Ons of the Realty
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Chapter 5. Historic Resources 5.1 Introduction
CHAPTER 5. HISTORIC RESOURCES 5.1 INTRODUCTION 5.1.1 CONTEXT Lower Manhattan is home to many of New York City’s most important historic resources and some of its finest architecture. It is the oldest and one of the most culturally rich sections of the city. Thus numerous buildings, street fixtures and other structures have been identified as historically significant. Officially recognized resources include National Historic Landmarks, other individual properties and historic districts listed on the State and National Registers of Historic Places, properties eligible for such listing, New York City Landmarks and Historic Districts, and properties pending such designation. National Historic Landmarks (NHL) are nationally significant historic places designated by the Secretary of the Interior because they possess exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States. All NHLs are included on the National Register, which is the nation’s official list of historic properties worthy of preservation. Historic resources include both standing structures and archaeological resources. Historically, Lower Manhattan’s skyline was developed with the most technologically advanced buildings of the time. As skyscraper technology allowed taller buildings to be built, many pioneering buildings were erected in Lower Manhattan, several of which were intended to be— and were—the tallest building in the world, such as the Woolworth Building. These modern skyscrapers were often constructed alongside older low buildings. By the mid 20th-century, the Lower Manhattan skyline was a mix of historic and modern, low and hi-rise structures, demonstrating the evolution of building technology, as well as New York City’s changing and growing streetscapes. -
The Configuration of the Rock Floor of Greater New York
Bulletin No. 270 . Series B, Descriptive Geology, 73 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. VVALCOTT, DIHECTOK THE CONFIGURATION OF THE ROCK FLOOR OF GREATER NEW YORK BY WILLIAM HERBERT HOBBS WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT. PRINTING OFFICE 1905 CONTENTS. Page. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL .................................................. 7 PART I. STRUCTURAL STUDIES ............................................. .9 Introduction......................................................... 9 Aids to geological studies on Manhattan Island..................... 9 Engineering enterprises that have pierced the rock floor............ 10 Keview of structural geological studies of the New York City area.... 12 Boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx ........................ 12 Gale .................................................... 12 Mather.................................................. 12 Cozzens ................................................. 12 Stevens.................................................. 12 Credner................................................. 13 Newberry ............................................... 13 Dana.................................................... 14 Russell.................................................. 14 Kemp ................................................... 14 Merrill .................................................. 15 Eckel ................................................... 16 Gratacap ................................................ '16 Julien ..................... i............................. -
January 1899
JUrljitrrtttral VOL. VIII. JANUARY-MARCH, 1899. No. 3. THE "SKY-SCRAPER" UP TO DATE. is strange that the solution of a building problem so new as IT that presented by the steel-framed tall building should have apparently so largely ceased to be experimental. The Ameri- can architect is a good deal fonder than his co-worker in other coun- tries of all he is no means so much inclined to proving things ; by hold fast that which is good. On the contrary, he is still altogether too much disposed rather to vindicate his own "originality" than to essay the task, at once more modest and more difficult of "shining with new gracefulness through old forms." Of course his origin- ality will be less crude, and more truly original, in proportion to his education, meaning both his knowledge and his discipline. Nothing can be more depressing than the undertaking to do "something new" by a man who is unaware what has already been done, or who has not learned how it is done. When, within a quarter of a century, the practicable height of commercial buildings has been raised, by successive movements and successive inventions, from five stories to twenty-five, we should expect, given the preference for originality that is born in the American architect, and the absolute necessity for originality that has been thrust upon him by these new mechanical devices, some very wild work, indeed, much wilder than we have had. What nobody could have expected, when the elevator came in to double the practicable height of commercial buildings, and even less when the steel-framed construction came in again to double the height made practicable by the elevator alone, is what has actually happened, and that is a consensus upon a new architectural type. -
ARCH 631 Note Set 28.2 F2009abn
ARCH 631 Note Set 28.2 F2009abn US Historical Structure Examples from Historical Building Construction, Donald Friedman, 1995. 1835 Obadiah Parker House, New York, Parker reinforced with rods, hollow cylinder columns reinforced designer, demolished. House walls were monolithic with hoops. concrete, probably with natural lime cement. 1875 Tribune Building, Park Row at Nassau Street, 1841 [Old] Merchants’ Exchange, 55 Wall Street at New York, Richard Morris Hunt architect, demolished William Street, New York, Isiah Rogers architect, heavily 1966. Probably highest bearing-wall building in New York modified 1907, landmarked. Monolithic all-masonry at 260 feet high. First tower-type building downtown. construction. Wrought-iron beam floors. 1853 New York Crystal Palace, George Carstensen 1883 Statue of Liberty, Bedloe’s Island, Frederic and Charles Gildemeister architects, burned 1858. Cast- Auguste Bartholdi architectural designer, Gustave Eifflel iron columns, wrought-iron arch ribs and truss girders, engineer, Keystone Bridge Company and D. H. King arched trusses, and all-glass curtain wall, portal bracing Contracting builders, landmarked. First full-braced frame for lateral load. in New York, first use of steel columns in the United States, early use of concrete in foundation. 1854 Harper & Brothers Building, 331 Pearl Street on Franklin Square, New York, John Corlies architect, 1885 Home Insurance Building1, Chicago, William James Bogardus engineer, James L. Jackson foundry LeBarron Jenny, architect and engineer, demolished. Main builders, demolished 1925. Brick jack arch floor topped building 138 feet high, 180 feet with 2 additional floors with concrete spanned between wrought-iron floor beams, added later. Construction halted temporarily when supported by cast-iron and wrought-iron bowstring truss building officials were concerned that the building weight girders and cast-iron columns. -
Prestel Munich Berlin London New York
NEWDIRK STICHWEH YORKPHOTOGRAPHY BY JÖRG MACHIRUS AND SCOTT MURPHY SKYSCRAPERS PRESTEL MUNICH BERLIN LONDON NEW YORK NY_SKYSCRAPERS_004_Essay_rl.indd 1 15.01.2009 18:12:13 Uhr NY_SKYSCRAPERS_004_Essay_rl.indd 2 15.01.2009 18:12:13 Uhr TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD 4 CHAPTER 3: MIDTOWN SOUTH 64 CHAPTER 6: FIFTH AVENUE AND ROCKEFELLER CENTER 140 THE HISTORY OF SKYSCRAPERS 6 21. Flatiron Building 66 55. Trump Tower 142 22. Metropolitan Life Tower 68 56. General Motors Building 144 23. Metropolitan Life North Building 70 57. Sherry-Netherland Hotel 146 CHAPTER 1: THE FINANCIAL DISTRICT 16 24. New York Life Building 72 58. Solow Building 147 1. Equitable Building 18 25. Empire State Building 74 59. Museum Tower 148 2. Bank of New York Building 20 26. One Penn Plaza 78 60. Olympic Tower 149 3. Bankers Trust Company Building 22 27. New Yorker Hotel 79 61. Rockefeller Center / G.E. Building 150 4. Trump Building 24 28. American Radiator Building 80 62. CBS Building 154 5. 20 Exchange Place 26 29. Lincoln Building 82 63. Time-Life Building 156 6. Standard Oil Building 28 30. 100 Park Avenue 83 64. XYZ Buildings 158 7. One New York Plaza 29 31. Chanin Building 84 65. W.R. Grace Building 160 8. 55 Water Street 30 66. 500 Fifth Avenue 162 9. 120 Wall Street 32 CHAPTER 4: MIDTOWN EAST 86 67. Fred F. French Building 164 10. American International Building 34 32. Chrysler Building 88 11. 60 Wall Street 36 33. Daily News Building 92 CHAPTER 7: THE THEATER DISTRICT 166 12. -
Greece and Rome in Manhattan
Art 1010 and Classics 1110, Prof. Simon and Prof. Yarrow, Fall 2017, Site Visit Worksheet Greece and Rome in Manhattan Team Name: _______________________________ Team Leader for the Day:__________________________________ Members sign in below: 1. 4. 2. 5. 3. 6. Team Leader Please Read Aloud Directions to your Team: You must complete this worksheet and hand it in to Prof. Simon or Prof. Yarrow at the end of your tour. You can find us at the statue of George Washington in front of Federal Hall. Buildings may be visited in any order. Your team meeting place and time has been assigned. See website or email. All team members present should take a turn being recorder at least one site. As you conduct your walking tour, you should be on the lookout for FASCES (pronounced ‘fas-KEEYS’). Each member of the team should take a picture of a representation of fasces and post to the class blog with the location of the example and an idea of why this design element might have been used in that location. (tags: fasces, SeeninNYC) What are fasces? Fasces are a symbol of the authority of a Roman magistrate (= elected official). At Rome sovereignty (power) rested with the people. Election and correct religious observance bestowed ability to exercise power on behalf of the people (imperium from which we get our English words, empire and imperial). Fasces were real bundles of rods carried by attendants called 1 lictors. The lictors followed the magistrates everywhere as long as they had imperium. A magistrate could order their lictors to enforce their commands with force, i.e. -
Brief Biographies of American Architects Who Died Between 1897 and 1947
Brief Biographies of American Architects Who Died Between 1897 and 1947 Transcribed from the American Art Annual by Earle G. Shettleworth, Jr., Director, Maine Historic Preservation Commission. Between 1897 and 1947 the American Art Annual and its successor volume Who's Who in American Art included brief obituaries of prominent American artists, sculptors, and architects. During this fifty-year period, the lives of more than twelve-hundred architects were summarized in anywhere from a few lines to several paragraphs. Recognizing the reference value of this information, I have carefully made verbatim transcriptions of these biographical notices, substituting full wording for abbreviations to provide for easier reading. After each entry, I have cited the volume in which the notice appeared and its date. The word "photo" after an architect's name indicates that a picture and copy negative of that individual is on file at the Maine Historic Preservation Commission. While the Art Annual and Who's Who contain few photographs of the architects, the Commission has gathered these from many sources and is pleased to make them available to researchers. The full text of these biographies are ordered alphabetically by surname: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z For further information, please contact: Earle G. Shettleworth, Jr., Director Maine Historic Preservation Commission 55 Capitol Street, 65 State House Station Augusta, Maine 04333-0065 Telephone: 207/287-2132 FAX: 207/287-2335 E-Mail: [email protected] AMERICAN ARCHITECTS' BIOGRAPHIES: ABELL, W. -
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
NFS Form 10-900 OMB No, 1024-0018 (Rev. 8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places DEC 141990© Registration Form NATIONAL REGISTER This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations of eligibility for individual properties or districts. See instructions in Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms (National Register Bulletin 16). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the requested information. If an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, styles, materials, and areas of significance, enter only the categories and subcategories listed in the instructions. For additional space use continuation sheets (Form 10-900a). Type all entries. 1. Name of Property________________________________________________ historic name Hibbs & Co. Building other names/site number Folger Building 2. Location street & number 725 Fifteenth Street, NW I I not for publication city, town Washington I I vicinity N/A state District of code DC county N/A code OQl zip code 2QQQ 5 Columbia 3. Classification Ownership of Property Category of Property Number of Resources within Property f*1 private fx" building(s) Contributing Noncontributing I I public-local I district 1 ____ buildings I I public-State I site ____ ____ sites I I public-Federal I structure ______ _____ structures I object ____ ____ objects ____ ____Total Name of related multiple property listing: N/A Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register N/A 4. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this LxJ nomination LH request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. -
Cultural Resources 11.1 Introduction 11.1.1 Context and Key Issues
MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation CHAPTER 11: CULTURAL RESOURCES 11.1 INTRODUCTION 11.1.1 CONTEXT AND KEY ISSUES Cultural resources are an important part of the character of a community. Cultural resources may include historic features, such as buildings, structures, sites, objects and districts, as well as archaeological resources, which are physical remains, usually buried, of past activities on a site. Archaeological resources can include remains from Native American people who used or occupied a site, including tools, refuse from tool-making activities, habitation sites, etc. These resources are also referred to as “precontact,” since they were deposited before Native Americans’ contact with European settlers. Archaeological resources can also include remains from activities that occurred during the “historic period” (the period beginning with European colonization of the New York area), and include remains such as battle sites, foundations, wells and privies. This chapter presents the potential impacts on cultural resources from the construction and operation of the Fulton Street Transit Center (FSTC). The analysis of potential impacts was carried out in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), 16 U.S.C Section 470f and the implementing regulations under Section 106 that are codified at 36 C.F.R. 800. Section 106 and the Part 800 regulations require Federal agencies to consider the effects of their actions on historic properties, which are defined in the regulations as resources listed on or determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Properties listed on or determined eligible for the National Register can include both archaeological and historic resources. -
Architectural Record Company
BRUCE PRICE. tTbe THE WORKS OF BRUCE PRICE. A CRITIQUE BY RUSSELL STURGIS. T may well be thought a great misfortune that the rage for what are supposed to be classical forms and classical combinations should have seized the community at a time when it is so entirely unfit to handle them. Its longing may be thought to prove its need. The fact that it cannot possibly hope to build in what is supposed to be the classical spirit is perhaps the reason why it longs to do so. Admit that the present historically learned epoch has discovered a virtue in certain ages of the past, which virtue it cannot but find itself notably deficient in, and it will yearn and strive that it may in some way, not yet clear to itself, seize some part of that lost propriety and intelligence. For propriety and intelligence are the chief characteristics of what the moderns call classical architecture. Little does the modern de- signer or the modern critic care about the facts, because the, as yet, ascertained $ facts are only slowly calling his attention. j{^H& Inasmuch as the men of the Renaissance and the men of the sixteenth century classical revival, or classical deca- dence, as you choose to con- sider it inasmuch as they had no suspicions that the buildings of Greece were differentiated in any- way from those at Rome, either in picturesqueness of situation, in ir- regularity of grouping, defying the "axis," or in smallness and sim- and inasmuch as had plicity ; they equally little idea that much of the original effect of the intended ef- fect of those Greek buildings lay Price. -
Foundations for Tall Buildings Is
r UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY Class . Book Voiun* MrlO-20M 4 4 " * *f ^- f ^ ^ f ^ -f 4- ' r , i- ^ ^ ^ - t -,- ! f * - ^1* -A + + ^ r ^ *^ f > ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ T -f » i- -f + f f- -v ^. >: ^ -f- < i ^ ^ -f- 1^ -4 ^ + > iK ^ 4 * 1- FOINDATIONS FOR Hl II.DIAdS « Chester Arthur Lord THESIS POR THE DEOREE OF BACHEEOR OF S( I ENCE CIVIL ENGINEERING COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS PRESEXTED JL'>'E. !»10£ UNIVERSITY OP ILLINOIS GOLLRC^E OF ENG-INETi:RING.. June 1, 1910 This Is to certify that the thesis of CHESTER AR~ TJIUR LORD entitled Foundations for Tall Buildings is approved by me as meeting this part of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in civil Enfclneer- Ing.' Instructor In Charge, Approved: Professor of Civil ]i:ngl nee ring. 167147 * *UIUC V / TABLE OF CONTKNTS. Pago. Introduction • 1. Poundations for Eariy Buildings 3» Pile Foundations 5. Spread Foundations 14. Floating Foundations 21. Caisson Foundations 26. Chicago and Northwestern Station, Chicago 31. Manhattan Life Insurance Company, New York 36. City Hall, Chicago 38. American Surety Company, New York 3^. Gillender Building, New York — 41. Conclusions 44. ILLUSTRATIONS. Plate I. - Section of Borings on Site of Chicago Post Office --^ 8. Plate II. - Type of Foundations for Chicago Post Office 9. Plate III- Masonry Foundations, and Iron Rails and Beams on Concrete Base»- 16. Plate IV. - Detail of Beam and Rail Footing in Pair Build- ing • . — 19. Plate V. - Section of Foundation-Singer Building, New York- 24. Plate VI,- Cross-section of Caissons in Manhattan Life Insurance Building, New York — 37. -
Chapter 11: Cultural Resources 11.1 Introduction 11.1.1 Context and Key Issues
MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center DEIS CHAPTER 11: CULTURAL RESOURCES 11.1 INTRODUCTION 11.1.1 CONTEXT AND KEY ISSUES Cultural resources are an important part of the character of a community. Cultural resources may include historic features, such as buildings, structures, sites, objects and districts, as well as archaeological resources, which are physical remains, usually buried, of past activities on a site. Archaeological resources can include remains from Native American people who used or occupied a site, including tools, refuse from tool-making activities, habitation sites, etc. These resources are also referred to as “precontact,” since they were deposited before Native Americans’ contact with European settlers. Archaeological resources can also include remains from activities that occurred during the “historic period” (the period beginning with European colonization of the New York area), and include remains such as battle sites, foundations, wells and privies. This chapter presents the potential impacts on cultural resources from the construction and operation of the Fulton Street Transit Center (FSTC). The analysis of potential impacts was carried out in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), 16 U.S.C Section 470f and the implementing regulations under Section 106 that are codified at 36 C.F.R. 800. Section 106 and the Part 800 regulations require Federal agencies to consider the effects of their actions on historic properties, which are defined in the regulations as resources listed on or determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Properties listed on or determined eligible for the National Register can include both archaeological and historic resources.