NYC-WTC_000093852
Brief explaining risks of sandblasting and chemical treatments on historic building materials.
Same agency, volume and box · similarity 0.881
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗Technical document describing characteristics, problems, and maintenance of glazed architectural terra-cotta.
NYC-WTC_000093838–000093851Folder label: “LANDMARK INFORMATION”

OCR status: ok · source: pdftotext
NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document
Preservation Brief 7: The Preservation of Historic Glazed Architectural Terra-Cotta Page 12 of 14
deterioration severely damages the more ornate pieces (urns, cartouche work, balusters, etc.) either expensive hand casting or alternative materials must be sought. There is a tendency today to replace damaged ornamental work with simpler, cheaper and more readily available units. This decision cannot, however, be supported, as the removal of this work inevitably diminishes the character and integrity of the building. Another major consideration in choosing in-kind replacement is the question of delivery time, which is often quite lengthy. If new glazed architectural terra-cotta is chosen as a replacement material, the architect or building owner should plan far in advance.
Stone may be a suitable replacement material for damaged glazed architectural terra- cotta. Its durability makes it highly appropriate, although the increase in weight over the original hollow units may be of some concern. The fact that historic glazed architectural terra-cotta was glazed in imitation of stone, however, may make the choice of stone as a replacement material a fortuitous one. Metal anchoring may be accommodated easily in the carving. Cost, however, is the major drawback in stone replacement, particularly where rich detailing must be carved to match the original.
Fiberglass replacement is a viable alternative, particularly when rich and elaborate ornamentation has to be duplicated. Casting from original intact pieces can produce numerous sharp copies of entablatures, moldings, balusters, voussoirs, etc. Anchoring is easily included in casting.
Significant drawbacks in using fiberglass replacement are color compatibility, fire code violations, and poor weathering and aging processes. The appropriate coloring of fiberglass is exceedingly difficult in many instances. Painting is often unsatisfactory, as it discolors at a rate different than that of the historic glazed original. While fiberglass casting is lighter than the original units and, therefore, of great interest in the rehabilitation of buildings in areas of high seismic activity, many fire code requirements cannot be met with the use of this material.
Precast concrete units show great promise in replacing glazed architectural terra-cotta at this writing. Precast concrete units can, like fiberglass, replicate nuances of detail in a modular fashion: they can also be cast hollow, use lightweight aggregate and be made to accommodate metal anchoring when necessary. Concrete can he colored or tinted to match the original material with excellent results. It is cost effective and once production is in process, precast concrete call be produced quickly and easily.
Experience shows that it is advisable to use a clear masonry coating on the weather face of the precast concrete units to guarantee the visual compatibility of the new unit, to prevent moisture absorption, to obtain the proper reflectivity in imitation of the original glaze and to prevent weathering of the unit itself. Precast concrete replacement units are presently enjoying great use in replicating historic glazed architectural terra-cotta and show promise for future rehabilitation programs.
Once the replacement material is selected (new glazed architectural terra-cotta. stone, precast concrete, or fiberglass), it must be reanchored into the masonry system. Original metal anchoring came In numerous designs, materials and coatings ranging from bituminous-coated iron to bronze. While most of these anchors are no longer available, they may be easily replicated in large quantities either in the original material when appropriate or out of more durable and available metals such as stainless steel.
Since the masonry backfill is already in place in the historic building, the new replacement unit with anchoring may simply be fitted into the existing backfill by boring a hole or slot for anchor and bedding the anchor and the unit itself in mortar. When replacing historic glazed architectural terra-cotta which originally employed metal anchoring, it is important to replace that anchoring when replacing the unit. Serious problems may result if anchoring is omitted in restoration, when it was used originally. It is erroneous to assume that mortar alone will be sufficient to hold these replacement
http://www2.cr.nps.gov/tps/briefs/brief07.htm 10/3/2001
NYC-WTC 000093849
OCR can misread numbers and units. Confirm readings against the page image before using them.
Ranked by indexed similarity. Reasons describe shared subjects and filing context; check the source records.
NYC-WTC_000093852
Brief explaining risks of sandblasting and chemical treatments on historic building materials.
Same agency, volume and box · similarity 0.881
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗NYC-WTC_000093728
Appendix B outlining performance standards and cleaning requirements for historic building exteriors.
Same agency, volume and box · similarity 0.854
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗NYC-WTC_000093788
Fax transmittal from the Mayor's Office regarding a March 2002 meeting with the building group.
Same agency, volume and box · similarity 0.829
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗NYC-WTC_000164903
Forwarded programmatic agreement documentation addressing post-disaster building cleaning procedures and eligible building list for recovery efforts.
Similar document embedding; no shared entity or topic indexed. · similarity 0.845
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗NYC-WTC_000125098
Protocol document outlining air sampling and monitoring procedures for 130 Cedar Street.
Similar document embedding; no shared entity or topic indexed. · similarity 0.827
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗NYC-WTC_000152327
A financial document from late September 2001 related to water supply operations and emergency response costs.
1 shared topics · similarity 0.825
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗NYC-WTC_000150931
Cover fax from the Mayor's Office forwarding DEP documents regarding exterior clean-up to be reviewed before a meeting with building owners.
Similar document embedding; no shared entity or topic indexed. · similarity 0.824
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗NYC-WTC_000166488
Department of Buildings report containing findings and recommendations regarding the World Trade Center site.
Similar document embedding; no shared entity or topic indexed. · similarity 0.821
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗NYC-WTC_000153308
Draft advisory outlining required safety assessments and utility checks before allowing residents to return to buildings near the World Trade Center.
Similar document embedding; no shared entity or topic indexed. · similarity 0.818
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗NYC-WTC_000139257
DEP official requests final review of the latest air monitoring Scope of Work to conclude negotiations.
1 shared non-person entities · similarity 0.817
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗NYC-WTC_000128425
Document excerpt describing compliance requirements for environmental remediation work at 94 Greenwich Street.
Similar document embedding; no shared entity or topic indexed. · similarity 0.816
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗NYC-WTC_000111934
Document outlining regulatory compliance and follow-up visual assessments conducted by DEP at buildings near the World Trade Center.
Similar document embedding; no shared entity or topic indexed. · similarity 0.815
machine-extracted · confidence unavailable · Check page ↗Similar subjects in other documents. Similarity does not establish the same event, measurement or conclusion.
Page similarity is temporarily unavailable or this page has no indexed vector.
Machine-extracted building matches; verify each source. Buildings, never households.
Readers open these alongside this record — through an Ask answer, the same folder, or indexed similarity. Not a claim they are about the same event.
NYC-WTC_000093580
Archival reference document with minimal visible content related to WTC-era landmark information.
Filed in the same folder
NYC-WTC_000093581
Administrative record from the Landmark Information folder regarding the World Trade Center site.
Filed in the same folder
NYC-WTC_000093582
Administrative record from the Landmark Information folder regarding the World Trade Center site.
Filed in the same folder
NYC-WTC_000093583
Landmarks Preservation Commission notice withdrawing an application for alterations at 192 Broadway due to lack of landmark status.
Filed in the same folder
Permit for minor work issued by the Landmarks Preservation Commission for alterations at 55 Liberty Street.
Filed in the same folder