock-market crash of 1929 thanks to its size and organization, the National City Bank of New York continued on through the Depression and World War II. It was renamed the First National City Bank of New York in 1955, in 1962 became the First National City Bank, and in 1976 became Citibank, part of the larger Citicorp. The City Bank-Farmers Trust, which had been a State-chartered affiliate of the nationally chartered City Bank, has gone out of existence. Citibank headquarters remained at 20 Exchange Place until 1956, when it moved to midtown Manhattan. Even so, Citibank owned 20 Exchange Place until 1979, and remained a tenant in the building until 1989.30 The Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce closed its branch and offices at 20 Exchange Place in 1989, consolidating its operations in its midtown location at 425 Lexington Avenue. Today 20 Exchange Place is a commercial office building, owned by the West World Holding Company, Inc. - From the 1996 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Morse Building (later Nassau-Beekman Building) http://flic.kr/p/9cJHtK Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The current form of the Morse Building results from three periods of construction: the original (1878-80), as well as alterations in 1901-02 and c. 1965. Today, the structure’s 6-story midsection, with two articulated facades featuring round- and segmental-arched fenestration, is, in part, the earliest surviving (as well as one of the very few surviving) tall “fireproof” New York office building of the period prior to the full development of the skyscraper. The original 8-story (plus raised basement and attic) Morse Building was a speculative commission by Sidney E. Morse and G. Livingston Morse, cousins who were sons of the founders of the religious newspaper The New-York Observer, and nephews of Samuel F.B. Morse, the artist and inventor of the electric telegraph. The first major New York design of architects [Benjamin, Jr.] Silliman & [James M.] Farnsworth, employing a generally-praised stylistic combination of Victorian Gothic, neo-Grec, and Rundbogenstil, the building was located in the center of the city’s newspaper publishing and printing industries, as Park Row and Nassau Street were redeveloped with significant tall office buildings. It is an early example of the use of brick and terra cotta for the exterior cladding of office buildings in that period. The intricate polychrome brickwork, among the finest of its time surviving in New York City, was supplied by the Peerless Brick Co. of Philadelphia. It features hues of deep red contrasted with glazed black, the latter employed ornamentally, largely to emphasize the outlines of the fenestration. Terra cotta manufactured by the Boston Terra Cotta Co., one of the first East Coast firms, was used for details such as sillcourses and rondels. Just 20 years after its completion, the Morse Building was considered small and old-fashioned compared to very tall 1890s steel-framed skyscrapers. The Nassau-Beekman Building, as it was re-named, was altered in 1901-02 to the “Edwardian” neo-Classical style design of architects [William P.] Bannister & [Richard M.] Schell. This entailed remodeling the base; reconstructing the upper two stories, capped by a projecting balcony/cornice supported by enormous scroll brackets; and adding four steel-framed stories clad in cream-colored brick, bringing it to 14 stories. The shift in color and style of this alteration apparently reflected the influence of the recently-built Broadway Chambers Building (1899-1900, Cass Gilbert). From 1919 to 1942, the former Morse Building was headquarters of the United Cities Realty Corp. The base of the structure was altered again c. 1965, and the 10-story balcony/cornice was removed. The building was converted from office to residential use in 1980. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS The Morse Family and the Morse Building The Morse Building was commissioned by Sidney Edwards Morse (1835-1908) and Gilbert Livingston Morse (1842-1891), cousins who were nephews of Samuel Finley Breese Morse (1791-1872), the artist and inventor of the electric telegraph (first operated in 1844). Sidney was the son of Richard Cary Morse (1795-1868), while G. Livingston was the son of Sidney Edwards Morse (1794-1871). The two elder Morses were the founders (1823) and publishers (until 1858) of The New-York Observer, called “the oldest existing religious newspaper in the United States” in King’s Handbook. G. Livingston Morse, born in New York City, was the inventor (c. 1869), with his father, of the bathometer, an instrument used in the exploration of sea depths, and was a partner and officer (1879-86) in the Nickel Alloy Co. (later Holmes-Wessell Metal Co.). He also served as a vice-president of the Mortgage Investment Co. (later Eno-Bunnell Investment Co.), as well as an alderman, acting Mayor, police commissioner, and Board of Education member in Yonkers. Sidney E. Morse was listed in the 1878-79 city directory as a pickle merchant. After the completion of the Morse Building, Sidney E. Morse & Co., pedometers, was located here until 1884, with both cousins associated with the firm. Afterwards, until G. Livingston’s death, their firm was S.E. & G.L. Morse, variously listed as bankers, brokers, real estate, and loans. The site of the Morse Building, at the northeast corner of Nassau and Beekman Streets, was the location where The New-York Observer was published from 1840 to 1859. Sidney E. [elder] and Richard C. Morse had an ownership interest in this property by 1845. Their executors conveyed the property to Sidney E. [younger] and G. Livingston Morse in June 1878. That month, the New York Times carried the following item: The old building at Nassau-street and Beekman long and unfortunately known as the Park Hotel has just been demolished, and on its site will rise one of the one of the finest buildings in the lower part of the City. The property is part of the Morse estate, and the new building, which is to be built by S.E. & G.L. Morse, will be called the Morse Building. Architects Silliman & Farnsworth filed for the construction of the speculative office building, to be eight stories (plus a raised basement and an attic). Construction began in June 1878 and was completed in March 1880. “Current work” listings in The American Architect & Building News indicated that the project cost $200,000. The Real Estate Record & Builders’ Guide referred to it as “the immense pile of masonry far overtopping adjoining structures, which has attracted the attention of thousands of pedestrians along Broadway.” With frontages of 85 feet on Nassau Street and 69 feet on Beekman Street, the structure was then “considered absolutely fire-proof”Architectural historian Sarah B. Landau and engineering historian Carl Condit described the Morse Building’s construction: It had unusually thick, brick bearing walls, 4 feet at the cellar level and 3.5 feet at the first floor. The roof was iron beamed, and the floors were constructed with 15-1/4-inch wrought-iron beams that were spanned with corrugated iron arches and filled in with concrete according to Hoyt’s patent fireproof construction to produce a curbed ceiling that was finished in flat, glazed tile. As additional protection, all partitions were covered with iron laths and plaster by Smith & Prodgers, who were the mason builders as well as the plasterers. This firm had worked on the Equitable and Western Union buildings and was one of the best in the business. It was in the construction of the Morse that the iron contractor Post & McCord used steam-powered derricks to hoist iron beams and girders for the first time. Upon its completion, the owners claimed that the Morse Building was “the tallest straight wall building in the world.” Interior amenities included some 175 offices, two hydraulic Otis elevators, steam heat, gas lighting, and fireplaces. A New York Times advertisement in March 1880 offered for rent “a large first-floor room, suitable for an institution.” The Morse Building was among the first of the major downtown office buildings to be erected after recovery began from the financial Panic of 1873. Several notices after completion of the building indicated the shrewdness of this investment, as the nature of office buildings and the demand for space downtown changed. In December 1881, the Real Estate Record & Builders’ Guide commented that the demand for offices is no longer confined to the neighborhood of the Stock, Mining, Cotton and Produce Exchanges. All the great industries which are represented in New York are using offices instead of stores, and these last are very profitable. Eugene Kelly paid $250,000 for the lots on the corner of Nassau and Beekman streets. The building he erected [Temple Court] is a very costly one, yet it is said it will net him a profit of 20 per cent, per annum. This was followed in February 1882 by the statement that in no part of the city has there been so great an increase in rents as in the great business centres, especially in the lower part of the island. . . The demand for well-located offices in Broad, Pine, Cedar, Wall and New streets, Exchange place and Broadway below Fulton street, is not only keeping pace, but fast outrunning the accommodations which have been provided, or which are nearing completion. Already many of the offices in the Marquand, Kelly, Mills, and Tribune structures are engaged, and at very fair figures. And in May 1882 was the further comment that “the Tribune, Times, Morse buildings and Temple Court are nearer the law courts, and better for lawyers and public offices.”The Morses claimed in 1883 to be receiving ten percent on their initial investment. The Tall Office Building in New York City in the 1870s-80s During the 19 century, commercial buildings in New York City developed from 4-story structures modeled on Italian Renaissance palazzi to much taller skyscrapers. Made possible by technological advances, tall buildings challenged designers to fashion an appropriate architectural expression. Between 1870 and 1890, 9- and 10-story buildings transformed the streetscapes of lower Manhattan between Bowling Green and City Hall. During the building boom following the Civil War, building envelopes continued to be articulated largely according to traditional palazzo compositions, with mansarded and towered roof profiles. The period of the late 1870s and 1880s was one of stylistic experimentation in which commercial and office buildings in New York incorporated diverse influences, such as the Queen Anne, Victorian Gothic, Romanesque, and neo-Grec styles, French rationalism, and the German Rundbogenstil, under the leadership of such architects as Richard M. Hunt and George B. Post. New York’s tallest buildings – including the 7-1/2-story Equitable Life Assurance Co. Building (1868-70, Gilman & Kendall and George B. Post) at Broadway and Cedar Street, the 10-story Western Union Building (1872-75, George B. Post) at Broadway and Liberty Street, and the 10-story Tribune Building (1873-75, Richard M. Hunt), at 154 Nassau Street – all now demolished – incorporated passenger elevators, iron floor beams, and fireproof building materials. Fireproofing was of paramount concern as office buildings grew taller, and by 1881-82 systems had been devised to “completely fireproof” them. The Morse Building utilized the successful design, construction, fireproofing, and planning techniques of these earlier buildings. “Newspaper Row”: Park Row and Nassau Street The vicinity of Park Row, Nassau Street, and Printing House Square, roughly from the Brooklyn Bridge to Ann Street, was the center of newspaper publishing in New York City from the 1840s through the 1920s, while Beekman Street became the center of the downtown printing industry. Beginning in the 1870s, this area was redeveloped with tall office buildings, most associated with the newspapers, and Park Row (with its advantageous frontage across from City Hall Park and the U.S. Post Office, as well as its proximity to the Brooklyn Bridge) and adjacent Nassau Street acquired a group of important late-19th-century structures: Tribune Building (1873-75; demolished); Morse Building (1878-80; 1901-02); Temple Court Building and Annex (1881-83, Silliman & Farnsworth; 1889-90, James M. Farnsworth), 3-9 Beekman Street; Potter Building (1883-86, N.G. Starkweather), 38 Park Row; New York Times Building (1888-89, George B. Post; 1903-05, Robert Maynicke), 41 Park Row; World (Pulitzer) Building (1889-90, George B. Post; demolished), 53-63 Park Row; American Tract Society Building (1894-95, R.H. Robertson), 150 Nassau Street; and Park Row Building (1896-99, R.H. Robertson), 15 Park Row. The Architects The firm of Silliman & Farnsworth, architects of the Morse Building, existed from 1876 to 1882. James Mace Farnsworth (1847-1917), born in New York City, apparently began his career around 1872 and worked as a draftsman with the noted architect Calvert Vaux by 1873. Benjamin Silliman, Jr. (1848-1901), born in Louisville, Ky., was the third generation in his direct family line with the same name. His grandfather (1779-1864), considered “the most prominent and influential scientific man in America during the first half of the nineteenth century,” had been a professor of chemistry and natural history at Yale University (1802-53). Samuel F.B. Morse had acquired his interest in electricity while studying under Professor Silliman. Silliman’s father (1816-1885) was also a noted professor of chemistry at Yale. Silliman, Jr., graduated from Yale University in 1870, studied architecture for three years in Charlottenburg [Berlin], Germany, and upon his return to the U.S. worked for the firm of Vaux, Withers & Co., where he met Farnsworth. Silliman & Farnsworth obtained a number of prominent office and institutional building commissions, for which they produced designs influenced by the Rundbogenstil and the neo-Grec and Queen Anne styles, most executed in red brick and terra cotta. Their Morse Building (187880), the location of their office, was called “the first work of any prominence they have placed before the building trade of New York, and a work of which they may well be proud” by the Real Estate Record & Builders’ Guide.The firm also designed the Vassar Brothers Laboratory (1879-80; demolished), Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, N.Y.; the Orange Music Hall (1880; demolished), Orange, N.J.; a hospital (1880; demolished) at Lexington Avenue and East 52 Street; two commercial buildings at Nos. 19 and 21 East 17 Street (1881-82); and the Temple Court Building (1881-83). Farnsworth practiced independently from 1883 to 1897, producing numerous designs for commercial and office buildings and warehouses for prominent builder-developer John Pettit, including additions to the cast-iron Bennett Building in 1890-94. He was responsible for the Singer Building (1886), Pittsburgh, Pa., and designed the Temple Court Annex (1889-90); he maintained his office in Temple Court in 1890-92. Associated with a number of other architects over the years, he worked with Charles E. Miller from 1897 to 1900, then with [J.A. Henry] Flemer & [V. Hugo] Koehler in 1900-01, and as part of Koehler & Farnsworth c. 1903-10; he practiced alone until his death. Little is known of Silliman’s subsequent practice, though he remained listed in New York City directories until around 1900. He moved to Yonkers around 1883, and former colleague George Martin Huss reminisced after Silliman’s death that “I believe that [he] built largely in Yonkers.” He was living in Harlem at the end of his life. The Design of the Morse Building The design of the Morse Building reflects the shift from the palazzo model for office buildings begun in the 1870s by Richard M. Hunt with the Tribune Building, among others. Stylistically, the building displays a combination of influences, including the Victorian Gothic and neo-Grec, along with the Rundbogenstil. The Real Estate Record & Builders’ Guide in 1879 called it “a distinctly modern style, an adaptation of the Romanesque and Gothic combined, still with well-curved Roman arches.” Sarah B. Landau has discerned the direct influence of the Evening Post Building (1874-75, architect undetermined; demolished) and Hunt’s Tribune Building. The polychrome Morse Building was also one of the early tall New York office buildings of the 1870s that employed brick and terra-cotta cladding. The corner location allows for two full facades, each of which is articulated vertically by monumental pilasters (which reflect internal party walls), dividing the facades into three sections on Nassau Street and two sections on Beekman Street. The building was originally arranged horizontally into four sections: a base, consisting of a raised basement and main first story; two similar midsections articulated by one story of round-arched fenestration surmounted by two stories with paired segmental-arched fenestration; and an upper section with one story of round-arched fenestration and an attic story with patterned brick corbelling and arches, terminated by a molded cornice with ornamental terra-cotta parapet. The walls were further elaborated by patterning, corbelling, stringcourses, rondels, and moldings. The original Nassau Street entrance had an elaborately ornamented round-arched surround of brick and terra cotta, with stairs leading to the first story. Landau and Condit opined that the “relative simplicity and regularity of the facade treatment imparted a quality of wholeness not typical of early skyscrapers.” The Morse Building provides an interesting contrast with the slightly later Temple Court Building, by the same architects, and the Potter Building, all three executed in red brick and terra cotta, at the same intersection of streets. Despite the decidedly mixed contemporary comment on most prominent tall buildings of the late-19 century in New York, the Morse Building was generally praised. A critic in The American Architect & Building News in January 1879 wrote that The architects had the difficult problem to solve, in designing the exterior, of a large, many-storied building, placed on the corner of two relatively narrow streets, and it seems questionable whether they have been altogether successful. ... the effect produced [of the base] is excellent, and shows perhaps the best use of brick of any work in the city, and is certainly a very creditable composition, both in its proportions and its color; above this, however, the design seems to hesitate between two different modes of treatment [round- and segmental-arched windows], not accepting either mode frankly enough to be successful... The effect of the building is excellent, however, and the construction seems to have been carefully studied and well carried out; it certainly is a relief to find work challenging criticism by its good points rather than by its bad ones. The same publication in July 1879 found that “there is contrast, diversity, and change, a great remove from monotony and a solution of the difficult problem which must strike all as a most satisfactory one.”The Manufacturer & Builder in 1879 considered it decidedly agreeable in its general appearance as well as in its details. The cause of this is the fine form of the many windows and the judicious use of black and molded bricks in the walls, while the effect of the whole is harmonious and chaste. The only criticism made by some is that the roof is flat, or rather that no roof is visible. (Critic Montgomery Schuyler was one of those who thought that a steep roof made a building an “impressive object” in the lower Manhattan skyline). Renderings of the Nassau Street facade and the main entrance were featured in Carpentry & Building in 1879 and The American Architect & Building News in 1880. The English The Building News in 1883 referred to it as “a very quiet and pleasing structure, well proportioned, and not at all glaring or showy.” Mrs. Schuyler Van Rensselaer in The Century in 1884 wrote “nor is the Morse building without evidence of effort in the right direction” in the design of office buildings. King’s Handbook in 1892 called it “a striking illustration of the architectural beauty of brick and terra cotta. It is a solid handsome structure...” In Silliman’s obituary in The American Architect & Building News in 1901, the Morse Building was called “one of the first and most successful of the many-storied office-buildings.” And Schuyler, considering the base of the building again in 1902, named it one of the last and one of the best works of the Gothic revival in New York, of that true Gothic revival which consisted not in the reproduction of Gothic forms, but in the application of the Gothic principle of functional expression. Today, the Morse Building is the earliest surviving (as well as one of the very few surviving) tall “fireproof” New York office building of the mid-1870s to mid-1880s, the period prior to the full development of the skyscraper.Its significance is enhanced by its visibility on a corner with two articulated facades, and its location within the district near City Hall Park that was developed with tall office buildings beginning in the 1870s. The Morse Building, Brick, and Architectural Terra Cotta in New York City The polychrome Morse Building is an early example of the use of brick and terra cotta for the exterior cladding of tall office buildings in the 1870s-80s, a trend seen in such brick structures as the Boreel, Western Union, and Tribune Buildings. As observed in 1881 by Montgomery Schuyler: The architects of the present generation found commercial New York an imitation of marble, either in cast-iron or in an actual veneer of white limestone. They are likely to leave it brick. . . Whatever of interest has since been done in business buildings has been done in baked clay, more and more including the use of terra-cotta as well as of brick. The first of the noteworthy attempts to build in brick alone . . . was Messrs. Silliman and Farnsworth’s Morse Building, which remains one of the most interesting and successful of these attempts. The manufacture of terra-cotta has been much improved in the interval, but there has been no example of brickwork built since in which moulded brick and colored brick have been used with more fitness and sobriety, nor in which a more agreeable and satisfactory result has been attained. The intricate brickwork of the Morse Building features brick that was manufactured in a wide variety of ornamental shapes, both cut and molded, in hues of deep red and glazed black. The black brick was employed ornamentally, largely to emphasize the outlines of the fenestration. The Peerless Brick Co. of Philadelphia, a leading producer in this period of quality pressed bricks, supplied the brick for the building. Peerless had been a pioneer in the improvement of brick-making machines that successfully increased the efficiency and quality of their manufacture. By 1880, the company advertised ARCHITECTURAL SHAPES 300 kinds. Also RED Pressed Fronts. Extra fine in color and quality. ... [and] BLACK, Velvety jet face. The only black brick fit for a fine building, producing a beautiful effect, and free from the glossy and greasy look of other black or dipped bricks. DIAPERING and ORNAMENTAL Bricks made in the above colors. The American Architect & Building News commented that The Peerless Company has revolutionized the manufacture of bricks, and has gone far toward effecting a welcome revolution in brick architecture, not alone by the infinite variety of shapes and excellence of finish which the company imparts to the bricks it turns out, but also by the reason of the beauty of their color. While a number of architects had attempted in the 1850s to employ architectural ornament of terra cotta in New York, it was after the Chicago and Boston fires of 1871-72 that terra cotta was revived as a significant interior and exterior building material in the United States. Walter Geer later noted that “by these fires it was conclusively demonstrated that fire-proof buildings could not be made of unprotected stone or iron, and that only brick and terra-cotta walls were practically fire-proof. This increased use of brick work, and of terra-cotta as a constructive and decorative material in connection with brick work, revived the demand for the manufacture of this material in or near New York.”(The term “constructive” in this quote refers to the manner in which the terra cotta was fully integrated into the exterior brick bearing walls). In the 1870s and early 1880s, architectural terra cotta was often a color that matched stone (commonly brownstone, buff or red) that could be employed in pleasant juxtaposition with brick, or as a substitute for brownstone. The Record & Guide remarked that during this period “terra cotta is most generally used for the trimming and ornamentation of buildings, taking the form of panels, courses, friezes, small tiles, roofing tiles and paving blocks.” George B. Post was a leader during this period in New York City in the use of exterior terra cotta, in his designs for the Long Island Historical Society (1878-81), New York Produce Exchange (1881-84; demolished), and Mills Building (1881-83; demolished). Among other contemporary architects who employed terra cotta were Kimball & Wisedell, designers of the Casino Theater (1881-82; demolished), an early New York building having highly intricate, exotic terra-cotta ornament, and Silliman & Farnsworth. The Morse Building, with terra cotta by the Boston Terra Cotta Co., one of the first terra cotta firms on the East Coast, was then considered the first prominent New York office building to employ exterior terra cotta, though it was used relatively sparingly for architectural details, such as sills, sillcourses, entrance surround elements, foliate rondels, and cornice. The Morse Building was constructed early enough in the revival of the use of terra cotta in New York that The American Architect & Building News expressed There are matters of pure construction which are as yet unsettled: terra-cotta is used in various ways as constructive ornament, and it remains to be seen whether a satisfactory exhibit of the employment of that material is to be given us in this city. No one will claim that any terra-cotta work of consequence has yet been done here. The Morse Building will be interesting as an experiment, and as such much of its terracotta work must be classed. James Taylor, “the father of American terra cotta,” later credited Silliman & Farnsworth with one technical innovation in their employment of terra cotta on the Morse Building: “In this building the raised or protected vertical joint was first used. This form of joint prevents the rain from scouring out the pointing mortar, and it is an important and necessary precaution which ought to be used upon all exposed surfaces.” The Morse Building was an early and significant building to employ exterior architectural terra cotta in its second American phase, and is today a rare surviving example of a tall New York office building of its era employing exterior (polychrome) brick and terra cotta. The brickwork is among the finest of its period surviving in New York City. Nassau-Beekman Building The base of the Morse Building was damaged in the disastrous fire in January 1882 that destroyed the World Building at Park Row and Beekman Street. According to the Brooklyn Daily Eagle: The handsome front of the Morse Building is much injured. The brick and terra cotta works of the lower story and the window frames were smashed, and the area lights broken in. The building to-day looks rather dilapidated, as a consequence. Mr. Morse characterized the action of the firemen in allowing the wall to fall on his building as a piece of downright vandalism. Following the death of G. Livingston Morse in 1891, Sidney E. Morse, the building’s co-owner and his cousin’s executor, sold a half-interest in the property in May 1892 to Nathaniel Niles, a New York lawyer who resided in Madison, N.J., and acquired it as an investment. Morse conveyed the other half-interest to Niles in February 1895, but maintained a real estate office here until his death in 1908. King’s Handbook in 1892 indicated that “the offices are occupied for the most part by lawyers and the agents of manufacturing corporations. ... Seldom are any of its offices vacant.” For several years, from about 1896 to 1900, the Morse Building was the site of the office and rooftop studio of one of the earliest American motion picture companies, which became the American Vitagraph Co., founded by James Stuart Blackton and Albert Edward Smith. Smith later reminisced that “the top floor of the Morse Building... was a cut-rate haven occupied largely by poverty-stricken newspaper artists and cartoonists.” “Burglar on the Roof,” filmed here, was the studio’s “first posed picture” in May 1897. In August 1898, the New York Times disclosed that the Washington Life Insurance Co. had instituted foreclosure proceedings against Niles and his partners for failure to pay the mortgage. The property, offered at auction in March-April 1899, was acquired by the insurance firm for $601,000. A deal was arranged by Washington Life in November 1900 where the company traded the Morse Building in exchange for the Hamilton Storage Warehouse building, at the northeast corner of Park Avenue and 125 Street, owned by Charles Ward Hall. The Times reported that “the Morse Building will be remodeled, in fact almost reconstructed, to make it conform as nearly as possible to the requirements of a modern office structure.” Just 20 years after its completion, the Morse Building was considered small and old-fashioned, particularly when compared to modern, very tall steel-framed skyscrapers, such as the 20-story (plus 3-story tower) American Tract Society Building (1894-95) next door. Architects Bannister & Schell filed in December 1900 for the alteration of the Morse Building in an “Edwardian” neo-Classical style, which was expected to cost $150,000. This entailed remodeling the two-story base (the former basement and first story levels were rearranged as two full stories) with a heavily rusticated treatment, having a pedimented entrance with columns; reconstructing the former 8 and attic stories; and the addition of four steel-framed stories, bringing the structure to 14 stories. The firm of Bannister & Schell was established c. 1899 and apparently lasted until the 1930s, despite the death of one of the partners. William P. Bannister (c. 1869-1939), born in New York City, worked in the offices of a number of New York architects, and established an independent architectural practice by 1886. He was joined in partnership by Richard Montgomery Schell, who died in 1924. Bannister & Schell was responsible for a number of tenement, church, stable, and store-and-loft buildings in Manhattan between 1903 and 1911. Bannister served as the Secretary of the New York State Board of Examiners, and on his own designed a number of churches, residences, and commercial buildings. The complex construction on the Morse Building, which included extensive foundation work, was performed between April 1901 and March 1902. The building’s owner, Charles Ward Hall (c. 1877-1936), a graduate of Cornell University (1895), was the engineer; his firm, Hall & Grant Construction Co., was general contractor. That firm, and Joseph W. Cody Contracting Co., of which Hall was president, had offices here. The Engineering Record described the architectural changes on the exterior in 1901 as follows: The architects decided to lighten the color and change the style. The lower stories have been modified by facing them with light-colored artificial stone, replacing the old portico by a new one of Indiana limestone and redesigning the main entrance. The new upper stories are faced with light-colored [cream] brick and have an enriched cornice separating the upper from the middle section. Montgomery Schuyler, highly critical of the alterations, included the building in his “Architectural Aberrations” column in Architectural Record in 1902. He described the upper stories: For the former respectable top is substituted two stories of plain red brick piers with iron sashes, window frames, and a balcony projected upon huge corbels of sheet metal, and four additional stories are added above in white brick, with the same metal window framing, the whole concluded with a Grecian cresting, also in sheet metal. The design of the upper stories is actually quite handsome. The new cornice that capped the 10 story (no longer extant), separating the form of the earlier building from the added four stories, featured a projecting balcony supported by enormous scroll brackets. The high terminating cornice is ornamented by stylized anthemia acroteria. Sarah B. Landau hypothesized that the shift in color for the addition and alteration of the Morse Building reflected the influence of the recently-built Broadway Chambers Building (1899-1900, Cass Gilbert), 277 Broadway, which epitomized the tripartite columnar base-shaft-capital form, but differentiated the sections by color and material. The name of the remodeled structure was changed to the Nassau-Beekman Building. A 1902 advertisement offered “Floors and offices at moderate rents, suitable for lawyers and parties connected with the paper trade.” Later History Charles Ward Hall lost the Nassau-Beekman Building to foreclosure by the Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. in 1918. (Hall became a pioneer in the design of flying boats and airplanes as early as 1916, was president of the Aluminum Aircraft Corp. of Bristol, Pa, and died in 1936 while flying an aluminum experimental plane). In 1919, the building was transferred to the Second United Cities Realty Corp., one of the four real estate entities within United Cities Realty Corps. (established c. 1905), under the control of William E. Harmon & Co. (later Harmon National Real Estate Corp.), that operated also in Chicago; Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Duluth, Minn.; and Joplin, Mo. The name of the structure was changed again, to the United Cities Realty Building, with the offices of that firm and the Harmon company located here. In 1942, the property reverted to the Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. It was acquired in 1945 by Nassau Offices, Inc.; transferred to a group of investors in 1951, who conveyed it in 1952 to Clarendon Building, Inc. (later 140 Nassau Street Corp.); and was acquired by Chatham Associates, Inc., in 1968. The base was altered again c. 1965, and the balcony/cornice (1901-02) above the 10 story was removed. The Morse (later Nassau-Beekman) Building was originally constructed on Manhattan Tax Map Block 101, Lot 26; in 1967, the portion of Tax Map Block 101 on which the building stands was merged with the block to the east, so that it is now part of Tax Map Block 100. The building was purchased in 1972 by Pace College, which was acquiring a number of historic properties in the vicinity. After a proposal to demolish them for a large office tower fell through, Pace sold this property in 1979 to 140 Nassau Street Associates, an entity of MJR Development Corp., controlled by Martin Raynes (who also purchased the Potter Building across the street). After conversion to cooperative loft apartments, part of a trend in changing downtown buildings from office to residential use, title passed in 1980 to 140 Nassau Residence Corp. Description The 14-story Morse Building is located at the northeast corner of Beekman and Nassau Streets. The current form of the building is the result of three periods of construction. The building is arranged horizontally into three sections: a two-story base (c. 1965); a 6-story original (1878-80) midsection consisting of two similar superimposed subsections; and a 6-story upper section consisting of two remodeled stories and four stories added in 1901-02 (a balcony/cornice added above the 10story in 1901-02 was removed c. 1965). Each major facade is articulated vertically by monumental pilasters, with three sections on Nassau Street and two sections on Beekman Street. One-over-one double-hung wood-framed windows (with transoms in the round arches) have been replaced c. 1986 by anodized aluminum windows (except for the 8 story, which are mostly wood). Base The two lower stories were remodeled in a simplified neo-Classical style c. 1965 with a facing of concrete (now painted). The deeply inset main entrance on Nassau Street, with polished black granite reveals and multi-pane glass and metal doors and windows, has a 2-story molded surround and is flanked by 2-story pilasters. There are also 2-story pilasters at the north end of the building on Nassau Street, and at the center and the eastern end of the Beekman Street facade. The ground story has four storefront bays on each facade, with the corner having a storefront entrance that interrupts the corner pier. Ground-story alterations include rolldown gates, storefronts on Nassau Street, metal panels on Beekman Street, awnings, and signage. The second story of each facade has five rectangular windows flanked by pilasters, above molded spandrel panels; the second story is capped by a molded cornice. Midsection The intact 6-story, 1878-80 midsection, clad in polychrome (deep red and black) brick and terra cotta, is articulated as two sub-sections, each having one story of round-arched fenestration surmounted by two stories with paired segmental-arched fenestration set within segmental arches. Each major facade is articulated vertically by monumental pilasters, with three sections on Nassau Street and two sections on Beekman Street. The facades are further elaborated by brick patterning, corbelling, and moldings, and terra-cotta sills, sillcourses and foliate rondels. The 8-story pressed metal cornice (1901-02) was replaced by one in fiberglass c. 2004. Some red bricks were replaced at that time. All of the original terra-cotta sillcourses along the Beekman Street facade and many of the sillcourses on the Nassau Street facade, and some units of the terra-cotta sills, were replaced by cast stone c. 2004. Upper Section The 6-story upper section (1901-02) consists of: two existing stories that were reconstructed and the pilasters re-faced with the original red brick, then terminated by a projecting balcony/cornice supported by enormous scroll brackets (this was removed c. 1965, and the area parged); a 3-story section having monumental cream-colored brick pilasters (the major ones having panels), capped by a molded pressed metal cornice supported by corbels (replicated in fiberglass c. 1995); and an attic story, terminated by a molded metal cornice ornamented by stylized anthemia acroteria (replicated in fiberglass c. 1995). Each story has tripartite window groups with metal framing and paneled metal spandrels. The cream brick was painted a reddish color at some point, but that paint is currently wearing away. There is a tall concrete elevator enclosure (c. 1901-02) on the roof. Eastern Facade Articulation of the Beekman Street facade continues by a corner return on the upper stories. This facade, pierced by fenestration, has been parged and painted. - From the 2005 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Robert and Anne Dickey House http://flic.kr/p/9cMKTG Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The large (nearly 41 by 62 feet), significantly intact Federal style town house at No. 67 Greenwich Street in lower Manhattan was constructed in 1809-10 when this was the most fashionable neighborhood for New York’s social elite and wealthy merchant class. As constructed, the house was 3-1/2 stories with a high peaked roof (probably with dormers), and featured Flemish bond brickwork, a brownstone base, splayed stone lintels with fluted keystones on the flat 4- bay front facade, and an elliptical 3-bay bow on the rear facade, a popular feature of the day, also with splayed lintels. Until 1820, this was the residence of merchant Robert Dickey and his wife, Anne. Typical of the period, Dickey conducted his business from the rear of the property on Lumber Street (later Trinity Place). From 1823 until 1919, the house was owned by Peter Schermerhorn, ship chandler and director of the Bank of New York, and his sons and heirs. Until 1832 it was leased to socially prominent tenants, and was the residence of builder Ezra Ludlow to 1841. It became a boardinghouse and in the 1850s served a number of other uses. 1872 alterations (still extant) to the building (then a tenement) performed by the distinguished architect Detlef Lienau included raising it to a full 4th story with a molded metal front cornice and replicating the rear elliptical bow, installing a pedimented hood over the front entrance, and replacing original lintels on the front facade’s 2nd- and 3rd- story outer bays with flat stone lintels like those on the 4th story. In 1922, a one-story commercial extension was built on Trinity Place. The Dickey House is one of only 5 surviving houses of Manhattan’s most elite neighborhood of the post-Revolutionary War era, which are among the relatively rare extant Manhattan houses of the Federal period and style, and is one of only 7 pre- 1810 houses located south of Chambers Street, the oldest section of New York City. The Dickey House is further distinguished as the grandest of these houses aside from the designated Watson House (1793, 1806), 7 State Street, and is the only remaining Federal style town house in Manhattan that has a bowed facade. No. 67 Greenwich Street is a nearly 41-foot-wide and 62-foot deep Federal style town house that was raised to a full 4th story (1872). It is clad in red brick (now painted), with Flemish bond on the 1st through the 3rd stories, and Common bond on the 4th story. Front (Greenwich Street) Facade Ground Story The brownstone base has a watertable, two small basement windows (one covered by a metal plate), and a basement entrance with metal steps, wrought-iron railings, and a door currently covered with wood and a metal gate. The windows are longer than those of the upper stories (the original splayed stone lintels with fluted keystones survived on all three windows into the 1960s, but have since been covered or possibly removed). The wide entrance (1872) has a bracketed and pedimented stone hood (partially altered), a small stoop with concrete steps and cheekwalls, and an inset doorway with wood and glass double doors, transoms, and angled walls with shop doors now covered by a metal gate and rolldown gate. Non-historic alterations on the 1st story include single-pane windows, a rolldown gate, lights, signage, and metal grilles. The areaway is bordered by brownstone blocks and has metal bulkhead doors and an iron grate. Upper Stories The flat 4-bay front facade has rectangular fenestration that diminishes in height from the 2nd to the 4th story. Original splayed stone lintels with fluted keystones appear in the central bays of the 2nd and 3rd stories. The other bays of the upper stories have flat stone lintels (1872). The stone sills project slightly. Windows are 6-over-6 double-hung wood sash on the 2nd story, and 2-over-2 above. Metal anchor bands have been installed (pre-1965) at the center and the north and south edges of the facade. A metal fire escape (pre-1939) was installed on the center bays of the upper stories. The facade is capped by a molded metal cornice (1872). Rear (Trinity Place) Facade Ground Story The original design of the rear extension (1922) has been altered over the years. The current non-historic storefront is clad in brick and wood siding, with windows with rolldown gates, double entrance doors with metal gates, and an awning. Mechanical equipment is visible on the roof. Upper Stories The upper portion of the rear facade has an elliptical bow on the three northernmost of the five bays. The 2nd and 3rd stories have original splayed stone lintels, while the 4th story has flat stone lintels (1872). The stone sills project slightly. Windows are 6-over-6 and 3-over-6 double-hung wood sash on the 2nd and 3rd stories, and 2-over-2 above. A small metal fire escape (pre-1939) was installed on the center bays of the 3rd and 4th stories. A metal ventilating pipe was installed between the northernmost bays. The facade is capped by a molded brick cornice (1872). Ventilating pipes are visible on the roof. - From the NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Beekman Tower http://flic.kr/p/9cMNVy Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog.

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: West Street Building http://flic.kr/p/9cMGEG Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The West Street Building, one of three major Downtown office buildings designed by Cass Gilbert, was built in 1905-07 for the West Street Improvement Corporation, a partnership headed by Howard Carroll. Carroll was president of two asphalt companies and vice-president of his father-in-law's Star in Transportation Company, which had major river shipping interests. Although today separated from the Hudson River by the landfill supporting Battery Park City, the site of the West Street Building originally had a highly visible location facing the waterfront along West Street. Carroll conceived of his project as a first-class skyscraper office building for the shipping and railroad industries. In addition to Carroll's companies, the building soon filled up with tenants including major companies in the transportation industry. The building's top floor was occupied by "The Garret Restaurant," which advertised itself as the highest restaurant in New York and boasted of its panoramic river and city views. Cass Gilbert was one of the most prominent architects in New York in the first decade of the twentieth century. His succession of early skyscrapers helped pave the way for the great romantic skyscraper towers of the 1920s and beyond. His West Street Building may be considered transitional from the "base-shaft-capital" arrangement of the late-nineteenth-century office buildings conceived as analogous to a classical column - and perhaps best epitomized by his own design for the Broad way-Chambers Building - to the romantic tower exemplified by his design for the Woolworth Building. While the West Street Building is tripartite in configuration, its upper floors are a romantic mansarded design. The building's Gothic vocabulary is an early instance of its use in American skyscraper design, anticipatin

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: West Street Building http://flic.kr/p/9cJBaF Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The West Street Building, one of three major Downtown office buildings designed by Cass Gilbert, was built in 1905-07 for the West Street Improvement Corporation, a partnership headed by Howard Carroll. Carroll was president of two asphalt companies and vice-president of his father-in-law's Star in Transportation Company, which had major river shipping interests. Although today separated from the Hudson River by the landfill supporting Battery Park City, the site of the West Street Building originally had a highly visible location facing the waterfront along West Street. Carroll conceived of his project as a first-class skyscraper office building for the shipping and railroad industries. In addition to Carroll's companies, the building soon filled up with tenants including major companies in the transportation industry. The building's top floor was occupied by "The Garret Restaurant," which advertised itself as the highest restaurant in New York and boasted of its panoramic river and city views. Cass Gilbert was one of the most prominent architects in New York in the first decade of the twentieth century. His succession of early skyscrapers helped pave the way for the great romantic skyscraper towers of the 1920s and beyond. His West Street Building may be considered transitional from the "base-shaft-capital" arrangement of the late-nineteenth-century office buildings conceived as analogous to a classical column - and perhaps best epitomized by his own design for the Broad way-Chambers Building - to the romantic tower exemplified by his design for the Woolworth Building. While the West Street Building is tripartite in configuration, its upper floors are a romantic mansarded design. The building's Gothic vocabulary is an early instance of its use in American skyscraper design, anticipating the Woolworth Building. The clustered piers in the tower's middle section anticipate the verticality stressed in later skyscraper design. The West Street Building was one of many office buildings erected in lower Manhattan during the first decade following the consolidation of the City of Greater New York, but its handsome design set it apart, and it won widespread critical acclaim. Today, its exterior survives largely intact, and the building remains in commercial office use. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS Carroll's dock-side skyscraper for the shipping trade The West Street Building was conceived and built by the West Street Improvement Company, a syndicate of downtown business interests headed by Howard Carroll that included John Peirce, who served as the building's general contractor. The company initially maintained its offices in the Broadway-Chambers Building, also designed by Cass Gilbert. Born in Albany. New York, and educated in New York and abroad, Howard Carroll (1854-1916) worked as a journalist at the New York Times. He later joined the Starin Transportation Company, a large firm with river transportation interests, owned by his father-in-law, John Henry Starin (1825-1909). By 1905, when Carroll formed the West Street Improvement Company, he had become the Starin Company's vice-president. He also had separate business interests unconnected to Starin, as president of both the Sicilian Asphalt Paving Company and the Asphalt Company of Canada. Carroll's West Street Improvement Company conceived the West Street Building as a high-class office building specifically targeting the shipping industry. Though the site today is several blocks inland from the waterfront, West Street in 1905 ran along the shore of the Hudson River, and the new building rose directly across the street from the docks. At the time West Street was lined with ferries and warehouses of the railroad and steamship companies.4 In the words of a rental brochure for the West Street Building, it "commends itself particularly to railroads, engineers, dock builders, contractors, lawyers, shippers, and machinery and electrical trades." Carroll commissioned a design for the West Street Building in April 1905 from architect Cass Gilbert. Cass Gilbert (1859-1934) Cass Gilbert's commissions include several of New York City's major landmarks; the two most important of these, the U.S. Custom House and the Wool worth Building, are of national significance. Gilbert was a Midwesterner who trained and later practiced in the East. His career falls roughly into two parts: a local practice in St. Paul, Minnesota, in the 1880s and 1890s, and a national practice, based in New York, from 1900 until his death in 1934. Gilbert was born the son of an engineer in Zanesville, Ohio, a town laid out in part by his grandfather. While still a child, he and his family moved to St. Paul, where he completed his secondary education. In 1876 he entered the office of A.M. Radcliffe, a local architect. Two years later he went east to study at the architecture school of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, then headed by William R. Ware; his teacher was a Frenchman, Eugene Letang. After two years of study, Gilbert went to Europe; he had hoped to work for an English architect but was unable to find employment. After traveling briefly through France and Italy, chiefly to see Gothic cathedrals, he was obliged to return to the United States later the same year. In New York he joined the firm of McKim, Mead & White, which had been formed barely a year earlier in September 1879. Unlike many major American architects of his era, Gilbert did not study at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris. His architectural education, however, reflected the American interpretation of Beaux-Arts ideas as promulgated through academic institutions and architectural apprenticeships. Eugene Letang had been an Ecole student; William R. Ware was one of the five architects who had studied in the New York atelier of Richard Morris Hunt, the first American to attend the Ecole. McKim, who was an Ecole student, and White, who was not, had both worked in the office of the second American to attend the Ecole, H.H. Richardson. Returning to St. Paul in 1882, Gilbert set up his own practice. Mead had suggested he open a St. Paul branch of McKim, Mead & White,10 but instead Gilbert formed a partnership with fellow M.I.T. graduate James Knox Taylor, which lasted eight years. During the last two decades of the century he built a solid reputation in St. Paul designing residences, churches, and office buildings; most of his designs were in the Shingle Style or the Richardsonian Romanesque. When John Welborn Root died in 1891, Mead wrote to Gilbert from New York urging him to go to Chicago to become Daniel Burnham's new partner; Gilbert, however, chose to remain in St. Paul. He became president of the Minnesota chapter of the A.I. A., and was invited to sit on various architectural juries — he was the only Westerner on the jury for the New York Public Library competition. In 1895, Gilbert won the competition for the new Minnesota state capitol, a commission that established his national reputation. Clearly reflecting the impact of the 1893 Chicago Columbian Exposition, Gilbert's design was an elegant Beaux-Arts building, which, in its monumental composition, classical style, and elaborate decoration, laid the groundwork for his 1899 winning entry in the New York Custom House competition.13 In 1900, Gilbert moved permanently to New York. Throughout his later careeer, Gilbert produced Beaux-Arts-inspired governmental buildings, including the Federal Courthouse in New York (1934), the Detroit Public Library (1914), the West Virginia state capitol in Charleston (1928-32), and the Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C. (1933-35) among many others. These public monuments, which comprised a major portion of his national work, were lavishly decorated with sculpture and murals. Gilbert's other major contribution to architecture was in the field of skyscraper design. As a Midwestern architect working during the last two decades of the nineteenth century, he was familiar with the technological developments in skyscraper construction in Chicago. His training in Eastern schools, on the other hand, enabled him to develop a style that was compatible with taste current in New York City when he moved there at the turn of the century. The unique combination of Midwestern technology, Eastern training, and Gilbert's personal design talents and beliefs helped him move away from the "base-shaft-capital" formula of early office buildings to the full-blown romantic skyscraper conception of the Woolworth Building, his most famous tall building. Gilbert's skyscraper designs reflected his clear belief in the value of studying the architecture of the past -- not to copy it, but certainly to adapt it. Speaking on the occasion of the presentation to him of the Gold Medal of Architecture by the Society of Arts and Sciences in honor of the Woolworth Building design, he said: ... as in language new words are coined to express new meanings and old words become obsolete, as old uses are abandoned so new forms to meet new needs are developed (I almost said invented) as the necessity requires. . . . My plea therefore is . . . for the solution of our own problems in the spirit of our own . . . but to disregard nothing of the past that may guide us in doing so. Gilbert also believed, however, that his approach to skyscraper design was based on structural expression and the aesthetic treatment of materials. He argued that since commercial buildings required thin surfaces, these had to be treated decoratively, and that a thin, decoratively treated surface expressed the structural fact that the skyscraper was a steel-cage structure, clearly not supported by its terra-cotta or stone cladding. One of the devices he used in this decorative treatment was proportion; another was color. All these aspects of design came to be embodied in the West Street Building. The West Street Building and Its Design During the first decade of the new century, following the 1898 consolidation of the City of Greater New York, the lower Manhattan business district experienced a boom in office building construction, with 40 new buildings in the financial district alone. Within just a few blocks of the West Street Building, nine new buildings were under construction in 1906, including the United States Express Building, the Singer Building, and the Evening Post Building; in height they varied from 18 to 40 stories. For the new building, Carroll and his partners chose a site with a frontage of 159 feet on West Street, facing the Hudson River, between Cedar and Albany streets. The location put the building in the heart of an area devoted to riverfront commerce, described in 1899 as "occupied with freight and ferry houses of great railroad and steamship lines. It also put the building on a waterfront site with excellent views in all directions, and offices convenient to docks and ferries to rail terminals. The owners and architects of the West Street Building filed their application in 1905 for an office building of 23 and 28 stories, estimated to cost $2 million.20 Construction began in April the following year, and was completed in 1907. The John Peirce Company, the West Street Building contractor, maintained offices in the building, as did Carroll's Sicilian Asphalt Paving Company. Railroad interests in the building initially included the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company, which rented the seventeenth through twentieth floors (the portion of the building which has the most ornately detailed facades). The DL & W Railroad owned both Pier 13 (earlier called Pier 20) at nearby Cortlandt Street, and a railroad and ferry terminal in Hoboken, New Jersey, completed in 1907; from the West Street Building windows, railroad executives could observe traffic between the two. Because of the nature of its tenants, the building was soon known as the "Railroad and Iron Exchange Building"22 or the "Coal and Iron Building."23 Its profile as a tall building on the waterfront skyline also attracted the "Garret Restaurant," called "the world's highest restaurant," which was located on the top floor and had river and city views.24 The West Street Building was one of four major office buildings designed by Cass Gilbert in the northeastern United States before the outbreak of World War I, the others being the Brazer Building (1896) in Boston, and the Broadway-Chambers Building (1899-1900) and the Woolworth Building {191 1-1913). both in New York City. In those buildings Gilbert charted the course of development of the skyscraper from the nineteenth-century "base-shaft-capital " type to the grand, romantic tower type, exemplified by the Woolworth, which became the prototype for the great towers of the 1920s and 1930s. The West Street Building bridged the gap from the one to the other. Both the Brazer Building and the Broadway-Chambers Building were office buildings of the "base-shaft-capital" type, in which the building was seen as analogous to a classical column: a decoratively treated "base" of one or two stories arranged around the entrance, a decoratively treated "capital" of several stories at the top, and a tall "shaft" of intervening stories. The Broadway-Chambers Building, a project in which Gilbert himself also acted as developer,-5 was widely admired at the time of its completion as one of the finest examples of the "base-shaft-capital" type yet produced. Gilbert approached an office building project from two perspectives : as a real-estate transaction which required economy and efficiency — in a c.1900 article he described an office building as "a machine that makes the land pay"; and as an opportunity to create a striking design — in the same article he also wrote, "one must not lose sight of the fact that the machine is none the less a useful one because it has a measure of beauty, and that architectural beauty, judged even from an economic standpoint, has an income-bearing value." The West Street Building was, to some extent, organized along a tripartite scheme, but it represented a major advance in office building design. Although arranged as base-shaft-capital, the building's design downplayed the "base," emphasized the verticality of the "shaft" with tall uninterrupted, clustered piers, and made the "capital" an elaborate Gothic fantasy with a mansard roof. The West Street Building's vertical expression and Gothic skin were the direct predecessors of the Woolworth Building, as was its use of color. That Gilbert, in his design for the West Street Building, was consciously moving away from the tripartite paradigm towards the tall tower is demonstrated by one of his early proposals. The building in that proposal rose to a five-story tower at the top, similar in spirit to the tower of the Woolworth Building. Since he couldn't have the tower, Gilbert in his subsequent design emphasized an elaborate, seven-story upper portion with mansarded roof. Gilbert's choice of Gothic similarly helped move skyscraper design along towards the tower ideal. In one of the first consistent uses of Gothic detailing on a tall office building, Gilbert took as models both the secular (town halls in Brussels and Louvain) and the religious (the tower of the cathedral in Malines, Belgium), and used the Gothic to emphasize the tower's sheer verticality. In another move anticipating his design for the Woolworth Building, Gilbert conceived the West Street Building's facades in terra cotta, which was manufactured by the Atlantic Terra-Cotta Company.30 Gilbert took advantage of the versatility of terra cotta to give the building polychromatic luster, making the shaft beige, but adding details in gold, blue, red, and green. Fellow practitioners and critics writing in the contemporary architectural press praised Cass Gilbert's new skyscraper. Architect John Carrere told Gilbert, "if my opinion counts for anything I think it is the most successful building of its class." Painter Edwin Blashfield wrote to Gilbert in 1907: I want to write a line to tell you what a splendid impression your West Street Building makes on one, as one comes up the harbor on the way back from the other side of the Atlantic. . . . Indeed I didn't suppose a skyscraper could be so picturesque and handsome. I've always admired the effect of power in such buildings but in yours you create a type which is immediately satisfying to the eye. The critics shared this opinion. Claude Bragdon, writing in the Architectural Record, called the West Street Building "an aesthetic and technical triumph .... in mass, in outline, in color, in detail, the building is the work of a master mind, the last word in New York skyscraper architecture." Five years after the building's completion, Francis Swales wrote in the Architectural Review: "Expression without exaggeration of the type of construction, combined with sparing use and judicious placing of ornament, in good scale, with due regard to the relative importance of different points of view, account for the excellence of effect of the West Street Building." The best known critic of the day, Montgomery Schuyler, praised "the pinnacled diadem of the West Street Building . . . the cynosure of a justified admiration." He reported that Gilbert's building had the unusual merit of winning both popular and critical approval. Schuyler particularly admired the building's crowning stories, and the building's expression of "its actual construction by the substitution of continuous reeded uprights for the blank brick piers of the [Gilbert's earlier] Broadway Chambers." He felt the shaft treatment of the reeded piers expressed the structural frame within, "for the first time." And he opined that the building demonstrated that the Gothic was most appropriate for "even ... a practical and prosaic New York skyscraper." Later opinion confirmed the early reactions. Guy Kirkham. writing in Pencil Points in 1934, the year Gilbert died, called the West Street Building "one of the most satisfying buildings of New York. Later History The West Street Building was purchased in 1923 by the Brady Security and Realty Corp. During the Depression, in 1933, the company replaced the elevators, rehabilitated the office space, and upgraded mechanical systems. And the company retained Cass Gilbert (now age 74) to modernize the first floor interiors of what was then called the Brady Building. The interior had originally been arched and groin-vaulted, with elaborate terra-cotta detail.30 The modernization was described at the time as improving the "outdated lobby, crusted with ornamental ironwork," and Gilbert was quoted as saying: "I found much professional pleasure in designing it." The exterior of the building, however, was left largely intact. More recent changes include modifications to the storefronts and entrances, replacement of window sash, the installation of air-conditioning louvers, and the installation of exterior light fixtures for night-time illumination. (These are described in greater detail below.) The West Street Building no longer occupies a riverfront site, because the shoreline has been significantly extended with landfill for Battery Park City. It remains, however, a strikingly handsome architectural presence in lower Manhattan, and one of Cass Gilbert's major skyscraper designs. Description The twenty-three story building, a rough C shape in plan, fills a lot which is a parallelogram in shape, extending along the eastern side of West Street from Albany Street to Cedar Street. The facades have nine bays on West Street, seven bays on Cedar, and six bays on Albany, while the eastern facade has two wings enclosing a light court, with four bays on the southern wing and two bays on the northern wing. Each, organized in accordance with a tripartite scheme, is finished with the same materials and has similar motifs. A three-story base of beige Fox Island granite on a polished red granite water table sets off the upper stories, faced in glazed beige architectural terra cotta (over a brick backing). A dormered three-story mansard roof is clad in standing seam metal. The window sash are are one-over-one aluminum replacements. Light fixtures have been installed at the bases of the windows on the twentieth and twenty-first stories to provide night-time illumination for the mansard roof. West Street Facade This nine-bay facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking seven double bays. A two-story arcade is separated by a corbelled cornice from a transitional third story. A more ornate cornice at the third story sets off the twelve-story midsection with continous clustered piers flanking window openings separated by recessed spandrels. Another transitional story signals the four-story arcaded crown of the building, which in turn carries the three-story mansard roof. Base. A projecting two-story three-center arched entrance opening, outlined with a foliate molding, is centered in the facade. The arch voussoirs originally had alternating granite and contrasting marble panels. A few red marble panels survive; the others have been replaced by concrete panels. Slender engaged marble columns with foliate capitals and set on bases flank the entrance. (The columns have been treated with a protective coating to prevent further deterioration to the stonework.) Foliate bosses and tracery adorn the arch spandrels. The keystone is a winged owl. The entrance infill is non-historic and includes a revolving door flanked by single doors below a marquee bearing the address "90 WEST ST." and a window above. Two-story segmental arch openings with cast-iron storefronts above granite bulkheads form the remaining bays. The storefronts appear to be modified versions of the originals with tripartite windows below tripartite transoms. Paneled spandrels set off the tripartite windows at the second story. Louvers have replaced glass in many of the transoms and the second-story windows. Projecting canopies have been placed above several of the storefronts at the first story. The door in the southern end bay is non-historic and set below a non-historic canopy. The door in the northern end bay is of bronze and glass and approached by two granite steps. Engaged granite columns are placed at the corners of the facade. A continuous corbelled cornice extends above the second story. It projects slightly above the entrance bay where it incorporates carved heads and supports carved bases for lamps (removed). The third story has paneled wall sections flanking square-headed window openings with paneled reveals and foliate bosses at the upper corners. The end bays have more elaborate surrounds with pilasters supporting carved heads and a tracery motif at the window heads. A band accented with red, gold and blue panels sets off a cornice with a foliate molding. This cornice incorporates slightly projecting balconettes with lion head corbels at the base of the fourth story windows. Engaged columns accent the corners. Midsection. Single end bays and paired window bays are set off by clustered piers which rise for twelve stories (floors four through fifteen). The paired windows are separated by slender piers rising to foliate capitals at the twelfth story. Recessed terra-cotta spandrels separate windows between the floors. Louvers for air conditioning have been installed in the spandrels below the windows. Small metal railings are placed at the base of the bays on the projecting balconettes. The bays culminate in arches adorned with finials, bosses, and winged figures above the twelfth stony'. Blue terracotta panels fill the arch spandrels. A wide molding with cusped motifs sets off the transitional sixteenth story. At the sixteenth story, the windows have ornamented molded surrounds, and strapwork motifs with foliate bosses flank the window bays. Crown. Floors seventeen through nineteen are handled as a very ornate three-story window arcade. Tripartite windows with paneled spandrels between the floors are recessed behind three-center arched reveals adorned with floral motifs in accents of green, blue, and gold. Foliate finials top the arches, which are flanked by projecting colonnettes accented by vertical foliate moldings. The foliate colonnette capitals carry the boss-adorned bases for the griffin figures at the twentieth story. A band of blue and gold diamond panels spans the facade above the arches. The twentieth story has closely spaced double and triple window bays flanked by colonnettes. A continuous arched screen shelters the tops of the windows. The griffins separating the bays are set below their own small canopies with blue terra cotta panels. A foliate cornice with gargoyle motifs sets off the mansard roof. Mansard. An ornate series of arched and finialed terra-cotta dormers form a parapet at the base of the roof. The polygonal dormers at the corners originally carried tourelles (later removed). Two tiers of smaller dormers, the upper tier hooded, punctuate the upper portion of the roof. The roof slopes are covered with standing-seam metal and terminate in a terra-cotta cresting (somewhat modified since originally installed). Cedar Street Facade Like the West Street facade, this facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking five double bays. The articulation of the components is like that of the facade on West Street. Base. The treatment and detail of the base is like that on West Street, although the projecting two-story arched entrance opening is placed at the third bay from the right, instead of being centered. The alternate address "140 CEDAR ST." is placed on the projecting marquee. The western bay has a bronze and glass door above granite steps. As on West Street, the storefronts in the remaining bays are modified versions of the originals. Those on either side of the entrance bay have non-historic projecting canopies. Midsection. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Crown. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Mansard. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Albany Street Facade Like the West Street facade, this facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking four double bays. The articulation of the components is like that of the facade on West Street. Base. The treatment and detail of the base is like that on West Street. A freight entrance with metal doors is placed in the easternmost double bay. The middle bay has new infill at the first story. The other bays have storefronts which are modified versions of the originals, similar to those on West Street, although the bulkheads are painted wood instead of granite. There are no canopies above any of the storefronts. Midsection. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Crown. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Mansard. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Eastern Facade This facade is organized with two wings enclosing a light court with four bays on the southern wing and two bays on the northern wing. The walls are visible and articulated from the thirteenth story up as they rise above the building immediately to the east.4' Floors thirteen through sixteen correspond to the midsection of the other facades. The walls are faced with buff brick. The unarticulated window openings are paired in the northern wing and paired, flanked by single openings, in the southern wing. As on the other facades, the sixteenth story is a transitional one. set off by corbelled bandcourses. Floors seventeen through twenty correspond to the crown of the other facades, and they are similarly articulated as a three-story window arcade with a story of double and triple window bays above, although the detail is less ornate. The articulation and form of the three-story mansard is particularly noticeable on this side of the building, and the detailing continues from the other facades. The inner walls of the light court continue for one bay from the wings as a detailed reveal. Otherwise the walls are faced with buff brick, punctuated by window openings. Large openwork trusses link the light court walls at the seventh, tenth, twelfth, and sixteenth stories, although only the uppermost one is visible. - From the 1998 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: West Street Building http://flic.kr/p/9cJBDi Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The West Street Building, one of three major Downtown office buildings designed by Cass Gilbert, was built in 1905-07 for the West Street Improvement Corporation, a partnership headed by Howard Carroll. Carroll was president of two asphalt companies and vice-president of his father-in-law's Star in Transportation Company, which had major river shipping interests. Although today separated from the Hudson River by the landfill supporting Battery Park City, the site of the West Street Building originally had a highly visible location facing the waterfront along West Street. Carroll conceived of his project as a first-class skyscraper office building for the shipping and railroad industries. In addition to Carroll's companies, the building soon filled up with tenants including major companies in the transportation industry. The building's top floor was occupied by "The Garret Restaurant," which advertised itself as the highest restaurant in New York and boasted of its panoramic river and city views. Cass Gilbert was one of the most prominent architects in New York in the first decade of the twentieth century. His succession of early skyscrapers helped pave the way for the great romantic skyscraper towers of the 1920s and beyond. His West Street Building may be considered transitional from the "base-shaft-capital" arrangement of the late-nineteenth-century office buildings conceived as analogous to a classical column - and perhaps best epitomized by his own design for the Broad way-Chambers Building - to the romantic tower exemplified by his design for the Woolworth Building. While the West Street Building is tripartite in configuration, its upper floors are a romantic mansarded design. The building's Gothic vocabulary is an early instance of its use in American skyscraper design, anticipating the Woolworth Building. The clustered piers in the tower's middle section anticipate the verticality stressed in later skyscraper design. The West Street Building was one of many office buildings erected in lower Manhattan during the first decade following the consolidation of the City of Greater New York, but its handsome design set it apart, and it won widespread critical acclaim. Today, its exterior survives largely intact, and the building remains in commercial office use. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS Carroll's dock-side skyscraper for the shipping trade The West Street Building was conceived and built by the West Street Improvement Company, a syndicate of downtown business interests headed by Howard Carroll that included John Peirce, who served as the building's general contractor. The company initially maintained its offices in the Broadway-Chambers Building, also designed by Cass Gilbert. Born in Albany. New York, and educated in New York and abroad, Howard Carroll (1854-1916) worked as a journalist at the New York Times. He later joined the Starin Transportation Company, a large firm with river transportation interests, owned by his father-in-law, John Henry Starin (1825-1909). By 1905, when Carroll formed the West Street Improvement Company, he had become the Starin Company's vice-president. He also had separate business interests unconnected to Starin, as president of both the Sicilian Asphalt Paving Company and the Asphalt Company of Canada. Carroll's West Street Improvement Company conceived the West Street Building as a high-class office building specifically targeting the shipping industry. Though the site today is several blocks inland from the waterfront, West Street in 1905 ran along the shore of the Hudson River, and the new building rose directly across the street from the docks. At the time West Street was lined with ferries and warehouses of the railroad and steamship companies.4 In the words of a rental brochure for the West Street Building, it "commends itself particularly to railroads, engineers, dock builders, contractors, lawyers, shippers, and machinery and electrical trades." Carroll commissioned a design for the West Street Building in April 1905 from architect Cass Gilbert. Cass Gilbert (1859-1934) Cass Gilbert's commissions include several of New York City's major landmarks; the two most important of these, the U.S. Custom House and the Wool worth Building, are of national significance. Gilbert was a Midwesterner who trained and later practiced in the East. His career falls roughly into two parts: a local practice in St. Paul, Minnesota, in the 1880s and 1890s, and a national practice, based in New York, from 1900 until his death in 1934. Gilbert was born the son of an engineer in Zanesville, Ohio, a town laid out in part by his grandfather. While still a child, he and his family moved to St. Paul, where he completed his secondary education. In 1876 he entered the office of A.M. Radcliffe, a local architect. Two years later he went east to study at the architecture school of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, then headed by William R. Ware; his teacher was a Frenchman, Eugene Letang. After two years of study, Gilbert went to Europe; he had hoped to work for an English architect but was unable to find employment. After traveling briefly through France and Italy, chiefly to see Gothic cathedrals, he was obliged to return to the United States later the same year. In New York he joined the firm of McKim, Mead & White, which had been formed barely a year earlier in September 1879. Unlike many major American architects of his era, Gilbert did not study at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris. His architectural education, however, reflected the American interpretation of Beaux-Arts ideas as promulgated through academic institutions and architectural apprenticeships. Eugene Letang had been an Ecole student; William R. Ware was one of the five architects who had studied in the New York atelier of Richard Morris Hunt, the first American to attend the Ecole. McKim, who was an Ecole student, and White, who was not, had both worked in the office of the second American to attend the Ecole, H.H. Richardson. Returning to St. Paul in 1882, Gilbert set up his own practice. Mead had suggested he open a St. Paul branch of McKim, Mead & White,10 but instead Gilbert formed a partnership with fellow M.I.T. graduate James Knox Taylor, which lasted eight years. During the last two decades of the century he built a solid reputation in St. Paul designing residences, churches, and office buildings; most of his designs were in the Shingle Style or the Richardsonian Romanesque. When John Welborn Root died in 1891, Mead wrote to Gilbert from New York urging him to go to Chicago to become Daniel Burnham's new partner; Gilbert, however, chose to remain in St. Paul. He became president of the Minnesota chapter of the A.I. A., and was invited to sit on various architectural juries — he was the only Westerner on the jury for the New York Public Library competition. In 1895, Gilbert won the competition for the new Minnesota state capitol, a commission that established his national reputation. Clearly reflecting the impact of the 1893 Chicago Columbian Exposition, Gilbert's design was an elegant Beaux-Arts building, which, in its monumental composition, classical style, and elaborate decoration, laid the groundwork for his 1899 winning entry in the New York Custom House competition.13 In 1900, Gilbert moved permanently to New York. Throughout his later careeer, Gilbert produced Beaux-Arts-inspired governmental buildings, including the Federal Courthouse in New York (1934), the Detroit Public Library (1914), the West Virginia state capitol in Charleston (1928-32), and the Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C. (1933-35) among many others. These public monuments, which comprised a major portion of his national work, were lavishly decorated with sculpture and murals. Gilbert's other major contribution to architecture was in the field of skyscraper design. As a Midwestern architect working during the last two decades of the nineteenth century, he was familiar with the technological developments in skyscraper construction in Chicago. His training in Eastern schools, on the other hand, enabled him to develop a style that was compatible with taste current in New York City when he moved there at the turn of the century. The unique combination of Midwestern technology, Eastern training, and Gilbert's personal design talents and beliefs helped him move away from the "base-shaft-capital" formula of early office buildings to the full-blown romantic skyscraper conception of the Woolworth Building, his most famous tall building. Gilbert's skyscraper designs reflected his clear belief in the value of studying the architecture of the past -- not to copy it, but certainly to adapt it. Speaking on the occasion of the presentation to him of the Gold Medal of Architecture by the Society of Arts and Sciences in honor of the Woolworth Building design, he said: ... as in language new words are coined to express new meanings and old words become obsolete, as old uses are abandoned so new forms to meet new needs are developed (I almost said invented) as the necessity requires. . . . My plea therefore is . . . for the solution of our own problems in the spirit of our own . . . but to disregard nothing of the past that may guide us in doing so. Gilbert also believed, however, that his approach to skyscraper design was based on structural expression and the aesthetic treatment of materials. He argued that since commercial buildings required thin surfaces, these had to be treated decoratively, and that a thin, decoratively treated surface expressed the structural fact that the skyscraper was a steel-cage structure, clearly not supported by its terra-cotta or stone cladding. One of the devices he used in this decorative treatment was proportion; another was color. All these aspects of design came to be embodied in the West Street Building. The West Street Building and Its Design During the first decade of the new century, following the 1898 consolidation of the City of Greater New York, the lower Manhattan business district experienced a boom in office building construction, with 40 new buildings in the financial district alone. Within just a few blocks of the West Street Building, nine new buildings were under construction in 1906, including the United States Express Building, the Singer Building, and the Evening Post Building; in height they varied from 18 to 40 stories. For the new building, Carroll and his partners chose a site with a frontage of 159 feet on West Street, facing the Hudson River, between Cedar and Albany streets. The location put the building in the heart of an area devoted to riverfront commerce, described in 1899 as "occupied with freight and ferry houses of great railroad and steamship lines. It also put the building on a waterfront site with excellent views in all directions, and offices convenient to docks and ferries to rail terminals. The owners and architects of the West Street Building filed their application in 1905 for an office building of 23 and 28 stories, estimated to cost $2 million.20 Construction began in April the following year, and was completed in 1907. The John Peirce Company, the West Street Building contractor, maintained offices in the building, as did Carroll's Sicilian Asphalt Paving Company. Railroad interests in the building initially included the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company, which rented the seventeenth through twentieth floors (the portion of the building which has the most ornately detailed facades). The DL & W Railroad owned both Pier 13 (earlier called Pier 20) at nearby Cortlandt Street, and a railroad and ferry terminal in Hoboken, New Jersey, completed in 1907; from the West Street Building windows, railroad executives could observe traffic between the two. Because of the nature of its tenants, the building was soon known as the "Railroad and Iron Exchange Building"22 or the "Coal and Iron Building."23 Its profile as a tall building on the waterfront skyline also attracted the "Garret Restaurant," called "the world's highest restaurant," which was located on the top floor and had river and city views.24 The West Street Building was one of four major office buildings designed by Cass Gilbert in the northeastern United States before the outbreak of World War I, the others being the Brazer Building (1896) in Boston, and the Broadway-Chambers Building (1899-1900) and the Woolworth Building {191 1-1913). both in New York City. In those buildings Gilbert charted the course of development of the skyscraper from the nineteenth-century "base-shaft-capital " type to the grand, romantic tower type, exemplified by the Woolworth, which became the prototype for the great towers of the 1920s and 1930s. The West Street Building bridged the gap from the one to the other. Both the Brazer Building and the Broadway-Chambers Building were office buildings of the "base-shaft-capital" type, in which the building was seen as analogous to a classical column: a decoratively treated "base" of one or two stories arranged around the entrance, a decoratively treated "capital" of several stories at the top, and a tall "shaft" of intervening stories. The Broadway-Chambers Building, a project in which Gilbert himself also acted as developer,-5 was widely admired at the time of its completion as one of the finest examples of the "base-shaft-capital" type yet produced. Gilbert approached an office building project from two perspectives : as a real-estate transaction which required economy and efficiency — in a c.1900 article he described an office building as "a machine that makes the land pay"; and as an opportunity to create a striking design — in the same article he also wrote, "one must not lose sight of the fact that the machine is none the less a useful one because it has a measure of beauty, and that architectural beauty, judged even from an economic standpoint, has an income-bearing value." The West Street Building was, to some extent, organized along a tripartite scheme, but it represented a major advance in office building design. Although arranged as base-shaft-capital, the building's design downplayed the "base," emphasized the verticality of the "shaft" with tall uninterrupted, clustered piers, and made the "capital" an elaborate Gothic fantasy with a mansard roof. The West Street Building's vertical expression and Gothic skin were the direct predecessors of the Woolworth Building, as was its use of color. That Gilbert, in his design for the West Street Building, was consciously moving away from the tripartite paradigm towards the tall tower is demonstrated by one of his early proposals. The building in that proposal rose to a five-story tower at the top, similar in spirit to the tower of the Woolworth Building. Since he couldn't have the tower, Gilbert in his subsequent design emphasized an elaborate, seven-story upper portion with mansarded roof. Gilbert's choice of Gothic similarly helped move skyscraper design along towards the tower ideal. In one of the first consistent uses of Gothic detailing on a tall office building, Gilbert took as models both the secular (town halls in Brussels and Louvain) and the religious (the tower of the cathedral in Malines, Belgium), and used the Gothic to emphasize the tower's sheer verticality. In another move anticipating his design for the Woolworth Building, Gilbert conceived the West Street Building's facades in terra cotta, which was manufactured by the Atlantic Terra-Cotta Company.30 Gilbert took advantage of the versatility of terra cotta to give the building polychromatic luster, making the shaft beige, but adding details in gold, blue, red, and green. Fellow practitioners and critics writing in the contemporary architectural press praised Cass Gilbert's new skyscraper. Architect John Carrere told Gilbert, "if my opinion counts for anything I think it is the most successful building of its class." Painter Edwin Blashfield wrote to Gilbert in 1907: I want to write a line to tell you what a splendid impression your West Street Building makes on one, as one comes up the harbor on the way back from the other side of the Atlantic. . . . Indeed I didn't suppose a skyscraper could be so picturesque and handsome. I've always admired the effect of power in such buildings but in yours you create a type which is immediately satisfying to the eye. The critics shared this opinion. Claude Bragdon, writing in the Architectural Record, called the West Street Building "an aesthetic and technical triumph .... in mass, in outline, in color, in detail, the building is the work of a master mind, the last word in New York skyscraper architecture." Five years after the building's completion, Francis Swales wrote in the Architectural Review: "Expression without exaggeration of the type of construction, combined with sparing use and judicious placing of ornament, in good scale, with due regard to the relative importance of different points of view, account for the excellence of effect of the West Street Building." The best known critic of the day, Montgomery Schuyler, praised "the pinnacled diadem of the West Street Building . . . the cynosure of a justified admiration." He reported that Gilbert's building had the unusual merit of winning both popular and critical approval. Schuyler particularly admired the building's crowning stories, and the building's expression of "its actual construction by the substitution of continuous reeded uprights for the blank brick piers of the [Gilbert's earlier] Broadway Chambers." He felt the shaft treatment of the reeded piers expressed the structural frame within, "for the first time." And he opined that the building demonstrated that the Gothic was most appropriate for "even ... a practical and prosaic New York skyscraper." Later opinion confirmed the early reactions. Guy Kirkham. writing in Pencil Points in 1934, the year Gilbert died, called the West Street Building "one of the most satisfying buildings of New York. Later History The West Street Building was purchased in 1923 by the Brady Security and Realty Corp. During the Depression, in 1933, the company replaced the elevators, rehabilitated the office space, and upgraded mechanical systems. And the company retained Cass Gilbert (now age 74) to modernize the first floor interiors of what was then called the Brady Building. The interior had originally been arched and groin-vaulted, with elaborate terra-cotta detail.30 The modernization was described at the time as improving the "outdated lobby, crusted with ornamental ironwork," and Gilbert was quoted as saying: "I found much professional pleasure in designing it." The exterior of the building, however, was left largely intact. More recent changes include modifications to the storefronts and entrances, replacement of window sash, the installation of air-conditioning louvers, and the installation of exterior light fixtures for night-time illumination. (These are described in greater detail below.) The West Street Building no longer occupies a riverfront site, because the shoreline has been significantly extended with landfill for Battery Park City. It remains, however, a strikingly handsome architectural presence in lower Manhattan, and one of Cass Gilbert's major skyscraper designs. Description The twenty-three story building, a rough C shape in plan, fills a lot which is a parallelogram in shape, extending along the eastern side of West Street from Albany Street to Cedar Street. The facades have nine bays on West Street, seven bays on Cedar, and six bays on Albany, while the eastern facade has two wings enclosing a light court, with four bays on the southern wing and two bays on the northern wing. Each, organized in accordance with a tripartite scheme, is finished with the same materials and has similar motifs. A three-story base of beige Fox Island granite on a polished red granite water table sets off the upper stories, faced in glazed beige architectural terra cotta (over a brick backing). A dormered three-story mansard roof is clad in standing seam metal. The window sash are are one-over-one aluminum replacements. Light fixtures have been installed at the bases of the windows on the twentieth and twenty-first stories to provide night-time illumination for the mansard roof. West Street Facade This nine-bay facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking seven double bays. A two-story arcade is separated by a corbelled cornice from a transitional third story. A more ornate cornice at the third story sets off the twelve-story midsection with continous clustered piers flanking window openings separated by recessed spandrels. Another transitional story signals the four-story arcaded crown of the building, which in turn carries the three-story mansard roof. Base. A projecting two-story three-center arched entrance opening, outlined with a foliate molding, is centered in the facade. The arch voussoirs originally had alternating granite and contrasting marble panels. A few red marble panels survive; the others have been replaced by concrete panels. Slender engaged marble columns with foliate capitals and set on bases flank the entrance. (The columns have been treated with a protective coating to prevent further deterioration to the stonework.) Foliate bosses and tracery adorn the arch spandrels. The keystone is a winged owl. The entrance infill is non-historic and includes a revolving door flanked by single doors below a marquee bearing the address "90 WEST ST." and a window above. Two-story segmental arch openings with cast-iron storefronts above granite bulkheads form the remaining bays. The storefronts appear to be modified versions of the originals with tripartite windows below tripartite transoms. Paneled spandrels set off the tripartite windows at the second story. Louvers have replaced glass in many of the transoms and the second-story windows. Projecting canopies have been placed above several of the storefronts at the first story. The door in the southern end bay is non-historic and set below a non-historic canopy. The door in the northern end bay is of bronze and glass and approached by two granite steps. Engaged granite columns are placed at the corners of the facade. A continuous corbelled cornice extends above the second story. It projects slightly above the entrance bay where it incorporates carved heads and supports carved bases for lamps (removed). The third story has paneled wall sections flanking square-headed window openings with paneled reveals and foliate bosses at the upper corners. The end bays have more elaborate surrounds with pilasters supporting carved heads and a tracery motif at the window heads. A band accented with red, gold and blue panels sets off a cornice with a foliate molding. This cornice incorporates slightly projecting balconettes with lion head corbels at the base of the fourth story windows. Engaged columns accent the corners. Midsection. Single end bays and paired window bays are set off by clustered piers which rise for twelve stories (floors four through fifteen). The paired windows are separated by slender piers rising to foliate capitals at the twelfth story. Recessed terra-cotta spandrels separate windows between the floors. Louvers for air conditioning have been installed in the spandrels below the windows. Small metal railings are placed at the base of the bays on the projecting balconettes. The bays culminate in arches adorned with finials, bosses, and winged figures above the twelfth stony'. Blue terracotta panels fill the arch spandrels. A wide molding with cusped motifs sets off the transitional sixteenth story. At the sixteenth story, the windows have ornamented molded surrounds, and strapwork motifs with foliate bosses flank the window bays. Crown. Floors seventeen through nineteen are handled as a very ornate three-story window arcade. Tripartite windows with paneled spandrels between the floors are recessed behind three-center arched reveals adorned with floral motifs in accents of green, blue, and gold. Foliate finials top the arches, which are flanked by projecting colonnettes accented by vertical foliate moldings. The foliate colonnette capitals carry the boss-adorned bases for the griffin figures at the twentieth story. A band of blue and gold diamond panels spans the facade above the arches. The twentieth story has closely spaced double and triple window bays flanked by colonnettes. A continuous arched screen shelters the tops of the windows. The griffins separating the bays are set below their own small canopies with blue terra cotta panels. A foliate cornice with gargoyle motifs sets off the mansard roof. Mansard. An ornate series of arched and finialed terra-cotta dormers form a parapet at the base of the roof. The polygonal dormers at the corners originally carried tourelles (later removed). Two tiers of smaller dormers, the upper tier hooded, punctuate the upper portion of the roof. The roof slopes are covered with standing-seam metal and terminate in a terra-cotta cresting (somewhat modified since originally installed). Cedar Street Facade Like the West Street facade, this facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking five double bays. The articulation of the components is like that of the facade on West Street. Base. The treatment and detail of the base is like that on West Street, although the projecting two-story arched entrance opening is placed at the third bay from the right, instead of being centered. The alternate address "140 CEDAR ST." is placed on the projecting marquee. The western bay has a bronze and glass door above granite steps. As on West Street, the storefronts in the remaining bays are modified versions of the originals. Those on either side of the entrance bay have non-historic projecting canopies. Midsection. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Crown. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Mansard. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Albany Street Facade Like the West Street facade, this facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking four double bays. The articulation of the components is like that of the facade on West Street. Base. The treatment and detail of the base is like that on West Street. A freight entrance with metal doors is placed in the easternmost double bay. The middle bay has new infill at the first story. The other bays have storefronts which are modified versions of the originals, similar to those on West Street, although the bulkheads are painted wood instead of granite. There are no canopies above any of the storefronts. Midsection. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Crown. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Mansard. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Eastern Facade This facade is organized with two wings enclosing a light court with four bays on the southern wing and two bays on the northern wing. The walls are visible and articulated from the thirteenth story up as they rise above the building immediately to the east.4' Floors thirteen through sixteen correspond to the midsection of the other facades. The walls are faced with buff brick. The unarticulated window openings are paired in the northern wing and paired, flanked by single openings, in the southern wing. As on the other facades, the sixteenth story is a transitional one. set off by corbelled bandcourses. Floors seventeen through twenty correspond to the crown of the other facades, and they are similarly articulated as a three-story window arcade with a story of double and triple window bays above, although the detail is less ornate. The articulation and form of the three-story mansard is particularly noticeable on this side of the building, and the detailing continues from the other facades. The inner walls of the light court continue for one bay from the wings as a detailed reveal. Otherwise the walls are faced with buff brick, punctuated by window openings. Large openwork trusses link the light court walls at the seventh, tenth, twelfth, and sixteenth stories, although only the uppermost one is visible. - From the 1998 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Barclay-Vesey Building http://flic.kr/p/9cMEJs Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS Summary The Barclay-Vesey Building of the New York Telephone Company (also known as the New York Telephone Building) was the first major work of prominent New York architect Ralph Walker. Constructed in 1923-27 and built at a time of great progress and transition in American design, it was a product of the atmosphere of architectural creativity and originality which flourished in New York in the 1920s. A pivotal structure in the history of skyscraper architecture, it is a prototypical example of what came to be regarded as the American Art Deco style. , Intended to be completely modern in. every feature and detail, from its form, generated by its parallelogram-shaped site and contemporary zoning restrictions, to its construction techniques, materials, unconventional ornament, and style, Walker's design for "the largest telephone company building in the world"1 was an emphatic statement of the most recent architectural trends. The building, designed to be "as modern as the telephone activity it houses . . . [was] a simple, straightforward solution" to the requirements of the building program.2 The progressive design of the building was envisioned by company president, Howard F. Thurber, and resulted in a grand statement of his company's size, strength, and success. The overall effect of Walker's Barclay-Vesey Building is one of strong form and bold silhouette, with its blunt setback transitions articulated by vertical buttress-like piers and massive form relieved by intricate, animated ornament. Substantially intact, the building continues to be a dramatic presence on Manhattan's skyline. Site History The block bounded by Barclay and Vesey Streets at the north and south and Washington and West-Streets at the east and west was originally located, beyond the .present shoreline, west side' of Manhattan was developed beginning early in the nineteenth century. As part of the improvement, the banks of the Hudson were filled in, extended, and raised, and piers were constructed at the western end of every street between Vesey and King Streets by the late 1830s.3 Crucial to the city's mercantile expansion, the improvements helped New York City to achieve recognition as the country's major port and trading center by the 1830s and 1840s. This area and the section of the city just to the north, now known as Tribeca, were transformed into a center for dairy goods, produce, and less perishable goods including tobacco, imported woods, coffee, and spices. Markets for these items were developed in the area close to the docks to facilitate the handling of the commodities. First established in 1812 and repeatedly expanded, the Washington Market, located on the block bounded by West, Washington, Vesey, and Fulton Streets, just south of the Barclay-Vesey Building, grew to be Manhattan's major wholesale and retail produce outlet.4 Many other buildings were constructed in the area to accommodate the food industry, including approximately thirty-five three-, four-, and five-story brick buildings on the site chosen for the telephone company's headquarters. The activities of the merchants, so important to the site and to the surrounding area, would later be recalled in the ornamental program of the Barclay-Vesey Building. The site was chosen over more popular office locations to the east on Broadway because it was much less expensive. The West Street frontage was considered an asset because it was assumed that the structures along the docks would never rise above two or three stories and the future building's western exposure would, therefore, always remain unobstructed. The New York Telephone Company The telephone business developed rapidly following the early successes of Alexander Graham Bell's inventions in the. L^70^. By the turn of the century the AmeVican' Telephone & Telegraph Company had become the central institution of Bell Telephone Company operations, with smaller companies, including the New York Telephone Company, conducting its regional services. After a sluggish period of business during World War I the New York Telephone Company faced a new period of rapid expansion. In an effort to organize and control the growth, the company decided to establish divisional headquarters throughout the state. A reassessment of the company's organization in New York City concluded that its personnel, offices, and equipment were inefficiently scattered city-wide. Howard Ford Thurber (1869-1928), president of the New York Telephone Company from 1919 to 1924, determined that a new central headquarters building would alleviate the problems associated with the company's lack of unity. Thurber's "vision," as it was called in his New York Times obituary, was to create a building large enough to "satisfy the [company's] present demands and to reasonably anticipate future requirements."5 The new headquarters building would consolidate an equipment and administrative center, incorporating six central offices. As explained in a Telephone Company pamphlet, central offices are the nerve centers of the [telephone] system. Here the wires from the local telephones and from other central offices converge and are carried to distributing frames, where they fan out to the proper points of contact on the switchboards. Thurber's building program required a large utilitarian facility with specialized mechanical features and space for a centralized work force of 6,000 employees serving 120,000 telephones. Undaunted by the numerous details of the project, Thurber envisioned not just the practical concerns of the building but its potential symbolic quality as well. A large structure, progressively designed, could establish a positive corporate image and symbolize the size and strength of the organization — an industry whose woTk was clearly at the forefront of modern technology. With Thurber's plan for a new headquarters building, the New York Telephone Company was established at the vanguard of modern trends in business and architecture. Ralph Walker and McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin For the design of its headquarters building, the New York Telephone Company chose MeKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin, an architectural firm whose long history with the telephone company began in 1885 with the firm's founding partner Cyrus L.W. Eidlitz (1853-1921). Eidlitz was commissioned by the Metropolitan Telephone and Telegraph Company, the predecessor of the New York Telephone Company, in that year to design its first headquarters building at 18 Cortlandt Street in Manhattan. Andrew McKenzie (1861-1926), born in Dunkirk, New York, and educated in Buffalo, came to New York City in 1884 and worked for the firm of Babb, Cook & Willard. He became associated with Cyrus L.W. Eidlitz in 1902 and the partnership of Eidlitz & McKenzie was active from 1905 to 1909. That firm's major work was the New York Times Building at Times Square.8 Stephen Voorhees (1879-1965) was born near Rocky Hill, New Jersey, and was educated as a civil engineer at Princeton University, graduating in 1900. In 1902 he began to practice with Eidlitz & McKenzie as an engineer and superintendent of construction; one of his first jobs was the supervision of the foundation work for the New York Times Building. German-born Paul Gmelin (1859-1937) studied in Stuttgart. He came to the United States as a draftsman, was briefly associated with McKim, Mead & White, and then joined the firm of Babb, Cook & Willard, where he met Andrew McKenzie. In 1910 the firm of McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was organized and continued Eidlitz's successful relationship with the telephone company, gaining numerous commissions for buildings throughout New York state. By 1912 the firm had completed approximately thirty new telephone buildings in New York City alone (not . counting alterations and expansions). The firm also designed the Brooklyn Edison Company Building and the Brooklyn Municipal Building, as well as private residences. McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was active through 1925. In 1919 Ralph Walker (1889-1973) joined the office of McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin. Born in Waterbury, Connecticut, Walker began a two-year apprenticeship with the Providence, Rhode Island, architectural firm of Hilton & Jackson in 1907 and then studied architecture at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In Montreal in 1911 Walker studied with Francis Swales (1878-1962) who had established architectural firms in London, Montreal, and Vancouver, British Columbia, and later moved hisr practice to New York. In 1913 Walker practiced with James Ritchie in Boston and three years later won the Rotch Traveling Scholarship. (His two-year trip to Italy was postponed by the war, during which he served in France with the Army Corps of Engineers.) Walker also worked as a designer in the offices of Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue and York & Sawyer. Walker's first major project with McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was the Barclay-Vesey Building. The appearance of the Barclay-Vesey Building, unlike anything previously produced by the firm, and the general success of the design, established Walker's reputation. Near the completion of the building and following the death of McKenzie, Walker rose to partnership in the firm of Voorhees, Gmelin & Walker. Considered the firm's main designer. Walker continued to produce designs for the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, becoming a specialist in the design of that industry's buildings. Subsequent commissions whose designs were based on concepts first developed in the Barclay-Vesey Building were the New Jersey Bell Headquarters (Newark, 1928-29), the Western Union Building at 60 Hudson Street (1928-30), and telephone buildings in Syracuse and Rochester. The living Trust Company Building at 1 Wall Street (1929-31) and the Long Distance Building of the American Telephone & Telegraph Company at 32 Sixth Avenue (1930-32) followed soon after. (The Western Union Building and the Long Distance Building are designated New York City Landmarks.) Walker also designed buildings for other corporate clients including General Foods and IBM, and several pavilions for firms at the 1939 World's Fair in New York. The success of Walker's corporate commissions brought him recognition as one of the city's most prominent designers of Art Deco skyscrapers. Active in professional circles, Walker was president of the New York Chapter of the American Institute of Architects from 1933 to 1935, president of the Architectural League from 1937 to 1939, and president of the national organization of the American Institute of Architects from 1949 to 1951. In 1957 the AIA gave Walker the title of "architect of the century." In 1958 Walker resigned from active participation in the firm, then known as Voorhees, Walker, Smith, Smith & Haines, but continued in the capacity of a consultant. He later served on the Fine Arts Commission (appointed in 1959 by President Eisenhower), as president of the Municipal Art Society, and as editor of Pencil Points. His firm continued in various forms after his retirement and is today known as Haines, Lundberg & Waehler. Zoning and the Creation of a Modern Style The 1916 Building Zone Resolution had a tremendous impact on architecture in New York City; the final form and appearance of the BaTclay-Vesey Building owe much to this law. Overbuilding, increased building heights, and related problems such as a decrease in the amount of sunlight at street level, were the factors which created the need for the ordinance. The Building Zone Handbook (1916) stated that the purpose of the law was to stabilize and conserve property values, to relieve the rapidly increasing congestion in the streets and in the transit lines, to provide greater safety in buildings and in the streets, and in general to make the city more beautiful, convenient and agreeable. The restrictions created to bring about the "more beautiful city" were based on the use of building setbacks to control height and bulk. Height and setback regulations applied to seventy-five percent of the site; the remaining portion of the building site was unlimited in height, encouraging developers to assemble large building sites to make tower construction more affordable, possibly even profitable. The building shape that resulted from the zoning restrictions took the form of a ziggurat, a rhythmic succession of blocks which grew smaller and more recessed from bottom to top. The ziggurat was then topped by a tower or a pair of towers. While the creators of the 1916 zoning resolution were motivated by purely practical concerns, architects drew inspiration from the building forms which resulted from the restrictions. In 1922, architect and critic Harvey Wiley Corbett (1873-1954) and architectural renderer Hugh Fern's (1889-1962) explored the possibilities of the zoning law in a series of drawings which illustrated progressive stages of design based on the law's restrictions. The drawings showed 1) the maximum allowable bulk of the building and its form under the zoning law, 2) the addition of necessary light courts to the basic block, 3) the impact of structural limitations, and 4) economic considerations. Finally, Ferris and Corbett presented drawings of an architecturally "trimmed" design. These dramatic renderings, published in Pencil Points (1923) and in Metropolis of Tomorrow (1929), significantly influenced architects of the day. The drawings and the laws from which they came directed the architects' attention to the building as a whole rather than to a single facade of the structure, thus altering the whole design process. By visualizing buildings "from every possible angle" the architect was transformed from a designer of facades into a "sculptor in building masses." The zoning law provided architects with a sound, rational basis for the form and appearance of the skyscraper as well as a new source of creativity; historical styles did not seem to express this modern sensibility and, consequently, a new "skyscraper style" emerged in the 1920s. William A. Starrett (1877-1932), an engineer, builder and architect, acknowledged the effect of the zoning law in his book, Skyscrapers and the Men Who Build Them, a short history of the skyscraper and related topics, and said its effect was "to give to architectural design in high buildings the greatest impetus it ever has known and to produce a new and beautiful pyramidal skyline. . . ," Major characteristics of the new style, as generated by the zoning restrictions, were sculpted massing, bold setbacks, and ornament subordinated to the overall mass. Clearly reflecting the current interest of the designers, the new style was commonly called "Modernistic." Corbett praised the new "setback style" and predicted it would "go down in history along with the Gothic, the Classic, and the Renaissance." The dramatic rendering style of Ferriss and others expressed the new, vertically-oriented, modernistic aesthetic. A rendering by Chester B. Price of the completed Barclay-Vesey Building captures the drama and the energy of the style and the lime. The Modernistic style generated additional interest as architects identified it as a distinctively American style. American businesses capitalized on the status achieved by the modern skyscraper. Increasingly, large corporations, such as the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, chose the skyscraper as the home for their operations, believing a massive skyscraper in a modern style could symbolize their success and progressiveness and project a positive image for their companies. The Chicago Tribune Company capitalized on the concept of the skyscraper as corporate image for its widely-publicized and much-entered architectural competition of 1922. The competition for the "most beautiful skyscraper in the world" to house the Tribune's new headquarters had a great impact on American architecture. The first place winners, Raymond Hood (1881-1934) and John Mead Howells (1868-1959), produced a relatively conservative design with Gothic-inspired ornament. The design of the second place winner, Eliel Saarinen (1873-1950), was the highly regarded public favorite and. was promoted for its vertical emphasis, setback transitions, and abstracted ornament. These elements appeared in numerous subsequent skyscrapers, including the Barclay-Vesey Building, and critics have traditionally cited Saarinen's entry as the source for Walker's design. However, Walker's own entry for the Tribune Competition, which received an award of Honorable Mention, also exhibits strongly emphasized vertical piers and a form composed of a tower on a base with setback transitions. An additional similarity between Walker's Tribune entry and an early design of the Barclay-Vesey Building is the pyramidal roof that caps the buildings in both designs. Walker's Tribune entry was due on November 1, 1922; the. winner was announced on December 3. Plans for the Barclay-Vesey Building were filed at the Department of Buildings on June .6, 1923.18 Considering the size of the building, it is not unlikely that Walker had begun its design by the Fall of 1922, and was working on both projects at the same time. Therefore, Walker's experimentation with vertical emphasis and setback tower forms in his Tribune entry seems to have played an important role in his conception of the Barclay-Vesey Building. Design of the Barclay-Vesey Building Walker's Design Theory. Walker's version of the modern skyscraper, as seen in the Barclay-Vesey Building, was based on two simple theories; 1) economy, not extravagance, is the key to good modern design, and 2) only through machine technology can a modern style develop. Walker was one of many designers who focused on the importance of modern technology and its role in the expression of the new style. Corbett summarized the trend: The modern architect-must learn to use the machine as a basis of design if his work is to be indigenous to this period." Walker even conceived of the Barclay-Vesey Building "as a machine which had definite functions to perform for the benefit of its occupants." This pragmatic approach to the problem of design was a direct response to the functionalism inspired by the zoning law. Walker's theoretical analysis of skyscraper design found a physical form in the Barclay-Vesey Building where he attempted to utilize building materials to express modern technology. The majority of the exterior material is brick, a material which Walker preferred for its textural qualities and subtle color variations, and is embellished throughout by stone ornament. Taking advantage of machine production wherever possible, ornament for the upper stories was executed in cast stone. Ornament at the lower stories was executed in limestone, but ornamental motifs were used in repeated patterns as a further expression of machine production. In addition, these materials, given their colors and textures, were chosen to convey a monolithic appearance and to express stability and mass. Preliminary designs for the Barclay-Vesey Building focused on the size of the structure. Designs for buildings of ten, sixteen, twenty-six, thirty-six, and forty-two stories were drawn to study the relationship between cost and height. It was understood that the taller the building, the less the cost per square foot of the land; however, Walker had to take into consideration the increase of the construction costs with greater heights, as well as the market value of similar space. The thirty-two-story tower, incorporating required setbacks at the tenth and eighteenth stories, was determined to be most economical on all counts. Another set of studies focused on developing the sculptural form of the building. Early designs showed a series of stacked blocks connected by blunt transitions. This concept appealed to Walker, but early designs using the concept lacked unity. Visual harmony was ultimately achieved through the emphatic treatment of the structure's vertical piers, which Walker believed also gave the building "dignity and a style." The piers softened the horizontal lines and, continuing above the rooflines of the setbacks, visually strengthened the overall verticality of the design. The final form of the building was significantly affected by the allocation of interior spaces. Many functions to be accommodated in the headquarters building did not require natural light. For example, mechanical space was held to the central core of the structure, as was the space for the central operating system which required artificial light. As a result, it was possible to locate office space, where natural light was preferred, along the exterior wall. Consequently, the sizable light courts usually necessary in a building on such a large site were limited, resulting in the opportunity to create a massive base for the structure. The size of the base was also affected by the city's desire to widen Vesey Street. Walker introduced an arcade as a compromise solution; he incorporated the sidewalk inside the building mass, thus providing a larger base for the building. He considered this a pioneering attempt to combat traffic congestion and as the first of many such arcades to be built in the city. Incorporating storefronts into the design, the arcade was described upon its completion as "one of the most comfortable shopping fronts in New York City." Walker experimented with different stylistic expressions for the building, including Gothic and Italian Renaissance, but grew unsatisfied with his attempts to adapt such traditional styles to a building which was being shaped by purely practical concerns. Coming to terms with this incompatibility, Walker attempted "to treat the problem for its own sake, to make it as modern in conception as the telephone activity it houses." He thus began his successful studies in the Modernistic style. The Ornamental Program. For Walker, - ornamental embellishment was needed to add texture and interest in a large building, and to reduce the scale of the mass to a more human level. To engage the passerby, Walker believed the ornament should be "so complicated in its structure as not to be readily comprehended; its framework should be as hidden as the steel structure itself. It should repay repeated interest and study. . . ." As to the actual content of the ornament, he believed that overly-used traditional motifs, such as the egg and dart, had lost all significance to the modern viewer. The ornament executed on the Barclay-Vesey Building met all of Walker's standards concerning texture, complexity, and unconventionalism. To complement the overall design, the ornament was given a vertical emphasis. It did not project from the wall surface but rather was cut into the stone for better weathering of the material. The desired texture of the ornament was achieved in a combination of low relief and high relief which resulted in the softening of the rigidity of the massing and of the strict vertical lines of the structure. The sculptural ornament of the Barclay-Vesey Building was carried out by Ulysses Ricci (1888-1960) and John DeCesare. Born in New York, Ricci studied at Cooper Union, the Art Students League, and with James Earl Fraser. He designed medals for the American Numismatic Society and executed sculptural work for many buildings in New York, including the Bowery Savings Bank and a series of bronze plaques for the Times Square Schrafft's restaurant. For a time he was a member of the firm Ricci & Zari. John DeCesare was a member of the National Sculpture Society and for a time was a member of the firm Stifter & DeCesare. Walker attempted to express the modernity of the telephone industry by casting aside all traditional ornamental forms. Thus, the ornament has no basis in historic architectural styles; instead it recalls the history and traditions of the site and surrounding area. Fruits, vegetables, vines with leaves, marine life, birds, small animals, and other natural objects populate the ornamented surfaces and recall the nearby Hudson River and the market area which earlier occupied the site. The lower stories of the building are so filled with ornament that Lewis Mumford called them "a rock garden." While the ornament was not intended to symbolize the telephone specifically, the use of grapes and grapevines can be seen as a representation of communication. In addition, an occasional bell, the company symbol, is found in the ornamented surfaces. Walker called his ornament "free and flowing,"28 a description which in many ways contradicts the strict rigidity of his overall design. However, the blending of complicated ornament with simple forms, naturalistic elements with geometric shapes, and large massing with small details can be seen as one of Walker's major triumphs. The synthesis of these elements allows the Barclay-Vesey Building to be admired both from a distance and from a closer perspective. Walker's theory of ornament and its execution in the Barclay-Vesey Building was called "straightforward and appropriate and eminently right." Praise for the building's ornament was not restricted to the exterior. By repeating the vertical emphasis and ornamental patterning on the interior, Walker achieved a continuity between interior and exterior design which was unusual at the time; many contemporary buildings which appeared modern on the exterior still reverted to historical styles on the interior. Mumford saw this compatibility between interior and exterior as a perpetuation of the work of H.H. Richardson, Louis Sullivan, and Frank Lloyd Wright, and he credited Walker as the first since Sullivan to carry through a significant scheme of decoration. In fact, many aspects of Walker's ornament - the textural quality, the complicated all-over patterning, the non-historicist subjects, the combination of naturalistic and geometric elements, and the synthesis of flowing ornament with geometric building forms -- were used by Sullivan and came to be seen as hallmarks of his style. Buildings such as the Carson Pirie Scott Department Store (Chicago, 1899-1904) and the Transportation Building at the World's Columbian Exposition (Chicago, 1893) clearly illustrate Sullivan's use of these techniques. The Stylistic Context of the Barclay-Vesey Building. The bold geometric massing of the Barclay-Vesey Building, its set-back form, its emphasis on vertically, and its flattened non-historical ornamental program all combine to make the building a prototypical example of what came to be known as the American Art Deco style. The Exposition des Arts Decoratifs et Industries in Paris, which opened in 1925 after much of the design of the Barclay-Vesey Building had been completed, disseminated many of these elements which had been pioneered by Walker: abstracted naturalistic and geometric ornament in all-over patterns, linear and vertical emphasis in design, streamlined forms, and dramatic juxtaposition of colors and textures of materials. These elements were used by numerous American architects for subsequent set-back skyscraper designs. Reaching its zenith between 1928 and 1931 in New York City this new architectural style was called "Modernistic" in contemporary sources. By the time of its critical re-assessment in the 1960s and '70s the style had achieved the popular name of Art Deco. Taking into account the source of the term Art Deco and. the timing of the design, it is accurate to call the style of the Barclay-Vesey Building "Modernistic." "Modern Perpendicular," another contemporary stylistic term, calls attention to the vertical emphasis of the design. Walker clearly expressed his view of the building's modern style and its origin; It was Emerson, I think, who told us to stop building the sepulchers of our fathers and build our own house. The Barclay-Vesey building is an attempt to build a house of today. A house that is not Greek or Gothic, or Mayan; that looks little to the past, much to the present, and tries to glimpse the future. Contemporary Reactions The Barclay-Vesey Building was hailed in its day as the ultimate modern skyscraper. Critics commented on all aspects of its design and construction. The Telephone Company was pleased with the result of its new headquarters building, calling it "a symbol of service and progress" and a "graphic example of [the] movement in modern telephony. In addition, the building became a model for subsequent telephone headquarters in New York State, including the South State Street Building in Syracuse (1928). The wide acceptance of the building as a symbol of modern architecture was confirmed when its photograph was. used as a frontispiece in the English translation of Le Corbusier's Towards a New Architecture. The Architectural League of New York awarded the building its Gold Medal of Honor in 1927. Many critics were struck by the size and form of the building. Corbett described it as "a building clean limbed and sure footed, rising with sheer, cliff-like walls." Joseph Pennell, an etcher struck by New York's skyscrapers, proclaimed it "the most impressive modern building in the world."Talbot Hamlin anticipated a prominent place in architectural history for the structure: "The whole building is destined to be a monument of American progress in architecture." Still other accounts commented on the elusive qualities of the design, citing the ability of its "rugged beauty" to "hold one breathless with its force." Mumford commended its thorough design, calling it "one of the few skyscrapers that [could] bear close inspection."39 Corbett agreed: The Telephone Building is worth the careful study of every modern architect, and should receive the admiration of every layman. Let it be hoped that it stands at the dawn of a new day, both for architects that sin, and the public that is sinned against. Construction Demolition of the existing buildings on the site was begun on May 23, 1923, and was completed on July 14. Foundation work was begun on June 20, 1923. Due to the instability of the land fill on the site, an elaborate system was created for the construction of the foundations which required twenty-two caissons sunk to bedrock at the perimeter of the site. The depth of the excavations allowed for five stories below ground, one more than had been originally planned. An innovative construction method was utilized thirty-eight feet below grade as permanent steel struts were substituted for temporary wooden cross-lot bracing at a savings of approximately $30,000. This was believed to be the first use of this construction method. The steel-framed building is faced with brick backed by terra cotta. The first ten floors of the structure were allocated to central office use (although it would take several years for all the necessary equipment to be moved and installed). The upper floors were allocated to administrative use, with the twenty-ninth floor reserved for executive offices. Usable floor space in the building amounts to 850,000 square feet. The seventeenth story divides the building into two mechanically separate sections. It forms a basement for the tower section, holding all the equipment (which is typically housed in the basement of a building) needed to provide services to the tower. The seventeenth story also holds typical rooftop equipment for the base of the building. In an emergency, the tower equipment can serve the base. The final rivet was placed in the structure by telephone company president J.S. McCulloh; Thurber by this time had assumed the position of chairman of the board. The last brick and stone were placed by tradesmen elected by their coworkers. On February 19,1926, the first occupants entered the building, beginning what was referred to as "the longest, moving day in New York's history." Contemporary accounts indicate that the building was completed on June 30, 1926, but the Department of Buildings did not sign off on the work until April 8, 1927. Description The Barclay-Vesey Building is a thirty-two-story structure with an additional five stories below ground. There are mezzanines above the first, seventeenth, and thirty-first stories. A New York Telephone Company publication equated the building's height with that of Egypt's tallest pyramid. The building occupies a parallelogram-shaped site approximately 210 by 250 feet wide, covering 52,000 square feet, with nineteen bays on the east and west facades of the base and twenty-three bays on the north and south facades. Above the granite base, the structure is faced in gray-, gold- and buff-colored brick in common bond which has been repointed in several areas on each facade. Detailing is executed in limestone at the lower stories and in cast stone above. The building takes the form of a tower rising from the center of a massive base. The orientation of the tower reflects the orthogonal grid of Manhattan and appears to have been rotated atop the parallelogram-shaped base of the structure. The building rises straight from the ground to the tenth story, where the first setback occurs along the length of the north and south facades. A setback also occurs at the center of the east and west facades at this point, creating light courts for the eleventh through the seventeenth stories in front of the tower. At the seventeenth story another major setback occurs at all facades. From this point the tower, measuring 108 feet by 116 feet, rises to a total height of thirty-two stories. Minor setbacks "occur at other points between the thirteenth and nineteenth stories, highlighted by detailing in stone and brick. Much of the decorative ornament of the building consists of intertwining vines sprouting leaves, flowers, and grapes. Scattered throughout the interlaces are cherubs, human figures, and a variety of creatures including fish, snails, mice, lizards, frogs, birds, squirrels, and snakes. While some specific decorative patterns may be repeated, numerous variations on the intertwining vine theme are found throughout the building's ornamental program. Rather than describe in detail all variations represented, particular architectural elements will be cited as using the intertwining vine pattern and it will be understood that the pattern may contain any combination of the figures mentioned above. Especially significant or unusual features will be addressed. The east and west (main) facades are similar in design and contain identical double-height entrances which are recessed in the center of the facades, the width of each entry spanning three window bays. Two revolving multipane doors and a pair of doors are framed in bronze. The framing members are filled with strings of creatures or with a repeating chevron pattern, and pinnacles with cherubs are capped by bells. (Another pair of doors is found to the right of each bronze-framed entryway.) Above each door arrangement at the east and west facades is an expansive window covered by an elaborate bronze grille of intertwining vines and grapes, arranged vertically, which is also visible at the interior through the colored window glass. (A metal replica of the Bell Telephone Company logo, a bell within a circle, has been attached to the window grille.) A limestone frieze above the window displays an intertwining vine pattern featuring human figures and a central bird. A light fixture with an inverted setback form hangs between two ceiling panels filled with ornament. The two-story entrance surround is faced in limestone; chamfered surfaces are elaborately ornamented. In the stone lintel above the opening are found figures of an American Indian and a Mongolian which are meant to symbolize the lands of the west and the east, the directions the entrances face. Flanking the center panel, which displays a bell, are the patterned, projecting bases of the vertical piers which articulate the overall height of the facade; their patterning of roots and stems further reinforce the vertical emphasis. Two single window bays flank the West Street entry. These are flanked at each side by a larger opening spanning three bays, then another single bay. The two end bays of this facade are each articulated by wide arches, the southern one opening onto the Vesey Street arcade. The storefronts of the building are based on a tripartite design: a solid panel at the base, a glazed area at the middle, usually divided into three vertical sections, and a transom with additional vertical subdivisions topped by a decorative cornice consisting of dolphins, seahorses, and birds. Winged figures act as pinnacles at the top of the window frame. A sketch, drawn by Walker and published in a history of the Rotch Traveling Scholarship, illustrates a centralized sculpture with similar winged elements.44 (Fig. 12) Some storefronts are recessed, some are punctuated by doors (some with transoms and steps). Most glass within the ground-story bays is now painted. Most of the spandrels between the first- and second-story windows are faced with ornamented stone. The stone sills and surrounds of the second-story windows also have elaborate ornamentation featuring a stylized plant form. Stone sills of third story windows also have carved ornament, and, excluding the end bays, have a geometric border below. Windows above the first story have steel, double-hung, three-over-three sash. A minimal number of windows have been replaced by aluminum windows at each facade. Also, several louvered vents fill window openings, either fully or partially, at each facade. Window sills above the third story have smaller proportions than those below and have no elaboration. The base of the building receives its vertical emphasis from piers which rise from the first and second stories to a point above the setbacks where they are capped with cast stone; the central piers display carved snails. Windows at this level are emphasized with elaborate stone ornament at the head and sill. The Vesey Street facade at the south side of the building incorporates a ground-story arcade whose vaulting system utilizes Guastavino arches. The twelve-bay arcade is sixteen feet wide, eighteen feet high, and 252 feet in length. The tile arches rest on brick piers with granite bases. The openings are faced in stone carved with an intertwining vine pattern, cherubs, roosters, and squirrels, and a chevron pattern borders the soffit. (Fig. 15) The arcade incorporates storefronts, similar to those of the West Street facade but with recessed transoms, in each bay opening. The storefront openings are faced with limestone. Along Vesey Street, the stone spandrels between the first-story arches and the second-storywindows are trimmed with a geometric pattern. Pairs of second-story windows have continuous stone sills with lions carved below the windows and surrounds which are similar to those of the West Street facade. Above the second story, the treatment of the facade follows that of the east and west facades. The Barclay Street facade on the north is similar to the Vesey Street facade. Ground-story openings of the north facade are similar to those inside the Vesey Street arcade, however, a central entrance spanning four bays provides for freight service. At all facades, the amount of cast stone ornament increases above the twenty-eighth story. (Fig. 16) Intricately carved panels fill the spandrels and cap the piers which, above the twenty-ninth story, form buttress-like elements. Corner piers at the twenty-ninth story display elephant heads with ears transformed into geometric shapes and trunks extending down the corner of the tower in a geometric pattern. The arched, multipane, double-height windows encompassing the thirtieth, thirty-first, and thirty-first-mezzanine stories are topped by elaborate cast stone ornament composed of geometric forms terminating in a pineapple or a rabbit. Window surrounds of the top story are simple, as are the piers extending above the roofline. Metal fencing now encloses rooftop equipment, with additional equipment located in front of some thirty-second-story windows. Subsequent History Apart from a few minor changes, the Barclay-Vesey Building remains substantially intact. One of the significant qualities of the building is its dual function as office space and a communications center. As technology in the field of communications has progressed, equipment has been added to the roof and regularly upgraded, while respecting the building's original design. This has enabled the structure to retain its significance as an office and operations center for the New York Telephone Company. It is anticipated that rooftop equipment will continue to be ugraded on a regular basis. - From the 1991 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: West Street Building http://flic.kr/p/9cMFDb Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The West Street Building, one of three major Downtown office buildings designed by Cass Gilbert, was built in 1905-07 for the West Street Improvement Corporation, a partnership headed by Howard Carroll. Carroll was president of two asphalt companies and vice-president of his father-in-law's Star in Transportation Company, which had major river shipping interests. Although today separated from the Hudson River by the landfill supporting Battery Park City, the site of the West Street Building originally had a highly visible location facing the waterfront along West Street. Carroll conceived of his project as a first-class skyscraper office building for the shipping and railroad industries. In addition to Carroll's companies, the building soon filled up with tenants including major companies in the transportation industry. The building's top floor was occupied by "The Garret Restaurant," which advertised itself as the highest restaurant in New York and boasted of its panoramic river and city views. Cass Gilbert was one of the most prominent architects in New York in the first decade of the twentieth century. His succession of early skyscrapers helped pave the way for the great romantic skyscraper towers of the 1920s and beyond. His West Street Building may be considered transitional from the "base-shaft-capital" arrangement of the late-nineteenth-century office buildings conceived as analogous to a classical column - and perhaps best epitomized by his own design for the Broad way-Chambers Building - to the romantic tower exemplified by his design for the Woolworth Building. While the West Street Building is tripartite in configuration, its upper floors are a romantic mansarded design. The building's Gothic vocabulary is an early instance of its use in American skyscraper design, anticipating the Woolworth Building. The clustered piers in the tower's middle section anticipate the verticality stressed in later skyscraper design. The West Street Building was one of many office buildings erected in lower Manhattan during the first decade following the consolidation of the City of Greater New York, but its handsome design set it apart, and it won widespread critical acclaim. Today, its exterior survives largely intact, and the building remains in commercial office use. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS Carroll's dock-side skyscraper for the shipping trade The West Street Building was conceived and built by the West Street Improvement Company, a syndicate of downtown business interests headed by Howard Carroll that included John Peirce, who served as the building's general contractor. The company initially maintained its offices in the Broadway-Chambers Building, also designed by Cass Gilbert. Born in Albany. New York, and educated in New York and abroad, Howard Carroll (1854-1916) worked as a journalist at the New York Times. He later joined the Starin Transportation Company, a large firm with river transportation interests, owned by his father-in-law, John Henry Starin (1825-1909). By 1905, when Carroll formed the West Street Improvement Company, he had become the Starin Company's vice-president. He also had separate business interests unconnected to Starin, as president of both the Sicilian Asphalt Paving Company and the Asphalt Company of Canada. Carroll's West Street Improvement Company conceived the West Street Building as a high-class office building specifically targeting the shipping industry. Though the site today is several blocks inland from the waterfront, West Street in 1905 ran along the shore of the Hudson River, and the new building rose directly across the street from the docks. At the time West Street was lined with ferries and warehouses of the railroad and steamship companies.4 In the words of a rental brochure for the West Street Building, it "commends itself particularly to railroads, engineers, dock builders, contractors, lawyers, shippers, and machinery and electrical trades." Carroll commissioned a design for the West Street Building in April 1905 from architect Cass Gilbert. Cass Gilbert (1859-1934) Cass Gilbert's commissions include several of New York City's major landmarks; the two most important of these, the U.S. Custom House and the Wool worth Building, are of national significance. Gilbert was a Midwesterner who trained and later practiced in the East. His career falls roughly into two parts: a local practice in St. Paul, Minnesota, in the 1880s and 1890s, and a national practice, based in New York, from 1900 until his death in 1934. Gilbert was born the son of an engineer in Zanesville, Ohio, a town laid out in part by his grandfather. While still a child, he and his family moved to St. Paul, where he completed his secondary education. In 1876 he entered the office of A.M. Radcliffe, a local architect. Two years later he went east to study at the architecture school of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, then headed by William R. Ware; his teacher was a Frenchman, Eugene Letang. After two years of study, Gilbert went to Europe; he had hoped to work for an English architect but was unable to find employment. After traveling briefly through France and Italy, chiefly to see Gothic cathedrals, he was obliged to return to the United States later the same year. In New York he joined the firm of McKim, Mead & White, which had been formed barely a year earlier in September 1879. Unlike many major American architects of his era, Gilbert did not study at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris. His architectural education, however, reflected the American interpretation of Beaux-Arts ideas as promulgated through academic institutions and architectural apprenticeships. Eugene Letang had been an Ecole student; William R. Ware was one of the five architects who had studied in the New York atelier of Richard Morris Hunt, the first American to attend the Ecole. McKim, who was an Ecole student, and White, who was not, had both worked in the office of the second American to attend the Ecole, H.H. Richardson. Returning to St. Paul in 1882, Gilbert set up his own practice. Mead had suggested he open a St. Paul branch of McKim, Mead & White,10 but instead Gilbert formed a partnership with fellow M.I.T. graduate James Knox Taylor, which lasted eight years. During the last two decades of the century he built a solid reputation in St. Paul designing residences, churches, and office buildings; most of his designs were in the Shingle Style or the Richardsonian Romanesque. When John Welborn Root died in 1891, Mead wrote to Gilbert from New York urging him to go to Chicago to become Daniel Burnham's new partner; Gilbert, however, chose to remain in St. Paul. He became president of the Minnesota chapter of the A.I. A., and was invited to sit on various architectural juries — he was the only Westerner on the jury for the New York Public Library competition. In 1895, Gilbert won the competition for the new Minnesota state capitol, a commission that established his national reputation. Clearly reflecting the impact of the 1893 Chicago Columbian Exposition, Gilbert's design was an elegant Beaux-Arts building, which, in its monumental composition, classical style, and elaborate decoration, laid the groundwork for his 1899 winning entry in the New York Custom House competition.13 In 1900, Gilbert moved permanently to New York. Throughout his later careeer, Gilbert produced Beaux-Arts-inspired governmental buildings, including the Federal Courthouse in New York (1934), the Detroit Public Library (1914), the West Virginia state capitol in Charleston (1928-32), and the Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C. (1933-35) among many others. These public monuments, which comprised a major portion of his national work, were lavishly decorated with sculpture and murals. Gilbert's other major contribution to architecture was in the field of skyscraper design. As a Midwestern architect working during the last two decades of the nineteenth century, he was familiar with the technological developments in skyscraper construction in Chicago. His training in Eastern schools, on the other hand, enabled him to develop a style that was compatible with taste current in New York City when he moved there at the turn of the century. The unique combination of Midwestern technology, Eastern training, and Gilbert's personal design talents and beliefs helped him move away from the "base-shaft-capital" formula of early office buildings to the full-blown romantic skyscraper conception of the Woolworth Building, his most famous tall building. Gilbert's skyscraper designs reflected his clear belief in the value of studying the architecture of the past -- not to copy it, but certainly to adapt it. Speaking on the occasion of the presentation to him of the Gold Medal of Architecture by the Society of Arts and Sciences in honor of the Woolworth Building design, he said: ... as in language new words are coined to express new meanings and old words become obsolete, as old uses are abandoned so new forms to meet new needs are developed (I almost said invented) as the necessity requires. . . . My plea therefore is . . . for the solution of our own problems in the spirit of our own . . . but to disregard nothing of the past that may guide us in doing so. Gilbert also believed, however, that his approach to skyscraper design was based on structural expression and the aesthetic treatment of materials. He argued that since commercial buildings required thin surfaces, these had to be treated decoratively, and that a thin, decoratively treated surface expressed the structural fact that the skyscraper was a steel-cage structure, clearly not supported by its terra-cotta or stone cladding. One of the devices he used in this decorative treatment was proportion; another was color. All these aspects of design came to be embodied in the West Street Building. The West Street Building and Its Design During the first decade of the new century, following the 1898 consolidation of the City of Greater New York, the lower Manhattan business district experienced a boom in office building construction, with 40 new buildings in the financial district alone. Within just a few blocks of the West Street Building, nine new buildings were under construction in 1906, including the United States Express Building, the Singer Building, and the Evening Post Building; in height they varied from 18 to 40 stories. For the new building, Carroll and his partners chose a site with a frontage of 159 feet on West Street, facing the Hudson River, between Cedar and Albany streets. The location put the building in the heart of an area devoted to riverfront commerce, described in 1899 as "occupied with freight and ferry houses of great railroad and steamship lines. It also put the building on a waterfront site with excellent views in all directions, and offices convenient to docks and ferries to rail terminals. The owners and architects of the West Street Building filed their application in 1905 for an office building of 23 and 28 stories, estimated to cost $2 million.20 Construction began in April the following year, and was completed in 1907. The John Peirce Company, the West Street Building contractor, maintained offices in the building, as did Carroll's Sicilian Asphalt Paving Company. Railroad interests in the building initially included the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company, which rented the seventeenth through twentieth floors (the portion of the building which has the most ornately detailed facades). The DL & W Railroad owned both Pier 13 (earlier called Pier 20) at nearby Cortlandt Street, and a railroad and ferry terminal in Hoboken, New Jersey, completed in 1907; from the West Street Building windows, railroad executives could observe traffic between the two. Because of the nature of its tenants, the building was soon known as the "Railroad and Iron Exchange Building"22 or the "Coal and Iron Building."23 Its profile as a tall building on the waterfront skyline also attracted the "Garret Restaurant," called "the world's highest restaurant," which was located on the top floor and had river and city views.24 The West Street Building was one of four major office buildings designed by Cass Gilbert in the northeastern United States before the outbreak of World War I, the others being the Brazer Building (1896) in Boston, and the Broadway-Chambers Building (1899-1900) and the Woolworth Building {191 1-1913). both in New York City. In those buildings Gilbert charted the course of development of the skyscraper from the nineteenth-century "base-shaft-capital " type to the grand, romantic tower type, exemplified by the Woolworth, which became the prototype for the great towers of the 1920s and 1930s. The West Street Building bridged the gap from the one to the other. Both the Brazer Building and the Broadway-Chambers Building were office buildings of the "base-shaft-capital" type, in which the building was seen as analogous to a classical column: a decoratively treated "base" of one or two stories arranged around the entrance, a decoratively treated "capital" of several stories at the top, and a tall "shaft" of intervening stories. The Broadway-Chambers Building, a project in which Gilbert himself also acted as developer,-5 was widely admired at the time of its completion as one of the finest examples of the "base-shaft-capital" type yet produced. Gilbert approached an office building project from two perspectives : as a real-estate transaction which required economy and efficiency — in a c.1900 article he described an office building as "a machine that makes the land pay"; and as an opportunity to create a striking design — in the same article he also wrote, "one must not lose sight of the fact that the machine is none the less a useful one because it has a measure of beauty, and that architectural beauty, judged even from an economic standpoint, has an income-bearing value." The West Street Building was, to some extent, organized along a tripartite scheme, but it represented a major advance in office building design. Although arranged as base-shaft-capital, the building's design downplayed the "base," emphasized the verticality of the "shaft" with tall uninterrupted, clustered piers, and made the "capital" an elaborate Gothic fantasy with a mansard roof. The West Street Building's vertical expression and Gothic skin were the direct predecessors of the Woolworth Building, as was its use of color. That Gilbert, in his design for the West Street Building, was consciously moving away from the tripartite paradigm towards the tall tower is demonstrated by one of his early proposals. The building in that proposal rose to a five-story tower at the top, similar in spirit to the tower of the Woolworth Building. Since he couldn't have the tower, Gilbert in his subsequent design emphasized an elaborate, seven-story upper portion with mansarded roof. Gilbert's choice of Gothic similarly helped move skyscraper design along towards the tower ideal. In one of the first consistent uses of Gothic detailing on a tall office building, Gilbert took as models both the secular (town halls in Brussels and Louvain) and the religious (the tower of the cathedral in Malines, Belgium), and used the Gothic to emphasize the tower's sheer verticality. In another move anticipating his design for the Woolworth Building, Gilbert conceived the West Street Building's facades in terra cotta, which was manufactured by the Atlantic Terra-Cotta Company.30 Gilbert took advantage of the versatility of terra cotta to give the building polychromatic luster, making the shaft beige, but adding details in gold, blue, red, and green. Fellow practitioners and critics writing in the contemporary architectural press praised Cass Gilbert's new skyscraper. Architect John Carrere told Gilbert, "if my opinion counts for anything I think it is the most successful building of its class." Painter Edwin Blashfield wrote to Gilbert in 1907: I want to write a line to tell you what a splendid impression your West Street Building makes on one, as one comes up the harbor on the way back from the other side of the Atlantic. . . . Indeed I didn't suppose a skyscraper could be so picturesque and handsome. I've always admired the effect of power in such buildings but in yours you create a type which is immediately satisfying to the eye. The critics shared this opinion. Claude Bragdon, writing in the Architectural Record, called the West Street Building "an aesthetic and technical triumph .... in mass, in outline, in color, in detail, the building is the work of a master mind, the last word in New York skyscraper architecture." Five years after the building's completion, Francis Swales wrote in the Architectural Review: "Expression without exaggeration of the type of construction, combined with sparing use and judicious placing of ornament, in good scale, with due regard to the relative importance of different points of view, account for the excellence of effect of the West Street Building." The best known critic of the day, Montgomery Schuyler, praised "the pinnacled diadem of the West Street Building . . . the cynosure of a justified admiration." He reported that Gilbert's building had the unusual merit of winning both popular and critical approval. Schuyler particularly admired the building's crowning stories, and the building's expression of "its actual construction by the substitution of continuous reeded uprights for the blank brick piers of the [Gilbert's earlier] Broadway Chambers." He felt the shaft treatment of the reeded piers expressed the structural frame within, "for the first time." And he opined that the building demonstrated that the Gothic was most appropriate for "even ... a practical and prosaic New York skyscraper." Later opinion confirmed the early reactions. Guy Kirkham. writing in Pencil Points in 1934, the year Gilbert died, called the West Street Building "one of the most satisfying buildings of New York. Later History The West Street Building was purchased in 1923 by the Brady Security and Realty Corp. During the Depression, in 1933, the company replaced the elevators, rehabilitated the office space, and upgraded mechanical systems. And the company retained Cass Gilbert (now age 74) to modernize the first floor interiors of what was then called the Brady Building. The interior had originally been arched and groin-vaulted, with elaborate terra-cotta detail.30 The modernization was described at the time as improving the "outdated lobby, crusted with ornamental ironwork," and Gilbert was quoted as saying: "I found much professional pleasure in designing it." The exterior of the building, however, was left largely intact. More recent changes include modifications to the storefronts and entrances, replacement of window sash, the installation of air-conditioning louvers, and the installation of exterior light fixtures for night-time illumination. (These are described in greater detail below.) The West Street Building no longer occupies a riverfront site, because the shoreline has been significantly extended with landfill for Battery Park City. It remains, however, a strikingly handsome architectural presence in lower Manhattan, and one of Cass Gilbert's major skyscraper designs. Description The twenty-three story building, a rough C shape in plan, fills a lot which is a parallelogram in shape, extending along the eastern side of West Street from Albany Street to Cedar Street. The facades have nine bays on West Street, seven bays on Cedar, and six bays on Albany, while the eastern facade has two wings enclosing a light court, with four bays on the southern wing and two bays on the northern wing. Each, organized in accordance with a tripartite scheme, is finished with the same materials and has similar motifs. A three-story base of beige Fox Island granite on a polished red granite water table sets off the upper stories, faced in glazed beige architectural terra cotta (over a brick backing). A dormered three-story mansard roof is clad in standing seam metal. The window sash are are one-over-one aluminum replacements. Light fixtures have been installed at the bases of the windows on the twentieth and twenty-first stories to provide night-time illumination for the mansard roof. West Street Facade This nine-bay facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking seven double bays. A two-story arcade is separated by a corbelled cornice from a transitional third story. A more ornate cornice at the third story sets off the twelve-story midsection with continous clustered piers flanking window openings separated by recessed spandrels. Another transitional story signals the four-story arcaded crown of the building, which in turn carries the three-story mansard roof. Base. A projecting two-story three-center arched entrance opening, outlined with a foliate molding, is centered in the facade. The arch voussoirs originally had alternating granite and contrasting marble panels. A few red marble panels survive; the others have been replaced by concrete panels. Slender engaged marble columns with foliate capitals and set on bases flank the entrance. (The columns have been treated with a protective coating to prevent further deterioration to the stonework.) Foliate bosses and tracery adorn the arch spandrels. The keystone is a winged owl. The entrance infill is non-historic and includes a revolving door flanked by single doors below a marquee bearing the address "90 WEST ST." and a window above. Two-story segmental arch openings with cast-iron storefronts above granite bulkheads form the remaining bays. The storefronts appear to be modified versions of the originals with tripartite windows below tripartite transoms. Paneled spandrels set off the tripartite windows at the second story. Louvers have replaced glass in many of the transoms and the second-story windows. Projecting canopies have been placed above several of the storefronts at the first story. The door in the southern end bay is non-historic and set below a non-historic canopy. The door in the northern end bay is of bronze and glass and approached by two granite steps. Engaged granite columns are placed at the corners of the facade. A continuous corbelled cornice extends above the second story. It projects slightly above the entrance bay where it incorporates carved heads and supports carved bases for lamps (removed). The third story has paneled wall sections flanking square-headed window openings with paneled reveals and foliate bosses at the upper corners. The end bays have more elaborate surrounds with pilasters supporting carved heads and a tracery motif at the window heads. A band accented with red, gold and blue panels sets off a cornice with a foliate molding. This cornice incorporates slightly projecting balconettes with lion head corbels at the base of the fourth story windows. Engaged columns accent the corners. Midsection. Single end bays and paired window bays are set off by clustered piers which rise for twelve stories (floors four through fifteen). The paired windows are separated by slender piers rising to foliate capitals at the twelfth story. Recessed terra-cotta spandrels separate windows between the floors. Louvers for air conditioning have been installed in the spandrels below the windows. Small metal railings are placed at the base of the bays on the projecting balconettes. The bays culminate in arches adorned with finials, bosses, and winged figures above the twelfth stony'. Blue terracotta panels fill the arch spandrels. A wide molding with cusped motifs sets off the transitional sixteenth story. At the sixteenth story, the windows have ornamented molded surrounds, and strapwork motifs with foliate bosses flank the window bays. Crown. Floors seventeen through nineteen are handled as a very ornate three-story window arcade. Tripartite windows with paneled spandrels between the floors are recessed behind three-center arched reveals adorned with floral motifs in accents of green, blue, and gold. Foliate finials top the arches, which are flanked by projecting colonnettes accented by vertical foliate moldings. The foliate colonnette capitals carry the boss-adorned bases for the griffin figures at the twentieth story. A band of blue and gold diamond panels spans the facade above the arches. The twentieth story has closely spaced double and triple window bays flanked by colonnettes. A continuous arched screen shelters the tops of the windows. The griffins separating the bays are set below their own small canopies with blue terra cotta panels. A foliate cornice with gargoyle motifs sets off the mansard roof. Mansard. An ornate series of arched and finialed terra-cotta dormers form a parapet at the base of the roof. The polygonal dormers at the corners originally carried tourelles (later removed). Two tiers of smaller dormers, the upper tier hooded, punctuate the upper portion of the roof. The roof slopes are covered with standing-seam metal and terminate in a terra-cotta cresting (somewhat modified since originally installed). Cedar Street Facade Like the West Street facade, this facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking five double bays. The articulation of the components is like that of the facade on West Street. Base. The treatment and detail of the base is like that on West Street, although the projecting two-story arched entrance opening is placed at the third bay from the right, instead of being centered. The alternate address "140 CEDAR ST." is placed on the projecting marquee. The western bay has a bronze and glass door above granite steps. As on West Street, the storefronts in the remaining bays are modified versions of the originals. Those on either side of the entrance bay have non-historic projecting canopies. Midsection. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Crown. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Mansard. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Albany Street Facade Like the West Street facade, this facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking four double bays. The articulation of the components is like that of the facade on West Street. Base. The treatment and detail of the base is like that on West Street. A freight entrance with metal doors is placed in the easternmost double bay. The middle bay has new infill at the first story. The other bays have storefronts which are modified versions of the originals, similar to those on West Street, although the bulkheads are painted wood instead of granite. There are no canopies above any of the storefronts. Midsection. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Crown. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Mansard. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Eastern Facade This facade is organized with two wings enclosing a light court with four bays on the southern wing and two bays on the northern wing. The walls are visible and articulated from the thirteenth story up as they rise above the building immediately to the east.4' Floors thirteen through sixteen correspond to the midsection of the other facades. The walls are faced with buff brick. The unarticulated window openings are paired in the northern wing and paired, flanked by single openings, in the southern wing. As on the other facades, the sixteenth story is a transitional one. set off by corbelled bandcourses. Floors seventeen through twenty correspond to the crown of the other facades, and they are similarly articulated as a three-story window arcade with a story of double and triple window bays above, although the detail is less ornate. The articulation and form of the three-story mansard is particularly noticeable on this side of the building, and the detailing continues from the other facades. The inner walls of the light court continue for one bay from the wings as a detailed reveal. Otherwise the walls are faced with buff brick, punctuated by window openings. Large openwork trusses link the light court walls at the seventh, tenth, twelfth, and sixteenth stories, although only the uppermost one is visible. - From the 1998 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: (Former) St. George's Syrian Catholic Church http://flic.kr/p/9cMHY7 Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The former St. George’s Syrian Catholic Church is the most significant remnant of the Lower Manhattan immigrant enclave known as the “Syrian Quarter,” the “Mother Colony” of Syrians and Lebanese in America. Immigrants from the former Ottoman province of Syria, which included modern-day Syria and Lebanon, began coming to this country in the 1880s, and over the next 40 years, thousands of them settled on and around lower Washington Street in a neighborhood that was their commercial and cultural center in the United States. Nearly half of these immigrants were Melkite Greek Catholics, who recognize the primacy of the Pope but worship using the Byzantine Rite. In Lower Manhattan, in 1889, they formed America’s first Melkite parish; by 1925, as St. George’s Syrian Catholic Church, they moved into this building, which had been purchased for their use by George E. Bardwil, an importer of fine linens and embroideries. In 1929, the church engaged Harvey F. Cassab, a young Lebanese-American draftsman, to design a new façade for the building. Cassab’s vibrant neo- Gothic composition, executed in bright white terra cotta, features a polychrome relief of St. George and the Dragon, and remains remarkably intact today. The former St. George’s Church building was constructed around 1812; three stories high with a peaked roof, it served as an immigrant boardinghouse by the 1850s. In 1869, it was raised to its present five stories and continued to function as a boardinghouse and tenement until Bardwil’s purchase. With the decline of Lower Manhattan’s Middle Eastern population after World War II, St. George’s was converted to a Roman Rite church for a period, and in 1982, the building was sold to Chapel Moran, Inc., which has owned and maintained the building and its unique Washington Street façade for the past 27 years. It remains Lower Manhattan’s most vivid reminder of the vanished ethnic community once known as the Syrian Quarter, and of the time when Washington Street was the Main Street of Syrian America. The standout feature of the former St. George’s Syrian Catholic Church is unquestionably its vibrant terra-cotta main façade, designed by Harvey F. Cassab, completed in 1929-30, and extending the full height of the building. Neo-Gothic in style, its design appears to have resulted from two major factors: the “Latinization” of Melkite churches in the early-to-mid twentieth century, which caused many to be built in Western rather than Eastern styles, and the need to adapt a historic design language to an existing structure, five stories high, 25 feet wide, and hemmed in by buildings on both sides.71 The decision by Cassab and St. George’s parish to employ the neo-Gothic style may seem counterintuitive, given the Eastern heritage of St. George’s parishioners and of the Melkite Church itself. But it was precisely the style’s long association with the West that made it attractive to people who were assimilating into American life and acculturating themselves to Catholicism as it was practiced in the United States. When Syrian Melkites immigrated to this country, they found that virtually all American Catholics worshiped using the Roman Rite, the most widely used rite within the Latin Rite, or Western Catholic Church. Melkites, however, used the Byzantine Rite and followed other Eastern traditions: they crossed themselves differently, their priests were able to marry, and their churches contained icons, not statues. The Church’s “foreign-born priests, lifted out of their natural environments, were suddenly alone and at a loss as to how to adapt to the American church scene,” and they soon began, with the approval oftheir parishioners, to adopt a variety of Western Catholic customs. - From the 2009 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: West Street Building http://flic.kr/p/9cJzvH Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The West Street Building, one of three major Downtown office buildings designed by Cass Gilbert, was built in 1905-07 for the West Street Improvement Corporation, a partnership headed by Howard Carroll. Carroll was president of two asphalt companies and vice-president of his father-in-law's Star in Transportation Company, which had major river shipping interests. Although today separated from the Hudson River by the landfill supporting Battery Park City, the site of the West Street Building originally had a highly visible location facing the waterfront along West Street. Carroll conceived of his project as a first-class skyscraper office building for the shipping and railroad industries. In addition to Carroll's companies, the building soon filled up with tenants including major companies in the transportation industry. The building's top floor was occupied by "The Garret Restaurant," which advertised itself as the highest restaurant in New York and boasted of its panoramic river and city views. Cass Gilbert was one of the most prominent architects in New York in the first decade of the twentieth century. His succession of early skyscrapers helped pave the way for the great romantic skyscraper towers of the 1920s and beyond. His West Street Building may be considered transitional from the "base-shaft-capital" arrangement of the late-nineteenth-century office buildings conceived as analogous to a classical column - and perhaps best epitomized by his own design for the Broad way-Chambers Building - to the romantic tower exemplified by his design for the Woolworth Building. While the West Street Building is tripartite in configuration, its upper floors are a romantic mansarded design. The building's Gothic vocabulary is an early instance of its use in American skyscraper design, anticipating the Woolworth Building. The clustered piers in the tower's middle section anticipate the verticality stressed in later skyscraper design. The West Street Building was one of many office buildings erected in lower Manhattan during the first decade following the consolidation of the City of Greater New York, but its handsome design set it apart, and it won widespread critical acclaim. Today, its exterior survives largely intact, and the building remains in commercial office use. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS Carroll's dock-side skyscraper for the shipping trade The West Street Building was conceived and built by the West Street Improvement Company, a syndicate of downtown business interests headed by Howard Carroll that included John Peirce, who served as the building's general contractor. The company initially maintained its offices in the Broadway-Chambers Building, also designed by Cass Gilbert. Born in Albany. New York, and educated in New York and abroad, Howard Carroll (1854-1916) worked as a journalist at the New York Times. He later joined the Starin Transportation Company, a large firm with river transportation interests, owned by his father-in-law, John Henry Starin (1825-1909). By 1905, when Carroll formed the West Street Improvement Company, he had become the Starin Company's vice-president. He also had separate business interests unconnected to Starin, as president of both the Sicilian Asphalt Paving Company and the Asphalt Company of Canada. Carroll's West Street Improvement Company conceived the West Street Building as a high-class office building specifically targeting the shipping industry. Though the site today is several blocks inland from the waterfront, West Street in 1905 ran along the shore of the Hudson River, and the new building rose directly across the street from the docks. At the time West Street was lined with ferries and warehouses of the railroad and steamship companies.4 In the words of a rental brochure for the West Street Building, it "commends itself particularly to railroads, engineers, dock builders, contractors, lawyers, shippers, and machinery and electrical trades." Carroll commissioned a design for the West Street Building in April 1905 from architect Cass Gilbert. Cass Gilbert (1859-1934) Cass Gilbert's commissions include several of New York City's major landmarks; the two most important of these, the U.S. Custom House and the Wool worth Building, are of national significance. Gilbert was a Midwesterner who trained and later practiced in the East. His career falls roughly into two parts: a local practice in St. Paul, Minnesota, in the 1880s and 1890s, and a national practice, based in New York, from 1900 until his death in 1934. Gilbert was born the son of an engineer in Zanesville, Ohio, a town laid out in part by his grandfather. While still a child, he and his family moved to St. Paul, where he completed his secondary education. In 1876 he entered the office of A.M. Radcliffe, a local architect. Two years later he went east to study at the architecture school of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, then headed by William R. Ware; his teacher was a Frenchman, Eugene Letang. After two years of study, Gilbert went to Europe; he had hoped to work for an English architect but was unable to find employment. After traveling briefly through France and Italy, chiefly to see Gothic cathedrals, he was obliged to return to the United States later the same year. In New York he joined the firm of McKim, Mead & White, which had been formed barely a year earlier in September 1879. Unlike many major American architects of his era, Gilbert did not study at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris. His architectural education, however, reflected the American interpretation of Beaux-Arts ideas as promulgated through academic institutions and architectural apprenticeships. Eugene Letang had been an Ecole student; William R. Ware was one of the five architects who had studied in the New York atelier of Richard Morris Hunt, the first American to attend the Ecole. McKim, who was an Ecole student, and White, who was not, had both worked in the office of the second American to attend the Ecole, H.H. Richardson. Returning to St. Paul in 1882, Gilbert set up his own practice. Mead had suggested he open a St. Paul branch of McKim, Mead & White,10 but instead Gilbert formed a partnership with fellow M.I.T. graduate James Knox Taylor, which lasted eight years. During the last two decades of the century he built a solid reputation in St. Paul designing residences, churches, and office buildings; most of his designs were in the Shingle Style or the Richardsonian Romanesque. When John Welborn Root died in 1891, Mead wrote to Gilbert from New York urging him to go to Chicago to become Daniel Burnham's new partner; Gilbert, however, chose to remain in St. Paul. He became president of the Minnesota chapter of the A.I. A., and was invited to sit on various architectural juries — he was the only Westerner on the jury for the New York Public Library competition. In 1895, Gilbert won the competition for the new Minnesota state capitol, a commission that established his national reputation. Clearly reflecting the impact of the 1893 Chicago Columbian Exposition, Gilbert's design was an elegant Beaux-Arts building, which, in its monumental composition, classical style, and elaborate decoration, laid the groundwork for his 1899 winning entry in the New York Custom House competition.13 In 1900, Gilbert moved permanently to New York. Throughout his later careeer, Gilbert produced Beaux-Arts-inspired governmental buildings, including the Federal Courthouse in New York (1934), the Detroit Public Library (1914), the West Virginia state capitol in Charleston (1928-32), and the Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C. (1933-35) among many others. These public monuments, which comprised a major portion of his national work, were lavishly decorated with sculpture and murals. Gilbert's other major contribution to architecture was in the field of skyscraper design. As a Midwestern architect working during the last two decades of the nineteenth century, he was familiar with the technological developments in skyscraper construction in Chicago. His training in Eastern schools, on the other hand, enabled him to develop a style that was compatible with taste current in New York City when he moved there at the turn of the century. The unique combination of Midwestern technology, Eastern training, and Gilbert's personal design talents and beliefs helped him move away from the "base-shaft-capital" formula of early office buildings to the full-blown romantic skyscraper conception of the Woolworth Building, his most famous tall building. Gilbert's skyscraper designs reflected his clear belief in the value of studying the architecture of the past -- not to copy it, but certainly to adapt it. Speaking on the occasion of the presentation to him of the Gold Medal of Architecture by the Society of Arts and Sciences in honor of the Woolworth Building design, he said: ... as in language new words are coined to express new meanings and old words become obsolete, as old uses are abandoned so new forms to meet new needs are developed (I almost said invented) as the necessity requires. . . . My plea therefore is . . . for the solution of our own problems in the spirit of our own . . . but to disregard nothing of the past that may guide us in doing so. Gilbert also believed, however, that his approach to skyscraper design was based on structural expression and the aesthetic treatment of materials. He argued that since commercial buildings required thin surfaces, these had to be treated decoratively, and that a thin, decoratively treated surface expressed the structural fact that the skyscraper was a steel-cage structure, clearly not supported by its terra-cotta or stone cladding. One of the devices he used in this decorative treatment was proportion; another was color. All these aspects of design came to be embodied in the West Street Building. The West Street Building and Its Design During the first decade of the new century, following the 1898 consolidation of the City of Greater New York, the lower Manhattan business district experienced a boom in office building construction, with 40 new buildings in the financial district alone. Within just a few blocks of the West Street Building, nine new buildings were under construction in 1906, including the United States Express Building, the Singer Building, and the Evening Post Building; in height they varied from 18 to 40 stories. For the new building, Carroll and his partners chose a site with a frontage of 159 feet on West Street, facing the Hudson River, between Cedar and Albany streets. The location put the building in the heart of an area devoted to riverfront commerce, described in 1899 as "occupied with freight and ferry houses of great railroad and steamship lines. It also put the building on a waterfront site with excellent views in all directions, and offices convenient to docks and ferries to rail terminals. The owners and architects of the West Street Building filed their application in 1905 for an office building of 23 and 28 stories, estimated to cost $2 million.20 Construction began in April the following year, and was completed in 1907. The John Peirce Company, the West Street Building contractor, maintained offices in the building, as did Carroll's Sicilian Asphalt Paving Company. Railroad interests in the building initially included the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company, which rented the seventeenth through twentieth floors (the portion of the building which has the most ornately detailed facades). The DL & W Railroad owned both Pier 13 (earlier called Pier 20) at nearby Cortlandt Street, and a railroad and ferry terminal in Hoboken, New Jersey, completed in 1907; from the West Street Building windows, railroad executives could observe traffic between the two. Because of the nature of its tenants, the building was soon known as the "Railroad and Iron Exchange Building"22 or the "Coal and Iron Building."23 Its profile as a tall building on the waterfront skyline also attracted the "Garret Restaurant," called "the world's highest restaurant," which was located on the top floor and had river and city views.24 The West Street Building was one of four major office buildings designed by Cass Gilbert in the northeastern United States before the outbreak of World War I, the others being the Brazer Building (1896) in Boston, and the Broadway-Chambers Building (1899-1900) and the Woolworth Building {191 1-1913). both in New York City. In those buildings Gilbert charted the course of development of the skyscraper from the nineteenth-century "base-shaft-capital " type to the grand, romantic tower type, exemplified by the Woolworth, which became the prototype for the great towers of the 1920s and 1930s. The West Street Building bridged the gap from the one to the other. Both the Brazer Building and the Broadway-Chambers Building were office buildings of the "base-shaft-capital" type, in which the building was seen as analogous to a classical column: a decoratively treated "base" of one or two stories arranged around the entrance, a decoratively treated "capital" of several stories at the top, and a tall "shaft" of intervening stories. The Broadway-Chambers Building, a project in which Gilbert himself also acted as developer,-5 was widely admired at the time of its completion as one of the finest examples of the "base-shaft-capital" type yet produced. Gilbert approached an office building project from two perspectives : as a real-estate transaction which required economy and efficiency — in a c.1900 article he described an office building as "a machine that makes the land pay"; and as an opportunity to create a striking design — in the same article he also wrote, "one must not lose sight of the fact that the machine is none the less a useful one because it has a measure of beauty, and that architectural beauty, judged even from an economic standpoint, has an income-bearing value." The West Street Building was, to some extent, organized along a tripartite scheme, but it represented a major advance in office building design. Although arranged as base-shaft-capital, the building's design downplayed the "base," emphasized the verticality of the "shaft" with tall uninterrupted, clustered piers, and made the "capital" an elaborate Gothic fantasy with a mansard roof. The West Street Building's vertical expression and Gothic skin were the direct predecessors of the Woolworth Building, as was its use of color. That Gilbert, in his design for the West Street Building, was consciously moving away from the tripartite paradigm towards the tall tower is demonstrated by one of his early proposals. The building in that proposal rose to a five-story tower at the top, similar in spirit to the tower of the Woolworth Building. Since he couldn't have the tower, Gilbert in his subsequent design emphasized an elaborate, seven-story upper portion with mansarded roof. Gilbert's choice of Gothic similarly helped move skyscraper design along towards the tower ideal. In one of the first consistent uses of Gothic detailing on a tall office building, Gilbert took as models both the secular (town halls in Brussels and Louvain) and the religious (the tower of the cathedral in Malines, Belgium), and used the Gothic to emphasize the tower's sheer verticality. In another move anticipating his design for the Woolworth Building, Gilbert conceived the West Street Building's facades in terra cotta, which was manufactured by the Atlantic Terra-Cotta Company.30 Gilbert took advantage of the versatility of terra cotta to give the building polychromatic luster, making the shaft beige, but adding details in gold, blue, red, and green. Fellow practitioners and critics writing in the contemporary architectural press praised Cass Gilbert's new skyscraper. Architect John Carrere told Gilbert, "if my opinion counts for anything I think it is the most successful building of its class." Painter Edwin Blashfield wrote to Gilbert in 1907: I want to write a line to tell you what a splendid impression your West Street Building makes on one, as one comes up the harbor on the way back from the other side of the Atlantic. . . . Indeed I didn't suppose a skyscraper could be so picturesque and handsome. I've always admired the effect of power in such buildings but in yours you create a type which is immediately satisfying to the eye. The critics shared this opinion. Claude Bragdon, writing in the Architectural Record, called the West Street Building "an aesthetic and technical triumph .... in mass, in outline, in color, in detail, the building is the work of a master mind, the last word in New York skyscraper architecture." Five years after the building's completion, Francis Swales wrote in the Architectural Review: "Expression without exaggeration of the type of construction, combined with sparing use and judicious placing of ornament, in good scale, with due regard to the relative importance of different points of view, account for the excellence of effect of the West Street Building." The best known critic of the day, Montgomery Schuyler, praised "the pinnacled diadem of the West Street Building . . . the cynosure of a justified admiration." He reported that Gilbert's building had the unusual merit of winning both popular and critical approval. Schuyler particularly admired the building's crowning stories, and the building's expression of "its actual construction by the substitution of continuous reeded uprights for the blank brick piers of the [Gilbert's earlier] Broadway Chambers." He felt the shaft treatment of the reeded piers expressed the structural frame within, "for the first time." And he opined that the building demonstrated that the Gothic was most appropriate for "even ... a practical and prosaic New York skyscraper." Later opinion confirmed the early reactions. Guy Kirkham. writing in Pencil Points in 1934, the year Gilbert died, called the West Street Building "one of the most satisfying buildings of New York. Later History The West Street Building was purchased in 1923 by the Brady Security and Realty Corp. During the Depression, in 1933, the company replaced the elevators, rehabilitated the office space, and upgraded mechanical systems. And the company retained Cass Gilbert (now age 74) to modernize the first floor interiors of what was then called the Brady Building. The interior had originally been arched and groin-vaulted, with elaborate terra-cotta detail.30 The modernization was described at the time as improving the "outdated lobby, crusted with ornamental ironwork," and Gilbert was quoted as saying: "I found much professional pleasure in designing it." The exterior of the building, however, was left largely intact. More recent changes include modifications to the storefronts and entrances, replacement of window sash, the installation of air-conditioning louvers, and the installation of exterior light fixtures for night-time illumination. (These are described in greater detail below.) The West Street Building no longer occupies a riverfront site, because the shoreline has been significantly extended with landfill for Battery Park City. It remains, however, a strikingly handsome architectural presence in lower Manhattan, and one of Cass Gilbert's major skyscraper designs. Description The twenty-three story building, a rough C shape in plan, fills a lot which is a parallelogram in shape, extending along the eastern side of West Street from Albany Street to Cedar Street. The facades have nine bays on West Street, seven bays on Cedar, and six bays on Albany, while the eastern facade has two wings enclosing a light court, with four bays on the southern wing and two bays on the northern wing. Each, organized in accordance with a tripartite scheme, is finished with the same materials and has similar motifs. A three-story base of beige Fox Island granite on a polished red granite water table sets off the upper stories, faced in glazed beige architectural terra cotta (over a brick backing). A dormered three-story mansard roof is clad in standing seam metal. The window sash are are one-over-one aluminum replacements. Light fixtures have been installed at the bases of the windows on the twentieth and twenty-first stories to provide night-time illumination for the mansard roof. West Street Facade This nine-bay facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking seven double bays. A two-story arcade is separated by a corbelled cornice from a transitional third story. A more ornate cornice at the third story sets off the twelve-story midsection with continous clustered piers flanking window openings separated by recessed spandrels. Another transitional story signals the four-story arcaded crown of the building, which in turn carries the three-story mansard roof. Base. A projecting two-story three-center arched entrance opening, outlined with a foliate molding, is centered in the facade. The arch voussoirs originally had alternating granite and contrasting marble panels. A few red marble panels survive; the others have been replaced by concrete panels. Slender engaged marble columns with foliate capitals and set on bases flank the entrance. (The columns have been treated with a protective coating to prevent further deterioration to the stonework.) Foliate bosses and tracery adorn the arch spandrels. The keystone is a winged owl. The entrance infill is non-historic and includes a revolving door flanked by single doors below a marquee bearing the address "90 WEST ST." and a window above. Two-story segmental arch openings with cast-iron storefronts above granite bulkheads form the remaining bays. The storefronts appear to be modified versions of the originals with tripartite windows below tripartite transoms. Paneled spandrels set off the tripartite windows at the second story. Louvers have replaced glass in many of the transoms and the second-story windows. Projecting canopies have been placed above several of the storefronts at the first story. The door in the southern end bay is non-historic and set below a non-historic canopy. The door in the northern end bay is of bronze and glass and approached by two granite steps. Engaged granite columns are placed at the corners of the facade. A continuous corbelled cornice extends above the second story. It projects slightly above the entrance bay where it incorporates carved heads and supports carved bases for lamps (removed). The third story has paneled wall sections flanking square-headed window openings with paneled reveals and foliate bosses at the upper corners. The end bays have more elaborate surrounds with pilasters supporting carved heads and a tracery motif at the window heads. A band accented with red, gold and blue panels sets off a cornice with a foliate molding. This cornice incorporates slightly projecting balconettes with lion head corbels at the base of the fourth story windows. Engaged columns accent the corners. Midsection. Single end bays and paired window bays are set off by clustered piers which rise for twelve stories (floors four through fifteen). The paired windows are separated by slender piers rising to foliate capitals at the twelfth story. Recessed terra-cotta spandrels separate windows between the floors. Louvers for air conditioning have been installed in the spandrels below the windows. Small metal railings are placed at the base of the bays on the projecting balconettes. The bays culminate in arches adorned with finials, bosses, and winged figures above the twelfth stony'. Blue terracotta panels fill the arch spandrels. A wide molding with cusped motifs sets off the transitional sixteenth story. At the sixteenth story, the windows have ornamented molded surrounds, and strapwork motifs with foliate bosses flank the window bays. Crown. Floors seventeen through nineteen are handled as a very ornate three-story window arcade. Tripartite windows with paneled spandrels between the floors are recessed behind three-center arched reveals adorned with floral motifs in accents of green, blue, and gold. Foliate finials top the arches, which are flanked by projecting colonnettes accented by vertical foliate moldings. The foliate colonnette capitals carry the boss-adorned bases for the griffin figures at the twentieth story. A band of blue and gold diamond panels spans the facade above the arches. The twentieth story has closely spaced double and triple window bays flanked by colonnettes. A continuous arched screen shelters the tops of the windows. The griffins separating the bays are set below their own small canopies with blue terra cotta panels. A foliate cornice with gargoyle motifs sets off the mansard roof. Mansard. An ornate series of arched and finialed terra-cotta dormers form a parapet at the base of the roof. The polygonal dormers at the corners originally carried tourelles (later removed). Two tiers of smaller dormers, the upper tier hooded, punctuate the upper portion of the roof. The roof slopes are covered with standing-seam metal and terminate in a terra-cotta cresting (somewhat modified since originally installed). Cedar Street Facade Like the West Street facade, this facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking five double bays. The articulation of the components is like that of the facade on West Street. Base. The treatment and detail of the base is like that on West Street, although the projecting two-story arched entrance opening is placed at the third bay from the right, instead of being centered. The alternate address "140 CEDAR ST." is placed on the projecting marquee. The western bay has a bronze and glass door above granite steps. As on West Street, the storefronts in the remaining bays are modified versions of the originals. Those on either side of the entrance bay have non-historic projecting canopies. Midsection. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Crown. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Mansard. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Albany Street Facade Like the West Street facade, this facade is symmetrically arranged with single end bays flanking four double bays. The articulation of the components is like that of the facade on West Street. Base. The treatment and detail of the base is like that on West Street. A freight entrance with metal doors is placed in the easternmost double bay. The middle bay has new infill at the first story. The other bays have storefronts which are modified versions of the originals, similar to those on West Street, although the bulkheads are painted wood instead of granite. There are no canopies above any of the storefronts. Midsection. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Crown. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Mansard. The treatment and detail is like that on West Street. Eastern Facade This facade is organized with two wings enclosing a light court with four bays on the southern wing and two bays on the northern wing. The walls are visible and articulated from the thirteenth story up as they rise above the building immediately to the east.4' Floors thirteen through sixteen correspond to the midsection of the other facades. The walls are faced with buff brick. The unarticulated window openings are paired in the northern wing and paired, flanked by single openings, in the southern wing. As on the other facades, the sixteenth story is a transitional one. set off by corbelled bandcourses. Floors seventeen through twenty correspond to the crown of the other facades, and they are similarly articulated as a three-story window arcade with a story of double and triple window bays above, although the detail is less ornate. The articulation and form of the three-story mansard is particularly noticeable on this side of the building, and the detailing continues from the other facades. The inner walls of the light court continue for one bay from the wings as a detailed reveal. Otherwise the walls are faced with buff brick, punctuated by window openings. Large openwork trusses link the light court walls at the seventh, tenth, twelfth, and sixteenth stories, although only the uppermost one is visible. - From the 1998 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: (Former) St. George's Syrian Catholic Church http://flic.kr/p/9cMJqW Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The former St. George’s Syrian Catholic Church is the most significant remnant of the Lower Manhattan immigrant enclave known as the “Syrian Quarter,” the “Mother Colony” of Syrians and Lebanese in America. Immigrants from the former Ottoman province of Syria, which included modern-day Syria and Lebanon, began coming to this country in the 1880s, and over the next 40 years, thousands of them settled on and around lower Washington Street in a neighborhood that was their commercial and cultural center in the United States. Nearly half of these immigrants were Melkite Greek Catholics, who recognize the primacy of the Pope but worship using the Byzantine Rite. In Lower Manhattan, in 1889, they formed America’s first Melkite parish; by 1925, as St. George’s Syrian Catholic Church, they moved into this building, which had been purchased for their use by George E. Bardwil, an importer of fine linens and embroideries. In 1929, the church engaged Harvey F. Cassab, a young Lebanese-American draftsman, to design a new façade for the building. Cassab’s vibrant neo- Gothic composition, executed in bright white terra cotta, features a polychrome relief of St. George and the Dragon, and remains remarkably intact today. The former St. George’s Church building was constructed around 1812; three stories high with a peaked roof, it served as an immigrant boardinghouse by the 1850s. In 1869, it was raised to its present five stories and continued to function as a boardinghouse and tenement until Bardwil’s purchase. With the decline of Lower Manhattan’s Middle Eastern population after World War II, St. George’s was converted to a Roman Rite church for a period, and in 1982, the building was sold to Chapel Moran, Inc., which has owned and maintained the building and its unique Washington Street façade for the past 27 years. It remains Lower Manhattan’s most vivid reminder of the vanished ethnic community once known as the Syrian Quarter, and of the time when Washington Street was the Main Street of Syrian America. The standout feature of the former St. George’s Syrian Catholic Church is unquestionably its vibrant terra-cotta main façade, designed by Harvey F. Cassab, completed in 1929-30, and extending the full height of the building. Neo-Gothic in style, its design appears to have resulted from two major factors: the “Latinization” of Melkite churches in the early-to-mid twentieth century, which caused many to be built in Western rather than Eastern styles, and the need to adapt a historic design language to an existing structure, five stories high, 25 feet wide, and hemmed in by buildings on both sides.71 The decision by Cassab and St. George’s parish to employ the neo-Gothic style may seem counterintuitive, given the Eastern heritage of St. George’s parishioners and of the Melkite Church itself. But it was precisely the style’s long association with the West that made it attractive to people who were assimilating into American life and acculturating themselves to Catholicism as it was practiced in the United States. When Syrian Melkites immigrated to this country, they found that virtually all American Catholics worshiped using the Roman Rite, the most widely used rite within the Latin Rite, or Western Catholic Church. Melkites, however, used the Byzantine Rite and followed other Eastern traditions: they crossed themselves differently, their priests were able to marry, and their churches contained icons, not statues. The Church’s “foreign-born priests, lifted out of their natural environments, were suddenly alone and at a loss as to how to adapt to the American church scene,” and they soon began, with the approval oftheir parishioners, to adopt a variety of Western Catholic customs. - From the 2009 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Freedom Tower, Jan. 9, 2011 http://flic.kr/p/9cJz82 Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog.

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Freedom Tower, Jan. 9, 2011 http://flic.kr/p/9cJBmK Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog.

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: (Former) St. George's Syrian Catholic Church http://flic.kr/p/9cMHHC Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. The former St. George’s Syrian Catholic Church is the most significant remnant of the Lower Manhattan immigrant enclave known as the “Syrian Quarter,” the “Mother Colony” of Syrians and Lebanese in America. Immigrants from the former Ottoman province of Syria, which included modern-day Syria and Lebanon, began coming to this country in the 1880s, and over the next 40 years, thousands of them settled on and around lower Washington Street in a neighborhood that was their commercial and cultural center in the United States. Nearly half of these immigrants were Melkite Greek Catholics, who recognize the primacy of the Pope but worship using the Byzantine Rite. In Lower Manhattan, in 1889, they formed America’s first Melkite parish; by 1925, as St. George’s Syrian Catholic Church, they moved into this building, which had been purchased for their use by George E. Bardwil, an importer of fine linens and embroideries. In 1929, the church engaged Harvey F. Cassab, a young Lebanese-American draftsman, to design a new façade for the building. Cassab’s vibrant neo- Gothic composition, executed in bright white terra cotta, features a polychrome relief of St. George and the Dragon, and remains remarkably intact today. The former St. George’s Church building was constructed around 1812; three stories high with a peaked roof, it served as an immigrant boardinghouse by the 1850s. In 1869, it was raised to its present five stories and continued to function as a boardinghouse and tenement until Bardwil’s purchase. With the decline of Lower Manhattan’s Middle Eastern population after World War II, St. George’s was converted to a Roman Rite church for a period, and in 1982, the building was sold to Chapel Moran, Inc., which has owned and maintained the building and its unique Washington Street façade for the past 27 years. It remains Lower Manhattan’s most vivid reminder of the vanished ethnic community once known as the Syrian Quarter, and of the time when Washington Street was the Main Street of Syrian America. The standout feature of the former St. George’s Syrian Catholic Church is unquestionably its vibrant terra-cotta main façade, designed by Harvey F. Cassab, completed in 1929-30, and extending the full height of the building. Neo-Gothic in style, its design appears to have resulted from two major factors: the “Latinization” of Melkite churches in the early-to-mid twentieth century, which caused many to be built in Western rather than Eastern styles, and the need to adapt a historic design language to an existing structure, five stories high, 25 feet wide, and hemmed in by buildings on both sides.71 The decision by Cassab and St. George’s parish to employ the neo-Gothic style may seem counterintuitive, given the Eastern heritage of St. George’s parishioners and of the Melkite Church itself. But it was precisely the style’s long association with the West that made it attractive to people who were assimilating into American life and acculturating themselves to Catholicism as it was practiced in the United States. When Syrian Melkites immigrated to this country, they found that virtually all American Catholics worshiped using the Roman Rite, the most widely used rite within the Latin Rite, or Western Catholic Church. Melkites, however, used the Byzantine Rite and followed other Eastern traditions: they crossed themselves differently, their priests were able to marry, and their churches contained icons, not statues. The Church’s “foreign-born priests, lifted out of their natural environments, were suddenly alone and at a loss as to how to adapt to the American church scene,” and they soon began, with the approval oftheir parishioners, to adopt a variety of Western Catholic customs. - From the 2009 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Freedom Tower, Jan. 9, 2011 http://flic.kr/p/9cMEv9 Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog.

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Barclay-Vesey Building http://flic.kr/p/9cJy7z Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS Summary The Barclay-Vesey Building of the New York Telephone Company (also known as the New York Telephone Building) was the first major work of prominent New York architect Ralph Walker. Constructed in 1923-27 and built at a time of great progress and transition in American design, it was a product of the atmosphere of architectural creativity and originality which flourished in New York in the 1920s. A pivotal structure in the history of skyscraper architecture, it is a prototypical example of what came to be regarded as the American Art Deco style. , Intended to be completely modern in. every feature and detail, from its form, generated by its parallelogram-shaped site and contemporary zoning restrictions, to its construction techniques, materials, unconventional ornament, and style, Walker's design for "the largest telephone company building in the world"1 was an emphatic statement of the most recent architectural trends. The building, designed to be "as modern as the telephone activity it houses . . . [was] a simple, straightforward solution" to the requirements of the building program.2 The progressive design of the building was envisioned by company president, Howard F. Thurber, and resulted in a grand statement of his company's size, strength, and success. The overall effect of Walker's Barclay-Vesey Building is one of strong form and bold silhouette, with its blunt setback transitions articulated by vertical buttress-like piers and massive form relieved by intricate, animated ornament. Substantially intact, the building continues to be a dramatic presence on Manhattan's skyline. Site History The block bounded by Barclay and Vesey Streets at the north and south and Washington and West-Streets at the east and west was originally located, beyond the .present shoreline, west side' of Manhattan was developed beginning early in the nineteenth century. As part of the improvement, the banks of the Hudson were filled in, extended, and raised, and piers were constructed at the western end of every street between Vesey and King Streets by the late 1830s.3 Crucial to the city's mercantile expansion, the improvements helped New York City to achieve recognition as the country's major port and trading center by the 1830s and 1840s. This area and the section of the city just to the north, now known as Tribeca, were transformed into a center for dairy goods, produce, and less perishable goods including tobacco, imported woods, coffee, and spices. Markets for these items were developed in the area close to the docks to facilitate the handling of the commodities. First established in 1812 and repeatedly expanded, the Washington Market, located on the block bounded by West, Washington, Vesey, and Fulton Streets, just south of the Barclay-Vesey Building, grew to be Manhattan's major wholesale and retail produce outlet.4 Many other buildings were constructed in the area to accommodate the food industry, including approximately thirty-five three-, four-, and five-story brick buildings on the site chosen for the telephone company's headquarters. The activities of the merchants, so important to the site and to the surrounding area, would later be recalled in the ornamental program of the Barclay-Vesey Building. The site was chosen over more popular office locations to the east on Broadway because it was much less expensive. The West Street frontage was considered an asset because it was assumed that the structures along the docks would never rise above two or three stories and the future building's western exposure would, therefore, always remain unobstructed. The New York Telephone Company The telephone business developed rapidly following the early successes of Alexander Graham Bell's inventions in the. L^70^. By the turn of the century the AmeVican' Telephone & Telegraph Company had become the central institution of Bell Telephone Company operations, with smaller companies, including the New York Telephone Company, conducting its regional services. After a sluggish period of business during World War I the New York Telephone Company faced a new period of rapid expansion. In an effort to organize and control the growth, the company decided to establish divisional headquarters throughout the state. A reassessment of the company's organization in New York City concluded that its personnel, offices, and equipment were inefficiently scattered city-wide. Howard Ford Thurber (1869-1928), president of the New York Telephone Company from 1919 to 1924, determined that a new central headquarters building would alleviate the problems associated with the company's lack of unity. Thurber's "vision," as it was called in his New York Times obituary, was to create a building large enough to "satisfy the [company's] present demands and to reasonably anticipate future requirements."5 The new headquarters building would consolidate an equipment and administrative center, incorporating six central offices. As explained in a Telephone Company pamphlet, central offices are the nerve centers of the [telephone] system. Here the wires from the local telephones and from other central offices converge and are carried to distributing frames, where they fan out to the proper points of contact on the switchboards. Thurber's building program required a large utilitarian facility with specialized mechanical features and space for a centralized work force of 6,000 employees serving 120,000 telephones. Undaunted by the numerous details of the project, Thurber envisioned not just the practical concerns of the building but its potential symbolic quality as well. A large structure, progressively designed, could establish a positive corporate image and symbolize the size and strength of the organization — an industry whose woTk was clearly at the forefront of modern technology. With Thurber's plan for a new headquarters building, the New York Telephone Company was established at the vanguard of modern trends in business and architecture. Ralph Walker and McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin For the design of its headquarters building, the New York Telephone Company chose MeKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin, an architectural firm whose long history with the telephone company began in 1885 with the firm's founding partner Cyrus L.W. Eidlitz (1853-1921). Eidlitz was commissioned by the Metropolitan Telephone and Telegraph Company, the predecessor of the New York Telephone Company, in that year to design its first headquarters building at 18 Cortlandt Street in Manhattan. Andrew McKenzie (1861-1926), born in Dunkirk, New York, and educated in Buffalo, came to New York City in 1884 and worked for the firm of Babb, Cook & Willard. He became associated with Cyrus L.W. Eidlitz in 1902 and the partnership of Eidlitz & McKenzie was active from 1905 to 1909. That firm's major work was the New York Times Building at Times Square.8 Stephen Voorhees (1879-1965) was born near Rocky Hill, New Jersey, and was educated as a civil engineer at Princeton University, graduating in 1900. In 1902 he began to practice with Eidlitz & McKenzie as an engineer and superintendent of construction; one of his first jobs was the supervision of the foundation work for the New York Times Building. German-born Paul Gmelin (1859-1937) studied in Stuttgart. He came to the United States as a draftsman, was briefly associated with McKim, Mead & White, and then joined the firm of Babb, Cook & Willard, where he met Andrew McKenzie. In 1910 the firm of McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was organized and continued Eidlitz's successful relationship with the telephone company, gaining numerous commissions for buildings throughout New York state. By 1912 the firm had completed approximately thirty new telephone buildings in New York City alone (not . counting alterations and expansions). The firm also designed the Brooklyn Edison Company Building and the Brooklyn Municipal Building, as well as private residences. McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was active through 1925. In 1919 Ralph Walker (1889-1973) joined the office of McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin. Born in Waterbury, Connecticut, Walker began a two-year apprenticeship with the Providence, Rhode Island, architectural firm of Hilton & Jackson in 1907 and then studied architecture at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In Montreal in 1911 Walker studied with Francis Swales (1878-1962) who had established architectural firms in London, Montreal, and Vancouver, British Columbia, and later moved hisr practice to New York. In 1913 Walker practiced with James Ritchie in Boston and three years later won the Rotch Traveling Scholarship. (His two-year trip to Italy was postponed by the war, during which he served in France with the Army Corps of Engineers.) Walker also worked as a designer in the offices of Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue and York & Sawyer. Walker's first major project with McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was the Barclay-Vesey Building. The appearance of the Barclay-Vesey Building, unlike anything previously produced by the firm, and the general success of the design, established Walker's reputation. Near the completion of the building and following the death of McKenzie, Walker rose to partnership in the firm of Voorhees, Gmelin & Walker. Considered the firm's main designer. Walker continued to produce designs for the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, becoming a specialist in the design of that industry's buildings. Subsequent commissions whose designs were based on concepts first developed in the Barclay-Vesey Building were the New Jersey Bell Headquarters (Newark, 1928-29), the Western Union Building at 60 Hudson Street (1928-30), and telephone buildings in Syracuse and Rochester. The living Trust Company Building at 1 Wall Street (1929-31) and the Long Distance Building of the American Telephone & Telegraph Company at 32 Sixth Avenue (1930-32) followed soon after. (The Western Union Building and the Long Distance Building are designated New York City Landmarks.) Walker also designed buildings for other corporate clients including General Foods and IBM, and several pavilions for firms at the 1939 World's Fair in New York. The success of Walker's corporate commissions brought him recognition as one of the city's most prominent designers of Art Deco skyscrapers. Active in professional circles, Walker was president of the New York Chapter of the American Institute of Architects from 1933 to 1935, president of the Architectural League from 1937 to 1939, and president of the national organization of the American Institute of Architects from 1949 to 1951. In 1957 the AIA gave Walker the title of "architect of the century." In 1958 Walker resigned from active participation in the firm, then known as Voorhees, Walker, Smith, Smith & Haines, but continued in the capacity of a consultant. He later served on the Fine Arts Commission (appointed in 1959 by President Eisenhower), as president of the Municipal Art Society, and as editor of Pencil Points. His firm continued in various forms after his retirement and is today known as Haines, Lundberg & Waehler. Zoning and the Creation of a Modern Style The 1916 Building Zone Resolution had a tremendous impact on architecture in New York City; the final form and appearance of the BaTclay-Vesey Building owe much to this law. Overbuilding, increased building heights, and related problems such as a decrease in the amount of sunlight at street level, were the factors which created the need for the ordinance. The Building Zone Handbook (1916) stated that the purpose of the law was to stabilize and conserve property values, to relieve the rapidly increasing congestion in the streets and in the transit lines, to provide greater safety in buildings and in the streets, and in general to make the city more beautiful, convenient and agreeable. The restrictions created to bring about the "more beautiful city" were based on the use of building setbacks to control height and bulk. Height and setback regulations applied to seventy-five percent of the site; the remaining portion of the building site was unlimited in height, encouraging developers to assemble large building sites to make tower construction more affordable, possibly even profitable. The building shape that resulted from the zoning restrictions took the form of a ziggurat, a rhythmic succession of blocks which grew smaller and more recessed from bottom to top. The ziggurat was then topped by a tower or a pair of towers. While the creators of the 1916 zoning resolution were motivated by purely practical concerns, architects drew inspiration from the building forms which resulted from the restrictions. In 1922, architect and critic Harvey Wiley Corbett (1873-1954) and architectural renderer Hugh Fern's (1889-1962) explored the possibilities of the zoning law in a series of drawings which illustrated progressive stages of design based on the law's restrictions. The drawings showed 1) the maximum allowable bulk of the building and its form under the zoning law, 2) the addition of necessary light courts to the basic block, 3) the impact of structural limitations, and 4) economic considerations. Finally, Ferris and Corbett presented drawings of an architecturally "trimmed" design. These dramatic renderings, published in Pencil Points (1923) and in Metropolis of Tomorrow (1929), significantly influenced architects of the day. The drawings and the laws from which they came directed the architects' attention to the building as a whole rather than to a single facade of the structure, thus altering the whole design process. By visualizing buildings "from every possible angle" the architect was transformed from a designer of facades into a "sculptor in building masses." The zoning law provided architects with a sound, rational basis for the form and appearance of the skyscraper as well as a new source of creativity; historical styles did not seem to express this modern sensibility and, consequently, a new "skyscraper style" emerged in the 1920s. William A. Starrett (1877-1932), an engineer, builder and architect, acknowledged the effect of the zoning law in his book, Skyscrapers and the Men Who Build Them, a short history of the skyscraper and related topics, and said its effect was "to give to architectural design in high buildings the greatest impetus it ever has known and to produce a new and beautiful pyramidal skyline. . . ," Major characteristics of the new style, as generated by the zoning restrictions, were sculpted massing, bold setbacks, and ornament subordinated to the overall mass. Clearly reflecting the current interest of the designers, the new style was commonly called "Modernistic." Corbett praised the new "setback style" and predicted it would "go down in history along with the Gothic, the Classic, and the Renaissance." The dramatic rendering style of Ferriss and others expressed the new, vertically-oriented, modernistic aesthetic. A rendering by Chester B. Price of the completed Barclay-Vesey Building captures the drama and the energy of the style and the lime. The Modernistic style generated additional interest as architects identified it as a distinctively American style. American businesses capitalized on the status achieved by the modern skyscraper. Increasingly, large corporations, such as the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, chose the skyscraper as the home for their operations, believing a massive skyscraper in a modern style could symbolize their success and progressiveness and project a positive image for their companies. The Chicago Tribune Company capitalized on the concept of the skyscraper as corporate image for its widely-publicized and much-entered architectural competition of 1922. The competition for the "most beautiful skyscraper in the world" to house the Tribune's new headquarters had a great impact on American architecture. The first place winners, Raymond Hood (1881-1934) and John Mead Howells (1868-1959), produced a relatively conservative design with Gothic-inspired ornament. The design of the second place winner, Eliel Saarinen (1873-1950), was the highly regarded public favorite and. was promoted for its vertical emphasis, setback transitions, and abstracted ornament. These elements appeared in numerous subsequent skyscrapers, including the Barclay-Vesey Building, and critics have traditionally cited Saarinen's entry as the source for Walker's design. However, Walker's own entry for the Tribune Competition, which received an award of Honorable Mention, also exhibits strongly emphasized vertical piers and a form composed of a tower on a base with setback transitions. An additional similarity between Walker's Tribune entry and an early design of the Barclay-Vesey Building is the pyramidal roof that caps the buildings in both designs. Walker's Tribune entry was due on November 1, 1922; the. winner was announced on December 3. Plans for the Barclay-Vesey Building were filed at the Department of Buildings on June .6, 1923.18 Considering the size of the building, it is not unlikely that Walker had begun its design by the Fall of 1922, and was working on both projects at the same time. Therefore, Walker's experimentation with vertical emphasis and setback tower forms in his Tribune entry seems to have played an important role in his conception of the Barclay-Vesey Building. Design of the Barclay-Vesey Building Walker's Design Theory. Walker's version of the modern skyscraper, as seen in the Barclay-Vesey Building, was based on two simple theories; 1) economy, not extravagance, is the key to good modern design, and 2) only through machine technology can a modern style develop. Walker was one of many designers who focused on the importance of modern technology and its role in the expression of the new style. Corbett summarized the trend: The modern architect-must learn to use the machine as a basis of design if his work is to be indigenous to this period." Walker even conceived of the Barclay-Vesey Building "as a machine which had definite functions to perform for the benefit of its occupants." This pragmatic approach to the problem of design was a direct response to the functionalism inspired by the zoning law. Walker's theoretical analysis of skyscraper design found a physical form in the Barclay-Vesey Building where he attempted to utilize building materials to express modern technology. The majority of the exterior material is brick, a material which Walker preferred for its textural qualities and subtle color variations, and is embellished throughout by stone ornament. Taking advantage of machine production wherever possible, ornament for the upper stories was executed in cast stone. Ornament at the lower stories was executed in limestone, but ornamental motifs were used in repeated patterns as a further expression of machine production. In addition, these materials, given their colors and textures, were chosen to convey a monolithic appearance and to express stability and mass. Preliminary designs for the Barclay-Vesey Building focused on the size of the structure. Designs for buildings of ten, sixteen, twenty-six, thirty-six, and forty-two stories were drawn to study the relationship between cost and height. It was understood that the taller the building, the less the cost per square foot of the land; however, Walker had to take into consideration the increase of the construction costs with greater heights, as well as the market value of similar space. The thirty-two-story tower, incorporating required setbacks at the tenth and eighteenth stories, was determined to be most economical on all counts. Another set of studies focused on developing the sculptural form of the building. Early designs showed a series of stacked blocks connected by blunt transitions. This concept appealed to Walker, but early designs using the concept lacked unity. Visual harmony was ultimately achieved through the emphatic treatment of the structure's vertical piers, which Walker believed also gave the building "dignity and a style." The piers softened the horizontal lines and, continuing above the rooflines of the setbacks, visually strengthened the overall verticality of the design. The final form of the building was significantly affected by the allocation of interior spaces. Many functions to be accommodated in the headquarters building did not require natural light. For example, mechanical space was held to the central core of the structure, as was the space for the central operating system which required artificial light. As a result, it was possible to locate office space, where natural light was preferred, along the exterior wall. Consequently, the sizable light courts usually necessary in a building on such a large site were limited, resulting in the opportunity to create a massive base for the structure. The size of the base was also affected by the city's desire to widen Vesey Street. Walker introduced an arcade as a compromise solution; he incorporated the sidewalk inside the building mass, thus providing a larger base for the building. He considered this a pioneering attempt to combat traffic congestion and as the first of many such arcades to be built in the city. Incorporating storefronts into the design, the arcade was described upon its completion as "one of the most comfortable shopping fronts in New York City." Walker experimented with different stylistic expressions for the building, including Gothic and Italian Renaissance, but grew unsatisfied with his attempts to adapt such traditional styles to a building which was being shaped by purely practical concerns. Coming to terms with this incompatibility, Walker attempted "to treat the problem for its own sake, to make it as modern in conception as the telephone activity it houses." He thus began his successful studies in the Modernistic style. The Ornamental Program. For Walker, - ornamental embellishment was needed to add texture and interest in a large building, and to reduce the scale of the mass to a more human level. To engage the passerby, Walker believed the ornament should be "so complicated in its structure as not to be readily comprehended; its framework should be as hidden as the steel structure itself. It should repay repeated interest and study. . . ." As to the actual content of the ornament, he believed that overly-used traditional motifs, such as the egg and dart, had lost all significance to the modern viewer. The ornament executed on the Barclay-Vesey Building met all of Walker's standards concerning texture, complexity, and unconventionalism. To complement the overall design, the ornament was given a vertical emphasis. It did not project from the wall surface but rather was cut into the stone for better weathering of the material. The desired texture of the ornament was achieved in a combination of low relief and high relief which resulted in the softening of the rigidity of the massing and of the strict vertical lines of the structure. The sculptural ornament of the Barclay-Vesey Building was carried out by Ulysses Ricci (1888-1960) and John DeCesare. Born in New York, Ricci studied at Cooper Union, the Art Students League, and with James Earl Fraser. He designed medals for the American Numismatic Society and executed sculptural work for many buildings in New York, including the Bowery Savings Bank and a series of bronze plaques for the Times Square Schrafft's restaurant. For a time he was a member of the firm Ricci & Zari. John DeCesare was a member of the National Sculpture Society and for a time was a member of the firm Stifter & DeCesare. Walker attempted to express the modernity of the telephone industry by casting aside all traditional ornamental forms. Thus, the ornament has no basis in historic architectural styles; instead it recalls the history and traditions of the site and surrounding area. Fruits, vegetables, vines with leaves, marine life, birds, small animals, and other natural objects populate the ornamented surfaces and recall the nearby Hudson River and the market area which earlier occupied the site. The lower stories of the building are so filled with ornament that Lewis Mumford called them "a rock garden." While the ornament was not intended to symbolize the telephone specifically, the use of grapes and grapevines can be seen as a representation of communication. In addition, an occasional bell, the company symbol, is found in the ornamented surfaces. Walker called his ornament "free and flowing,"28 a description which in many ways contradicts the strict rigidity of his overall design. However, the blending of complicated ornament with simple forms, naturalistic elements with geometric shapes, and large massing with small details can be seen as one of Walker's major triumphs. The synthesis of these elements allows the Barclay-Vesey Building to be admired both from a distance and from a closer perspective. Walker's theory of ornament and its execution in the Barclay-Vesey Building was called "straightforward and appropriate and eminently right." Praise for the building's ornament was not restricted to the exterior. By repeating the vertical emphasis and ornamental patterning on the interior, Walker achieved a continuity between interior and exterior design which was unusual at the time; many contemporary buildings which appeared modern on the exterior still reverted to historical styles on the interior. Mumford saw this compatibility between interior and exterior as a perpetuation of the work of H.H. Richardson, Louis Sullivan, and Frank Lloyd Wright, and he credited Walker as the first since Sullivan to carry through a significant scheme of decoration. In fact, many aspects of Walker's ornament - the textural quality, the complicated all-over patterning, the non-historicist subjects, the combination of naturalistic and geometric elements, and the synthesis of flowing ornament with geometric building forms -- were used by Sullivan and came to be seen as hallmarks of his style. Buildings such as the Carson Pirie Scott Department Store (Chicago, 1899-1904) and the Transportation Building at the World's Columbian Exposition (Chicago, 1893) clearly illustrate Sullivan's use of these techniques. The Stylistic Context of the Barclay-Vesey Building. The bold geometric massing of the Barclay-Vesey Building, its set-back form, its emphasis on vertically, and its flattened non-historical ornamental program all combine to make the building a prototypical example of what came to be known as the American Art Deco style. The Exposition des Arts Decoratifs et Industries in Paris, which opened in 1925 after much of the design of the Barclay-Vesey Building had been completed, disseminated many of these elements which had been pioneered by Walker: abstracted naturalistic and geometric ornament in all-over patterns, linear and vertical emphasis in design, streamlined forms, and dramatic juxtaposition of colors and textures of materials. These elements were used by numerous American architects for subsequent set-back skyscraper designs. Reaching its zenith between 1928 and 1931 in New York City this new architectural style was called "Modernistic" in contemporary sources. By the time of its critical re-assessment in the 1960s and '70s the style had achieved the popular name of Art Deco. Taking into account the source of the term Art Deco and. the timing of the design, it is accurate to call the style of the Barclay-Vesey Building "Modernistic." "Modern Perpendicular," another contemporary stylistic term, calls attention to the vertical emphasis of the design. Walker clearly expressed his view of the building's modern style and its origin; It was Emerson, I think, who told us to stop building the sepulchers of our fathers and build our own house. The Barclay-Vesey building is an attempt to build a house of today. A house that is not Greek or Gothic, or Mayan; that looks little to the past, much to the present, and tries to glimpse the future. Contemporary Reactions The Barclay-Vesey Building was hailed in its day as the ultimate modern skyscraper. Critics commented on all aspects of its design and construction. The Telephone Company was pleased with the result of its new headquarters building, calling it "a symbol of service and progress" and a "graphic example of [the] movement in modern telephony. In addition, the building became a model for subsequent telephone headquarters in New York State, including the South State Street Building in Syracuse (1928). The wide acceptance of the building as a symbol of modern architecture was confirmed when its photograph was. used as a frontispiece in the English translation of Le Corbusier's Towards a New Architecture. The Architectural League of New York awarded the building its Gold Medal of Honor in 1927. Many critics were struck by the size and form of the building. Corbett described it as "a building clean limbed and sure footed, rising with sheer, cliff-like walls." Joseph Pennell, an etcher struck by New York's skyscrapers, proclaimed it "the most impressive modern building in the world."Talbot Hamlin anticipated a prominent place in architectural history for the structure: "The whole building is destined to be a monument of American progress in architecture." Still other accounts commented on the elusive qualities of the design, citing the ability of its "rugged beauty" to "hold one breathless with its force." Mumford commended its thorough design, calling it "one of the few skyscrapers that [could] bear close inspection."39 Corbett agreed: The Telephone Building is worth the careful study of every modern architect, and should receive the admiration of every layman. Let it be hoped that it stands at the dawn of a new day, both for architects that sin, and the public that is sinned against. Construction Demolition of the existing buildings on the site was begun on May 23, 1923, and was completed on July 14. Foundation work was begun on June 20, 1923. Due to the instability of the land fill on the site, an elaborate system was created for the construction of the foundations which required twenty-two caissons sunk to bedrock at the perimeter of the site. The depth of the excavations allowed for five stories below ground, one more than had been originally planned. An innovative construction method was utilized thirty-eight feet below grade as permanent steel struts were substituted for temporary wooden cross-lot bracing at a savings of approximately $30,000. This was believed to be the first use of this construction method. The steel-framed building is faced with brick backed by terra cotta. The first ten floors of the structure were allocated to central office use (although it would take several years for all the necessary equipment to be moved and installed). The upper floors were allocated to administrative use, with the twenty-ninth floor reserved for executive offices. Usable floor space in the building amounts to 850,000 square feet. The seventeenth story divides the building into two mechanically separate sections. It forms a basement for the tower section, holding all the equipment (which is typically housed in the basement of a building) needed to provide services to the tower. The seventeenth story also holds typical rooftop equipment for the base of the building. In an emergency, the tower equipment can serve the base. The final rivet was placed in the structure by telephone company president J.S. McCulloh; Thurber by this time had assumed the position of chairman of the board. The last brick and stone were placed by tradesmen elected by their coworkers. On February 19,1926, the first occupants entered the building, beginning what was referred to as "the longest, moving day in New York's history." Contemporary accounts indicate that the building was completed on June 30, 1926, but the Department of Buildings did not sign off on the work until April 8, 1927. Description The Barclay-Vesey Building is a thirty-two-story structure with an additional five stories below ground. There are mezzanines above the first, seventeenth, and thirty-first stories. A New York Telephone Company publication equated the building's height with that of Egypt's tallest pyramid. The building occupies a parallelogram-shaped site approximately 210 by 250 feet wide, covering 52,000 square feet, with nineteen bays on the east and west facades of the base and twenty-three bays on the north and south facades. Above the granite base, the structure is faced in gray-, gold- and buff-colored brick in common bond which has been repointed in several areas on each facade. Detailing is executed in limestone at the lower stories and in cast stone above. The building takes the form of a tower rising from the center of a massive base. The orientation of the tower reflects the orthogonal grid of Manhattan and appears to have been rotated atop the parallelogram-shaped base of the structure. The building rises straight from the ground to the tenth story, where the first setback occurs along the length of the north and south facades. A setback also occurs at the center of the east and west facades at this point, creating light courts for the eleventh through the seventeenth stories in front of the tower. At the seventeenth story another major setback occurs at all facades. From this point the tower, measuring 108 feet by 116 feet, rises to a total height of thirty-two stories. Minor setbacks "occur at other points between the thirteenth and nineteenth stories, highlighted by detailing in stone and brick. Much of the decorative ornament of the building consists of intertwining vines sprouting leaves, flowers, and grapes. Scattered throughout the interlaces are cherubs, human figures, and a variety of creatures including fish, snails, mice, lizards, frogs, birds, squirrels, and snakes. While some specific decorative patterns may be repeated, numerous variations on the intertwining vine theme are found throughout the building's ornamental program. Rather than describe in detail all variations represented, particular architectural elements will be cited as using the intertwining vine pattern and it will be understood that the pattern may contain any combination of the figures mentioned above. Especially significant or unusual features will be addressed. The east and west (main) facades are similar in design and contain identical double-height entrances which are recessed in the center of the facades, the width of each entry spanning three window bays. Two revolving multipane doors and a pair of doors are framed in bronze. The framing members are filled with strings of creatures or with a repeating chevron pattern, and pinnacles with cherubs are capped by bells. (Another pair of doors is found to the right of each bronze-framed entryway.) Above each door arrangement at the east and west facades is an expansive window covered by an elaborate bronze grille of intertwining vines and grapes, arranged vertically, which is also visible at the interior through the colored window glass. (A metal replica of the Bell Telephone Company logo, a bell within a circle, has been attached to the window grille.) A limestone frieze above the window displays an intertwining vine pattern featuring human figures and a central bird. A light fixture with an inverted setback form hangs between two ceiling panels filled with ornament. The two-story entrance surround is faced in limestone; chamfered surfaces are elaborately ornamented. In the stone lintel above the opening are found figures of an American Indian and a Mongolian which are meant to symbolize the lands of the west and the east, the directions the entrances face. Flanking the center panel, which displays a bell, are the patterned, projecting bases of the vertical piers which articulate the overall height of the facade; their patterning of roots and stems further reinforce the vertical emphasis. Two single window bays flank the West Street entry. These are flanked at each side by a larger opening spanning three bays, then another single bay. The two end bays of this facade are each articulated by wide arches, the southern one opening onto the Vesey Street arcade. The storefronts of the building are based on a tripartite design: a solid panel at the base, a glazed area at the middle, usually divided into three vertical sections, and a transom with additional vertical subdivisions topped by a decorative cornice consisting of dolphins, seahorses, and birds. Winged figures act as pinnacles at the top of the window frame. A sketch, drawn by Walker and published in a history of the Rotch Traveling Scholarship, illustrates a centralized sculpture with similar winged elements.44 (Fig. 12) Some storefronts are recessed, some are punctuated by doors (some with transoms and steps). Most glass within the ground-story bays is now painted. Most of the spandrels between the first- and second-story windows are faced with ornamented stone. The stone sills and surrounds of the second-story windows also have elaborate ornamentation featuring a stylized plant form. Stone sills of third story windows also have carved ornament, and, excluding the end bays, have a geometric border below. Windows above the first story have steel, double-hung, three-over-three sash. A minimal number of windows have been replaced by aluminum windows at each facade. Also, several louvered vents fill window openings, either fully or partially, at each facade. Window sills above the third story have smaller proportions than those below and have no elaboration. The base of the building receives its vertical emphasis from piers which rise from the first and second stories to a point above the setbacks where they are capped with cast stone; the central piers display carved snails. Windows at this level are emphasized with elaborate stone ornament at the head and sill. The Vesey Street facade at the south side of the building incorporates a ground-story arcade whose vaulting system utilizes Guastavino arches. The twelve-bay arcade is sixteen feet wide, eighteen feet high, and 252 feet in length. The tile arches rest on brick piers with granite bases. The openings are faced in stone carved with an intertwining vine pattern, cherubs, roosters, and squirrels, and a chevron pattern borders the soffit. (Fig. 15) The arcade incorporates storefronts, similar to those of the West Street facade but with recessed transoms, in each bay opening. The storefront openings are faced with limestone. Along Vesey Street, the stone spandrels between the first-story arches and the second-storywindows are trimmed with a geometric pattern. Pairs of second-story windows have continuous stone sills with lions carved below the windows and surrounds which are similar to those of the West Street facade. Above the second story, the treatment of the facade follows that of the east and west facades. The Barclay Street facade on the north is similar to the Vesey Street facade. Ground-story openings of the north facade are similar to those inside the Vesey Street arcade, however, a central entrance spanning four bays provides for freight service. At all facades, the amount of cast stone ornament increases above the twenty-eighth story. (Fig. 16) Intricately carved panels fill the spandrels and cap the piers which, above the twenty-ninth story, form buttress-like elements. Corner piers at the twenty-ninth story display elephant heads with ears transformed into geometric shapes and trunks extending down the corner of the tower in a geometric pattern. The arched, multipane, double-height windows encompassing the thirtieth, thirty-first, and thirty-first-mezzanine stories are topped by elaborate cast stone ornament composed of geometric forms terminating in a pineapple or a rabbit. Window surrounds of the top story are simple, as are the piers extending above the roofline. Metal fencing now encloses rooftop equipment, with additional equipment located in front of some thirty-second-story windows. Subsequent History Apart from a few minor changes, the Barclay-Vesey Building remains substantially intact. One of the significant qualities of the building is its dual function as office space and a communications center. As technology in the field of communications has progressed, equipment has been added to the roof and regularly upgraded, while respecting the building's original design. This has enabled the structure to retain its significance as an office and operations center for the New York Telephone Company. It is anticipated that rooftop equipment will continue to be ugraded on a regular basis. - From the 1991 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Barclay-Vesey Building http://flic.kr/p/9cMDH3 Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS Summary The Barclay-Vesey Building of the New York Telephone Company (also known as the New York Telephone Building) was the first major work of prominent New York architect Ralph Walker. Constructed in 1923-27 and built at a time of great progress and transition in American design, it was a product of the atmosphere of architectural creativity and originality which flourished in New York in the 1920s. A pivotal structure in the history of skyscraper architecture, it is a prototypical example of what came to be regarded as the American Art Deco style. , Intended to be completely modern in. every feature and detail, from its form, generated by its parallelogram-shaped site and contemporary zoning restrictions, to its construction techniques, materials, unconventional ornament, and style, Walker's design for "the largest telephone company building in the world"1 was an emphatic statement of the most recent architectural trends. The building, designed to be "as modern as the telephone activity it houses . . . [was] a simple, straightforward solution" to the requirements of the building program.2 The progressive design of the building was envisioned by company president, Howard F. Thurber, and resulted in a grand statement of his company's size, strength, and success. The overall effect of Walker's Barclay-Vesey Building is one of strong form and bold silhouette, with its blunt setback transitions articulated by vertical buttress-like piers and massive form relieved by intricate, animated ornament. Substantially intact, the building continues to be a dramatic presence on Manhattan's skyline. Site History The block bounded by Barclay and Vesey Streets at the north and south and Washington and West-Streets at the east and west was originally located, beyond the .present shoreline, west side' of Manhattan was developed beginning early in the nineteenth century. As part of the improvement, the banks of the Hudson were filled in, extended, and raised, and piers were constructed at the western end of every street between Vesey and King Streets by the late 1830s.3 Crucial to the city's mercantile expansion, the improvements helped New York City to achieve recognition as the country's major port and trading center by the 1830s and 1840s. This area and the section of the city just to the north, now known as Tribeca, were transformed into a center for dairy goods, produce, and less perishable goods including tobacco, imported woods, coffee, and spices. Markets for these items were developed in the area close to the docks to facilitate the handling of the commodities. First established in 1812 and repeatedly expanded, the Washington Market, located on the block bounded by West, Washington, Vesey, and Fulton Streets, just south of the Barclay-Vesey Building, grew to be Manhattan's major wholesale and retail produce outlet.4 Many other buildings were constructed in the area to accommodate the food industry, including approximately thirty-five three-, four-, and five-story brick buildings on the site chosen for the telephone company's headquarters. The activities of the merchants, so important to the site and to the surrounding area, would later be recalled in the ornamental program of the Barclay-Vesey Building. The site was chosen over more popular office locations to the east on Broadway because it was much less expensive. The West Street frontage was considered an asset because it was assumed that the structures along the docks would never rise above two or three stories and the future building's western exposure would, therefore, always remain unobstructed. The New York Telephone Company The telephone business developed rapidly following the early successes of Alexander Graham Bell's inventions in the. L^70^. By the turn of the century the AmeVican' Telephone & Telegraph Company had become the central institution of Bell Telephone Company operations, with smaller companies, including the New York Telephone Company, conducting its regional services. After a sluggish period of business during World War I the New York Telephone Company faced a new period of rapid expansion. In an effort to organize and control the growth, the company decided to establish divisional headquarters throughout the state. A reassessment of the company's organization in New York City concluded that its personnel, offices, and equipment were inefficiently scattered city-wide. Howard Ford Thurber (1869-1928), president of the New York Telephone Company from 1919 to 1924, determined that a new central headquarters building would alleviate the problems associated with the company's lack of unity. Thurber's "vision," as it was called in his New York Times obituary, was to create a building large enough to "satisfy the [company's] present demands and to reasonably anticipate future requirements."5 The new headquarters building would consolidate an equipment and administrative center, incorporating six central offices. As explained in a Telephone Company pamphlet, central offices are the nerve centers of the [telephone] system. Here the wires from the local telephones and from other central offices converge and are carried to distributing frames, where they fan out to the proper points of contact on the switchboards. Thurber's building program required a large utilitarian facility with specialized mechanical features and space for a centralized work force of 6,000 employees serving 120,000 telephones. Undaunted by the numerous details of the project, Thurber envisioned not just the practical concerns of the building but its potential symbolic quality as well. A large structure, progressively designed, could establish a positive corporate image and symbolize the size and strength of the organization — an industry whose woTk was clearly at the forefront of modern technology. With Thurber's plan for a new headquarters building, the New York Telephone Company was established at the vanguard of modern trends in business and architecture. Ralph Walker and McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin For the design of its headquarters building, the New York Telephone Company chose MeKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin, an architectural firm whose long history with the telephone company began in 1885 with the firm's founding partner Cyrus L.W. Eidlitz (1853-1921). Eidlitz was commissioned by the Metropolitan Telephone and Telegraph Company, the predecessor of the New York Telephone Company, in that year to design its first headquarters building at 18 Cortlandt Street in Manhattan. Andrew McKenzie (1861-1926), born in Dunkirk, New York, and educated in Buffalo, came to New York City in 1884 and worked for the firm of Babb, Cook & Willard. He became associated with Cyrus L.W. Eidlitz in 1902 and the partnership of Eidlitz & McKenzie was active from 1905 to 1909. That firm's major work was the New York Times Building at Times Square.8 Stephen Voorhees (1879-1965) was born near Rocky Hill, New Jersey, and was educated as a civil engineer at Princeton University, graduating in 1900. In 1902 he began to practice with Eidlitz & McKenzie as an engineer and superintendent of construction; one of his first jobs was the supervision of the foundation work for the New York Times Building. German-born Paul Gmelin (1859-1937) studied in Stuttgart. He came to the United States as a draftsman, was briefly associated with McKim, Mead & White, and then joined the firm of Babb, Cook & Willard, where he met Andrew McKenzie. In 1910 the firm of McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was organized and continued Eidlitz's successful relationship with the telephone company, gaining numerous commissions for buildings throughout New York state. By 1912 the firm had completed approximately thirty new telephone buildings in New York City alone (not . counting alterations and expansions). The firm also designed the Brooklyn Edison Company Building and the Brooklyn Municipal Building, as well as private residences. McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was active through 1925. In 1919 Ralph Walker (1889-1973) joined the office of McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin. Born in Waterbury, Connecticut, Walker began a two-year apprenticeship with the Providence, Rhode Island, architectural firm of Hilton & Jackson in 1907 and then studied architecture at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In Montreal in 1911 Walker studied with Francis Swales (1878-1962) who had established architectural firms in London, Montreal, and Vancouver, British Columbia, and later moved hisr practice to New York. In 1913 Walker practiced with James Ritchie in Boston and three years later won the Rotch Traveling Scholarship. (His two-year trip to Italy was postponed by the war, during which he served in France with the Army Corps of Engineers.) Walker also worked as a designer in the offices of Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue and York & Sawyer. Walker's first major project with McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was the Barclay-Vesey Building. The appearance of the Barclay-Vesey Building, unlike anything previously produced by the firm, and the general success of the design, established Walker's reputation. Near the completion of the building and following the death of McKenzie, Walker rose to partnership in the firm of Voorhees, Gmelin & Walker. Considered the firm's main designer. Walker continued to produce designs for the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, becoming a specialist in the design of that industry's buildings. Subsequent commissions whose designs were based on concepts first developed in the Barclay-Vesey Building were the New Jersey Bell Headquarters (Newark, 1928-29), the Western Union Building at 60 Hudson Street (1928-30), and telephone buildings in Syracuse and Rochester. The living Trust Company Building at 1 Wall Street (1929-31) and the Long Distance Building of the American Telephone & Telegraph Company at 32 Sixth Avenue (1930-32) followed soon after. (The Western Union Building and the Long Distance Building are designated New York City Landmarks.) Walker also designed buildings for other corporate clients including General Foods and IBM, and several pavilions for firms at the 1939 World's Fair in New York. The success of Walker's corporate commissions brought him recognition as one of the city's most prominent designers of Art Deco skyscrapers. Active in professional circles, Walker was president of the New York Chapter of the American Institute of Architects from 1933 to 1935, president of the Architectural League from 1937 to 1939, and president of the national organization of the American Institute of Architects from 1949 to 1951. In 1957 the AIA gave Walker the title of "architect of the century." In 1958 Walker resigned from active participation in the firm, then known as Voorhees, Walker, Smith, Smith & Haines, but continued in the capacity of a consultant. He later served on the Fine Arts Commission (appointed in 1959 by President Eisenhower), as president of the Municipal Art Society, and as editor of Pencil Points. His firm continued in various forms after his retirement and is today known as Haines, Lundberg & Waehler. Zoning and the Creation of a Modern Style The 1916 Building Zone Resolution had a tremendous impact on architecture in New York City; the final form and appearance of the BaTclay-Vesey Building owe much to this law. Overbuilding, increased building heights, and related problems such as a decrease in the amount of sunlight at street level, were the factors which created the need for the ordinance. The Building Zone Handbook (1916) stated that the purpose of the law was to stabilize and conserve property values, to relieve the rapidly increasing congestion in the streets and in the transit lines, to provide greater safety in buildings and in the streets, and in general to make the city more beautiful, convenient and agreeable. The restrictions created to bring about the "more beautiful city" were based on the use of building setbacks to control height and bulk. Height and setback regulations applied to seventy-five percent of the site; the remaining portion of the building site was unlimited in height, encouraging developers to assemble large building sites to make tower construction more affordable, possibly even profitable. The building shape that resulted from the zoning restrictions took the form of a ziggurat, a rhythmic succession of blocks which grew smaller and more recessed from bottom to top. The ziggurat was then topped by a tower or a pair of towers. While the creators of the 1916 zoning resolution were motivated by purely practical concerns, architects drew inspiration from the building forms which resulted from the restrictions. In 1922, architect and critic Harvey Wiley Corbett (1873-1954) and architectural renderer Hugh Fern's (1889-1962) explored the possibilities of the zoning law in a series of drawings which illustrated progressive stages of design based on the law's restrictions. The drawings showed 1) the maximum allowable bulk of the building and its form under the zoning law, 2) the addition of necessary light courts to the basic block, 3) the impact of structural limitations, and 4) economic considerations. Finally, Ferris and Corbett presented drawings of an architecturally "trimmed" design. These dramatic renderings, published in Pencil Points (1923) and in Metropolis of Tomorrow (1929), significantly influenced architects of the day. The drawings and the laws from which they came directed the architects' attention to the building as a whole rather than to a single facade of the structure, thus altering the whole design process. By visualizing buildings "from every possible angle" the architect was transformed from a designer of facades into a "sculptor in building masses." The zoning law provided architects with a sound, rational basis for the form and appearance of the skyscraper as well as a new source of creativity; historical styles did not seem to express this modern sensibility and, consequently, a new "skyscraper style" emerged in the 1920s. William A. Starrett (1877-1932), an engineer, builder and architect, acknowledged the effect of the zoning law in his book, Skyscrapers and the Men Who Build Them, a short history of the skyscraper and related topics, and said its effect was "to give to architectural design in high buildings the greatest impetus it ever has known and to produce a new and beautiful pyramidal skyline. . . ," Major characteristics of the new style, as generated by the zoning restrictions, were sculpted massing, bold setbacks, and ornament subordinated to the overall mass. Clearly reflecting the current interest of the designers, the new style was commonly called "Modernistic." Corbett praised the new "setback style" and predicted it would "go down in history along with the Gothic, the Classic, and the Renaissance." The dramatic rendering style of Ferriss and others expressed the new, vertically-oriented, modernistic aesthetic. A rendering by Chester B. Price of the completed Barclay-Vesey Building captures the drama and the energy of the style and the lime. The Modernistic style generated additional interest as architects identified it as a distinctively American style. American businesses capitalized on the status achieved by the modern skyscraper. Increasingly, large corporations, such as the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, chose the skyscraper as the home for their operations, believing a massive skyscraper in a modern style could symbolize their success and progressiveness and project a positive image for their companies. The Chicago Tribune Company capitalized on the concept of the skyscraper as corporate image for its widely-publicized and much-entered architectural competition of 1922. The competition for the "most beautiful skyscraper in the world" to house the Tribune's new headquarters had a great impact on American architecture. The first place winners, Raymond Hood (1881-1934) and John Mead Howells (1868-1959), produced a relatively conservative design with Gothic-inspired ornament. The design of the second place winner, Eliel Saarinen (1873-1950), was the highly regarded public favorite and. was promoted for its vertical emphasis, setback transitions, and abstracted ornament. These elements appeared in numerous subsequent skyscrapers, including the Barclay-Vesey Building, and critics have traditionally cited Saarinen's entry as the source for Walker's design. However, Walker's own entry for the Tribune Competition, which received an award of Honorable Mention, also exhibits strongly emphasized vertical piers and a form composed of a tower on a base with setback transitions. An additional similarity between Walker's Tribune entry and an early design of the Barclay-Vesey Building is the pyramidal roof that caps the buildings in both designs. Walker's Tribune entry was due on November 1, 1922; the. winner was announced on December 3. Plans for the Barclay-Vesey Building were filed at the Department of Buildings on June .6, 1923.18 Considering the size of the building, it is not unlikely that Walker had begun its design by the Fall of 1922, and was working on both projects at the same time. Therefore, Walker's experimentation with vertical emphasis and setback tower forms in his Tribune entry seems to have played an important role in his conception of the Barclay-Vesey Building. Design of the Barclay-Vesey Building Walker's Design Theory. Walker's version of the modern skyscraper, as seen in the Barclay-Vesey Building, was based on two simple theories; 1) economy, not extravagance, is the key to good modern design, and 2) only through machine technology can a modern style develop. Walker was one of many designers who focused on the importance of modern technology and its role in the expression of the new style. Corbett summarized the trend: The modern architect-must learn to use the machine as a basis of design if his work is to be indigenous to this period." Walker even conceived of the Barclay-Vesey Building "as a machine which had definite functions to perform for the benefit of its occupants." This pragmatic approach to the problem of design was a direct response to the functionalism inspired by the zoning law. Walker's theoretical analysis of skyscraper design found a physical form in the Barclay-Vesey Building where he attempted to utilize building materials to express modern technology. The majority of the exterior material is brick, a material which Walker preferred for its textural qualities and subtle color variations, and is embellished throughout by stone ornament. Taking advantage of machine production wherever possible, ornament for the upper stories was executed in cast stone. Ornament at the lower stories was executed in limestone, but ornamental motifs were used in repeated patterns as a further expression of machine production. In addition, these materials, given their colors and textures, were chosen to convey a monolithic appearance and to express stability and mass. Preliminary designs for the Barclay-Vesey Building focused on the size of the structure. Designs for buildings of ten, sixteen, twenty-six, thirty-six, and forty-two stories were drawn to study the relationship between cost and height. It was understood that the taller the building, the less the cost per square foot of the land; however, Walker had to take into consideration the increase of the construction costs with greater heights, as well as the market value of similar space. The thirty-two-story tower, incorporating required setbacks at the tenth and eighteenth stories, was determined to be most economical on all counts. Another set of studies focused on developing the sculptural form of the building. Early designs showed a series of stacked blocks connected by blunt transitions. This concept appealed to Walker, but early designs using the concept lacked unity. Visual harmony was ultimately achieved through the emphatic treatment of the structure's vertical piers, which Walker believed also gave the building "dignity and a style." The piers softened the horizontal lines and, continuing above the rooflines of the setbacks, visually strengthened the overall verticality of the design. The final form of the building was significantly affected by the allocation of interior spaces. Many functions to be accommodated in the headquarters building did not require natural light. For example, mechanical space was held to the central core of the structure, as was the space for the central operating system which required artificial light. As a result, it was possible to locate office space, where natural light was preferred, along the exterior wall. Consequently, the sizable light courts usually necessary in a building on such a large site were limited, resulting in the opportunity to create a massive base for the structure. The size of the base was also affected by the city's desire to widen Vesey Street. Walker introduced an arcade as a compromise solution; he incorporated the sidewalk inside the building mass, thus providing a larger base for the building. He considered this a pioneering attempt to combat traffic congestion and as the first of many such arcades to be built in the city. Incorporating storefronts into the design, the arcade was described upon its completion as "one of the most comfortable shopping fronts in New York City." Walker experimented with different stylistic expressions for the building, including Gothic and Italian Renaissance, but grew unsatisfied with his attempts to adapt such traditional styles to a building which was being shaped by purely practical concerns. Coming to terms with this incompatibility, Walker attempted "to treat the problem for its own sake, to make it as modern in conception as the telephone activity it houses." He thus began his successful studies in the Modernistic style. The Ornamental Program. For Walker, - ornamental embellishment was needed to add texture and interest in a large building, and to reduce the scale of the mass to a more human level. To engage the passerby, Walker believed the ornament should be "so complicated in its structure as not to be readily comprehended; its framework should be as hidden as the steel structure itself. It should repay repeated interest and study. . . ." As to the actual content of the ornament, he believed that overly-used traditional motifs, such as the egg and dart, had lost all significance to the modern viewer. The ornament executed on the Barclay-Vesey Building met all of Walker's standards concerning texture, complexity, and unconventionalism. To complement the overall design, the ornament was given a vertical emphasis. It did not project from the wall surface but rather was cut into the stone for better weathering of the material. The desired texture of the ornament was achieved in a combination of low relief and high relief which resulted in the softening of the rigidity of the massing and of the strict vertical lines of the structure. The sculptural ornament of the Barclay-Vesey Building was carried out by Ulysses Ricci (1888-1960) and John DeCesare. Born in New York, Ricci studied at Cooper Union, the Art Students League, and with James Earl Fraser. He designed medals for the American Numismatic Society and executed sculptural work for many buildings in New York, including the Bowery Savings Bank and a series of bronze plaques for the Times Square Schrafft's restaurant. For a time he was a member of the firm Ricci & Zari. John DeCesare was a member of the National Sculpture Society and for a time was a member of the firm Stifter & DeCesare. Walker attempted to express the modernity of the telephone industry by casting aside all traditional ornamental forms. Thus, the ornament has no basis in historic architectural styles; instead it recalls the history and traditions of the site and surrounding area. Fruits, vegetables, vines with leaves, marine life, birds, small animals, and other natural objects populate the ornamented surfaces and recall the nearby Hudson River and the market area which earlier occupied the site. The lower stories of the building are so filled with ornament that Lewis Mumford called them "a rock garden." While the ornament was not intended to symbolize the telephone specifically, the use of grapes and grapevines can be seen as a representation of communication. In addition, an occasional bell, the company symbol, is found in the ornamented surfaces. Walker called his ornament "free and flowing,"28 a description which in many ways contradicts the strict rigidity of his overall design. However, the blending of complicated ornament with simple forms, naturalistic elements with geometric shapes, and large massing with small details can be seen as one of Walker's major triumphs. The synthesis of these elements allows the Barclay-Vesey Building to be admired both from a distance and from a closer perspective. Walker's theory of ornament and its execution in the Barclay-Vesey Building was called "straightforward and appropriate and eminently right." Praise for the building's ornament was not restricted to the exterior. By repeating the vertical emphasis and ornamental patterning on the interior, Walker achieved a continuity between interior and exterior design which was unusual at the time; many contemporary buildings which appeared modern on the exterior still reverted to historical styles on the interior. Mumford saw this compatibility between interior and exterior as a perpetuation of the work of H.H. Richardson, Louis Sullivan, and Frank Lloyd Wright, and he credited Walker as the first since Sullivan to carry through a significant scheme of decoration. In fact, many aspects of Walker's ornament - the textural quality, the complicated all-over patterning, the non-historicist subjects, the combination of naturalistic and geometric elements, and the synthesis of flowing ornament with geometric building forms -- were used by Sullivan and came to be seen as hallmarks of his style. Buildings such as the Carson Pirie Scott Department Store (Chicago, 1899-1904) and the Transportation Building at the World's Columbian Exposition (Chicago, 1893) clearly illustrate Sullivan's use of these techniques. The Stylistic Context of the Barclay-Vesey Building. The bold geometric massing of the Barclay-Vesey Building, its set-back form, its emphasis on vertically, and its flattened non-historical ornamental program all combine to make the building a prototypical example of what came to be known as the American Art Deco style. The Exposition des Arts Decoratifs et Industries in Paris, which opened in 1925 after much of the design of the Barclay-Vesey Building had been completed, disseminated many of these elements which had been pioneered by Walker: abstracted naturalistic and geometric ornament in all-over patterns, linear and vertical emphasis in design, streamlined forms, and dramatic juxtaposition of colors and textures of materials. These elements were used by numerous American architects for subsequent set-back skyscraper designs. Reaching its zenith between 1928 and 1931 in New York City this new architectural style was called "Modernistic" in contemporary sources. By the time of its critical re-assessment in the 1960s and '70s the style had achieved the popular name of Art Deco. Taking into account the source of the term Art Deco and. the timing of the design, it is accurate to call the style of the Barclay-Vesey Building "Modernistic." "Modern Perpendicular," another contemporary stylistic term, calls attention to the vertical emphasis of the design. Walker clearly expressed his view of the building's modern style and its origin; It was Emerson, I think, who told us to stop building the sepulchers of our fathers and build our own house. The Barclay-Vesey building is an attempt to build a house of today. A house that is not Greek or Gothic, or Mayan; that looks little to the past, much to the present, and tries to glimpse the future. Contemporary Reactions The Barclay-Vesey Building was hailed in its day as the ultimate modern skyscraper. Critics commented on all aspects of its design and construction. The Telephone Company was pleased with the result of its new headquarters building, calling it "a symbol of service and progress" and a "graphic example of [the] movement in modern telephony. In addition, the building became a model for subsequent telephone headquarters in New York State, including the South State Street Building in Syracuse (1928). The wide acceptance of the building as a symbol of modern architecture was confirmed when its photograph was. used as a frontispiece in the English translation of Le Corbusier's Towards a New Architecture. The Architectural League of New York awarded the building its Gold Medal of Honor in 1927. Many critics were struck by the size and form of the building. Corbett described it as "a building clean limbed and sure footed, rising with sheer, cliff-like walls." Joseph Pennell, an etcher struck by New York's skyscrapers, proclaimed it "the most impressive modern building in the world."Talbot Hamlin anticipated a prominent place in architectural history for the structure: "The whole building is destined to be a monument of American progress in architecture." Still other accounts commented on the elusive qualities of the design, citing the ability of its "rugged beauty" to "hold one breathless with its force." Mumford commended its thorough design, calling it "one of the few skyscrapers that [could] bear close inspection."39 Corbett agreed: The Telephone Building is worth the careful study of every modern architect, and should receive the admiration of every layman. Let it be hoped that it stands at the dawn of a new day, both for architects that sin, and the public that is sinned against. Construction Demolition of the existing buildings on the site was begun on May 23, 1923, and was completed on July 14. Foundation work was begun on June 20, 1923. Due to the instability of the land fill on the site, an elaborate system was created for the construction of the foundations which required twenty-two caissons sunk to bedrock at the perimeter of the site. The depth of the excavations allowed for five stories below ground, one more than had been originally planned. An innovative construction method was utilized thirty-eight feet below grade as permanent steel struts were substituted for temporary wooden cross-lot bracing at a savings of approximately $30,000. This was believed to be the first use of this construction method. The steel-framed building is faced with brick backed by terra cotta. The first ten floors of the structure were allocated to central office use (although it would take several years for all the necessary equipment to be moved and installed). The upper floors were allocated to administrative use, with the twenty-ninth floor reserved for executive offices. Usable floor space in the building amounts to 850,000 square feet. The seventeenth story divides the building into two mechanically separate sections. It forms a basement for the tower section, holding all the equipment (which is typically housed in the basement of a building) needed to provide services to the tower. The seventeenth story also holds typical rooftop equipment for the base of the building. In an emergency, the tower equipment can serve the base. The final rivet was placed in the structure by telephone company president J.S. McCulloh; Thurber by this time had assumed the position of chairman of the board. The last brick and stone were placed by tradesmen elected by their coworkers. On February 19,1926, the first occupants entered the building, beginning what was referred to as "the longest, moving day in New York's history." Contemporary accounts indicate that the building was completed on June 30, 1926, but the Department of Buildings did not sign off on the work until April 8, 1927. Description The Barclay-Vesey Building is a thirty-two-story structure with an additional five stories below ground. There are mezzanines above the first, seventeenth, and thirty-first stories. A New York Telephone Company publication equated the building's height with that of Egypt's tallest pyramid. The building occupies a parallelogram-shaped site approximately 210 by 250 feet wide, covering 52,000 square feet, with nineteen bays on the east and west facades of the base and twenty-three bays on the north and south facades. Above the granite base, the structure is faced in gray-, gold- and buff-colored brick in common bond which has been repointed in several areas on each facade. Detailing is executed in limestone at the lower stories and in cast stone above. The building takes the form of a tower rising from the center of a massive base. The orientation of the tower reflects the orthogonal grid of Manhattan and appears to have been rotated atop the parallelogram-shaped base of the structure. The building rises straight from the ground to the tenth story, where the first setback occurs along the length of the north and south facades. A setback also occurs at the center of the east and west facades at this point, creating light courts for the eleventh through the seventeenth stories in front of the tower. At the seventeenth story another major setback occurs at all facades. From this point the tower, measuring 108 feet by 116 feet, rises to a total height of thirty-two stories. Minor setbacks "occur at other points between the thirteenth and nineteenth stories, highlighted by detailing in stone and brick. Much of the decorative ornament of the building consists of intertwining vines sprouting leaves, flowers, and grapes. Scattered throughout the interlaces are cherubs, human figures, and a variety of creatures including fish, snails, mice, lizards, frogs, birds, squirrels, and snakes. While some specific decorative patterns may be repeated, numerous variations on the intertwining vine theme are found throughout the building's ornamental program. Rather than describe in detail all variations represented, particular architectural elements will be cited as using the intertwining vine pattern and it will be understood that the pattern may contain any combination of the figures mentioned above. Especially significant or unusual features will be addressed. The east and west (main) facades are similar in design and contain identical double-height entrances which are recessed in the center of the facades, the width of each entry spanning three window bays. Two revolving multipane doors and a pair of doors are framed in bronze. The framing members are filled with strings of creatures or with a repeating chevron pattern, and pinnacles with cherubs are capped by bells. (Another pair of doors is found to the right of each bronze-framed entryway.) Above each door arrangement at the east and west facades is an expansive window covered by an elaborate bronze grille of intertwining vines and grapes, arranged vertically, which is also visible at the interior through the colored window glass. (A metal replica of the Bell Telephone Company logo, a bell within a circle, has been attached to the window grille.) A limestone frieze above the window displays an intertwining vine pattern featuring human figures and a central bird. A light fixture with an inverted setback form hangs between two ceiling panels filled with ornament. The two-story entrance surround is faced in limestone; chamfered surfaces are elaborately ornamented. In the stone lintel above the opening are found figures of an American Indian and a Mongolian which are meant to symbolize the lands of the west and the east, the directions the entrances face. Flanking the center panel, which displays a bell, are the patterned, projecting bases of the vertical piers which articulate the overall height of the facade; their patterning of roots and stems further reinforce the vertical emphasis. Two single window bays flank the West Street entry. These are flanked at each side by a larger opening spanning three bays, then another single bay. The two end bays of this facade are each articulated by wide arches, the southern one opening onto the Vesey Street arcade. The storefronts of the building are based on a tripartite design: a solid panel at the base, a glazed area at the middle, usually divided into three vertical sections, and a transom with additional vertical subdivisions topped by a decorative cornice consisting of dolphins, seahorses, and birds. Winged figures act as pinnacles at the top of the window frame. A sketch, drawn by Walker and published in a history of the Rotch Traveling Scholarship, illustrates a centralized sculpture with similar winged elements.44 (Fig. 12) Some storefronts are recessed, some are punctuated by doors (some with transoms and steps). Most glass within the ground-story bays is now painted. Most of the spandrels between the first- and second-story windows are faced with ornamented stone. The stone sills and surrounds of the second-story windows also have elaborate ornamentation featuring a stylized plant form. Stone sills of third story windows also have carved ornament, and, excluding the end bays, have a geometric border below. Windows above the first story have steel, double-hung, three-over-three sash. A minimal number of windows have been replaced by aluminum windows at each facade. Also, several louvered vents fill window openings, either fully or partially, at each facade. Window sills above the third story have smaller proportions than those below and have no elaboration. The base of the building receives its vertical emphasis from piers which rise from the first and second stories to a point above the setbacks where they are capped with cast stone; the central piers display carved snails. Windows at this level are emphasized with elaborate stone ornament at the head and sill. The Vesey Street facade at the south side of the building incorporates a ground-story arcade whose vaulting system utilizes Guastavino arches. The twelve-bay arcade is sixteen feet wide, eighteen feet high, and 252 feet in length. The tile arches rest on brick piers with granite bases. The openings are faced in stone carved with an intertwining vine pattern, cherubs, roosters, and squirrels, and a chevron pattern borders the soffit. (Fig. 15) The arcade incorporates storefronts, similar to those of the West Street facade but with recessed transoms, in each bay opening. The storefront openings are faced with limestone. Along Vesey Street, the stone spandrels between the first-story arches and the second-storywindows are trimmed with a geometric pattern. Pairs of second-story windows have continuous stone sills with lions carved below the windows and surrounds which are similar to those of the West Street facade. Above the second story, the treatment of the facade follows that of the east and west facades. The Barclay Street facade on the north is similar to the Vesey Street facade. Ground-story openings of the north facade are similar to those inside the Vesey Street arcade, however, a central entrance spanning four bays provides for freight service. At all facades, the amount of cast stone ornament increases above the twenty-eighth story. (Fig. 16) Intricately carved panels fill the spandrels and cap the piers which, above the twenty-ninth story, form buttress-like elements. Corner piers at the twenty-ninth story display elephant heads with ears transformed into geometric shapes and trunks extending down the corner of the tower in a geometric pattern. The arched, multipane, double-height windows encompassing the thirtieth, thirty-first, and thirty-first-mezzanine stories are topped by elaborate cast stone ornament composed of geometric forms terminating in a pineapple or a rabbit. Window surrounds of the top story are simple, as are the piers extending above the roofline. Metal fencing now encloses rooftop equipment, with additional equipment located in front of some thirty-second-story windows. Subsequent History Apart from a few minor changes, the Barclay-Vesey Building remains substantially intact. One of the significant qualities of the building is its dual function as office space and a communications center. As technology in the field of communications has progressed, equipment has been added to the roof and regularly upgraded, while respecting the building's original design. This has enabled the structure to retain its significance as an office and operations center for the New York Telephone Company. It is anticipated that rooftop equipment will continue to be ugraded on a regular basis. - From the 1991 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Barclay-Vesey Building http://flic.kr/p/9cJxmB Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS Summary The Barclay-Vesey Building of the New York Telephone Company (also known as the New York Telephone Building) was the first major work of prominent New York architect Ralph Walker. Constructed in 1923-27 and built at a time of great progress and transition in American design, it was a product of the atmosphere of architectural creativity and originality which flourished in New York in the 1920s. A pivotal structure in the history of skyscraper architecture, it is a prototypical example of what came to be regarded as the American Art Deco style. , Intended to be completely modern in. every feature and detail, from its form, generated by its parallelogram-shaped site and contemporary zoning restrictions, to its construction techniques, materials, unconventional ornament, and style, Walker's design for "the largest telephone company building in the world"1 was an emphatic statement of the most recent architectural trends. The building, designed to be "as modern as the telephone activity it houses . . . [was] a simple, straightforward solution" to the requirements of the building program.2 The progressive design of the building was envisioned by company president, Howard F. Thurber, and resulted in a grand statement of his company's size, strength, and success. The overall effect of Walker's Barclay-Vesey Building is one of strong form and bold silhouette, with its blunt setback transitions articulated by vertical buttress-like piers and massive form relieved by intricate, animated ornament. Substantially intact, the building continues to be a dramatic presence on Manhattan's skyline. Site History The block bounded by Barclay and Vesey Streets at the north and south and Washington and West-Streets at the east and west was originally located, beyond the .present shoreline, west side' of Manhattan was developed beginning early in the nineteenth century. As part of the improvement, the banks of the Hudson were filled in, extended, and raised, and piers were constructed at the western end of every street between Vesey and King Streets by the late 1830s.3 Crucial to the city's mercantile expansion, the improvements helped New York City to achieve recognition as the country's major port and trading center by the 1830s and 1840s. This area and the section of the city just to the north, now known as Tribeca, were transformed into a center for dairy goods, produce, and less perishable goods including tobacco, imported woods, coffee, and spices. Markets for these items were developed in the area close to the docks to facilitate the handling of the commodities. First established in 1812 and repeatedly expanded, the Washington Market, located on the block bounded by West, Washington, Vesey, and Fulton Streets, just south of the Barclay-Vesey Building, grew to be Manhattan's major wholesale and retail produce outlet.4 Many other buildings were constructed in the area to accommodate the food industry, including approximately thirty-five three-, four-, and five-story brick buildings on the site chosen for the telephone company's headquarters. The activities of the merchants, so important to the site and to the surrounding area, would later be recalled in the ornamental program of the Barclay-Vesey Building. The site was chosen over more popular office locations to the east on Broadway because it was much less expensive. The West Street frontage was considered an asset because it was assumed that the structures along the docks would never rise above two or three stories and the future building's western exposure would, therefore, always remain unobstructed. The New York Telephone Company The telephone business developed rapidly following the early successes of Alexander Graham Bell's inventions in the. L^70^. By the turn of the century the AmeVican' Telephone & Telegraph Company had become the central institution of Bell Telephone Company operations, with smaller companies, including the New York Telephone Company, conducting its regional services. After a sluggish period of business during World War I the New York Telephone Company faced a new period of rapid expansion. In an effort to organize and control the growth, the company decided to establish divisional headquarters throughout the state. A reassessment of the company's organization in New York City concluded that its personnel, offices, and equipment were inefficiently scattered city-wide. Howard Ford Thurber (1869-1928), president of the New York Telephone Company from 1919 to 1924, determined that a new central headquarters building would alleviate the problems associated with the company's lack of unity. Thurber's "vision," as it was called in his New York Times obituary, was to create a building large enough to "satisfy the [company's] present demands and to reasonably anticipate future requirements."5 The new headquarters building would consolidate an equipment and administrative center, incorporating six central offices. As explained in a Telephone Company pamphlet, central offices are the nerve centers of the [telephone] system. Here the wires from the local telephones and from other central offices converge and are carried to distributing frames, where they fan out to the proper points of contact on the switchboards. Thurber's building program required a large utilitarian facility with specialized mechanical features and space for a centralized work force of 6,000 employees serving 120,000 telephones. Undaunted by the numerous details of the project, Thurber envisioned not just the practical concerns of the building but its potential symbolic quality as well. A large structure, progressively designed, could establish a positive corporate image and symbolize the size and strength of the organization — an industry whose woTk was clearly at the forefront of modern technology. With Thurber's plan for a new headquarters building, the New York Telephone Company was established at the vanguard of modern trends in business and architecture. Ralph Walker and McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin For the design of its headquarters building, the New York Telephone Company chose MeKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin, an architectural firm whose long history with the telephone company began in 1885 with the firm's founding partner Cyrus L.W. Eidlitz (1853-1921). Eidlitz was commissioned by the Metropolitan Telephone and Telegraph Company, the predecessor of the New York Telephone Company, in that year to design its first headquarters building at 18 Cortlandt Street in Manhattan. Andrew McKenzie (1861-1926), born in Dunkirk, New York, and educated in Buffalo, came to New York City in 1884 and worked for the firm of Babb, Cook & Willard. He became associated with Cyrus L.W. Eidlitz in 1902 and the partnership of Eidlitz & McKenzie was active from 1905 to 1909. That firm's major work was the New York Times Building at Times Square.8 Stephen Voorhees (1879-1965) was born near Rocky Hill, New Jersey, and was educated as a civil engineer at Princeton University, graduating in 1900. In 1902 he began to practice with Eidlitz & McKenzie as an engineer and superintendent of construction; one of his first jobs was the supervision of the foundation work for the New York Times Building. German-born Paul Gmelin (1859-1937) studied in Stuttgart. He came to the United States as a draftsman, was briefly associated with McKim, Mead & White, and then joined the firm of Babb, Cook & Willard, where he met Andrew McKenzie. In 1910 the firm of McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was organized and continued Eidlitz's successful relationship with the telephone company, gaining numerous commissions for buildings throughout New York state. By 1912 the firm had completed approximately thirty new telephone buildings in New York City alone (not . counting alterations and expansions). The firm also designed the Brooklyn Edison Company Building and the Brooklyn Municipal Building, as well as private residences. McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was active through 1925. In 1919 Ralph Walker (1889-1973) joined the office of McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin. Born in Waterbury, Connecticut, Walker began a two-year apprenticeship with the Providence, Rhode Island, architectural firm of Hilton & Jackson in 1907 and then studied architecture at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In Montreal in 1911 Walker studied with Francis Swales (1878-1962) who had established architectural firms in London, Montreal, and Vancouver, British Columbia, and later moved hisr practice to New York. In 1913 Walker practiced with James Ritchie in Boston and three years later won the Rotch Traveling Scholarship. (His two-year trip to Italy was postponed by the war, during which he served in France with the Army Corps of Engineers.) Walker also worked as a designer in the offices of Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue and York & Sawyer. Walker's first major project with McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was the Barclay-Vesey Building. The appearance of the Barclay-Vesey Building, unlike anything previously produced by the firm, and the general success of the design, established Walker's reputation. Near the completion of the building and following the death of McKenzie, Walker rose to partnership in the firm of Voorhees, Gmelin & Walker. Considered the firm's main designer. Walker continued to produce designs for the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, becoming a specialist in the design of that industry's buildings. Subsequent commissions whose designs were based on concepts first developed in the Barclay-Vesey Building were the New Jersey Bell Headquarters (Newark, 1928-29), the Western Union Building at 60 Hudson Street (1928-30), and telephone buildings in Syracuse and Rochester. The living Trust Company Building at 1 Wall Street (1929-31) and the Long Distance Building of the American Telephone & Telegraph Company at 32 Sixth Avenue (1930-32) followed soon after. (The Western Union Building and the Long Distance Building are designated New York City Landmarks.) Walker also designed buildings for other corporate clients including General Foods and IBM, and several pavilions for firms at the 1939 World's Fair in New York. The success of Walker's corporate commissions brought him recognition as one of the city's most prominent designers of Art Deco skyscrapers. Active in professional circles, Walker was president of the New York Chapter of the American Institute of Architects from 1933 to 1935, president of the Architectural League from 1937 to 1939, and president of the national organization of the American Institute of Architects from 1949 to 1951. In 1957 the AIA gave Walker the title of "architect of the century." In 1958 Walker resigned from active participation in the firm, then known as Voorhees, Walker, Smith, Smith & Haines, but continued in the capacity of a consultant. He later served on the Fine Arts Commission (appointed in 1959 by President Eisenhower), as president of the Municipal Art Society, and as editor of Pencil Points. His firm continued in various forms after his retirement and is today known as Haines, Lundberg & Waehler. Zoning and the Creation of a Modern Style The 1916 Building Zone Resolution had a tremendous impact on architecture in New York City; the final form and appearance of the BaTclay-Vesey Building owe much to this law. Overbuilding, increased building heights, and related problems such as a decrease in the amount of sunlight at street level, were the factors which created the need for the ordinance. The Building Zone Handbook (1916) stated that the purpose of the law was to stabilize and conserve property values, to relieve the rapidly increasing congestion in the streets and in the transit lines, to provide greater safety in buildings and in the streets, and in general to make the city more beautiful, convenient and agreeable. The restrictions created to bring about the "more beautiful city" were based on the use of building setbacks to control height and bulk. Height and setback regulations applied to seventy-five percent of the site; the remaining portion of the building site was unlimited in height, encouraging developers to assemble large building sites to make tower construction more affordable, possibly even profitable. The building shape that resulted from the zoning restrictions took the form of a ziggurat, a rhythmic succession of blocks which grew smaller and more recessed from bottom to top. The ziggurat was then topped by a tower or a pair of towers. While the creators of the 1916 zoning resolution were motivated by purely practical concerns, architects drew inspiration from the building forms which resulted from the restrictions. In 1922, architect and critic Harvey Wiley Corbett (1873-1954) and architectural renderer Hugh Fern's (1889-1962) explored the possibilities of the zoning law in a series of drawings which illustrated progressive stages of design based on the law's restrictions. The drawings showed 1) the maximum allowable bulk of the building and its form under the zoning law, 2) the addition of necessary light courts to the basic block, 3) the impact of structural limitations, and 4) economic considerations. Finally, Ferris and Corbett presented drawings of an architecturally "trimmed" design. These dramatic renderings, published in Pencil Points (1923) and in Metropolis of Tomorrow (1929), significantly influenced architects of the day. The drawings and the laws from which they came directed the architects' attention to the building as a whole rather than to a single facade of the structure, thus altering the whole design process. By visualizing buildings "from every possible angle" the architect was transformed from a designer of facades into a "sculptor in building masses." The zoning law provided architects with a sound, rational basis for the form and appearance of the skyscraper as well as a new source of creativity; historical styles did not seem to express this modern sensibility and, consequently, a new "skyscraper style" emerged in the 1920s. William A. Starrett (1877-1932), an engineer, builder and architect, acknowledged the effect of the zoning law in his book, Skyscrapers and the Men Who Build Them, a short history of the skyscraper and related topics, and said its effect was "to give to architectural design in high buildings the greatest impetus it ever has known and to produce a new and beautiful pyramidal skyline. . . ," Major characteristics of the new style, as generated by the zoning restrictions, were sculpted massing, bold setbacks, and ornament subordinated to the overall mass. Clearly reflecting the current interest of the designers, the new style was commonly called "Modernistic." Corbett praised the new "setback style" and predicted it would "go down in history along with the Gothic, the Classic, and the Renaissance." The dramatic rendering style of Ferriss and others expressed the new, vertically-oriented, modernistic aesthetic. A rendering by Chester B. Price of the completed Barclay-Vesey Building captures the drama and the energy of the style and the lime. The Modernistic style generated additional interest as architects identified it as a distinctively American style. American businesses capitalized on the status achieved by the modern skyscraper. Increasingly, large corporations, such as the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, chose the skyscraper as the home for their operations, believing a massive skyscraper in a modern style could symbolize their success and progressiveness and project a positive image for their companies. The Chicago Tribune Company capitalized on the concept of the skyscraper as corporate image for its widely-publicized and much-entered architectural competition of 1922. The competition for the "most beautiful skyscraper in the world" to house the Tribune's new headquarters had a great impact on American architecture. The first place winners, Raymond Hood (1881-1934) and John Mead Howells (1868-1959), produced a relatively conservative design with Gothic-inspired ornament. The design of the second place winner, Eliel Saarinen (1873-1950), was the highly regarded public favorite and. was promoted for its vertical emphasis, setback transitions, and abstracted ornament. These elements appeared in numerous subsequent skyscrapers, including the Barclay-Vesey Building, and critics have traditionally cited Saarinen's entry as the source for Walker's design. However, Walker's own entry for the Tribune Competition, which received an award of Honorable Mention, also exhibits strongly emphasized vertical piers and a form composed of a tower on a base with setback transitions. An additional similarity between Walker's Tribune entry and an early design of the Barclay-Vesey Building is the pyramidal roof that caps the buildings in both designs. Walker's Tribune entry was due on November 1, 1922; the. winner was announced on December 3. Plans for the Barclay-Vesey Building were filed at the Department of Buildings on June .6, 1923.18 Considering the size of the building, it is not unlikely that Walker had begun its design by the Fall of 1922, and was working on both projects at the same time. Therefore, Walker's experimentation with vertical emphasis and setback tower forms in his Tribune entry seems to have played an important role in his conception of the Barclay-Vesey Building. Design of the Barclay-Vesey Building Walker's Design Theory. Walker's version of the modern skyscraper, as seen in the Barclay-Vesey Building, was based on two simple theories; 1) economy, not extravagance, is the key to good modern design, and 2) only through machine technology can a modern style develop. Walker was one of many designers who focused on the importance of modern technology and its role in the expression of the new style. Corbett summarized the trend: The modern architect-must learn to use the machine as a basis of design if his work is to be indigenous to this period." Walker even conceived of the Barclay-Vesey Building "as a machine which had definite functions to perform for the benefit of its occupants." This pragmatic approach to the problem of design was a direct response to the functionalism inspired by the zoning law. Walker's theoretical analysis of skyscraper design found a physical form in the Barclay-Vesey Building where he attempted to utilize building materials to express modern technology. The majority of the exterior material is brick, a material which Walker preferred for its textural qualities and subtle color variations, and is embellished throughout by stone ornament. Taking advantage of machine production wherever possible, ornament for the upper stories was executed in cast stone. Ornament at the lower stories was executed in limestone, but ornamental motifs were used in repeated patterns as a further expression of machine production. In addition, these materials, given their colors and textures, were chosen to convey a monolithic appearance and to express stability and mass. Preliminary designs for the Barclay-Vesey Building focused on the size of the structure. Designs for buildings of ten, sixteen, twenty-six, thirty-six, and forty-two stories were drawn to study the relationship between cost and height. It was understood that the taller the building, the less the cost per square foot of the land; however, Walker had to take into consideration the increase of the construction costs with greater heights, as well as the market value of similar space. The thirty-two-story tower, incorporating required setbacks at the tenth and eighteenth stories, was determined to be most economical on all counts. Another set of studies focused on developing the sculptural form of the building. Early designs showed a series of stacked blocks connected by blunt transitions. This concept appealed to Walker, but early designs using the concept lacked unity. Visual harmony was ultimately achieved through the emphatic treatment of the structure's vertical piers, which Walker believed also gave the building "dignity and a style." The piers softened the horizontal lines and, continuing above the rooflines of the setbacks, visually strengthened the overall verticality of the design. The final form of the building was significantly affected by the allocation of interior spaces. Many functions to be accommodated in the headquarters building did not require natural light. For example, mechanical space was held to the central core of the structure, as was the space for the central operating system which required artificial light. As a result, it was possible to locate office space, where natural light was preferred, along the exterior wall. Consequently, the sizable light courts usually necessary in a building on such a large site were limited, resulting in the opportunity to create a massive base for the structure. The size of the base was also affected by the city's desire to widen Vesey Street. Walker introduced an arcade as a compromise solution; he incorporated the sidewalk inside the building mass, thus providing a larger base for the building. He considered this a pioneering attempt to combat traffic congestion and as the first of many such arcades to be built in the city. Incorporating storefronts into the design, the arcade was described upon its completion as "one of the most comfortable shopping fronts in New York City." Walker experimented with different stylistic expressions for the building, including Gothic and Italian Renaissance, but grew unsatisfied with his attempts to adapt such traditional styles to a building which was being shaped by purely practical concerns. Coming to terms with this incompatibility, Walker attempted "to treat the problem for its own sake, to make it as modern in conception as the telephone activity it houses." He thus began his successful studies in the Modernistic style. The Ornamental Program. For Walker, - ornamental embellishment was needed to add texture and interest in a large building, and to reduce the scale of the mass to a more human level. To engage the passerby, Walker believed the ornament should be "so complicated in its structure as not to be readily comprehended; its framework should be as hidden as the steel structure itself. It should repay repeated interest and study. . . ." As to the actual content of the ornament, he believed that overly-used traditional motifs, such as the egg and dart, had lost all significance to the modern viewer. The ornament executed on the Barclay-Vesey Building met all of Walker's standards concerning texture, complexity, and unconventionalism. To complement the overall design, the ornament was given a vertical emphasis. It did not project from the wall surface but rather was cut into the stone for better weathering of the material. The desired texture of the ornament was achieved in a combination of low relief and high relief which resulted in the softening of the rigidity of the massing and of the strict vertical lines of the structure. The sculptural ornament of the Barclay-Vesey Building was carried out by Ulysses Ricci (1888-1960) and John DeCesare. Born in New York, Ricci studied at Cooper Union, the Art Students League, and with James Earl Fraser. He designed medals for the American Numismatic Society and executed sculptural work for many buildings in New York, including the Bowery Savings Bank and a series of bronze plaques for the Times Square Schrafft's restaurant. For a time he was a member of the firm Ricci & Zari. John DeCesare was a member of the National Sculpture Society and for a time was a member of the firm Stifter & DeCesare. Walker attempted to express the modernity of the telephone industry by casting aside all traditional ornamental forms. Thus, the ornament has no basis in historic architectural styles; instead it recalls the history and traditions of the site and surrounding area. Fruits, vegetables, vines with leaves, marine life, birds, small animals, and other natural objects populate the ornamented surfaces and recall the nearby Hudson River and the market area which earlier occupied the site. The lower stories of the building are so filled with ornament that Lewis Mumford called them "a rock garden." While the ornament was not intended to symbolize the telephone specifically, the use of grapes and grapevines can be seen as a representation of communication. In addition, an occasional bell, the company symbol, is found in the ornamented surfaces. Walker called his ornament "free and flowing,"28 a description which in many ways contradicts the strict rigidity of his overall design. However, the blending of complicated ornament with simple forms, naturalistic elements with geometric shapes, and large massing with small details can be seen as one of Walker's major triumphs. The synthesis of these elements allows the Barclay-Vesey Building to be admired both from a distance and from a closer perspective. Walker's theory of ornament and its execution in the Barclay-Vesey Building was called "straightforward and appropriate and eminently right." Praise for the building's ornament was not restricted to the exterior. By repeating the vertical emphasis and ornamental patterning on the interior, Walker achieved a continuity between interior and exterior design which was unusual at the time; many contemporary buildings which appeared modern on the exterior still reverted to historical styles on the interior. Mumford saw this compatibility between interior and exterior as a perpetuation of the work of H.H. Richardson, Louis Sullivan, and Frank Lloyd Wright, and he credited Walker as the first since Sullivan to carry through a significant scheme of decoration. In fact, many aspects of Walker's ornament - the textural quality, the complicated all-over patterning, the non-historicist subjects, the combination of naturalistic and geometric elements, and the synthesis of flowing ornament with geometric building forms -- were used by Sullivan and came to be seen as hallmarks of his style. Buildings such as the Carson Pirie Scott Department Store (Chicago, 1899-1904) and the Transportation Building at the World's Columbian Exposition (Chicago, 1893) clearly illustrate Sullivan's use of these techniques. The Stylistic Context of the Barclay-Vesey Building. The bold geometric massing of the Barclay-Vesey Building, its set-back form, its emphasis on vertically, and its flattened non-historical ornamental program all combine to make the building a prototypical example of what came to be known as the American Art Deco style. The Exposition des Arts Decoratifs et Industries in Paris, which opened in 1925 after much of the design of the Barclay-Vesey Building had been completed, disseminated many of these elements which had been pioneered by Walker: abstracted naturalistic and geometric ornament in all-over patterns, linear and vertical emphasis in design, streamlined forms, and dramatic juxtaposition of colors and textures of materials. These elements were used by numerous American architects for subsequent set-back skyscraper designs. Reaching its zenith between 1928 and 1931 in New York City this new architectural style was called "Modernistic" in contemporary sources. By the time of its critical re-assessment in the 1960s and '70s the style had achieved the popular name of Art Deco. Taking into account the source of the term Art Deco and. the timing of the design, it is accurate to call the style of the Barclay-Vesey Building "Modernistic." "Modern Perpendicular," another contemporary stylistic term, calls attention to the vertical emphasis of the design. Walker clearly expressed his view of the building's modern style and its origin; It was Emerson, I think, who told us to stop building the sepulchers of our fathers and build our own house. The Barclay-Vesey building is an attempt to build a house of today. A house that is not Greek or Gothic, or Mayan; that looks little to the past, much to the present, and tries to glimpse the future. Contemporary Reactions The Barclay-Vesey Building was hailed in its day as the ultimate modern skyscraper. Critics commented on all aspects of its design and construction. The Telephone Company was pleased with the result of its new headquarters building, calling it "a symbol of service and progress" and a "graphic example of [the] movement in modern telephony. In addition, the building became a model for subsequent telephone headquarters in New York State, including the South State Street Building in Syracuse (1928). The wide acceptance of the building as a symbol of modern architecture was confirmed when its photograph was. used as a frontispiece in the English translation of Le Corbusier's Towards a New Architecture. The Architectural League of New York awarded the building its Gold Medal of Honor in 1927. Many critics were struck by the size and form of the building. Corbett described it as "a building clean limbed and sure footed, rising with sheer, cliff-like walls." Joseph Pennell, an etcher struck by New York's skyscrapers, proclaimed it "the most impressive modern building in the world."Talbot Hamlin anticipated a prominent place in architectural history for the structure: "The whole building is destined to be a monument of American progress in architecture." Still other accounts commented on the elusive qualities of the design, citing the ability of its "rugged beauty" to "hold one breathless with its force." Mumford commended its thorough design, calling it "one of the few skyscrapers that [could] bear close inspection."39 Corbett agreed: The Telephone Building is worth the careful study of every modern architect, and should receive the admiration of every layman. Let it be hoped that it stands at the dawn of a new day, both for architects that sin, and the public that is sinned against. Construction Demolition of the existing buildings on the site was begun on May 23, 1923, and was completed on July 14. Foundation work was begun on June 20, 1923. Due to the instability of the land fill on the site, an elaborate system was created for the construction of the foundations which required twenty-two caissons sunk to bedrock at the perimeter of the site. The depth of the excavations allowed for five stories below ground, one more than had been originally planned. An innovative construction method was utilized thirty-eight feet below grade as permanent steel struts were substituted for temporary wooden cross-lot bracing at a savings of approximately $30,000. This was believed to be the first use of this construction method. The steel-framed building is faced with brick backed by terra cotta. The first ten floors of the structure were allocated to central office use (although it would take several years for all the necessary equipment to be moved and installed). The upper floors were allocated to administrative use, with the twenty-ninth floor reserved for executive offices. Usable floor space in the building amounts to 850,000 square feet. The seventeenth story divides the building into two mechanically separate sections. It forms a basement for the tower section, holding all the equipment (which is typically housed in the basement of a building) needed to provide services to the tower. The seventeenth story also holds typical rooftop equipment for the base of the building. In an emergency, the tower equipment can serve the base. The final rivet was placed in the structure by telephone company president J.S. McCulloh; Thurber by this time had assumed the position of chairman of the board. The last brick and stone were placed by tradesmen elected by their coworkers. On February 19,1926, the first occupants entered the building, beginning what was referred to as "the longest, moving day in New York's history." Contemporary accounts indicate that the building was completed on June 30, 1926, but the Department of Buildings did not sign off on the work until April 8, 1927. Description The Barclay-Vesey Building is a thirty-two-story structure with an additional five stories below ground. There are mezzanines above the first, seventeenth, and thirty-first stories. A New York Telephone Company publication equated the building's height with that of Egypt's tallest pyramid. The building occupies a parallelogram-shaped site approximately 210 by 250 feet wide, covering 52,000 square feet, with nineteen bays on the east and west facades of the base and twenty-three bays on the north and south facades. Above the granite base, the structure is faced in gray-, gold- and buff-colored brick in common bond which has been repointed in several areas on each facade. Detailing is executed in limestone at the lower stories and in cast stone above. The building takes the form of a tower rising from the center of a massive base. The orientation of the tower reflects the orthogonal grid of Manhattan and appears to have been rotated atop the parallelogram-shaped base of the structure. The building rises straight from the ground to the tenth story, where the first setback occurs along the length of the north and south facades. A setback also occurs at the center of the east and west facades at this point, creating light courts for the eleventh through the seventeenth stories in front of the tower. At the seventeenth story another major setback occurs at all facades. From this point the tower, measuring 108 feet by 116 feet, rises to a total height of thirty-two stories. Minor setbacks "occur at other points between the thirteenth and nineteenth stories, highlighted by detailing in stone and brick. Much of the decorative ornament of the building consists of intertwining vines sprouting leaves, flowers, and grapes. Scattered throughout the interlaces are cherubs, human figures, and a variety of creatures including fish, snails, mice, lizards, frogs, birds, squirrels, and snakes. While some specific decorative patterns may be repeated, numerous variations on the intertwining vine theme are found throughout the building's ornamental program. Rather than describe in detail all variations represented, particular architectural elements will be cited as using the intertwining vine pattern and it will be understood that the pattern may contain any combination of the figures mentioned above. Especially significant or unusual features will be addressed. The east and west (main) facades are similar in design and contain identical double-height entrances which are recessed in the center of the facades, the width of each entry spanning three window bays. Two revolving multipane doors and a pair of doors are framed in bronze. The framing members are filled with strings of creatures or with a repeating chevron pattern, and pinnacles with cherubs are capped by bells. (Another pair of doors is found to the right of each bronze-framed entryway.) Above each door arrangement at the east and west facades is an expansive window covered by an elaborate bronze grille of intertwining vines and grapes, arranged vertically, which is also visible at the interior through the colored window glass. (A metal replica of the Bell Telephone Company logo, a bell within a circle, has been attached to the window grille.) A limestone frieze above the window displays an intertwining vine pattern featuring human figures and a central bird. A light fixture with an inverted setback form hangs between two ceiling panels filled with ornament. The two-story entrance surround is faced in limestone; chamfered surfaces are elaborately ornamented. In the stone lintel above the opening are found figures of an American Indian and a Mongolian which are meant to symbolize the lands of the west and the east, the directions the entrances face. Flanking the center panel, which displays a bell, are the patterned, projecting bases of the vertical piers which articulate the overall height of the facade; their patterning of roots and stems further reinforce the vertical emphasis. Two single window bays flank the West Street entry. These are flanked at each side by a larger opening spanning three bays, then another single bay. The two end bays of this facade are each articulated by wide arches, the southern one opening onto the Vesey Street arcade. The storefronts of the building are based on a tripartite design: a solid panel at the base, a glazed area at the middle, usually divided into three vertical sections, and a transom with additional vertical subdivisions topped by a decorative cornice consisting of dolphins, seahorses, and birds. Winged figures act as pinnacles at the top of the window frame. A sketch, drawn by Walker and published in a history of the Rotch Traveling Scholarship, illustrates a centralized sculpture with similar winged elements.44 (Fig. 12) Some storefronts are recessed, some are punctuated by doors (some with transoms and steps). Most glass within the ground-story bays is now painted. Most of the spandrels between the first- and second-story windows are faced with ornamented stone. The stone sills and surrounds of the second-story windows also have elaborate ornamentation featuring a stylized plant form. Stone sills of third story windows also have carved ornament, and, excluding the end bays, have a geometric border below. Windows above the first story have steel, double-hung, three-over-three sash. A minimal number of windows have been replaced by aluminum windows at each facade. Also, several louvered vents fill window openings, either fully or partially, at each facade. Window sills above the third story have smaller proportions than those below and have no elaboration. The base of the building receives its vertical emphasis from piers which rise from the first and second stories to a point above the setbacks where they are capped with cast stone; the central piers display carved snails. Windows at this level are emphasized with elaborate stone ornament at the head and sill. The Vesey Street facade at the south side of the building incorporates a ground-story arcade whose vaulting system utilizes Guastavino arches. The twelve-bay arcade is sixteen feet wide, eighteen feet high, and 252 feet in length. The tile arches rest on brick piers with granite bases. The openings are faced in stone carved with an intertwining vine pattern, cherubs, roosters, and squirrels, and a chevron pattern borders the soffit. (Fig. 15) The arcade incorporates storefronts, similar to those of the West Street facade but with recessed transoms, in each bay opening. The storefront openings are faced with limestone. Along Vesey Street, the stone spandrels between the first-story arches and the second-storywindows are trimmed with a geometric pattern. Pairs of second-story windows have continuous stone sills with lions carved below the windows and surrounds which are similar to those of the West Street facade. Above the second story, the treatment of the facade follows that of the east and west facades. The Barclay Street facade on the north is similar to the Vesey Street facade. Ground-story openings of the north facade are similar to those inside the Vesey Street arcade, however, a central entrance spanning four bays provides for freight service. At all facades, the amount of cast stone ornament increases above the twenty-eighth story. (Fig. 16) Intricately carved panels fill the spandrels and cap the piers which, above the twenty-ninth story, form buttress-like elements. Corner piers at the twenty-ninth story display elephant heads with ears transformed into geometric shapes and trunks extending down the corner of the tower in a geometric pattern. The arched, multipane, double-height windows encompassing the thirtieth, thirty-first, and thirty-first-mezzanine stories are topped by elaborate cast stone ornament composed of geometric forms terminating in a pineapple or a rabbit. Window surrounds of the top story are simple, as are the piers extending above the roofline. Metal fencing now encloses rooftop equipment, with additional equipment located in front of some thirty-second-story windows. Subsequent History Apart from a few minor changes, the Barclay-Vesey Building remains substantially intact. One of the significant qualities of the building is its dual function as office space and a communications center. As technology in the field of communications has progressed, equipment has been added to the roof and regularly upgraded, while respecting the building's original design. This has enabled the structure to retain its significance as an office and operations center for the New York Telephone Company. It is anticipated that rooftop equipment will continue to be ugraded on a regular basis. - From the 1991 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Joseph Randolph House (formerly 329 Washington Street) http://flic.kr/p/9cJwQF Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. This house is one of six Federal houses which compose a group that is unique in New York City. Nowhere else is there a survival of this many houses of this style - all of which retain their original pitched roofs and dormers. The fact that they wrap around a corner, showing a distinctive gable-end profile, also makes this group one-of-a-kind in the City today. This two-and-one-half story house is constructed of Flemish bond brickwork. Though iI of the original details on the ground floor were lost when these houses were converted to warehouse use, the upper stories retain most of their charming Federal character. The arched dormers are particularly rare in their condition, as ere the paneled stone lintels above the original window openings. Handsome paneled blocks have been set at the front ends of the party walls, which extend up through the roof, to conceal the coping - which acted as a f i re-break. The skylight which formerly lighted a circular interior staircase, remains only in this house - it is still set into the sloping roof. Once common in Federal houses, this feature is one of the few extant. The sheet metal cornice with modillions replaces the original one which must have matched that remaining at #331. These houses were built for specific owners, already in possession of the property: they were not speculator's houses, as wore so many of the period. Most of the original owners were master craftsmen or prosperous business men, and 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 for Joseph Randolph, This house and its neighbors show the craftsman-Iike attention to detail and scale - so pleasing to the eye - that is characteristic of the Federal Style. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: William B. Nichols House (formerly 331 Washington Street) http://flic.kr/p/9cMB35 Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Freedom Tower, Jan. 9, 2011 http://flic.kr/p/9cJynr Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog.

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Wilson Hunt House (formerly 327 Washington Street) http://flic.kr/p/9cJw8R Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Joseph Randolph House (formerly 329 Washington Street) http://flic.kr/p/9cJvPa Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. This house is one of six Federal houses which compose a group that is unique in New York City. Nowhere else is there a survival of this many houses of this style - all of which retain their original pitched roofs and dormers. The fact that they wrap around a corner, showing a distinctive gable-end profile, also makes this group one-of-a-kind in the City today. This two-and-one-half story house is constructed of Flemish bond brickwork. Though iI of the original details on the ground floor were lost when these houses were converted to warehouse use, the upper stories retain most of their charming Federal character. The arched dormers are particularly rare in their condition, as ere the paneled stone lintels above the original window openings. Handsome paneled blocks have been set at the front ends of the party walls, which extend up through the roof, to conceal the coping - which acted as a f i re-break. The skylight which formerly lighted a circular interior staircase, remains only in this house - it is still set into the sloping roof. Once common in Federal houses, this feature is one of the few extant. The sheet metal cornice with modillions replaces the original one which must have matched that remaining at #331. These houses were built for specific owners, already in possession of the property: they were not speculator's houses, as wore so many of the period. Most of the original owners were master craftsmen or prosperous business men, and 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 for Joseph Randolph, This house and its neighbors show the craftsman-Iike attention to detail and scale - so pleasing to the eye - that is characteristic of the Federal Style. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Wilson Hunt House (formerly 327 Washington Street) http://flic.kr/p/9cJwAP Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 33 Harrison Street House (Ebenezer Miller House) http://flic.kr/p/9cMAts Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Wilson Hunt House (formerly 327 Washington Street) http://flic.kr/p/9cJwra Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Barclay-Vesey Building http://flic.kr/p/9cJxDX Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS Summary The Barclay-Vesey Building of the New York Telephone Company (also known as the New York Telephone Building) was the first major work of prominent New York architect Ralph Walker. Constructed in 1923-27 and built at a time of great progress and transition in American design, it was a product of the atmosphere of architectural creativity and originality which flourished in New York in the 1920s. A pivotal structure in the history of skyscraper architecture, it is a prototypical example of what came to be regarded as the American Art Deco style. , Intended to be completely modern in. every feature and detail, from its form, generated by its parallelogram-shaped site and contemporary zoning restrictions, to its construction techniques, materials, unconventional ornament, and style, Walker's design for "the largest telephone company building in the world"1 was an emphatic statement of the most recent architectural trends. The building, designed to be "as modern as the telephone activity it houses . . . [was] a simple, straightforward solution" to the requirements of the building program.2 The progressive design of the building was envisioned by company president, Howard F. Thurber, and resulted in a grand statement of his company's size, strength, and success. The overall effect of Walker's Barclay-Vesey Building is one of strong form and bold silhouette, with its blunt setback transitions articulated by vertical buttress-like piers and massive form relieved by intricate, animated ornament. Substantially intact, the building continues to be a dramatic presence on Manhattan's skyline. Site History The block bounded by Barclay and Vesey Streets at the north and south and Washington and West-Streets at the east and west was originally located, beyond the .present shoreline, west side' of Manhattan was developed beginning early in the nineteenth century. As part of the improvement, the banks of the Hudson were filled in, extended, and raised, and piers were constructed at the western end of every street between Vesey and King Streets by the late 1830s.3 Crucial to the city's mercantile expansion, the improvements helped New York City to achieve recognition as the country's major port and trading center by the 1830s and 1840s. This area and the section of the city just to the north, now known as Tribeca, were transformed into a center for dairy goods, produce, and less perishable goods including tobacco, imported woods, coffee, and spices. Markets for these items were developed in the area close to the docks to facilitate the handling of the commodities. First established in 1812 and repeatedly expanded, the Washington Market, located on the block bounded by West, Washington, Vesey, and Fulton Streets, just south of the Barclay-Vesey Building, grew to be Manhattan's major wholesale and retail produce outlet.4 Many other buildings were constructed in the area to accommodate the food industry, including approximately thirty-five three-, four-, and five-story brick buildings on the site chosen for the telephone company's headquarters. The activities of the merchants, so important to the site and to the surrounding area, would later be recalled in the ornamental program of the Barclay-Vesey Building. The site was chosen over more popular office locations to the east on Broadway because it was much less expensive. The West Street frontage was considered an asset because it was assumed that the structures along the docks would never rise above two or three stories and the future building's western exposure would, therefore, always remain unobstructed. The New York Telephone Company The telephone business developed rapidly following the early successes of Alexander Graham Bell's inventions in the. L^70^. By the turn of the century the AmeVican' Telephone & Telegraph Company had become the central institution of Bell Telephone Company operations, with smaller companies, including the New York Telephone Company, conducting its regional services. After a sluggish period of business during World War I the New York Telephone Company faced a new period of rapid expansion. In an effort to organize and control the growth, the company decided to establish divisional headquarters throughout the state. A reassessment of the company's organization in New York City concluded that its personnel, offices, and equipment were inefficiently scattered city-wide. Howard Ford Thurber (1869-1928), president of the New York Telephone Company from 1919 to 1924, determined that a new central headquarters building would alleviate the problems associated with the company's lack of unity. Thurber's "vision," as it was called in his New York Times obituary, was to create a building large enough to "satisfy the [company's] present demands and to reasonably anticipate future requirements."5 The new headquarters building would consolidate an equipment and administrative center, incorporating six central offices. As explained in a Telephone Company pamphlet, central offices are the nerve centers of the [telephone] system. Here the wires from the local telephones and from other central offices converge and are carried to distributing frames, where they fan out to the proper points of contact on the switchboards. Thurber's building program required a large utilitarian facility with specialized mechanical features and space for a centralized work force of 6,000 employees serving 120,000 telephones. Undaunted by the numerous details of the project, Thurber envisioned not just the practical concerns of the building but its potential symbolic quality as well. A large structure, progressively designed, could establish a positive corporate image and symbolize the size and strength of the organization — an industry whose woTk was clearly at the forefront of modern technology. With Thurber's plan for a new headquarters building, the New York Telephone Company was established at the vanguard of modern trends in business and architecture. Ralph Walker and McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin For the design of its headquarters building, the New York Telephone Company chose MeKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin, an architectural firm whose long history with the telephone company began in 1885 with the firm's founding partner Cyrus L.W. Eidlitz (1853-1921). Eidlitz was commissioned by the Metropolitan Telephone and Telegraph Company, the predecessor of the New York Telephone Company, in that year to design its first headquarters building at 18 Cortlandt Street in Manhattan. Andrew McKenzie (1861-1926), born in Dunkirk, New York, and educated in Buffalo, came to New York City in 1884 and worked for the firm of Babb, Cook & Willard. He became associated with Cyrus L.W. Eidlitz in 1902 and the partnership of Eidlitz & McKenzie was active from 1905 to 1909. That firm's major work was the New York Times Building at Times Square.8 Stephen Voorhees (1879-1965) was born near Rocky Hill, New Jersey, and was educated as a civil engineer at Princeton University, graduating in 1900. In 1902 he began to practice with Eidlitz & McKenzie as an engineer and superintendent of construction; one of his first jobs was the supervision of the foundation work for the New York Times Building. German-born Paul Gmelin (1859-1937) studied in Stuttgart. He came to the United States as a draftsman, was briefly associated with McKim, Mead & White, and then joined the firm of Babb, Cook & Willard, where he met Andrew McKenzie. In 1910 the firm of McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was organized and continued Eidlitz's successful relationship with the telephone company, gaining numerous commissions for buildings throughout New York state. By 1912 the firm had completed approximately thirty new telephone buildings in New York City alone (not . counting alterations and expansions). The firm also designed the Brooklyn Edison Company Building and the Brooklyn Municipal Building, as well as private residences. McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was active through 1925. In 1919 Ralph Walker (1889-1973) joined the office of McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin. Born in Waterbury, Connecticut, Walker began a two-year apprenticeship with the Providence, Rhode Island, architectural firm of Hilton & Jackson in 1907 and then studied architecture at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In Montreal in 1911 Walker studied with Francis Swales (1878-1962) who had established architectural firms in London, Montreal, and Vancouver, British Columbia, and later moved hisr practice to New York. In 1913 Walker practiced with James Ritchie in Boston and three years later won the Rotch Traveling Scholarship. (His two-year trip to Italy was postponed by the war, during which he served in France with the Army Corps of Engineers.) Walker also worked as a designer in the offices of Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue and York & Sawyer. Walker's first major project with McKenzie, Voorhees & Gmelin was the Barclay-Vesey Building. The appearance of the Barclay-Vesey Building, unlike anything previously produced by the firm, and the general success of the design, established Walker's reputation. Near the completion of the building and following the death of McKenzie, Walker rose to partnership in the firm of Voorhees, Gmelin & Walker. Considered the firm's main designer. Walker continued to produce designs for the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, becoming a specialist in the design of that industry's buildings. Subsequent commissions whose designs were based on concepts first developed in the Barclay-Vesey Building were the New Jersey Bell Headquarters (Newark, 1928-29), the Western Union Building at 60 Hudson Street (1928-30), and telephone buildings in Syracuse and Rochester. The living Trust Company Building at 1 Wall Street (1929-31) and the Long Distance Building of the American Telephone & Telegraph Company at 32 Sixth Avenue (1930-32) followed soon after. (The Western Union Building and the Long Distance Building are designated New York City Landmarks.) Walker also designed buildings for other corporate clients including General Foods and IBM, and several pavilions for firms at the 1939 World's Fair in New York. The success of Walker's corporate commissions brought him recognition as one of the city's most prominent designers of Art Deco skyscrapers. Active in professional circles, Walker was president of the New York Chapter of the American Institute of Architects from 1933 to 1935, president of the Architectural League from 1937 to 1939, and president of the national organization of the American Institute of Architects from 1949 to 1951. In 1957 the AIA gave Walker the title of "architect of the century." In 1958 Walker resigned from active participation in the firm, then known as Voorhees, Walker, Smith, Smith & Haines, but continued in the capacity of a consultant. He later served on the Fine Arts Commission (appointed in 1959 by President Eisenhower), as president of the Municipal Art Society, and as editor of Pencil Points. His firm continued in various forms after his retirement and is today known as Haines, Lundberg & Waehler. Zoning and the Creation of a Modern Style The 1916 Building Zone Resolution had a tremendous impact on architecture in New York City; the final form and appearance of the BaTclay-Vesey Building owe much to this law. Overbuilding, increased building heights, and related problems such as a decrease in the amount of sunlight at street level, were the factors which created the need for the ordinance. The Building Zone Handbook (1916) stated that the purpose of the law was to stabilize and conserve property values, to relieve the rapidly increasing congestion in the streets and in the transit lines, to provide greater safety in buildings and in the streets, and in general to make the city more beautiful, convenient and agreeable. The restrictions created to bring about the "more beautiful city" were based on the use of building setbacks to control height and bulk. Height and setback regulations applied to seventy-five percent of the site; the remaining portion of the building site was unlimited in height, encouraging developers to assemble large building sites to make tower construction more affordable, possibly even profitable. The building shape that resulted from the zoning restrictions took the form of a ziggurat, a rhythmic succession of blocks which grew smaller and more recessed from bottom to top. The ziggurat was then topped by a tower or a pair of towers. While the creators of the 1916 zoning resolution were motivated by purely practical concerns, architects drew inspiration from the building forms which resulted from the restrictions. In 1922, architect and critic Harvey Wiley Corbett (1873-1954) and architectural renderer Hugh Fern's (1889-1962) explored the possibilities of the zoning law in a series of drawings which illustrated progressive stages of design based on the law's restrictions. The drawings showed 1) the maximum allowable bulk of the building and its form under the zoning law, 2) the addition of necessary light courts to the basic block, 3) the impact of structural limitations, and 4) economic considerations. Finally, Ferris and Corbett presented drawings of an architecturally "trimmed" design. These dramatic renderings, published in Pencil Points (1923) and in Metropolis of Tomorrow (1929), significantly influenced architects of the day. The drawings and the laws from which they came directed the architects' attention to the building as a whole rather than to a single facade of the structure, thus altering the whole design process. By visualizing buildings "from every possible angle" the architect was transformed from a designer of facades into a "sculptor in building masses." The zoning law provided architects with a sound, rational basis for the form and appearance of the skyscraper as well as a new source of creativity; historical styles did not seem to express this modern sensibility and, consequently, a new "skyscraper style" emerged in the 1920s. William A. Starrett (1877-1932), an engineer, builder and architect, acknowledged the effect of the zoning law in his book, Skyscrapers and the Men Who Build Them, a short history of the skyscraper and related topics, and said its effect was "to give to architectural design in high buildings the greatest impetus it ever has known and to produce a new and beautiful pyramidal skyline. . . ," Major characteristics of the new style, as generated by the zoning restrictions, were sculpted massing, bold setbacks, and ornament subordinated to the overall mass. Clearly reflecting the current interest of the designers, the new style was commonly called "Modernistic." Corbett praised the new "setback style" and predicted it would "go down in history along with the Gothic, the Classic, and the Renaissance." The dramatic rendering style of Ferriss and others expressed the new, vertically-oriented, modernistic aesthetic. A rendering by Chester B. Price of the completed Barclay-Vesey Building captures the drama and the energy of the style and the lime. The Modernistic style generated additional interest as architects identified it as a distinctively American style. American businesses capitalized on the status achieved by the modern skyscraper. Increasingly, large corporations, such as the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, chose the skyscraper as the home for their operations, believing a massive skyscraper in a modern style could symbolize their success and progressiveness and project a positive image for their companies. The Chicago Tribune Company capitalized on the concept of the skyscraper as corporate image for its widely-publicized and much-entered architectural competition of 1922. The competition for the "most beautiful skyscraper in the world" to house the Tribune's new headquarters had a great impact on American architecture. The first place winners, Raymond Hood (1881-1934) and John Mead Howells (1868-1959), produced a relatively conservative design with Gothic-inspired ornament. The design of the second place winner, Eliel Saarinen (1873-1950), was the highly regarded public favorite and. was promoted for its vertical emphasis, setback transitions, and abstracted ornament. These elements appeared in numerous subsequent skyscrapers, including the Barclay-Vesey Building, and critics have traditionally cited Saarinen's entry as the source for Walker's design. However, Walker's own entry for the Tribune Competition, which received an award of Honorable Mention, also exhibits strongly emphasized vertical piers and a form composed of a tower on a base with setback transitions. An additional similarity between Walker's Tribune entry and an early design of the Barclay-Vesey Building is the pyramidal roof that caps the buildings in both designs. Walker's Tribune entry was due on November 1, 1922; the. winner was announced on December 3. Plans for the Barclay-Vesey Building were filed at the Department of Buildings on June .6, 1923.18 Considering the size of the building, it is not unlikely that Walker had begun its design by the Fall of 1922, and was working on both projects at the same time. Therefore, Walker's experimentation with vertical emphasis and setback tower forms in his Tribune entry seems to have played an important role in his conception of the Barclay-Vesey Building. Design of the Barclay-Vesey Building Walker's Design Theory. Walker's version of the modern skyscraper, as seen in the Barclay-Vesey Building, was based on two simple theories; 1) economy, not extravagance, is the key to good modern design, and 2) only through machine technology can a modern style develop. Walker was one of many designers who focused on the importance of modern technology and its role in the expression of the new style. Corbett summarized the trend: The modern architect-must learn to use the machine as a basis of design if his work is to be indigenous to this period." Walker even conceived of the Barclay-Vesey Building "as a machine which had definite functions to perform for the benefit of its occupants." This pragmatic approach to the problem of design was a direct response to the functionalism inspired by the zoning law. Walker's theoretical analysis of skyscraper design found a physical form in the Barclay-Vesey Building where he attempted to utilize building materials to express modern technology. The majority of the exterior material is brick, a material which Walker preferred for its textural qualities and subtle color variations, and is embellished throughout by stone ornament. Taking advantage of machine production wherever possible, ornament for the upper stories was executed in cast stone. Ornament at the lower stories was executed in limestone, but ornamental motifs were used in repeated patterns as a further expression of machine production. In addition, these materials, given their colors and textures, were chosen to convey a monolithic appearance and to express stability and mass. Preliminary designs for the Barclay-Vesey Building focused on the size of the structure. Designs for buildings of ten, sixteen, twenty-six, thirty-six, and forty-two stories were drawn to study the relationship between cost and height. It was understood that the taller the building, the less the cost per square foot of the land; however, Walker had to take into consideration the increase of the construction costs with greater heights, as well as the market value of similar space. The thirty-two-story tower, incorporating required setbacks at the tenth and eighteenth stories, was determined to be most economical on all counts. Another set of studies focused on developing the sculptural form of the building. Early designs showed a series of stacked blocks connected by blunt transitions. This concept appealed to Walker, but early designs using the concept lacked unity. Visual harmony was ultimately achieved through the emphatic treatment of the structure's vertical piers, which Walker believed also gave the building "dignity and a style." The piers softened the horizontal lines and, continuing above the rooflines of the setbacks, visually strengthened the overall verticality of the design. The final form of the building was significantly affected by the allocation of interior spaces. Many functions to be accommodated in the headquarters building did not require natural light. For example, mechanical space was held to the central core of the structure, as was the space for the central operating system which required artificial light. As a result, it was possible to locate office space, where natural light was preferred, along the exterior wall. Consequently, the sizable light courts usually necessary in a building on such a large site were limited, resulting in the opportunity to create a massive base for the structure. The size of the base was also affected by the city's desire to widen Vesey Street. Walker introduced an arcade as a compromise solution; he incorporated the sidewalk inside the building mass, thus providing a larger base for the building. He considered this a pioneering attempt to combat traffic congestion and as the first of many such arcades to be built in the city. Incorporating storefronts into the design, the arcade was described upon its completion as "one of the most comfortable shopping fronts in New York City." Walker experimented with different stylistic expressions for the building, including Gothic and Italian Renaissance, but grew unsatisfied with his attempts to adapt such traditional styles to a building which was being shaped by purely practical concerns. Coming to terms with this incompatibility, Walker attempted "to treat the problem for its own sake, to make it as modern in conception as the telephone activity it houses." He thus began his successful studies in the Modernistic style. The Ornamental Program. For Walker, - ornamental embellishment was needed to add texture and interest in a large building, and to reduce the scale of the mass to a more human level. To engage the passerby, Walker believed the ornament should be "so complicated in its structure as not to be readily comprehended; its framework should be as hidden as the steel structure itself. It should repay repeated interest and study. . . ." As to the actual content of the ornament, he believed that overly-used traditional motifs, such as the egg and dart, had lost all significance to the modern viewer. The ornament executed on the Barclay-Vesey Building met all of Walker's standards concerning texture, complexity, and unconventionalism. To complement the overall design, the ornament was given a vertical emphasis. It did not project from the wall surface but rather was cut into the stone for better weathering of the material. The desired texture of the ornament was achieved in a combination of low relief and high relief which resulted in the softening of the rigidity of the massing and of the strict vertical lines of the structure. The sculptural ornament of the Barclay-Vesey Building was carried out by Ulysses Ricci (1888-1960) and John DeCesare. Born in New York, Ricci studied at Cooper Union, the Art Students League, and with James Earl Fraser. He designed medals for the American Numismatic Society and executed sculptural work for many buildings in New York, including the Bowery Savings Bank and a series of bronze plaques for the Times Square Schrafft's restaurant. For a time he was a member of the firm Ricci & Zari. John DeCesare was a member of the National Sculpture Society and for a time was a member of the firm Stifter & DeCesare. Walker attempted to express the modernity of the telephone industry by casting aside all traditional ornamental forms. Thus, the ornament has no basis in historic architectural styles; instead it recalls the history and traditions of the site and surrounding area. Fruits, vegetables, vines with leaves, marine life, birds, small animals, and other natural objects populate the ornamented surfaces and recall the nearby Hudson River and the market area which earlier occupied the site. The lower stories of the building are so filled with ornament that Lewis Mumford called them "a rock garden." While the ornament was not intended to symbolize the telephone specifically, the use of grapes and grapevines can be seen as a representation of communication. In addition, an occasional bell, the company symbol, is found in the ornamented surfaces. Walker called his ornament "free and flowing,"28 a description which in many ways contradicts the strict rigidity of his overall design. However, the blending of complicated ornament with simple forms, naturalistic elements with geometric shapes, and large massing with small details can be seen as one of Walker's major triumphs. The synthesis of these elements allows the Barclay-Vesey Building to be admired both from a distance and from a closer perspective. Walker's theory of ornament and its execution in the Barclay-Vesey Building was called "straightforward and appropriate and eminently right." Praise for the building's ornament was not restricted to the exterior. By repeating the vertical emphasis and ornamental patterning on the interior, Walker achieved a continuity between interior and exterior design which was unusual at the time; many contemporary buildings which appeared modern on the exterior still reverted to historical styles on the interior. Mumford saw this compatibility between interior and exterior as a perpetuation of the work of H.H. Richardson, Louis Sullivan, and Frank Lloyd Wright, and he credited Walker as the first since Sullivan to carry through a significant scheme of decoration. In fact, many aspects of Walker's ornament - the textural quality, the complicated all-over patterning, the non-historicist subjects, the combination of naturalistic and geometric elements, and the synthesis of flowing ornament with geometric building forms -- were used by Sullivan and came to be seen as hallmarks of his style. Buildings such as the Carson Pirie Scott Department Store (Chicago, 1899-1904) and the Transportation Building at the World's Columbian Exposition (Chicago, 1893) clearly illustrate Sullivan's use of these techniques. The Stylistic Context of the Barclay-Vesey Building. The bold geometric massing of the Barclay-Vesey Building, its set-back form, its emphasis on vertically, and its flattened non-historical ornamental program all combine to make the building a prototypical example of what came to be known as the American Art Deco style. The Exposition des Arts Decoratifs et Industries in Paris, which opened in 1925 after much of the design of the Barclay-Vesey Building had been completed, disseminated many of these elements which had been pioneered by Walker: abstracted naturalistic and geometric ornament in all-over patterns, linear and vertical emphasis in design, streamlined forms, and dramatic juxtaposition of colors and textures of materials. These elements were used by numerous American architects for subsequent set-back skyscraper designs. Reaching its zenith between 1928 and 1931 in New York City this new architectural style was called "Modernistic" in contemporary sources. By the time of its critical re-assessment in the 1960s and '70s the style had achieved the popular name of Art Deco. Taking into account the source of the term Art Deco and. the timing of the design, it is accurate to call the style of the Barclay-Vesey Building "Modernistic." "Modern Perpendicular," another contemporary stylistic term, calls attention to the vertical emphasis of the design. Walker clearly expressed his view of the building's modern style and its origin; It was Emerson, I think, who told us to stop building the sepulchers of our fathers and build our own house. The Barclay-Vesey building is an attempt to build a house of today. A house that is not Greek or Gothic, or Mayan; that looks little to the past, much to the present, and tries to glimpse the future. Contemporary Reactions The Barclay-Vesey Building was hailed in its day as the ultimate modern skyscraper. Critics commented on all aspects of its design and construction. The Telephone Company was pleased with the result of its new headquarters building, calling it "a symbol of service and progress" and a "graphic example of [the] movement in modern telephony. In addition, the building became a model for subsequent telephone headquarters in New York State, including the South State Street Building in Syracuse (1928). The wide acceptance of the building as a symbol of modern architecture was confirmed when its photograph was. used as a frontispiece in the English translation of Le Corbusier's Towards a New Architecture. The Architectural League of New York awarded the building its Gold Medal of Honor in 1927. Many critics were struck by the size and form of the building. Corbett described it as "a building clean limbed and sure footed, rising with sheer, cliff-like walls." Joseph Pennell, an etcher struck by New York's skyscrapers, proclaimed it "the most impressive modern building in the world."Talbot Hamlin anticipated a prominent place in architectural history for the structure: "The whole building is destined to be a monument of American progress in architecture." Still other accounts commented on the elusive qualities of the design, citing the ability of its "rugged beauty" to "hold one breathless with its force." Mumford commended its thorough design, calling it "one of the few skyscrapers that [could] bear close inspection."39 Corbett agreed: The Telephone Building is worth the careful study of every modern architect, and should receive the admiration of every layman. Let it be hoped that it stands at the dawn of a new day, both for architects that sin, and the public that is sinned against. Construction Demolition of the existing buildings on the site was begun on May 23, 1923, and was completed on July 14. Foundation work was begun on June 20, 1923. Due to the instability of the land fill on the site, an elaborate system was created for the construction of the foundations which required twenty-two caissons sunk to bedrock at the perimeter of the site. The depth of the excavations allowed for five stories below ground, one more than had been originally planned. An innovative construction method was utilized thirty-eight feet below grade as permanent steel struts were substituted for temporary wooden cross-lot bracing at a savings of approximately $30,000. This was believed to be the first use of this construction method. The steel-framed building is faced with brick backed by terra cotta. The first ten floors of the structure were allocated to central office use (although it would take several years for all the necessary equipment to be moved and installed). The upper floors were allocated to administrative use, with the twenty-ninth floor reserved for executive offices. Usable floor space in the building amounts to 850,000 square feet. The seventeenth story divides the building into two mechanically separate sections. It forms a basement for the tower section, holding all the equipment (which is typically housed in the basement of a building) needed to provide services to the tower. The seventeenth story also holds typical rooftop equipment for the base of the building. In an emergency, the tower equipment can serve the base. The final rivet was placed in the structure by telephone company president J.S. McCulloh; Thurber by this time had assumed the position of chairman of the board. The last brick and stone were placed by tradesmen elected by their coworkers. On February 19,1926, the first occupants entered the building, beginning what was referred to as "the longest, moving day in New York's history." Contemporary accounts indicate that the building was completed on June 30, 1926, but the Department of Buildings did not sign off on the work until April 8, 1927. Description The Barclay-Vesey Building is a thirty-two-story structure with an additional five stories below ground. There are mezzanines above the first, seventeenth, and thirty-first stories. A New York Telephone Company publication equated the building's height with that of Egypt's tallest pyramid. The building occupies a parallelogram-shaped site approximately 210 by 250 feet wide, covering 52,000 square feet, with nineteen bays on the east and west facades of the base and twenty-three bays on the north and south facades. Above the granite base, the structure is faced in gray-, gold- and buff-colored brick in common bond which has been repointed in several areas on each facade. Detailing is executed in limestone at the lower stories and in cast stone above. The building takes the form of a tower rising from the center of a massive base. The orientation of the tower reflects the orthogonal grid of Manhattan and appears to have been rotated atop the parallelogram-shaped base of the structure. The building rises straight from the ground to the tenth story, where the first setback occurs along the length of the north and south facades. A setback also occurs at the center of the east and west facades at this point, creating light courts for the eleventh through the seventeenth stories in front of the tower. At the seventeenth story another major setback occurs at all facades. From this point the tower, measuring 108 feet by 116 feet, rises to a total height of thirty-two stories. Minor setbacks "occur at other points between the thirteenth and nineteenth stories, highlighted by detailing in stone and brick. Much of the decorative ornament of the building consists of intertwining vines sprouting leaves, flowers, and grapes. Scattered throughout the interlaces are cherubs, human figures, and a variety of creatures including fish, snails, mice, lizards, frogs, birds, squirrels, and snakes. While some specific decorative patterns may be repeated, numerous variations on the intertwining vine theme are found throughout the building's ornamental program. Rather than describe in detail all variations represented, particular architectural elements will be cited as using the intertwining vine pattern and it will be understood that the pattern may contain any combination of the figures mentioned above. Especially significant or unusual features will be addressed. The east and west (main) facades are similar in design and contain identical double-height entrances which are recessed in the center of the facades, the width of each entry spanning three window bays. Two revolving multipane doors and a pair of doors are framed in bronze. The framing members are filled with strings of creatures or with a repeating chevron pattern, and pinnacles with cherubs are capped by bells. (Another pair of doors is found to the right of each bronze-framed entryway.) Above each door arrangement at the east and west facades is an expansive window covered by an elaborate bronze grille of intertwining vines and grapes, arranged vertically, which is also visible at the interior through the colored window glass. (A metal replica of the Bell Telephone Company logo, a bell within a circle, has been attached to the window grille.) A limestone frieze above the window displays an intertwining vine pattern featuring human figures and a central bird. A light fixture with an inverted setback form hangs between two ceiling panels filled with ornament. The two-story entrance surround is faced in limestone; chamfered surfaces are elaborately ornamented. In the stone lintel above the opening are found figures of an American Indian and a Mongolian which are meant to symbolize the lands of the west and the east, the directions the entrances face. Flanking the center panel, which displays a bell, are the patterned, projecting bases of the vertical piers which articulate the overall height of the facade; their patterning of roots and stems further reinforce the vertical emphasis. Two single window bays flank the West Street entry. These are flanked at each side by a larger opening spanning three bays, then another single bay. The two end bays of this facade are each articulated by wide arches, the southern one opening onto the Vesey Street arcade. The storefronts of the building are based on a tripartite design: a solid panel at the base, a glazed area at the middle, usually divided into three vertical sections, and a transom with additional vertical subdivisions topped by a decorative cornice consisting of dolphins, seahorses, and birds. Winged figures act as pinnacles at the top of the window frame. A sketch, drawn by Walker and published in a history of the Rotch Traveling Scholarship, illustrates a centralized sculpture with similar winged elements.44 (Fig. 12) Some storefronts are recessed, some are punctuated by doors (some with transoms and steps). Most glass within the ground-story bays is now painted. Most of the spandrels between the first- and second-story windows are faced with ornamented stone. The stone sills and surrounds of the second-story windows also have elaborate ornamentation featuring a stylized plant form. Stone sills of third story windows also have carved ornament, and, excluding the end bays, have a geometric border below. Windows above the first story have steel, double-hung, three-over-three sash. A minimal number of windows have been replaced by aluminum windows at each facade. Also, several louvered vents fill window openings, either fully or partially, at each facade. Window sills above the third story have smaller proportions than those below and have no elaboration. The base of the building receives its vertical emphasis from piers which rise from the first and second stories to a point above the setbacks where they are capped with cast stone; the central piers display carved snails. Windows at this level are emphasized with elaborate stone ornament at the head and sill. The Vesey Street facade at the south side of the building incorporates a ground-story arcade whose vaulting system utilizes Guastavino arches. The twelve-bay arcade is sixteen feet wide, eighteen feet high, and 252 feet in length. The tile arches rest on brick piers with granite bases. The openings are faced in stone carved with an intertwining vine pattern, cherubs, roosters, and squirrels, and a chevron pattern borders the soffit. (Fig. 15) The arcade incorporates storefronts, similar to those of the West Street facade but with recessed transoms, in each bay opening. The storefront openings are faced with limestone. Along Vesey Street, the stone spandrels between the first-story arches and the second-storywindows are trimmed with a geometric pattern. Pairs of second-story windows have continuous stone sills with lions carved below the windows and surrounds which are similar to those of the West Street facade. Above the second story, the treatment of the facade follows that of the east and west facades. The Barclay Street facade on the north is similar to the Vesey Street facade. Ground-story openings of the north facade are similar to those inside the Vesey Street arcade, however, a central entrance spanning four bays provides for freight service. At all facades, the amount of cast stone ornament increases above the twenty-eighth story. (Fig. 16) Intricately carved panels fill the spandrels and cap the piers which, above the twenty-ninth story, form buttress-like elements. Corner piers at the twenty-ninth story display elephant heads with ears transformed into geometric shapes and trunks extending down the corner of the tower in a geometric pattern. The arched, multipane, double-height windows encompassing the thirtieth, thirty-first, and thirty-first-mezzanine stories are topped by elaborate cast stone ornament composed of geometric forms terminating in a pineapple or a rabbit. Window surrounds of the top story are simple, as are the piers extending above the roofline. Metal fencing now encloses rooftop equipment, with additional equipment located in front of some thirty-second-story windows. Subsequent History Apart from a few minor changes, the Barclay-Vesey Building remains substantially intact. One of the significant qualities of the building is its dual function as office space and a communications center. As technology in the field of communications has progressed, equipment has been added to the roof and regularly upgraded, while respecting the building's original design. This has enabled the structure to retain its significance as an office and operations center for the New York Telephone Company. It is anticipated that rooftop equipment will continue to be ugraded on a regular basis. - From the 1991 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 33 Harrison Street House (Ebenezer Miller House) http://flic.kr/p/9cMAN7 Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: William B. Nichols House (formerly 331 Washington Street) http://flic.kr/p/9cJvyH Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 33 Harrison Street House (Ebenezer Miller House) http://flic.kr/p/9cJx4v Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 27A Harrison Street House http://flic.kr/p/9cMzXL Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 27A Harrison Street House http://flic.kr/p/9cMzpS Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 27 Harrison Street http://flic.kr/p/9cMyjh Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Harrison Street http://flic.kr/p/9cMwZE Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Introduction The Tribeca West Historic District, encompassing some 220 buildings, extends northward from James Bogardus Triangle to Hudson Square with Hudson Street serving as the spine of the district and Duane Park acting as a focal point. West Broadway and Varick Street, historically a major transportation route, form the eastern boundary. Greenwich Street forms a regular edge at the western boundary. Portions of Reade Street where corner buildings intersect Hudson and Greenwich Streets form the southern boundary, while Hubert Street and Ericsson Place, fronting onto the site of Hudson Square, form the northern boundaries. Within this area much of the street grid is set askew from and intersects with the grid of streets running off Broadway, a factor which reinforces the special character of the area. The Tribeca West Historic District takes its name from the acronym TriBeCa, for Triangle Below Canal Street. Coined in the mid-1970s as the result of City Planning studies and the adoption of a Special Lower Manhattan Mixed Use District, the Tribeca name came to be applied to the area south of Canal Street, between Broadway and West Street, extending south to Vesey Street, which is larger than the zoning district. The area of the Tribeca West Historic District has a distinct and special character within the larger Tribeca community which is defined by the district's historical development as reflected in the plan of its streets and the architectural qualities of its buildings. Early in the nineteenth century as the area was initially developed, it was a prime residential neighborhood concentrated around Duane Park and Hudson Square (renamed St. John's Park with the construction of St. John's Chapel on the east side of Varick Street). The basic residential development pattern did much to define the later architectural character of the area as it established the street grid at right angles to Greenwich Street intersecting with the street grid off Broadway, and fixed lot sizes for houses that were later reflected in the lot sizes for commercial buildings. A number of Federal-era houses, subsequently converted for commercial uses, remain in the district. By the mid-nineteenth century, with produce and other goods arriving at the Washington Market, southwest of the area of the historic district, and the transfer of goods facilitated by extensive ship and railroad service, the area of the Tribeca West Historic District began to develop its dominant architectural character. Houses were replaced by buildings constructed to meet the changing needs and growing complexity of commerce, particularly businesses associated with the food industry. Today the district is defined and dominated by commercial buildings of the store and loft and warehouse types, which provide a consistent architectural character although one that developed over a span of some fifty years, roughly 1860 through 1910. This is the result of a functional, yet decorative, approach to commercial architecture which produced substantial and attractive buildings whose form and appearance — generated largely by the uses of the buildings — tended to transcend the changing fashions of architectural style. Still, the buildings encompass a range of treatments: some are utilitarian and influenced by longstanding vernacular traditions; others are influenced by popular architectural styles and ornament, consciously designed to be decorative in appearance; and, late in the century, are those warehouses reflecting contemporary high-style architecture whose architects self-consciously sought to devise an appropriate American architectural expression for the warehouse as a discrete building type. Within the district these buildings are unified by a similar scale; similar building materials, largely masonry in shades of red, brown, and tan; and similar use-generated base treatments consisting of cast-iron piers rising above stepped vaults and loading platforms and sheltered by awnings. Folding iron shutters and wood doors historically filled the loading bay openings, and many of these elements still survive. Granite-slab sidewalks and Belgian block street pavers are other unifying elements which give the district much of its historic and architectural character. While businesses dealing in eggs, butter, and cheese predominated, clients as diverse as flour wholesalers, fancygoods merchants, tobacconists, and produce merchants commissioned and occupied store and loft buildings in the district. Architects for this building type ranged from such architect/builders as Bloodgood & Bloodgood to architects who specialized in commercial architecture such as John B. Snook and his sons, Berger & Baylies, Thomas R. Jackson, and William Graul. Warehouse construction, which reached its peak in numbers in the late 1880s and continued through the first decade of the twentieth century, reflected the greater scale of commerce not only for merchants of perishables but also for merchants requiring large amounts of storage space such as grocery wholesalers. Cold storage warehouses, many of them constructed for the Merchants' Refrigerating Company, are an important variation of this building type within the district. Some of the city's most prominent architects constructed warehouse buildings in the area of the historic district, among them, Stephen D. Hatch, Charles C. Haight, Babb & Cook, and Edward H. Kendall. The importance of the food industry in the history of Tribeca is exemplified by the construction in 1885 of the New York Mercantile Exchange, 2-6 Harrison Street, designed by Thomas R. Jackson. Founded in 1872 as the Butter and Cheese Exchange, reflecting the concentration of these businesses in the area, it expanded by 1882 to include dealers in groceries, dried fruits, poultry, and canned goods. The exchange building, a specialized commercial building type, incorporates arcades containing the double- height windows of the trading room, and its prominence in the area is further emphasized by the picturesque entrance tower and hipped roof. West Broadway, which defines the eastern edge of the district, was a major transportation route into the 1930s, a factor which helped to set off the blocks to the west. Today the street is lined largely by store and loft buildings, including No. 138 West Broadway, one of the rare cast-iron fronted buildings in the district, and several prominent warehouse buildings, including No. 110-116 (a/k/a 16 Hudson Street) and No. 220-224 (a/k/a 126-128 Franklin Street). At the south end of the district West Broadway begins at James Bogardus Triangle, historically a transportation hub. West Broadway leads into Varick Street which assumed its present character when the street was widened in 1918. This street widening also resulted in the creation of Finn Square at the intersection of West Broadway, Varick, and Franklin Streets. Varick Street contains two distinguished civic structures, the Hook and Ladder Company No. 8 (1903, Alexander H. Stevens) at the intersection of North Moore Street and the former Fourth Police Precinct Station House (1912, Hoppin & Koen) at the intersection of Ericsson Place, as well as the prominent windowless cold storage warehouse for the Merchants1 Refrigerating Co. (1924, John B. Snook Sons). Greenwich Street, originally on land owned by Trinity Church, was historically the main north-south thoroughfare along the western side of the island, and the blocks both to the east and west were developed beginning in the mid-nineteenth century with commercial buildings of the store and loft and warehouse types. Today the area of the historic district is divorced from the Hudson River by modern development west of Greenwich Street, leaving the east side of Greenwich as a regular western edge for the historic district. Greenwich Street is characterized by its store and loft buildings, many of them dating from fairly early in the area!s commercial development, several Federal-era houses later converted for commercial use, and several prominent warehouse buildings including No. 371-375 (1905, Joseph Wolf). Hudson Street, the spine of the district, begins at James Bogardus Triangle, formed by the convergence of Hudson and West Broadway, which acts as a gateway at the southern end of the historic district. As befits the role Hudson Street plays in the district, it contains some of the district's most impressive as well as most characteristic buildings. These include the two warehouses which begin the district, No. 19 (1885, George Martin Huss) and No. 16 (1873-74, Charles F. Mengelson); the Schepp Building (1880-81, Stephen D. Hatch), which also fronts onto Duane Park; the American Express Building (1890-91, Edward Hale Kendall); the Pierce Building, later the Powell Building (1890-92, Carrere & Hastings, 1905, enlarged by Henri Fouchaux), an early office building; the Mercantile Exchange (1885, Thomas R. Jackson), and New York Hospital's House of Relief or Emergency Hospital (1893-94, Josiah C. Cady). At the northern end of the district, Hudson Street fronts what was once Hudson Square. Ericsson Place, one of the northern boundaries of the district, also fronts onto Hudson Square. It is dominated by the former Fourth Police Precinct Station House and warehouses which form the complex of buildings developed by the Merchants' Refrigerating Company. The roadbed itself contains some of the district's most intact Belgian block street paving. Hubert Street, the other northern boundary of the district, can be seen as a divider marking the transition between the smaller warehouses and store and loft buildings within the district and the larger, later warehouses outside the district to the north which in their development pattern relate more directly to the Hudson River Railroad Terminal. The district's side streets -- Duane, Thomas, Jay, Worth, Harrison, Leonard, Franklin, North Moore, and Beach — have a consistent development pattern and architectural character defined by store and loft buildings, many of which were built in groups, and larger warehouse buildings. The scale, forms, materials, and use-generated base treatments unify the streetscapes and enhance the district's sense of place. Duane Park is another major element which by its presence reinforces the district's special sense of place. The park is formed as Duane Street splits to encompass this small triangular park whose spatial quality is further enhanced by the uniform street walls of the warehouse and store and loft buildings surrounding it. Further reinforcing the district's special sense of place are two small alley-like streets — Staple Street and Collister Street. Staple Street, extending northward for two blocks from Duane Park and providing a striking vista from the park, is fronted by the side or rear elevations of buildings oriented to Hudson Street, Duane Street, Jay Street, or Harrison Street. No. 171 Duane Street is of special interest because its Staple Street elevation reveals the evidence of two early nineteenth-century building campaigns. North of Jay Street, Staple Street is spanned by a picturesque overhead bridge linking New York Hospital's two buildings. Within the district Collister Street extends for one block between Beach and Hubert Streets and also provides a striking vista. Architects and Builders The architecture of the Tribeca West Historic District was the work of a diverse group of architects and builders who are identifiable since most of the buildings post-date the establishment of the Department of Buildings in the mid-1860s. The architects of record for the more utilitarian buildings in the district are, for the most part, not among the roster of prominent architects working in the city. They include architects based in New Jersey, working for clients who were fellow New Jersey residents, and architects, such as J. Morgan Slade, who subsequently and simultaneously designed more high-style buildings. Architect/builders working in the district included Matthew A. Ryan who designed and built 17 Hubert Street and 185 Franklin Street and the firm of Bloodgood & Bloodgood responsible for 177 and 179 Duane Street, as well as those based in the area like Havilah M. Smith whose carpenter shop was located at 35 North Moore Street. Some buildings were designed by the property owners, such as William Livingston who is the architect of record for his building at 387-391 Greenwich Street. Store and loft buildings in the district were largely the work of architects who specialized in commercial architecture, as well as well-known architects for whom commercial work was a portion of their practice. The former group includes those responsible for multiple buildings in the district, such as John B. Snook and his sons, J. Morgan Slade, Berger & Baylies, and William Graul. Within the district is a substantial body of work of Thomas R. Jackson, who specialized in commercial architecture in the late nineteenth century. His work includes store and loft buildings, warehouses, and the notable Mercantile Exchange Building. Many of them incorporate arcading as a design scheme. Charles C. Haight, most often associated with his institutional work, designed several warehouses in the district around the turn of the century which are studies in abstracted arcaded forms and Renaissance-inspired ornament. - From the 1991 NYCLPC Historic District Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Hudson Street http://flic.kr/p/9cMwL7 Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Introduction The Tribeca West Historic District, encompassing some 220 buildings, extends northward from James Bogardus Triangle to Hudson Square with Hudson Street serving as the spine of the district and Duane Park acting as a focal point. West Broadway and Varick Street, historically a major transportation route, form the eastern boundary. Greenwich Street forms a regular edge at the western boundary. Portions of Reade Street where corner buildings intersect Hudson and Greenwich Streets form the southern boundary, while Hubert Street and Ericsson Place, fronting onto the site of Hudson Square, form the northern boundaries. Within this area much of the street grid is set askew from and intersects with the grid of streets running off Broadway, a factor which reinforces the special character of the area. The Tribeca West Historic District takes its name from the acronym TriBeCa, for Triangle Below Canal Street. Coined in the mid-1970s as the result of City Planning studies and the adoption of a Special Lower Manhattan Mixed Use District, the Tribeca name came to be applied to the area south of Canal Street, between Broadway and West Street, extending south to Vesey Street, which is larger than the zoning district. The area of the Tribeca West Historic District has a distinct and special character within the larger Tribeca community which is defined by the district's historical development as reflected in the plan of its streets and the architectural qualities of its buildings. Early in the nineteenth century as the area was initially developed, it was a prime residential neighborhood concentrated around Duane Park and Hudson Square (renamed St. John's Park with the construction of St. John's Chapel on the east side of Varick Street). The basic residential development pattern did much to define the later architectural character of the area as it established the street grid at right angles to Greenwich Street intersecting with the street grid off Broadway, and fixed lot sizes for houses that were later reflected in the lot sizes for commercial buildings. A number of Federal-era houses, subsequently converted for commercial uses, remain in the district. By the mid-nineteenth century, with produce and other goods arriving at the Washington Market, southwest of the area of the historic district, and the transfer of goods facilitated by extensive ship and railroad service, the area of the Tribeca West Historic District began to develop its dominant architectural character. Houses were replaced by buildings constructed to meet the changing needs and growing complexity of commerce, particularly businesses associated with the food industry. Today the district is defined and dominated by commercial buildings of the store and loft and warehouse types, which provide a consistent architectural character although one that developed over a span of some fifty years, roughly 1860 through 1910. This is the result of a functional, yet decorative, approach to commercial architecture which produced substantial and attractive buildings whose form and appearance — generated largely by the uses of the buildings — tended to transcend the changing fashions of architectural style. Still, the buildings encompass a range of treatments: some are utilitarian and influenced by longstanding vernacular traditions; others are influenced by popular architectural styles and ornament, consciously designed to be decorative in appearance; and, late in the century, are those warehouses reflecting contemporary high-style architecture whose architects self-consciously sought to devise an appropriate American architectural expression for the warehouse as a discrete building type. Within the district these buildings are unified by a similar scale; similar building materials, largely masonry in shades of red, brown, and tan; and similar use-generated base treatments consisting of cast-iron piers rising above stepped vaults and loading platforms and sheltered by awnings. Folding iron shutters and wood doors historically filled the loading bay openings, and many of these elements still survive. Granite-slab sidewalks and Belgian block street pavers are other unifying elements which give the district much of its historic and architectural character. While businesses dealing in eggs, butter, and cheese predominated, clients as diverse as flour wholesalers, fancygoods merchants, tobacconists, and produce merchants commissioned and occupied store and loft buildings in the district. Architects for this building type ranged from such architect/builders as Bloodgood & Bloodgood to architects who specialized in commercial architecture such as John B. Snook and his sons, Berger & Baylies, Thomas R. Jackson, and William Graul. Warehouse construction, which reached its peak in numbers in the late 1880s and continued through the first decade of the twentieth century, reflected the greater scale of commerce not only for merchants of perishables but also for merchants requiring large amounts of storage space such as grocery wholesalers. Cold storage warehouses, many of them constructed for the Merchants' Refrigerating Company, are an important variation of this building type within the district. Some of the city's most prominent architects constructed warehouse buildings in the area of the historic district, among them, Stephen D. Hatch, Charles C. Haight, Babb & Cook, and Edward H. Kendall. The importance of the food industry in the history of Tribeca is exemplified by the construction in 1885 of the New York Mercantile Exchange, 2-6 Harrison Street, designed by Thomas R. Jackson. Founded in 1872 as the Butter and Cheese Exchange, reflecting the concentration of these businesses in the area, it expanded by 1882 to include dealers in groceries, dried fruits, poultry, and canned goods. The exchange building, a specialized commercial building type, incorporates arcades containing the double- height windows of the trading room, and its prominence in the area is further emphasized by the picturesque entrance tower and hipped roof. West Broadway, which defines the eastern edge of the district, was a major transportation route into the 1930s, a factor which helped to set off the blocks to the west. Today the street is lined largely by store and loft buildings, including No. 138 West Broadway, one of the rare cast-iron fronted buildings in the district, and several prominent warehouse buildings, including No. 110-116 (a/k/a 16 Hudson Street) and No. 220-224 (a/k/a 126-128 Franklin Street). At the south end of the district West Broadway begins at James Bogardus Triangle, historically a transportation hub. West Broadway leads into Varick Street which assumed its present character when the street was widened in 1918. This street widening also resulted in the creation of Finn Square at the intersection of West Broadway, Varick, and Franklin Streets. Varick Street contains two distinguished civic structures, the Hook and Ladder Company No. 8 (1903, Alexander H. Stevens) at the intersection of North Moore Street and the former Fourth Police Precinct Station House (1912, Hoppin & Koen) at the intersection of Ericsson Place, as well as the prominent windowless cold storage warehouse for the Merchants1 Refrigerating Co. (1924, John B. Snook Sons). Greenwich Street, originally on land owned by Trinity Church, was historically the main north-south thoroughfare along the western side of the island, and the blocks both to the east and west were developed beginning in the mid-nineteenth century with commercial buildings of the store and loft and warehouse types. Today the area of the historic district is divorced from the Hudson River by modern development west of Greenwich Street, leaving the east side of Greenwich as a regular western edge for the historic district. Greenwich Street is characterized by its store and loft buildings, many of them dating from fairly early in the area!s commercial development, several Federal-era houses later converted for commercial use, and several prominent warehouse buildings including No. 371-375 (1905, Joseph Wolf). Hudson Street, the spine of the district, begins at James Bogardus Triangle, formed by the convergence of Hudson and West Broadway, which acts as a gateway at the southern end of the historic district. As befits the role Hudson Street plays in the district, it contains some of the district's most impressive as well as most characteristic buildings. These include the two warehouses which begin the district, No. 19 (1885, George Martin Huss) and No. 16 (1873-74, Charles F. Mengelson); the Schepp Building (1880-81, Stephen D. Hatch), which also fronts onto Duane Park; the American Express Building (1890-91, Edward Hale Kendall); the Pierce Building, later the Powell Building (1890-92, Carrere & Hastings, 1905, enlarged by Henri Fouchaux), an early office building; the Mercantile Exchange (1885, Thomas R. Jackson), and New York Hospital's House of Relief or Emergency Hospital (1893-94, Josiah C. Cady). At the northern end of the district, Hudson Street fronts what was once Hudson Square. Ericsson Place, one of the northern boundaries of the district, also fronts onto Hudson Square. It is dominated by the former Fourth Police Precinct Station House and warehouses which form the complex of buildings developed by the Merchants' Refrigerating Company. The roadbed itself contains some of the district's most intact Belgian block street paving. Hubert Street, the other northern boundary of the district, can be seen as a divider marking the transition between the smaller warehouses and store and loft buildings within the district and the larger, later warehouses outside the district to the north which in their development pattern relate more directly to the Hudson River Railroad Terminal. The district's side streets -- Duane, Thomas, Jay, Worth, Harrison, Leonard, Franklin, North Moore, and Beach — have a consistent development pattern and architectural character defined by store and loft buildings, many of which were built in groups, and larger warehouse buildings. The scale, forms, materials, and use-generated base treatments unify the streetscapes and enhance the district's sense of place. Duane Park is another major element which by its presence reinforces the district's special sense of place. The park is formed as Duane Street splits to encompass this small triangular park whose spatial quality is further enhanced by the uniform street walls of the warehouse and store and loft buildings surrounding it. Further reinforcing the district's special sense of place are two small alley-like streets — Staple Street and Collister Street. Staple Street, extending northward for two blocks from Duane Park and providing a striking vista from the park, is fronted by the side or rear elevations of buildings oriented to Hudson Street, Duane Street, Jay Street, or Harrison Street. No. 171 Duane Street is of special interest because its Staple Street elevation reveals the evidence of two early nineteenth-century building campaigns. North of Jay Street, Staple Street is spanned by a picturesque overhead bridge linking New York Hospital's two buildings. Within the district Collister Street extends for one block between Beach and Hubert Streets and also provides a striking vista. Architects and Builders The architecture of the Tribeca West Historic District was the work of a diverse group of architects and builders who are identifiable since most of the buildings post-date the establishment of the Department of Buildings in the mid-1860s. The architects of record for the more utilitarian buildings in the district are, for the most part, not among the roster of prominent architects working in the city. They include architects based in New Jersey, working for clients who were fellow New Jersey residents, and architects, such as J. Morgan Slade, who subsequently and simultaneously designed more high-style buildings. Architect/builders working in the district included Matthew A. Ryan who designed and built 17 Hubert Street and 185 Franklin Street and the firm of Bloodgood & Bloodgood responsible for 177 and 179 Duane Street, as well as those based in the area like Havilah M. Smith whose carpenter shop was located at 35 North Moore Street. Some buildings were designed by the property owners, such as William Livingston who is the architect of record for his building at 387-391 Greenwich Street. Store and loft buildings in the district were largely the work of architects who specialized in commercial architecture, as well as well-known architects for whom commercial work was a portion of their practice. The former group includes those responsible for multiple buildings in the district, such as John B. Snook and his sons, J. Morgan Slade, Berger & Baylies, and William Graul. Within the district is a substantial body of work of Thomas R. Jackson, who specialized in commercial architecture in the late nineteenth century. His work includes store and loft buildings, warehouses, and the notable Mercantile Exchange Building. Many of them incorporate arcading as a design scheme. Charles C. Haight, most often associated with his institutional work, designed several warehouses in the district around the turn of the century which are studies in abstracted arcaded forms and Renaissance-inspired ornament. - From the 1991 NYCLPC Historic District Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 25 Harrison Street http://flic.kr/p/9cMy2u Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 25-27 Harrison Street http://flic.kr/p/9cMxJU Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 25 Harrison Street http://flic.kr/p/9cMz8u Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Hudson Street http://flic.kr/p/9cMwg1 Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Introduction The Tribeca West Historic District, encompassing some 220 buildings, extends northward from James Bogardus Triangle to Hudson Square with Hudson Street serving as the spine of the district and Duane Park acting as a focal point. West Broadway and Varick Street, historically a major transportation route, form the eastern boundary. Greenwich Street forms a regular edge at the western boundary. Portions of Reade Street where corner buildings intersect Hudson and Greenwich Streets form the southern boundary, while Hubert Street and Ericsson Place, fronting onto the site of Hudson Square, form the northern boundaries. Within this area much of the street grid is set askew from and intersects with the grid of streets running off Broadway, a factor which reinforces the special character of the area. The Tribeca West Historic District takes its name from the acronym TriBeCa, for Triangle Below Canal Street. Coined in the mid-1970s as the result of City Planning studies and the adoption of a Special Lower Manhattan Mixed Use District, the Tribeca name came to be applied to the area south of Canal Street, between Broadway and West Street, extending south to Vesey Street, which is larger than the zoning district. The area of the Tribeca West Historic District has a distinct and special character within the larger Tribeca community which is defined by the district's historical development as reflected in the plan of its streets and the architectural qualities of its buildings. Early in the nineteenth century as the area was initially developed, it was a prime residential neighborhood concentrated around Duane Park and Hudson Square (renamed St. John's Park with the construction of St. John's Chapel on the east side of Varick Street). The basic residential development pattern did much to define the later architectural character of the area as it established the street grid at right angles to Greenwich Street intersecting with the street grid off Broadway, and fixed lot sizes for houses that were later reflected in the lot sizes for commercial buildings. A number of Federal-era houses, subsequently converted for commercial uses, remain in the district. By the mid-nineteenth century, with produce and other goods arriving at the Washington Market, southwest of the area of the historic district, and the transfer of goods facilitated by extensive ship and railroad service, the area of the Tribeca West Historic District began to develop its dominant architectural character. Houses were replaced by buildings constructed to meet the changing needs and growing complexity of commerce, particularly businesses associated with the food industry. Today the district is defined and dominated by commercial buildings of the store and loft and warehouse types, which provide a consistent architectural character although one that developed over a span of some fifty years, roughly 1860 through 1910. This is the result of a functional, yet decorative, approach to commercial architecture which produced substantial and attractive buildings whose form and appearance — generated largely by the uses of the buildings — tended to transcend the changing fashions of architectural style. Still, the buildings encompass a range of treatments: some are utilitarian and influenced by longstanding vernacular traditions; others are influenced by popular architectural styles and ornament, consciously designed to be decorative in appearance; and, late in the century, are those warehouses reflecting contemporary high-style architecture whose architects self-consciously sought to devise an appropriate American architectural expression for the warehouse as a discrete building type. Within the district these buildings are unified by a similar scale; similar building materials, largely masonry in shades of red, brown, and tan; and similar use-generated base treatments consisting of cast-iron piers rising above stepped vaults and loading platforms and sheltered by awnings. Folding iron shutters and wood doors historically filled the loading bay openings, and many of these elements still survive. Granite-slab sidewalks and Belgian block street pavers are other unifying elements which give the district much of its historic and architectural character. While businesses dealing in eggs, butter, and cheese predominated, clients as diverse as flour wholesalers, fancygoods merchants, tobacconists, and produce merchants commissioned and occupied store and loft buildings in the district. Architects for this building type ranged from such architect/builders as Bloodgood & Bloodgood to architects who specialized in commercial architecture such as John B. Snook and his sons, Berger & Baylies, Thomas R. Jackson, and William Graul. Warehouse construction, which reached its peak in numbers in the late 1880s and continued through the first decade of the twentieth century, reflected the greater scale of commerce not only for merchants of perishables but also for merchants requiring large amounts of storage space such as grocery wholesalers. Cold storage warehouses, many of them constructed for the Merchants' Refrigerating Company, are an important variation of this building type within the district. Some of the city's most prominent architects constructed warehouse buildings in the area of the historic district, among them, Stephen D. Hatch, Charles C. Haight, Babb & Cook, and Edward H. Kendall. The importance of the food industry in the history of Tribeca is exemplified by the construction in 1885 of the New York Mercantile Exchange, 2-6 Harrison Street, designed by Thomas R. Jackson. Founded in 1872 as the Butter and Cheese Exchange, reflecting the concentration of these businesses in the area, it expanded by 1882 to include dealers in groceries, dried fruits, poultry, and canned goods. The exchange building, a specialized commercial building type, incorporates arcades containing the double- height windows of the trading room, and its prominence in the area is further emphasized by the picturesque entrance tower and hipped roof. West Broadway, which defines the eastern edge of the district, was a major transportation route into the 1930s, a factor which helped to set off the blocks to the west. Today the street is lined largely by store and loft buildings, including No. 138 West Broadway, one of the rare cast-iron fronted buildings in the district, and several prominent warehouse buildings, including No. 110-116 (a/k/a 16 Hudson Street) and No. 220-224 (a/k/a 126-128 Franklin Street). At the south end of the district West Broadway begins at James Bogardus Triangle, historically a transportation hub. West Broadway leads into Varick Street which assumed its present character when the street was widened in 1918. This street widening also resulted in the creation of Finn Square at the intersection of West Broadway, Varick, and Franklin Streets. Varick Street contains two distinguished civic structures, the Hook and Ladder Company No. 8 (1903, Alexander H. Stevens) at the intersection of North Moore Street and the former Fourth Police Precinct Station House (1912, Hoppin & Koen) at the intersection of Ericsson Place, as well as the prominent windowless cold storage warehouse for the Merchants1 Refrigerating Co. (1924, John B. Snook Sons). Greenwich Street, originally on land owned by Trinity Church, was historically the main north-south thoroughfare along the western side of the island, and the blocks both to the east and west were developed beginning in the mid-nineteenth century with commercial buildings of the store and loft and warehouse types. Today the area of the historic district is divorced from the Hudson River by modern development west of Greenwich Street, leaving the east side of Greenwich as a regular western edge for the historic district. Greenwich Street is characterized by its store and loft buildings, many of them dating from fairly early in the area!s commercial development, several Federal-era houses later converted for commercial use, and several prominent warehouse buildings including No. 371-375 (1905, Joseph Wolf). Hudson Street, the spine of the district, begins at James Bogardus Triangle, formed by the convergence of Hudson and West Broadway, which acts as a gateway at the southern end of the historic district. As befits the role Hudson Street plays in the district, it contains some of the district's most impressive as well as most characteristic buildings. These include the two warehouses which begin the district, No. 19 (1885, George Martin Huss) and No. 16 (1873-74, Charles F. Mengelson); the Schepp Building (1880-81, Stephen D. Hatch), which also fronts onto Duane Park; the American Express Building (1890-91, Edward Hale Kendall); the Pierce Building, later the Powell Building (1890-92, Carrere & Hastings, 1905, enlarged by Henri Fouchaux), an early office building; the Mercantile Exchange (1885, Thomas R. Jackson), and New York Hospital's House of Relief or Emergency Hospital (1893-94, Josiah C. Cady). At the northern end of the district, Hudson Street fronts what was once Hudson Square. Ericsson Place, one of the northern boundaries of the district, also fronts onto Hudson Square. It is dominated by the former Fourth Police Precinct Station House and warehouses which form the complex of buildings developed by the Merchants' Refrigerating Company. The roadbed itself contains some of the district's most intact Belgian block street paving. Hubert Street, the other northern boundary of the district, can be seen as a divider marking the transition between the smaller warehouses and store and loft buildings within the district and the larger, later warehouses outside the district to the north which in their development pattern relate more directly to the Hudson River Railroad Terminal. The district's side streets -- Duane, Thomas, Jay, Worth, Harrison, Leonard, Franklin, North Moore, and Beach — have a consistent development pattern and architectural character defined by store and loft buildings, many of which were built in groups, and larger warehouse buildings. The scale, forms, materials, and use-generated base treatments unify the streetscapes and enhance the district's sense of place. Duane Park is another major element which by its presence reinforces the district's special sense of place. The park is formed as Duane Street splits to encompass this small triangular park whose spatial quality is further enhanced by the uniform street walls of the warehouse and store and loft buildings surrounding it. Further reinforcing the district's special sense of place are two small alley-like streets — Staple Street and Collister Street. Staple Street, extending northward for two blocks from Duane Park and providing a striking vista from the park, is fronted by the side or rear elevations of buildings oriented to Hudson Street, Duane Street, Jay Street, or Harrison Street. No. 171 Duane Street is of special interest because its Staple Street elevation reveals the evidence of two early nineteenth-century building campaigns. North of Jay Street, Staple Street is spanned by a picturesque overhead bridge linking New York Hospital's two buildings. Within the district Collister Street extends for one block between Beach and Hubert Streets and also provides a striking vista. Architects and Builders The architecture of the Tribeca West Historic District was the work of a diverse group of architects and builders who are identifiable since most of the buildings post-date the establishment of the Department of Buildings in the mid-1860s. The architects of record for the more utilitarian buildings in the district are, for the most part, not among the roster of prominent architects working in the city. They include architects based in New Jersey, working for clients who were fellow New Jersey residents, and architects, such as J. Morgan Slade, who subsequently and simultaneously designed more high-style buildings. Architect/builders working in the district included Matthew A. Ryan who designed and built 17 Hubert Street and 185 Franklin Street and the firm of Bloodgood & Bloodgood responsible for 177 and 179 Duane Street, as well as those based in the area like Havilah M. Smith whose carpenter shop was located at 35 North Moore Street. Some buildings were designed by the property owners, such as William Livingston who is the architect of record for his building at 387-391 Greenwich Street. Store and loft buildings in the district were largely the work of architects who specialized in commercial architecture, as well as well-known architects for whom commercial work was a portion of their practice. The former group includes those responsible for multiple buildings in the district, such as John B. Snook and his sons, J. Morgan Slade, Berger & Baylies, and William Graul. Within the district is a substantial body of work of Thomas R. Jackson, who specialized in commercial architecture in the late nineteenth century. His work includes store and loft buildings, warehouses, and the notable Mercantile Exchange Building. Many of them incorporate arcading as a design scheme. Charles C. Haight, most often associated with his institutional work, designed several warehouses in the district around the turn of the century which are studies in abstracted arcaded forms and Renaissance-inspired ornament. - From the 1991 NYCLPC Historic District Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: Harrison Street http://flic.kr/p/9cMxtq Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. Introduction The Tribeca West Historic District, encompassing some 220 buildings, extends northward from James Bogardus Triangle to Hudson Square with Hudson Street serving as the spine of the district and Duane Park acting as a focal point. West Broadway and Varick Street, historically a major transportation route, form the eastern boundary. Greenwich Street forms a regular edge at the western boundary. Portions of Reade Street where corner buildings intersect Hudson and Greenwich Streets form the southern boundary, while Hubert Street and Ericsson Place, fronting onto the site of Hudson Square, form the northern boundaries. Within this area much of the street grid is set askew from and intersects with the grid of streets running off Broadway, a factor which reinforces the special character of the area. The Tribeca West Historic District takes its name from the acronym TriBeCa, for Triangle Below Canal Street. Coined in the mid-1970s as the result of City Planning studies and the adoption of a Special Lower Manhattan Mixed Use District, the Tribeca name came to be applied to the area south of Canal Street, between Broadway and West Street, extending south to Vesey Street, which is larger than the zoning district. The area of the Tribeca West Historic District has a distinct and special character within the larger Tribeca community which is defined by the district's historical development as reflected in the plan of its streets and the architectural qualities of its buildings. Early in the nineteenth century as the area was initially developed, it was a prime residential neighborhood concentrated around Duane Park and Hudson Square (renamed St. John's Park with the construction of St. John's Chapel on the east side of Varick Street). The basic residential development pattern did much to define the later architectural character of the area as it established the street grid at right angles to Greenwich Street intersecting with the street grid off Broadway, and fixed lot sizes for houses that were later reflected in the lot sizes for commercial buildings. A number of Federal-era houses, subsequently converted for commercial uses, remain in the district. By the mid-nineteenth century, with produce and other goods arriving at the Washington Market, southwest of the area of the historic district, and the transfer of goods facilitated by extensive ship and railroad service, the area of the Tribeca West Historic District began to develop its dominant architectural character. Houses were replaced by buildings constructed to meet the changing needs and growing complexity of commerce, particularly businesses associated with the food industry. Today the district is defined and dominated by commercial buildings of the store and loft and warehouse types, which provide a consistent architectural character although one that developed over a span of some fifty years, roughly 1860 through 1910. This is the result of a functional, yet decorative, approach to commercial architecture which produced substantial and attractive buildings whose form and appearance — generated largely by the uses of the buildings — tended to transcend the changing fashions of architectural style. Still, the buildings encompass a range of treatments: some are utilitarian and influenced by longstanding vernacular traditions; others are influenced by popular architectural styles and ornament, consciously designed to be decorative in appearance; and, late in the century, are those warehouses reflecting contemporary high-style architecture whose architects self-consciously sought to devise an appropriate American architectural expression for the warehouse as a discrete building type. Within the district these buildings are unified by a similar scale; similar building materials, largely masonry in shades of red, brown, and tan; and similar use-generated base treatments consisting of cast-iron piers rising above stepped vaults and loading platforms and sheltered by awnings. Folding iron shutters and wood doors historically filled the loading bay openings, and many of these elements still survive. Granite-slab sidewalks and Belgian block street pavers are other unifying elements which give the district much of its historic and architectural character. While businesses dealing in eggs, butter, and cheese predominated, clients as diverse as flour wholesalers, fancygoods merchants, tobacconists, and produce merchants commissioned and occupied store and loft buildings in the district. Architects for this building type ranged from such architect/builders as Bloodgood & Bloodgood to architects who specialized in commercial architecture such as John B. Snook and his sons, Berger & Baylies, Thomas R. Jackson, and William Graul. Warehouse construction, which reached its peak in numbers in the late 1880s and continued through the first decade of the twentieth century, reflected the greater scale of commerce not only for merchants of perishables but also for merchants requiring large amounts of storage space such as grocery wholesalers. Cold storage warehouses, many of them constructed for the Merchants' Refrigerating Company, are an important variation of this building type within the district. Some of the city's most prominent architects constructed warehouse buildings in the area of the historic district, among them, Stephen D. Hatch, Charles C. Haight, Babb & Cook, and Edward H. Kendall. The importance of the food industry in the history of Tribeca is exemplified by the construction in 1885 of the New York Mercantile Exchange, 2-6 Harrison Street, designed by Thomas R. Jackson. Founded in 1872 as the Butter and Cheese Exchange, reflecting the concentration of these businesses in the area, it expanded by 1882 to include dealers in groceries, dried fruits, poultry, and canned goods. The exchange building, a specialized commercial building type, incorporates arcades containing the double- height windows of the trading room, and its prominence in the area is further emphasized by the picturesque entrance tower and hipped roof. West Broadway, which defines the eastern edge of the district, was a major transportation route into the 1930s, a factor which helped to set off the blocks to the west. Today the street is lined largely by store and loft buildings, including No. 138 West Broadway, one of the rare cast-iron fronted buildings in the district, and several prominent warehouse buildings, including No. 110-116 (a/k/a 16 Hudson Street) and No. 220-224 (a/k/a 126-128 Franklin Street). At the south end of the district West Broadway begins at James Bogardus Triangle, historically a transportation hub. West Broadway leads into Varick Street which assumed its present character when the street was widened in 1918. This street widening also resulted in the creation of Finn Square at the intersection of West Broadway, Varick, and Franklin Streets. Varick Street contains two distinguished civic structures, the Hook and Ladder Company No. 8 (1903, Alexander H. Stevens) at the intersection of North Moore Street and the former Fourth Police Precinct Station House (1912, Hoppin & Koen) at the intersection of Ericsson Place, as well as the prominent windowless cold storage warehouse for the Merchants1 Refrigerating Co. (1924, John B. Snook Sons). Greenwich Street, originally on land owned by Trinity Church, was historically the main north-south thoroughfare along the western side of the island, and the blocks both to the east and west were developed beginning in the mid-nineteenth century with commercial buildings of the store and loft and warehouse types. Today the area of the historic district is divorced from the Hudson River by modern development west of Greenwich Street, leaving the east side of Greenwich as a regular western edge for the historic district. Greenwich Street is characterized by its store and loft buildings, many of them dating from fairly early in the area!s commercial development, several Federal-era houses later converted for commercial use, and several prominent warehouse buildings including No. 371-375 (1905, Joseph Wolf). Hudson Street, the spine of the district, begins at James Bogardus Triangle, formed by the convergence of Hudson and West Broadway, which acts as a gateway at the southern end of the historic district. As befits the role Hudson Street plays in the district, it contains some of the district's most impressive as well as most characteristic buildings. These include the two warehouses which begin the district, No. 19 (1885, George Martin Huss) and No. 16 (1873-74, Charles F. Mengelson); the Schepp Building (1880-81, Stephen D. Hatch), which also fronts onto Duane Park; the American Express Building (1890-91, Edward Hale Kendall); the Pierce Building, later the Powell Building (1890-92, Carrere & Hastings, 1905, enlarged by Henri Fouchaux), an early office building; the Mercantile Exchange (1885, Thomas R. Jackson), and New York Hospital's House of Relief or Emergency Hospital (1893-94, Josiah C. Cady). At the northern end of the district, Hudson Street fronts what was once Hudson Square. Ericsson Place, one of the northern boundaries of the district, also fronts onto Hudson Square. It is dominated by the former Fourth Police Precinct Station House and warehouses which form the complex of buildings developed by the Merchants' Refrigerating Company. The roadbed itself contains some of the district's most intact Belgian block street paving. Hubert Street, the other northern boundary of the district, can be seen as a divider marking the transition between the smaller warehouses and store and loft buildings within the district and the larger, later warehouses outside the district to the north which in their development pattern relate more directly to the Hudson River Railroad Terminal. The district's side streets -- Duane, Thomas, Jay, Worth, Harrison, Leonard, Franklin, North Moore, and Beach — have a consistent development pattern and architectural character defined by store and loft buildings, many of which were built in groups, and larger warehouse buildings. The scale, forms, materials, and use-generated base treatments unify the streetscapes and enhance the district's sense of place. Duane Park is another major element which by its presence reinforces the district's special sense of place. The park is formed as Duane Street splits to encompass this small triangular park whose spatial quality is further enhanced by the uniform street walls of the warehouse and store and loft buildings surrounding it. Further reinforcing the district's special sense of place are two small alley-like streets — Staple Street and Collister Street. Staple Street, extending northward for two blocks from Duane Park and providing a striking vista from the park, is fronted by the side or rear elevations of buildings oriented to Hudson Street, Duane Street, Jay Street, or Harrison Street. No. 171 Duane Street is of special interest because its Staple Street elevation reveals the evidence of two early nineteenth-century building campaigns. North of Jay Street, Staple Street is spanned by a picturesque overhead bridge linking New York Hospital's two buildings. Within the district Collister Street extends for one block between Beach and Hubert Streets and also provides a striking vista. Architects and Builders The architecture of the Tribeca West Historic District was the work of a diverse group of architects and builders who are identifiable since most of the buildings post-date the establishment of the Department of Buildings in the mid-1860s. The architects of record for the more utilitarian buildings in the district are, for the most part, not among the roster of prominent architects working in the city. They include architects based in New Jersey, working for clients who were fellow New Jersey residents, and architects, such as J. Morgan Slade, who subsequently and simultaneously designed more high-style buildings. Architect/builders working in the district included Matthew A. Ryan who designed and built 17 Hubert Street and 185 Franklin Street and the firm of Bloodgood & Bloodgood responsible for 177 and 179 Duane Street, as well as those based in the area like Havilah M. Smith whose carpenter shop was located at 35 North Moore Street. Some buildings were designed by the property owners, such as William Livingston who is the architect of record for his building at 387-391 Greenwich Street. Store and loft buildings in the district were largely the work of architects who specialized in commercial architecture, as well as well-known architects for whom commercial work was a portion of their practice. The former group includes those responsible for multiple buildings in the district, such as John B. Snook and his sons, J. Morgan Slade, Berger & Baylies, and William Graul. Within the district is a substantial body of work of Thomas R. Jackson, who specialized in commercial architecture in the late nineteenth century. His work includes store and loft buildings, warehouses, and the notable Mercantile Exchange Building. Many of them incorporate arcading as a design scheme. Charles C. Haight, most often associated with his institutional work, designed several warehouses in the district around the turn of the century which are studies in abstracted arcaded forms and Renaissance-inspired ornament. - From the 1991 NYCLPC Historic District Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra

Flickr photo by Emilio Guerra: 27 Harrison Street http://flic.kr/p/9cMySC Tribeca, Manhattan, New York City, New York, United States If you want to know more about my walks and photos, check out my blog. When these houses were built, they were refreshingly close to the river. The land on which 329 Washington Street stands was originally part of the well-known farm of Annetje Jans. The Dutch Director General, Van Twiller, had granted it in 1636 to her and her first husband, who were both Scandinavian born On this farm of sixty-two acres extending between the present Chambers and Canal Streets, they constructed a building on a point at the then Hudson River shoreline between the present Harrison, Jay, Washington and West Streets, in the block immediately west of 329 Washington Street. After the death of her husband Annetje Jans married the minister of the province, Dominie Bogardus, and the farm became known as the Dominie's Bowery. Annetje's heirs sold it in 1671 to Col . Francis Lovelace, the English Governor of the province, but three years later he lost it to the crown in the satisfaction of a debt. Meanwhile the Dutch province had been granted by the English King to his brother, the Duke of York, who later became James II, King of England. He was succeeded on the throne by Queen Anne. Hence, Annetje Jans' bowery came to be known successively as the Duke's Farm, the King's Farm, and the Queen's Farm. In 1705 Queen Anne gave it by patent to Trinity Church. This portion of the farm was leased for ninety-nine years, in 1765, and became also the site of Hanson's Brewery: "the most commodious and complete of any in America." Philip Rhine lander bought the complex in 1793 and the Brewery then became known as Rhine lander's. After the death of William Rhinelander the property was sold in 1827 by the executors of his estate. 329 Washington Street was built in 1828 as were the two matching houses at Nos. 327 and 331 Washington Street. As the City grew in the early nineteenth century, the commercial activities of the 'Washington Market, located on a site to the south, expanded northward until, by the end of the nineteenth century, this entire area was wholly commercial, and there were no mare than a handful of the original town houses left. After restoration, this house, as part of the larger group of nine houses, will retain intact the characteristic late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century scale and profile which exist nowhere else in New York City. - From the 1969 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report

This photo hosted on Flickr.com (click to view it on Flickr) and owned by: Emilio Guerra