Expensive Authenticity Weighed Against Ersatz Cost-Effectiveness
The managers of a historic Tribeca condominium building hope to adulterate the facade of the landmark building by replacing cast iron elements with fiberglass lookalikes, but preservation advocates are pushing for purity.
With its front doors at 105-107 Chambers Street (corner of Church Street), the Cary Building occupies a full block on Church Street, and sports cast-iron facing on its southern and northern (facing Reade Street) frontages. Designed by architects Gamaliel King and John Kellum in 1855, the building is cherished for the metalwork on its Chambers and Reade Street sides. This was fabricated by Daniel D. Badger, who was (along with James Bogardus) one of the two principal pioneers of cast-iron architecture in the United States. In the mid-19th century, these rivals together unleashed a revolution in urban design, because cast iron was vastly less expensive (and lighter in weight) than decorative stone, but still closely matched the appearance of the material it replaced. Dozens of buildings in Lower Manhattan (especially in the neighborhoods now known as Tribeca and Soho) took advantage of these attributes to launch a new style, which became known as Renaissance Revival, imitating elements of 15th-century Italian humanist design, especially as it had been practiced in Venice and Florence.
Among the first structures anywhere in the world to incorporate facades that were entirely cast iron was the Cary Building, erected in the mid-1850s as the headquarters of Cary, Howard & Sanger, a department store that sold “1,500 different kinds of foreign and domestic fancy goods, comprising jewelry, perfumes, watches, cutlery, guns, musical instruments, combs, brushes,” according a catalog of the day. Founder William Cary prized the large windows made possible by the slender columns that were a hallmark of Renaissance Revival design, the better to entice customers from the street.
Because the Cary Building was designated a legally protected landmark in 1982, any changes to its exterior must be approved by the City’s Landmarks Preservation Commission, which first asks for an advisory opinion from Community Board 1 (CB1).
In a resolution enacted at its October 24 meeting, CB1 notes, “the applicant has proposed that this major façade restoration campaign include the replacement of deteriorated architectural details using fiberglass molded materials,” and “the prevailing rationale for requesting the use of a replacement material is driven by the price escalation between new cast-iron and new fiberglass.”
The same measure notes, “CB1 does not feel that a building of such high historical value should have patches of 21st-century materials all over its facades, to the point where after several patching campaigns, the façade has entirely become fiberglass.” It concludes with the recommendation that “the Landmarks Preservation Commission reject the proposed fiberglass replacements,” and cautions, “this should not become the standard for the restoration of cast-iron buildings throughout historic districts.”