Sponsored images from 
View allAll Photos Tagged streamlined
42101, 42107 and 4708 work south towards Yanderra with Vintage Rail Journey’s “Riverina Rail Tour” as far as Griffith and Parkes.
The first night of the tour is to Goulburn for the night.
Sunday 7th April 2024
The first streamlined diesel-electric locomotive in the world on display at the B&O Railroad Museum in Baltimore, Maryland.
The streamlined dream like clinker built oak of The Skidbladner calls out to those that can pack their sea chest as a seat from which to person the oars on an imaginary journey and hopefully the visitors will have notions of goods in their sea chest to trade and room there also to bring back their hard won treasures? This now land bound longboat affords a great prospect to experience Viking visions. The replica of the archaeological recovered Gokstad ship now sits next to a reproduction longhouse and both have room enough to house your imagination and also to inspire your dreams.
The Viking Unst Project,
A968
Brookpoint, Haroldswick, Scotland, ZE2
60.7853, -0.8343
© PHH Sykes 2023
phhsykes@gmail.com
The Skidbladner
Architect William Fox of Missoula, Montana, designed the Streamlined Moderne station for KPRK radio located just outside of Livingston, Montana. The building dates to 1946. The stylized radio tower above the front entrance is reminiscent of something straight out of a Buck Rogers comic strip.
Livingston, Montana
U.S. Route 89
Southern Shorthaul Railroad loaded domestic grain service from Nyngan AWB to Allied Mills at Maldon is led by locomotives CLP12, VL354, 4911 & CLF2 as they climb the Cullerin Ranges in Southern NSW and approach the location known as Top Bridge with train number 8242. At Maldon, VL354 would be detached from the train and continue to DELEC as train number D214. Thursday, 14th September 2023.
A video of this train and others filmed on this day can be watched here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9L5iXSWBcc
The streamlined dream like clinker built oak of The Skidbladner calls out to those that can pack their sea chest as a seat from which to person the oars on an imaginary journey and hopefully the visitors will have notions of goods in their sea chest to trade and room there also to bring back their hard won treasures? This now land bound longboat affords a great prospect to experience Viking visions. The replica of the archaeological recovered Gokstad ship now sits next to a reproduction longhouse and both have room enough to house your imagination and also to inspire your dreams.
The Viking Unst Project,
A968
Brookpoint, Haroldswick, Scotland, ZE2
60.7853, -0.8343
© PHH Sykes 2023
phhsykes@gmail.com
The Skidbladner
The streamlined dream like clinker built oak of The Skidbladner calls out to those that can pack their sea chest as a seat from which to person the oars on an imaginary journey and hopefully the visitors will have notions of goods in their sea chest to trade and room there also to bring back their hard won treasures? This now land bound longboat affords a great prospect to experience Viking visions. The replica of the archaeological recovered Gokstad ship now sits next to a reproduction longhouse and both have room enough to house your imagination and also to inspire your dreams.
The Viking Unst Project,
A968
Brookpoint, Haroldswick, Scotland, ZE2
60.7853, -0.8343
© PHH Sykes 2023
phhsykes@gmail.com
The Skidbladner
Streamlined aerodynamic monocoque two-tone luxury coupe - 292-cubic-inch L-head 75° V12, 110-hp
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln-Zephyr
----
Georgetown Cruise Night Thursday show and shine, Nashville North country music night club
www.haltonhillstoday.ca/local-news/cruise-night-revving-u...
www.theifp.ca/news/classic-car-cruise-night-relocates-to-...
----
Olympus PEN Lite E-PL5 + Panasonic Lumix G 20mm 1:1.7 II ASPH
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympus_PEN_E-PL5
www.ephotozine.com/article/olympus-pen-lite-e-pl5-review-...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panasonic_Lumix_20mm_lens
www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-20-1p7-o20/2
P6040426 Anx2 Q90 1200h 1.5k f25 f50 f70
S311, B80, N464 and N466 work 9195 empty grain train bound for Nullawil between Wycheproof and Dumosa.
Thursday 27th February 2025
The streamlined dream like clinker built oak of The Skidbladner calls out to those that can pack their sea chest as a seat from which to person the oars on an imaginary journey and hopefully the visitors will have notions of goods in their sea chest to trade and room there also to bring back their hard won treasures? This now land bound longboat affords a great prospect to experience Viking visions.
The old saying states, "The Devil is in the detail." This expression is used to denote either stumbling blocks, or unseen misfortune from easily overlooked small details. Where the rear of the neck joins in the centre of this image a face can be seen. This reflected small weathered detail looks like a face of shapeshifter in transition and I am choosing to follow the links where Loki can stand in for the Devil in certain circumstances, This shape shifting face made where one neck reflects upon itself is an unlooked for detail that once seen cannot be overlooked again as the picturesque Devil is in this detail.
The replica of the archaeological recovered Gokstad ship now sits next to a reproduction longhouse and both have room enough to house your imagination and also to inspire your dreams.
The Viking Unst Project,
A968
Brookpoint, Haroldswick, Scotland, ZE2
60.7853, -0.8343
© PHH Sykes 2023
phhsykes@gmail.com
The Skidbladner
A Red-eyed Vireo checking things out at my favorite forest. This migratory song bird holds the record for most songs given in a single day among bird species with more than 20,000 songs.
The streamlined dream like clinker built oak of The Skidbladner calls out to those that can pack their sea chest as a seat from which to person the oars on an imaginary journey and hopefully the visitors will have notions of goods in their sea chest to trade and room there also to bring back their hard won treasures? This now land bound longboat affords a great prospect to experience Viking visions. The replica of the archaeological recovered Gokstad ship now sits next to a reproduction longhouse and both have room enough to house your imagination and also to inspire your dreams.
The Viking Unst Project,
A968
Brookpoint, Haroldswick, Scotland, ZE2
60.7853, -0.8343
© PHH Sykes 2023
phhsykes@gmail.com
The Skidbladner
A yardang is a streamlined protuberance carved from bedrock or any consolidated or semiconsolidated material by the dual action of wind abrasion by dust and sand, and deflation which is the removal of loose material by wind turbulence. Yardangs become elongated features typically three or more times longer than wide, and when viewed from above, resemble the hull of a boat. Facing the wind is a steep, blunt face that gradually gets lower and narrower toward the lee end.[2] Yardangs are formed by wind erosion, typically of an originally flat surface formed from areas of harder and softer material. The soft material is eroded and removed by the wind, and the harder material remains. The resulting pattern of yardangs is therefore a combination of the original rock distribution, and the fluid mechanics of the air flow and resulting pattern of erosion.
The streamlined dream like clinker built oak of The Skidbladner calls out to those that can pack their sea chest as a seat from which to person the oars on an imaginary journey and hopefully the visitors will have notions of goods in their sea chest to trade and room there also to bring back their hard won treasures? This now land bound longboat affords a great prospect to experience Viking visions. The replica of the archaeological recovered Gokstad ship now sits next to a reproduction longhouse and both have room enough to house your imagination and also to inspire your dreams.
The Viking Unst Project,
A968
Brookpoint, Haroldswick, Scotland, ZE2
60.7853, -0.8343
© PHH Sykes 2023
phhsykes@gmail.com
The Skidbladner
Southern Shorthaul Railroads Westons tip duties is usually done with SSR101 & SSR102, CLF1 (Formerly CL2) replaced SSR102 while it was at Cardiff for some TLC. Here we see CLF1 & SSR101 at Westons during the tip. Thursday, 28th October 2021.
great egret tucks the long neck up against the body and points the toes to keep wind resistance to a minimum
Got the whole lot in this time! Wild Ringed Necked Parakeet in Kensington Gardens. Spot the robin, I have only just noticed it!
S311, B80, N464 and N466 head away from Wycheproof past the GEB with empty SSR grain train 9195 to Nullawil.
Thursday 27th February 2025
As the sun rises on another day, A70 and N455 approach Borung with empty grain train 9193 to Manangatang.
Thursday 27th February 2025
A visit to NATIONAL WOW MUSEUM
& NELSON CLASSIC CAR COLLECTION Nelson. On our trip up the South Island of New Zealand April 2019.
The Museum showcases two very distinct collections that collide in a celebration of design, innovation and wonder.
Where else in the world can you see a stunning selection of more than 60 wearable art garments, alongside more than 140 veteran, vintage and classic cars?
Together the wearable art and collectible cars epitomise the very heart of WOW – exploding the boundaries of design so that creativity and invention can thrive in a world of limitless possibilities.
For more Info: www.wowcars.co.nz/
The streamlined dream like clinker built oak of The Skidbladner calls out to those that can pack their sea chest as a seat from which to person the oars on an imaginary journey and hopefully the visitors will have notions of goods in their sea chest to trade and room there also to bring back their hard won treasures? This now land bound longboat affords a great prospect to experience Viking visions. The replica of the archaeological recovered Gokstad ship now sits next to a reproduction longhouse and both have room enough to house your imagination and also to inspire your dreams.
The Viking Unst Project,
A968
Brookpoint, Haroldswick, Scotland, ZE2
60.7853, -0.8343
© PHH Sykes 2023
phhsykes@gmail.com
The Skidbladner
When the forced perspective adventure began, the one24thscale team naively imagined we could focus on the sleek, streamlined cars of the nineteen thirties. Ken marveled at how, during the greatest economic crisis the nation ever experienced, some of the greatest works of automotive art had been created. I share that sense of wonder. We wanted to celebrate those cars.
The Danbury Mint, 1934 Packard LeBaron was one of only a handful of die cast models we had to work with on that first day of shooting. We soon learned, yes there are lots of gorgeous models of cars of the rich and famous available from makers of die cast models. What proved difficult was finding scenes to use them in. There are only so many mansions around town to use as backdrops. In the rural settings we revisit time and again, about the only place for a rich man's car, is hot rodding down a country lane, disrupting the peace and quiet. Well, we did that story, a couple of times.
We even staged our own Concours de Elegance one hot July day, under the trees on the west lawn of the Grant-Humphreys mansion. We were able to spotlight a lot of high end cars in that series.
Finding a stage for the gorgeous cars of the deco era was the idea behind this set. It is meant to evoke a nineteen thirties, car dealer's salon. The buying experience was once very different, especially for high-end buyers. Though, I doubt they would have served you a Latte while you talked about financing.
In the months ahead, pandemic willing, you can expect to see more from this new time machine. Stay tuned!
No forced perspective trickery happening here! This is a photograph of a 1/24 scale die-cast model car in a 1/24 scale custom built 1930's car dealership.
Danbury Mint 1934 Packard Lebaron
Heber Valley Railroad 2936 is a restored vintage 56-seat passenger coach originally built by the Budd Company for the New York Central. The car was later converted to a 28-seat parlor car for use on Chessie steam specials, and later on the Morristown & Erie.
The car was recently repainted in D&RGW inspired livery. All stainless steel surfaces were restored and polished by hand. The car will offer premium seating on a high-end streamlined passenger train, with an option for cheese and wine tasting.
An Elegant Tern riding the wind like a streamlined missile along the shore of the Pacific Ocean in California. Such a beautiful bird glad to have an image!
Common Merganser
Common Mergansers are streamlined ducks that float gracefully down small rivers or shallow shorelines. The males are striking with clean white bodies, dark green heads, and a slender, serrated red bill. The elegant, gray-bodied females have rich, cinnamon heads with a short crest. In summer, look for them leading ducklings from eddy to eddy along streams or standing on a flat rock in the middle of the current. These large ducks’ nest in hollow trees; in winter they form flocks on larger bodies of water.
For more info: www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Common_Merganser/overview
Vintage streamlined passenger cars exit Loray Canyon at North Pass west of Montello, Nevada with Big Boy 4014 in charge.
July 19. 2024
C&O streamlined steam locomotive 490, B&O Railroad Museum.
Description of the 490 from the museum's website:
The No. 490 was constructed by the American Locomotive Company (ALCO) for the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway (C&O) in 1926. As one of the five F-19 4-6-2 "Pacific" locomotives built for the C&O, the No. 490 was used on passenger trains on the mainline east of Charlottesville and west of Clifton Forge. In 1930, the No. 490 was assigned to the "Sportsman," the premier C&O passenger train at the time. Later, the No. 490 was transferred to the "George Washington." The No. 490 and other 4-6-2s operated between the Cincinnati and Washington route until 1942 when the C&O replaced the "Pacifics" with new heavy Baldwin 4-8-4. The No. 490 and other 4-6-2s continued to run as secondary passenger trains during World War II.
Shortly after the end of the war, the C&O decided to upgrade their passenger service. The C&O was primarily a coal-hauler and therefore wanted to improve steam locomotive technology. They developed a new luxury liner between Washington and Cincinnati named the "Chessie." The new liner was to be powered by experimental steam-turbine-electric locomotives. In addition, the C&O's Huntington shops rebuilt the No. 490 and the other 4-6-2s into 4-6-4 "Hudsons." The new locomotives had roller bearings, front-end throttle, high-speed booster, cross counterbalance, and the Franklin system of steam distribution.
Due to the increased automobile production and the airline expansion that occurred after the war, the luxury Chessie passenger trains never ran. The rebuilt "Hudsons" instead hauled regular passenger trains until 1953. The No. 490 was stored in the Huntington Roundhouse until 1968 when it was moved to the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Museum.
The streamlined dream like clinker built oak of The Skidbladner calls out to those that can pack their sea chest as a seat from which to person the oars on an imaginary journey and hopefully the visitors will have notions of goods in their sea chest to trade and room there also to bring back their hard won treasures? This now land bound longboat affords a great prospect to experience Viking visions. The replica of the archaeological recovered Gokstad ship now sits next to a reproduction longhouse and both have room enough to house your imagination and also to inspire your dreams.
The Viking Unst Project,
A968
Brookpoint, Haroldswick, Scotland, ZE2
60.7853, -0.8343
© PHH Sykes 2023
phhsykes@gmail.com
The Skidbladner
Baobao does the mind-melding stuff. Do you feel smooth soothing energy and serenity emanating from him?
[#36]
Beautiful fountain and worthy customer. Ibises are a group of long-legged wading birds in the family Threskiornithidae, that inhabit wetlands, forests and plains. Ibises usually feed as a group, probing mud for food items, usually crustaceans. It is widespread across much of Australia. It has a predominantly white plumage with a bare, black head, long down curved bill and black legs. They are monogamous and highly territorial while nesting and feeding. Most nest in trees, often with spoonbills or herons. Due to its increasing presence in the urban environment and its habit of rummaging in garbage, the species has acquired a variety of colloquial names such as tip turkey; and bin chicken, and in recent years has become an icon of popular culture, being regarded with passion, wit, and, in equal measure, affection and disgust. 28715
The hood ornament on a '40 Chevrolet has the Art Deco look of a streamlined locomotive of the same era.
Another decade ago photo (2025 -> 2015). Another "Railfan Weekend" photo relating to NP 3617... which is on the other end of this train. (Look closely).
At the time, NP 3617 wasn't yet operational, so why not use a beautiful Soo Line FP7 to move the photo train around?
Soo 2500 was shoving hard moving the train to Palmers, the next photo location. Northern Pacific observation car "Rainier Club" and NP Caboose 1311 are along for the ride with the CN ore jennies.
Maybe someday there will be more railfan weekends... I have some ideas...
Anteaters are amongst the strangest looking creatures on earth.
Its name is a hint to one of its favorite foods, and you can't miss its long snout, but there's more to the story of the Giant Anteater or Ant Bear (Myrmecophaga tridactyla). This unique animal is the largest of the four species of anteaters, 180 to 215 cm in length, with weights of 25 to 41 kg. The snout is long (up to 45 cm in length) and the skull is streamlined with small eyes and ears. The tail is large and bushy and is nearly as long as the body.
Giant anteaters have fur that is thick and coarse and longer towards the tail. Their coat is gray or brown with black and white stripes on the shoulders and a crest of hair along the middle of the back. The forelegs are white with black bands at the toes.
Anteaters eat ants. They also eat termites, consuming both in vast quantities, sometimes up to 35,000 insects in a single day. The anteater will rip open a termite hill with large front claws and work its tubular snout into the opening, sticking its long, worm-shaped tongue down into the heart of the colony and trapping the insects on the tongue's sticky coating. The tongue can be extended as much as 60 cm.
Giant anteaters are found in Central and South America, east of the Andes, from southern Belize and Guatemala to northern Argentina, where they prefer grasslands, savannas, and open tropical forests.
This picture was taken in Zoo Parc Overloon, zoo in Overloon, the Netherlands.
Miereneters behoren tot de meest vreemd uitziende wezens op aarde. Zijn naam is een hint naar zijn favoriete voedsel, en zijn lange snuit is niet te missen, maar er is meer te vertellen over de reuzenmiereneter (Myrmecophaga tridactyla). Andere namen voor dit opvallende dier zijn grote miereneter, mierenbeer of yoeroemi. De reuzenmiereneter is de grootste van de vier soorten miereneters, 180 à 215 cm lang, en een gewicht van 25 à 41 kg. Op schouderhoogte is dit dier ongeveer 60 cm hoog. De snuit is tot circa 45 cm lang en het hoofd is gestroomlijnd met kleine ogen en oren. De ruig en lang behaarde staart is bijna even lang als het lichaam. Het lichaam is kort en stevig grijs of bruin behaard. De kop is lichter van kleur dan de achterzijde. Een brede zwarte band, met een witte streep begrensd, begint op de borst, en loopt over de schouder naar zijn middel. Deze streep geeft een camouflage-effect. De voorpoten zijn wit met zwarte banden bij de tenen.
Miereneters eten mieren, maar ook termieten en andere insecten, die ze in grote hoeveelheden, soms tot 35.000 insecten per dag consumeren. Hij gebruikt zijn scherpe klauwen om de mierennesten of holen open te scheuren, waarna hij z’n lange buisvormige snuit naar binnen steekt. Met zijn 60 cm lange wormvormige tong slurpt hij de mieren op. Door het kleverige speeksel blijven de insecten gemakkelijk op de tong kleven. Hij steekt zijn tong zo'n 150 keer per minuut naar buiten. Miereneters hebben geen tanden. Wel zijn de speekselklieren goed ontwikkeld. Ze kauwen hun prooi met harde delen van hun gehemelte. De taak van het gebit is overgenomen door wrijfplaten in een gedeelte van de maag.
Reuzenmiereneters komen voor in Midden- en in Zuid-Amerika ten oosten van het Andesgebergte; ongeveer vanaf het zuiden van Belize en Guatemala naar het noorden van Argentinië, waar ze leven in graslanden, savannes, en open tropische bossen.
Zijn natuurlijke vijanden zijn de jaguar en de poema. Ze kunnen zich tegen deze dieren met hun scherpe klauwen verdedigen.
Deze foto is gemaakt in Zoo Parc Overloon bij Overloon in Noord-Brabant.
_________________________
All rights reserved. Copyright © Martien Uiterweerd. All my images are protected under international authors copyright laws and may not be downloaded, reproduced, copied, transmitted or manipulated without my written explicit permission.
_________________________
.
.
I don't remember having taken a photo of the Brighton starlings where so many of them have had their wings back. I'm not sure if this was because it was windy (it was VERY windy!), or whether they were preparing to swoop low over the water. The blue in the background is the sky reflected on the sea. This was taken early on when it was still light.
This sleek silver beauty (1957 Chevy 3100 pickup) was spotted in Paola Kansas about to participate in the annual Heartland Car Show held on the historic town square.
The 1957 Chevrolet 3100 Pickup is part of the Chevrolet Task Force series, introduced in 1955, marking a significant redesign from earlier models. This truck is known for its classic styling and robust performance, featuring various engine options and configurations that appealed to both consumers and collectors alike.
The 1957 model is part of the Chevrolet Task Force series, which began in 1955, representing a major redesign from the previous Advance Design series.
It offered several engine choices, including an inline 6 with 140 HP and a V8 option, enhancing its appeal.
The 1957 model featured a more streamlined design with a distinctive grille and updated body lines, contributing to its iconic status.
The 3100 Pickup was popular among both commercial users and private owners, making it a sought-after classic today.
Williamsburg, Brooklyn
A collaborative project of the Federal Public Works Administration and the newly established New York City Housing Authority, the Williamsburg Houses are notable as one of the earliest housing developments in the United States to reflect the ideas of the modern movement in architecture. In the 1920s Williamsburg was one of the most densely populated sections of Brooklyn and nearly six hundred, mostly frame, structures were demolished to create the 23.3 acre site. Proposed in 1934, this residential complex was skillfully designed by the Williamsburg Associated Architects during 1935 and most units were occupied by 1938.
The partnership included Richmond H. Shreve, of Shreve, Lamb & Harmon, the architects of the Empire State Building, and William Lescaze, the Swiss-born architect who helped introduce the “International” style on the eastern seaboard. Lescaze was responsible for the design, which includes twenty 4-story structures on four “super” blocks turned at 15 degree angles to the street grid. Oriented to the sun and prevailing winds, this unusual layout produced a series of large and small courts, many of which flow into a large public space at the center of each block. A light-colored palette distinguishes the facades, executed in tan brick and exposed concrete.
Among the most prominent features are the entrances, marked by blue tile and projecting stainless steel canopies, and the handsome streamlined storefronts. The complex was widely discussed by contemporary critics and more than 25,000 New Yorkers applied for 1,622 apartments. During the mid-1990s, the buildings underwent an extensive restoration which included the replacement of all exterior materials. Sponsored by the Housing Authority, in consultation with the Landmarks Preservation Commission, these alterations were remarkably sensitive and in the 4th edition of the AIA Guide to New York City the “revivified” complex was called “the best public housing project ever built in New York.”
DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS
Housing the Masses
From the rowhouse to the apartment building, New York City has been a laboratory for innovative housing. Beginning after the Civil War, apartments, variously known as French Flats and tenements, were built to house the city’s surging population. Immigrants, for the most part, crowded into unregulated tenements, structures that maximized profits for developers while providing few amenities that we take for granted today, such as light, air, and private bathrooms.
Despite government efforts to legislate minimum standards in 1867 and 1879, initially private individuals took the most significant steps to make decent housing affordable to all. Several pioneering examples were located close to the Brooklyn waterfront, including the Home and Tower Buildings (William Field and Son, 1876-78), the Astral Apartments (Lamb & Rich, 1885-87) and Riverside (William Field and Son, 1890). The later complex surrounded a large tree-shaded courtyard incorporating a music pavilion and areas for drying laundry. Despite these, and a few innovative Manhattan developments, the majority of New Yorkers continued to live in substandard conditions.
The passage of the New Tenement Law in 1901 improved the situation, requiring that multiple dwellings be built on significantly larger lots, with fire escapes and separate “privies” for each family. After World War I, the garden apartment came into vogue. While most were built for the middle class, especially in Jackson Heights, a significant group were sponsored by unions and cooperative organizations that wished to provide members with inexpensive apartments. Significant examples include the Amalgamated Houses (Springsteen & Goldhammer, 1930) on Manhattan’s Lower East Side and the “Coops” built in the Bronx by the United Workers Cooperative Association (Springsteen & Goldhammer, 1925-27; Herman Jessor, 1927-29).
The first significant act of government intervention occurred in 1926 with the passage of the New York State Housing Law. Promoted by Governor Alfred E. Smith to encourage construction through the formation of local authorities that would sell bonds or seek federal funds, it had little impact until 1934 when the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) was established. The authority’s first project, aptly called the First Houses (Frederick L. Ackerman, 1934-36), was located in Manhattan’s East Village. Begun as a rehabilitation program involving the demolition of every third structure, due to structural problems the eight brick buildings were entirely rebuilt.
Throughout the early Depression, government-subsidized housing remained a controversial issue. Consequently, it was first promoted as worker relief, organized to create jobs but not compete with the commercial market. The first federal agency to involve itself with housing was the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) which was created in 1932 to provide low-interest loans to limited-dividend housing corporations. Of the two loans it made, one was toward the construction of Knickerbocker Village (John S. Van Wart & Frederick L. Ackerman, 1933). Built for the Fred F. French Company, this Chinatown-area development consists of two 12-story buildings, both enclosing an interior courtyard.
In mid-1933, as part of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal, the Housing Division of the Public Works Administration (PWA) was established. What made this agency different from its predecessor, the RFC, was that it would be directly involved in the planning and construction of low-income housing. The program was a great success and over the next three and half years it collaborated on the design and construction of 51 projects in 36 cities, including the Harlem River Houses and the Williamsburg Houses.
The passage of the Wagner-Steagall Bill (aka U.S. Housing Bill) by the United States Congress in September 1937, strengthened the federal government’s commitment to housing, but shifted greater control to local authorities. The first New York City housing project to be financed under this program was the Red Hook Houses (Electus Litchfied, chief designer, 1938-39) in Brooklyn. Future construction, which would amount to more than half a million low-rental units nationwide by 1957, would be funded primarily through low-interest loans.
Site
The Williamsburg Houses are located in northwestern Brooklyn, approximately one mile east of the Williamsburg Bridge and two blocks south of Grand Street, a lively commercial thoroughfare. Founded as part of the town of Bushwick in the mid17th century, Williamsburg was incorporated as a village in 1827. The community prospered and by 1852 it was the 20th largest city in the nation. Three years later, Williamsburg became part of Brooklyn and was commonly referred to as the Eastern District. Although ferry service was important to the area’s development, it was the planning and construction of a second East River crossing, the Williamsburg Bridge, that caused the most dramatic growth.
Proposed in 1883, the bridge was completed with much fanfare in 1903, serving pedestrians, bicycles and horse-drawn vehicles. In subsequent decades, Williamsburg rivaled the Lower East Side in population and density. The Brooklyn Eagle claimed in 1920 that the bridge was part of the busiest traffic center in the nation and that a single block north of it was the most crowded in the world. Conditions in the neighborhood continued to deteriorate throughout the decade, so much so that the population began to decline.
In October 1933, the Federal Works Administration (PWA) established a slum clearance committee to study conditions throughout New York City. Richmond H. Shreve, who would later serve as chief architect of the Williamsburg Houses, was named director. Based on the committee’s recommendations, $25 million was set aside for a housing program in New York City. Under the direction of the NYCHA, a more comprehensive study was undertaken in 1934, focusing on fourteen neighborhoods, including Williamsburg. The PWA reported:
When the study was completed the blighted slum area of the Williamsburg section stood out as the best example where the most good could be done in wholesale clearance work.
Of 93 blocks studied, a grid of 12 was identified for redevelopment in Williamsburg. These blocks were chosen because property values were relatively low and the owners were willing to sell. Most of buildings were mixed-use, incorporating retail spaces at ground level and apartments above. Each lot was carefully documented: 90% of the structures were at least forty years old, 70% were built of wood, 78% had no central heating, and 67% had no private toilets. Such statistics were used to paint an extremely bleak picture of life there:
But the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn, according to official surveys, is unique in that its slums bear the stamp of dull listlessness and despair . . . Laissez faire, exploitation, and land speculation have robbed the community of its natural potentialities for development and orderly urban life.
Public amenities were also in short supply; there were few schools and there were almost no parks.
Architects
Five architects were appointed to the NYCHA’s architectural board in May 1934: Richmond H. Shreve (1877-1946) of Shreve, Lamb & Harmon, Matthew W. Del Gaudio (1889-1960), William Lescaze (1899-1969), Arthur C. Holden (18901993), and James F. Bly. As members of the board, their initial role was advisory. They would act as the authority’s chief architect, overseeing the design and construction of municipal housing citywide.
In June 1934 an open competition was held to choose the architects who would work on the Williamsburg Houses and other NYCHA projects. The program guidelines did not specify the location, but the grid chosen closely resembled the long blocks where the Williamsburg Houses would be built. Of 278 architects who participated, 5 of the 22 selected were assigned to the Brooklyn project: Samuel Gardstein, of Holmgren, Volz & Gardstein, G. Harmon Gurney (b. 1896), of Gurney & Clavan, John W. Ingle Jr., Paul Trapani (1887-1974), and Harry Leslie Walker (1877-1954).
In June 1935, a contract was signed with the Williamsburg Associated Architects. The partnership consisted of ten men: the five architects selected by jury, as well as the five members of the architectural board. Among them, Shreve had the most experience with large projects, having worked on a succession of major Manhattan skyscrapers, most notably, the Empire State Building (Shreve, Lamb & Harmon, 1931).
A graduate of the College of Architecture at Cornell University (1902), he began his career as a member of the school’s faculty and later joined the firm of Carrére & Hastings in New York City where he distinguished himself as having a “genius for the solution of operational and administrative problems.” Whereas prior to the Depression he mainly worked on office buildings, in his later years Shreve was associated with residential developments, most notably the Vladeck Houses (1940) on the Lower East Side, and Parkchester (1938-42), a development with more than twelve thousand apartments in the Bronx. During the late 1930s, he also served as a member of the board of design for the New York World’s Fair.
Design
Of the three initial projects built by the NYCHA and the PWA, the Williamsburg Houses were the most innovative. Shreve appointed Lescaze as the chief designer, responsible for the plan and elevations. In the 1930s, he was at the height of his career, profiled in publications read by professionals and the layman. Born near Geneva, Switzerland, in 1896, he studied in Zurich with the architect Karl Moser in 1915-19 and for a brief period worked in Paris with Henri Sauvage, an important designer of apartment buildings. Lescaze moved to the United States in 1920 and after working in Cleveland and New York City, formed a partnership with George Howe, a Philadelphia architect, in 1929.
Their association lasted four years and produced one architectural masterpiece, the Philadelphia Savings Fund Society building, completed in 1932. During the mid-1930s, he was extremely active, working on unrealized plans for the Museum of Modern Art, the Brooklyn Museum, and the Brooklyn Children’s Museum, as well as building three of the earliest modern-style townhouses in Manhattan, his own house and studio, completed in 1934, as well as the Raymond C. and Mildred Kramer (1934-5) and Edward and Dorothy Norman (1940) houses. He also designed, with Albert Frey, the Chrystie-Forsyth Houses. Planned in 1931, this unrealized proposal was included in the Museum of Modern Art’s so-called “International Style” exhibition of 1932.
One of the most unique aspects of the Williamsburg Houses is the plan. To create the 23.3 acre complex, twelve blocks were acquired by the city, and the two east-west streets (Stagg and Ten Eyck) were closed to traffic to create four “super” blocks. All but one extend three full blocks from north to south, except part of the block between Manhattan and Graham Avenues that was set aside for a new junior high school and play area.
The development of New York City was closely tied to its gridiron. Introduced in 1811, it resulted in a city of predictable intersecting streets and avenues. In 1835, a similar plan was approved for Brooklyn and by the early 1850s the streets that cross through the site of the Williamsburg Houses had opened.
Most were named for area residents, such as Daniel Maujer, a lawyer and alderman, John and James Lorimer Graham, land jobbers, and James Scholes, a local land owner. The impact of this approach is visible throughout New York City, establishing blocks and lots of equal size and dimensions. Residential developers benefitted immensely, commissioning rowhouse and tenement designs that could be repeated without regard to location.
By the end of the 19th century, there was relatively little open space in Manhattan and Brooklyn. As part of the City Beautiful movement, various attempts were made to loosen the grid’s hold, first through the passage of the Small Parks Act in 1887, which focused on tenement neighborhoods, and later, by situating major civic structures in plazas. Similar ideas shaped the development of garden apartments which came into vogue after 1910. One of the primary characteristics of this type of multiple dwelling was reduced site coverage.
In most cases, such as in the Jackson Heights Historic District, the buildings were set around the perimeter of each block, enclosing large private gardens, but in other situations, such as at the Harlem River Houses, a “crankshaft” arrangement was adopted, creating a mixture of interior and exterior courts.
Lescaze borrowed freely from both the garden apartment tradition and architects associated with European modernism. In his earliest design, each block incorporated six U-shaped structures arranged around a narrow central court. A later design was considerably more irregular. Turned at an angle to the street, there were fewer but larger buildings.
Many aspects of this proposal were integrated into the final design. The Williamsburg Houses are configured in three ways, with footprints suggesting a capital “H,” small “h,” and “T.” All have small spurs and extensions, resembling crossbars. By adding this feature the number of courtyards was significantly increased. Within each block are six buildings (except north of the school); at the north and south are the “H” and “h” configurations, and in the middle, the “T”s.
The decision to turn the buildings at a 15 degree angle to the street grid proved controversial. PWA accounts described it in functional terms, explaining that the orientation would provide tenants with more sun and take advantage of the prevailing northwest breezes. During the previous decade, many architects and planners experimented with similar ideas. One of the earliest built examples “to deviate from the geometry of the New York gridiron” was the Mesa Verde apartments (1926) in Jackson Heights. Designed by Henry Atterbury Smith and based on an earlier proposal from 1917, the development featured two rows of six “closed L buildings” set at 45 degree angle to the surrounding streets.
Lescaze, however, was more likely to have been influenced by European sources. During the 1920s, he frequently returned to Europe, a period when leading architects were involved in the design of social housing. Many favored the “tower in the park” approach in which free-standing high-rise structures stood in continuous open space. Writing in English in 1935, Walter Gropius concluded that apartment blocks should “command a clear view of the sky, over broad expanses of grass and trees which separate the blocks and serve as playgrounds.”
Another source of inspiration might have been Ernst May who oversaw the design and construction of many low-rise housing estates in Frankfurt. In his Bruchfeldstrasse development of 1926-27, designed with C. K. Rudloff, one section was arranged in an overlapping zig-zag configuration. As in Williamsburg, each unit had corner windows, providing tenants with uninterrupted views of a central garden.
Many writers were skeptical about the benefits of Lescaze’s plan. Hamlin argued that the layout would convert the courts “into perfect channels for Project for a group of factories. our most vicious northwest winds.” He was told that
the arrangement had, in fact, been chosen for aesthetic reasons, to “break up the street facades” and “allow the feeling of space to weave in and out on the street fronts. This goal was definitely achieved, producing an environment that was new and distinctive. The flowing spaces that Lescaze planned are less monumental and more intimate than those experienced in most housing projects, juxtaposing wedge-shaped lawns with semi-enclosed courtyards and large open plazas. As originally built, no fences interrupted the spaces and the areas adjoining the curving concrete walks were paved with cobblestone.
The Elevations
Equally modern were the elevations. Lescaze was attracted to the expressive and aesthetic qualities of modern materials. Particularly unusual was the decision to use a light-colored palette. Built from reinforced concrete, the walls were originally enclosed with a sand-cast brick that was variously described by observers as bright tan, yellowish, pinkish, and grayish warm pink. One of the most notable features was the exposed concrete floor plates which express the structure and division between the floors while giving the complex a strong horizontal appearance. Talbot Hamlin observed:
The effectiveness of the buildings is undoubted. The striping of brick and concrete and the contrast of the light walls which front the stair towers make a vivid picture . . .
Prior to the mid-1930s, red brick was the most frequently used material in housing developments, used throughout Jackson Heights and in the First Houses and Harlem River Houses. The proposal to break with this tradition generated considerable debate. While the general scheme was approved in June 1935, it was not until October that specific materials were selected. Presumably, the PWA wished to standardize the building process and reduce costs. Frederick Ackerman, technical director of the NYCHA, defended Lescaze’s proposal. He wrote the authority’s chairman, Langdon W. Post:
. . . the “effect” of the Project will depend very largely upon the texture and quality of the exterior wall. Unless the exterior wall possesses a greater intrinsic interest than one made of common brick then the resultant effect is certain to be a bleak, barren and unusually forbidding mass of building:
One might readily mistake the At Williamsburg, the buildings stand as freestanding objects, finished on all sides and approachable from multiple directions. No facade dominates and the apartment entrances face both the streets and courtyards. For those unfamiliar with the layout, the angled plan may have been somewhat disorienting. To make it easier to navigate, signs were installed throughout the complex and Lescaze skillfully designed the entrances, making dramatic use of color and form. Like Le Corbusier, he was an “accomplished” painter and frequently used color, especially blue, to enliven wall surfaces. Another possible model was May’s housing development at Praunheim (1926-29) where contrasting colors were used to give the projecting stair towers a distinctive appearance.
Within the courtyards are as many as five entrances. Each is sheltered by a small cantilevered aluminum marquee and is flanked by square blue terra-cotta tiles. The entrances that are located at the far end of the larger courtyards are set at a angle. In these instances, the tiles spread onto the adjoining walls and extend above the parapet to the stair bulkhead. Other tile treatments project slightly forward, or are recessed above the doors to the roof. An entrance is also located in the covered breezeway. Reached by a short flight of stairs connecting both the street and courtyard, the more public street facade had an asymmetrical character, incorporating projecting blue tiles to one side and a wide aluminum marquee.
Construction
To prepare the site for construction, 568 buildings were demolished on 349 lots and approximately 5,400 people were relocated. A 1935 report described the population as divided equally between American born, Italian born, and other nationalities. Most were semi-skilled workers, employed in manufacturing, or as clerks, truck drivers, and construction workers.
Demolition commenced in June 1935 as PWA supervisor Elizabeth Ross dug a crowbar into the facade of 197 Manhattan Avenue, near Ten Eyck Street. In the months that followed:
Steam shovels and picks played a tune to rival that of the pipes of the Pied Piper of Hamlin. From every dank basement and crumbling wall rats fled in droves. Backyards disgorged an assortment of rusted cans, trash, filth and litter that would have discouraged the most voracious goat.
Ground was broken on January 3, 1936. Following a brief ceremony in the rain, public officials addressed an audience of five hundred at Public School 196. During April 1936, the first foundations were poured at the southwest corner of Manhattan Avenue and Stagg Street. Mayor Fiorello H. LaGuardia was in attendance, followed by “a few hundred interested onlookers and an army of schoolboys.”
As the foundations neared completion, the PWA solicited bids for construction. Starrett Brothers & Eken was awarded the $7. 5 million contract for the first 18 buildings in October 1936. A subsequent contract, for construction of buildings No. 5 and 18, was signed in late April 1937.
Founded by Paul Starrett (1866-1957) and William Aiken Starrett (1877-1932) and Andrew J. Eken (1882-1965) in 1922, the firm was responsible for such high-profile buildings as the New York Life Insurance Company Building (1925), Bank of Manhattan Building (1929-30), McGraw-Hill Building (1930-31), and Empire State Building (1930-31, all are designated New York City Landmarks). The Starrett Brothers worked closely with Shreve on the Empire State Building and it is likely that this relationship helped secure the contract for the Williamsburg Houses. William Starrett acknowledged the importance and complexity of this issue when he said:
It is the hope of people who are discussing this (slum) problem that those same brains that put together the great skyscrapers . . . will turn toward this.
Starrett Brothers & Eken later built Parkchester (Richmond H. Shreve, chairman of the board of design, 1938-42), Stuyvesant Town (Irwin Clavan and Gilmore Clarke, 1943-49) and Peter Cooper Village (Irwin Clavan and Gilmore D. Clarke, 1947) for the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company.
The cornerstone was laid in October 1936. It contained an aerial view of the site, a copy of the federal act creating the PWA, as well as an autographed copy of Jacob Riis’s timeless account of slum conditions, How the Other Half Lives, donated by his widow. Construction progressed rapidly, and aside from minor walk-outs by metalworkers and painters, the first six buildings were ready for occupancy with a year, in September
Publicity
The Williamsburg Houses was the largest and costliest project built by the PWA. With 1,622 apartments, it was more than twice the size of the Harlem River Houses. The approximate cost was $12.8 million. It was described by the PWA as part of “demonstration program” and numerous public events were held. In a letter to Post, Shreve stated:
As this project is the beginning of what, in a way, is a housing community experiment and as the public attitude toward housing will be largely controlled by the success or failure of such an experiment, it is of importance that every effort be made to make the first experiment successful.
In this context, how the project was perceived was of the utmost importance. Once the design had been approved, a scale model was built by the PWA and exhibited at banks in Brooklyn Heights and Williamsburg during late 1935 and 1936. This presentation was accompanied by a series of posters documenting the site, including photographs of earlier buildings and their demolition, as well as projected floor plans. The New York Times reported the model:
. . . throws into graphic relief the application of the new principle of multiple housing, providing more air, sunlight and recreational facilities and involving a departure from the solid-block construction.
The idea of using public funds to create low-income housing was relatively new and much of the language used in speeches and press releases heralded it as a major advance. At the site, signs were posted, calling Williamsburg the “Largest Low Rental Development in the USA.” At the ground-breaking, public officials evoked the memory of Alfred T. White, whose Brooklyn developments were among the first attempts to improve low-income housing in the nation.
Mayor LaGuardia thanked the President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, for his support, as did Harold L. Ickes, Secretary of the Interior, who described slums as a “vicious project of that old order whose passing, we hope, is at hand.” While some critics equated the federal housing program with socialism, most speakers saw it as a defense of democracy.
In November 1935, Post had contacted the PWA, requesting that the complex be called the “Ten Eyck” Houses. No explanation was given, but it is likely that the request was made to distinguish the new development from the larger surrounding neighborhood.
Ten Eyck Street was one of two east-west streets closed to create the site and it was probably named for the Dutch family whose Brooklyn lineage extended back to at least the 18th century. In the immediate area also lived William Ten Eyck, who during the mid-19th century served as the deacon of the Reformed Church of South Bushwick (1853, a designated New York City Landmark). Post’s request was quickly approved. The new name, however, was not widely used and a 1938 PWA publication refers to the development as the Williamsburg Houses.
On October 28, 1936, the construction site was briefly visited by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Eleanor Roosevelt. According to the New York Times, ten thousand school children and five thousand adults “cheered the President’s passage through the streets bordering the housing project.”
Three “model” apartments were opened for public view in July through August 1937. Furnished with loans from various Brooklyn department stores, they were presented at 180 Maujer Street. Post was an early visitor and he described the apartments as a “demonstration of what can be done, this is the most valuable contribution to social progress that the New Deal has made.” An average of 1,200 persons a day visited. In September 1937, a second group of apartments opened at 176 Maujer Street, including one decorated entirely with “reconditioned furniture.” In a related development, during April and May 1938, the WPA created an exhibit in a storefront office at 212 Graham Avenue. Organized by William Friedman of the art teaching division, the display was changed periodically to demonstrate different apartment layouts and decoration. Nine experts spent five months preparing the exhibit, hoping that it would influence local residents and provide a model for future public housing developments. A music branch, at 176 Maujer Street, also provided lessons in theory, voice, and various instruments.
Tenants
According to the Brooklyn Eagle, the Williamsburg Houses were “one of the most perfect home sites in the word . . . an eagerly sought spot to live.” Income and need formed the basis of selection and no tenant could earn more than five times the annual rent. Preference was also given to former residents of the site.
The first tenants began to occupy their apartments on September 30, 1937. The New York Times devoted at least two articles to “Moving Day,” as did the Brooklyn Eagle. As part of the operation, each tenant’s belongings were moved to a fumigation plant for sterilization near the intersection of Bushwick Avenue at Scholes Street.
This procedure was described as a “wise precaution against the spread of disease.” Bessie and Louis Grabkowitz were recognized by the NYCHA as the first official tenants. A week’s rent, of less than seven dollars, was paid and they were given keys to their new apartment. Two to five rooms in size, units featured steam heat, hot and cold water, as well as electric stoves and refrigerators. Residents praised their new homes, commenting on the appliances and abundant sunlight.
By the end of 1937, most apartments were occupied. A community newspaper, the Projector, began publishing on a semi-monthly basis in December 1937. In April 1938, the complex was completed. In addition to the twenty residential buildings, there were retail spaces, facing the north-south streets. The PWA reported:
To insure efficient, sanitary commercial services, 49 stores and shops within the project, distributing drugs, groceries, appliances, and general merchandise, have been leased to private individuals.
The storefronts were executed in a sleek Moderne style. To the north and south, they curved away from the street, recalling the streamlined designs of Erich Mendelsohn, as well as J. J. P. Oud’s Kiefhoek development of 1925. The prominent metal parapets were blue, matching the color of the apartment entrances. Despite their polished design, a significant number failed to attract and retain tenants. Consequently, in 1945 ten unleased spaces, near the corners of Maujer and Leonard Streets, and Scholes Street and Bushwick Avenue, were converted to apartments.
Tenants enjoyed a variety of useful services. At the center of the complex, on Graham Avenue stood the stripped classical-style William J. Gaynor Junior High School (1936-37), and opposite it, Building No. 11 housed a nursery school. Incorporated into the building’s south court and featuring a large play terrace, Hamlin described its glass-fronted design as “pleasant” and “delightful.” In addition, a new Moderne-style health center was built directly across from the complex, on Maujer Street.
Throughout the development were “social and craft rooms.” These basement spaces were originally used for classes, clubs, and meetings and many were decorated with large colorful murals. In contrast to the majority of WPA murals that were executed in style of social realism, the Williamsburg murals were non-objective. Lescaze favored “abstract and stimulating patterns” and Burgoyne Diller who headed the Federal Art Project, wrote that:
The decision to place abstract murals in these rooms [of the Williamsburg Housing Project] was made because the areas were intended to provide a place of relaxation and entertainment . . . The more arbitrary the color, possible when not determined by the description of objects, enables the artist to place an emphasis on its psychological potential to stimulate relaxation.
Of twelve murals commissioned, at least five were installed. In the early 1990s, the deteriorated canvases were restored and moved to the Brooklyn Museum of Art. They include works by the American painters Ilya Bolotowsky, Paul Kelpe, and Balcomb Greene.
Critical Reception
The opening of the Williamsburg Houses was treated as major news and writers used the event to analyze the project and express their own views about the role of public housing and the importance of modern architecture. Some of the earliest comments came from the architect Walter Gropius, former director of the Bauhaus in Germany. On a visit to New York City in April 1937 he was interviewed by H.I. Brock in the New York Times. They traveled together throughout the city, visiting both new skyscrapers and the nearly-complete Brooklyn development. Gropius was impressed and praised the unusual plan, saying that Lescaze:
. . . seems to have solved the problem of space and light very successfully and economically, and it has the great advantage of being spread over enough land to make it worthwhile as a sample of planned development.
Lewis Mumford was the first critic to publish a substantial review in February 1938. As a persistent advocate for public housing, he used the opportunity to evaluate the “outlines of the new order of building.” He praised the PWA for eschewing “overpriced building lots” and instead assembling large sites in quieter areas where streets could be closed to traffic to create gardens and playgrounds. Considerable attention was paid to the slanted orientation. Although he described it as “a bit queer,” he liked the way it separated the residences from the street and that it gave the appearance that the architects were concerned about providing tenants with ample sunlight.
Talbot Hamlin published the most-detailed analysis. In this review, he addressed both PWA projects, calling them “a new vision of democracy ... they are better than the most expensive apartments on Park Avenue.” Despite such praise, he expressed mixed feelings. While he found the buildings “fresh and inventive and alive,” he was disturbed by the “shockingly low” standards of construction. He also admired the “imaginative and carefully studied detailing,” but criticized the landscaping as little more than adequate. The WPA Guide to New York City, published in 1939, shared similar views, quoting Hamlin’s review, and praising the design of the individual buildings.
In the years since completion, the Williamsburg Houses have been a frequent subject for architectural historians. Many, starting with the Museum of Modern Art in 1939, have placed the development within the context of European modernism. In an exhibition celebrating the museum’s 10th anniversary and the opening of its new building, it was the only architectural work represented that was located in New York City. In a brief essay on housing, the curators highlighted the “triple-size superblocks,” that form an “oasis of open space,” but criticized the adjoining school building as a lost opportunity to create a “truly important work.” Photographs of the complex were also included in Forms and Functions of Twentieth-Century Architecture (1952), in sections devoted to city planning and concrete construction.
G. Holmes Perkins wrote in the city planning section that despite faults, the complex “may be held up as patterns for tomorrow.” Richard Pommer, in one of the most insightful discussions of Depression-era housing in the United States, criticized the angled plan, calling Lescaze a “versatile pasticheur” who used visual effects without logic or relation to function. Robert A. M. Stern shared this view, writing in 1980 that it “seems overrated.” Richard Plunz, in A History of Housing in New York City, credited the project as the start of a “brief but intense struggle” to determine the aesthetic direction government-built housing would take. All four editions of the AIA Guide to New York City have praised the Williamsburg Houses. The 1968 edition called it a “very successful solution to the problem of low-rent subsidized housing,” and in 2000 “the best public housing project ever built in New York.”
Subsequent History
Conveyed by the federal government to the NYCHA in 1957, the Williamsburg Houses continue to serve their original purpose, housing more than three thousand New Yorkers. Major alterations were first proposed in 1980 and significant work took place during 1985-91. At this time, the original casement windows were replaced with bronze-colored aluminum sash and the blue terra cotta that surrounded the entrances, with tan “Morocco” glazed brick.
In a remarkable turnaround, during the mid1990s, the facades were restored. What began as continued maintenance, soon evolved into a major architectural project, requiring an outside contractor and consultation with the Landmarks Preservation Commission. Under the supervision of Neil Cohen of the NYCHA, the elevations were completely reskinned, the parapets replaced, as well as the chimneys, railings, and terra-cotta banding. In addition, new canopies, doors, lighting fixtures, and signage were fabricated.
The approximately $70 million project was executed with great sensitivity; there was an article in the real estate section of the New York Times and the NYCHA was the recipient of the Lucy G. Moses Preservation Award from the New York Landmarks Conservancy (1999), which praised the participants for restoring the complex to “better-than-new condition.” Restoration of the storefronts, except along Bushwick Avenue, was completed in 2002.
The high standards set by the design of the Williamsburg Houses have rarely been matched. Innovative in terms of scale, plan, and aesthetics, it remains one of the most pleasant and architecturally-distinguished housing developments in New York City.
Description
There are twenty walk-up buildings in the 23.3acre Williamsburg complex and a total of 1,620 apartments. These buildings are numbered from 1 to 20 and each entrance has its own street address, for instance, “112 Maujer Street.” Stainless steel signs, with pin-mounted numbers and letters, identify each entrance.
The site extends four blocks east to west, from Bushwick Avenue to Leonard Street, and three blocks north to south, from Maujer to Scholes Streets. The principal north-south artery is Graham Avenue. Between Maujer and Scholes Streets, Ten Eyck Street and Stagg Street are closed to vehicles. These winding east-west paths are called Ten Eyck Walk and Stagg Walk. They are identified by large pin-mounted stainless steel letters attached to the building facades and are visible along the north-south streets. Throughout the complex are wall-mounted cantilevered lighting fixtures. These glass and aluminum fixtures are reproductions of the originals.
Three of the four blocks have a tree-shaded open space at center. At present, non-historic benches, play equipment, and basketball courts are located here. Most lawns are enclosed by low iron fences. Though not original, these fences pre-date the 1990s. Pole-mounted lighting fixtures are occasionally used to illuminate these areas.
All buildings materials are non-historic. Each structure is four stories tall and clad in ochre-colored brick. Exterior concrete spandrel beams are exposed at each floor. To disguise patches to the concrete, the beams are coated with a grey-colored water repellency finish. The entrances are flanked by blue structural glazed facing tiles that are approximately 12 by 12 inches. Blue mortar was used to minimize the joint lines. A canopy projects in front of each entrance (except on one side of the breezeways). Made of stainless steel, they incorporate recessed down lights. Some canopies are supported by a single pipe column. The entrance doors and sidelights are made of stainless steel.
Each door has a grid of four small square windows. Breezeways serve a dual purpose: reached by two sets of stairs, they provide an additional north-south passage, as well as entry to apartments. Most of the stairs are flanked by stainless steel railings. The bronze anodized aluminum windows, installed in the 1980s, are all one-over-one. Arranged as single windows or in pairs, they have concrete sills and meet the concrete spandrels above. The smaller windows light the bathrooms. Single windows and pairs are located where the facades meet, often creating triple-width openings at the cantilevered corners.
There are three general building configurations. All are original to the complex. They include eight buildings with “H” shaped floor plans, six with floor plans that suggest a small letter “h,” and six buildings with “T” shaped floor plans. While the “H” and “h” types alternate along Maujer and Scholes Streets (except next to the school where both are “H” shaped), the “T” shaped buildings are located only between Ten Eyck Walk and Stagg Walk.
The “H” buildings (Nos. 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 15, and 20) are nearly symmetrical, with almost identical north and south courtyards. At the center of each court is either a projecting center section or breezeway. The apartments are reached by four distinct entrances, each with a different tile treatment. They include: corner, wide, recessed between the door and the roof, and incorporated within a breezeway. Each entrance leads to interior stairs. The windows that light the stairs are arranged in horizontal grids of six and eight panes. Except for the recessed variant, the tiles project slightly and rise above the parapet to the stair bulkhead. The opposite side of the breezeway has no tilework. Reached by stairs, each breezeway incorporates two concrete columns and a metal door. The “h” buildings (Nos. 2, 5, 19, 13, 16 and 19) are similar to the “H” buildings, except one court is partially enclosed.
The “T” buildings (Nos. 3, 4, 11, 12, 17, 18) have shallow courts. The top of the ‘T” has three entrances, each framed with blue tiles. A pair of entrances are also found facing each other in one of the side courts, and occasionally on the opposite side, as well. Building No. 11, located on the east side of Graham Avenue, is unique due to the presence of a nursery school at the wider south end. To accommodate this function, the entrances were moved and the court at the south end was enclosed. The south wall of school is clad with glass blocks, many of which are original. A concrete shed, at the center of the wall, is not historic and there are plans for removal. From the south facade extends a raised play area that is enclosed by a fence. Along the east side of the building, facing Graham Avenue, a non-historic ramp with metal railings has been constructed.
Commercial storefronts parallel the streets and adjoin the apartment buildings in various locations. The materials are non-historic, but the new elevations closely resemble the originals. The largest storefronts are located on either side of Graham Avenue, between Maujer Street and Ten Eyck Walk (Nos. 8 and 9). Smaller retail spaces are located along Graham Avenue (near Scholes Street, No. 13); on Leonard Street (near Maujer Street, No. 1); and on Bushwick Avenue (between Maujer and Stagg Walk, No. 16). They have a stream-lined character and curve away from the street at both ends. One story tall, they have granite bases and are clad with stainless steel and metal that has a baked-on blue porcelain finish. Above the storefronts runs the blue metal parapet, crowned by a stainless steel roof rail. Lighting was added above the storefronts, and security gates, when the stores are open, roll up and are neatly hidden within the facades. Large glass blocks or plate glass are used throughout. Along Bushwick Avenue, the modifications are less sympathetic and a vertical grid of older decorative concrete block occasionally interrupts the facade.
- From the 2003 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report
"The streamlined Goosander is a handsome bird and a great fisher - its long, serrated bill helps it to catch and hold its slippery fish prey...It nests in riverbank trees, but can be seen on lakes and reservoirs in winter...
"The Goosander is a medium-sized duck and a member of a group called the 'sawbills' because of their long, narrow bills with saw-like 'teeth' which are good for gripping fish... A long, streamlined bird, it is perfectly shaped for swimming after fish...Goosanders are gregarious birds, forming flocks of thousands in some parts of Europe..."
"Male Goosanders are white, with dark green heads, black backs and long, red, hooked bills...The white sides and breast sometimes have a pink glow...Females are grey, with a gingery or reddish-brown head and a white throat..."
*
*
*
Copyright ©
All Of My Photographic Images Are Subject To Copyright ! Each Of My Photographs Remain My Intellectual Property ! All Rights Are Reserved And As Such, Do Not Use, Modify, Copy, Edit, Distribute Or Publish Any Of My Photographs ! If You Wish To Use Any Of My Photographs For Any Reproductive Purposes, Or Other Uses, My Written Permission Is Specifically Required, Contact Me Via Flickr Mail !