Deceniber 14, 1907





LECORD  AND  GUTDE





961





ESTABUSHH)-^ MÍÍBPH 21*^*. 166 8.
DEV&ld) TD REM.ESTATE,BuiLOi;fe #^rTECTURÍ.t{oUSEtíOlIlDECaĩĩAT10ÍÍ,
Bl/SllÆsSAĩtoTHEHESOFGEIÍER^l IfÍTEfÍfSl..

PRICE   PER  YEAR   IN  ADVANCE   EIGHT   DOLLARS

Communĩcations  should be  addressed to

C. W. SWEET

Tubíisfied Etíery Saturdag

By THB BECOBD AND GXĨIDE CO.

Presldent,   CLINTON  W.   SWEBT                        Treasurer,  F.  W. DODGE

Vlce-Pres. & Genl,  Mgr., H. W. DBSMOND         Secretary, F. T. MILLBR

Nos.  11  to  15 East 24th  Street, New Yorli  City

(Teleplione,   Madlson   Square,  44.30  to  4433.)

••Entered oí tUe Posl O^fice at Nevi York, N.  Y.. aa sccoiitl-clasa matter.''
Copyrighted,   1907,   by  The  RecoTd   &  Guide  Co.





Vol.  LXXX.





DECEMBBR 14, 1907.





No, 2074.







FEW BOOKS have been so well perused
this week ia New York as the E.evised
Buildiug Code, It is the book of tbe bour
for owners and builders, arcbitects and
engineers. Coucerniug tbe geiieral plan
and structure of tbe work, it may be re-
marked iu tbe first place tliat it is not a new code, in tbe
seuse of being a complete departure from tbe old model
and of taking notbing from the common stock of bmlding
regulations, but is simply a revisĩon of the old book, fol-
lowing upon tbe same lines, and witb mucb tbe same ar-
rangement; but tbere has been added a great deal that is
absolutely new and severai features ciuite revolutionary.
The old ordinance asked to be construed liberally, but tbis
code deelares tbere sball be no modiflcations of its require-
ments—except as provided for in tbe Cbarter, and sucb iu-
terpretatious as the Superiutendent of Buildings may make
under tbat autbority mu'St be taken as precedents in future
cases. Evidently if the commissioners could bave eliminated
discretionary power absolutely tbey would so bave done.
Tbis is one of tbe most striking and important points of dif-
ference between tbe two ordinances. Anotber relates to
registered constructors. No one wiU be permitted to file
plans and specifications for the erection of a building witb-
out being registered at the Building Department, and in
order to register he must bold a certificate of competeucy
from a Board of "Constructors' Examiners," to be appointed
by tbe Mayor, Tbis registered constructor not only flĩes tbe
plans and statement before tbe erection of the buildlng, but
he a!so, upon tbe completion of the work, must make afii-
davit that it has been done in accordance with tbe plans
and specifications. Tbe present ordinance allows eitber an
owner, lessee, agent, arcbitect or builder to file the plans
and statement of specifications, but bereafter, by tbe new
code, ît must be one who will be able to swear wben tbe
contract is finisbed that it bas been done în accordabce witb
tbe law, The necessity of baving works inspected from the
Building Department will seemingly no longer exist, as tbe
registered constructor, or supervisor of tbe work, will be the
responsible individual. Tbe departmental inspeetor of con-
struction work is not eliminated in terms, but it is obvious
that bis duties have virtually been delegated to another, wbo
is responsiiDle, not to tbe Superintendent of Buildings, but
to the Board of Constructors' Examiners, wbicb alone ba,g
power to cancel his certificate of competency, according to
our reading of the text, Under tbe revised code the regis-
tered constructor would become an extremely important
figure in metropolitan building, so mucb so that it is diffi-
cult to anticipato all the possibiĩities and consequences.





Limîtations for

CoDcrete

Constniction





THE DEFINITIONS AND CLASSIFICA-
TIONS of tbe new revision of the Build:
ing Code constitute anotber of its import-
ant features, The old ordinance recog-
nized tbe exístenee o£ an "apartment
bouse," and tbere bas been some curiosity
as to wbetber tbe commission would make, or recommend, a
distinction in terms between a tenement bouse and an
"apartment bouse," Tbe answer îs in tbe negatĩve: every
residence building oecupied by three or more families is a
tenement house, as defined in the Tenement House Act, A
botel is "a residence building, otber than a tenement bouse,
containing more than fifteen sleepîng rooms," regardiess of
wbetber it Í3 intended, designed or used for supplylng food





and sbelter, Definitions become estremely importánt wben
tbe law is rigidly applíed. In the offieial ciassification all
structures ih which sleeping accommodations are provided
are termed "residence buildings," and fall under Class C,
wbieb includes what are commonly ealled dwellings, board-
íng bouses, tenement bouses, hotels, apartment bouses, hos-
pitais, lodging-houses, club-bouses, studios, couvents, dor-
mitories, police stations, fire bouses and jails. It is ap-
parent that tbe largest part of construction work wiil come
under Class C. Mercantile buildiugs, such as lofts, ware-
houses and stores, also factories and worksbops, printins
bouses, storage buiidings, power stations and garages,—and
intended to include all buildiugs used in the manufacture,
sale and storage of infiammable products—are termed "spe-
ciai bazard buildings" and designated as "Class E." Here
it is important to note that alĩ buildings required to be of
flreproof eonstruction under the revised code in Class E
must be of "first-class constru'Ction," and what is meant by
first-class construction is described in precise terms in See-
tion 112; tbat "the flreproof fioor and roof contructiou be-
tween tbe steel beams sball be in tbe îorm of segmental
arches," to be composed of "Portland cement concrete, brick
or hollow tile or bard-burned clay, or semi-porous or porous
terra-cotta." Tbe import to some firms engaged iu flreproof
coustruction is more fuliy set forth in a letter from Mr. Guy
V. Waite in anotber column. Reinforced concrete construc-
tion is provided for under Section 117. Buildings designed
iu accordance with the requirements of tbis secLion will be
deemed to be flreproof and permissible under tbe code, "as
second-class construction," But as only "first-class construc-
fion," so called, "can be used in Class E buildings." Rein-
forced concrete is consequently debarred from that field.

-------------•-------------

FOR PUBLIC BUILDINGS, theatres and
places of assemblage, the. resulations in
the code which went into effect December
23, 1S99, are followed closely, particu-
larly witb reference to open side courta
or spaces, with corridors to tbe street.
In instances wbere tbe oid iaw is not definite in terms tbe
proviíiions are amended by inserting requirements' evidentĩy
suggested by the rules of the National Board of Fire Under-
writers. Under the bead of quality of materials it is noticed
tbat tbe revised code recognizes two kinds of Soutbern yel-
low pine—sbortleaf as well as longleaf, and more par-
ticularly such species as North Carolina pine and loblolly
pine; and ií Cuban, shortleaf and loblolíy pine is grown
under eonditioQS tbat it produces a large perceutage of bard
summer wood, "so as to be equivaient to tbe wood produced
by the true longleaf, it would be covered by the term 'long-
leaf.' " The signiflcance of this will be understood wben it
is recalled tbat intimations were given some time ago that
shortleaf or loblolly pine timber would be barred by tbe
terms of tbe new code, But, in the matter of concrete, tbe
new code makes a decided cbange, in specifying tbat coocrete
sball be made of "Portland cement," instead of merely
"cement," wîth sand, broken stone or gravel, This elimin-
ates from "concrete" construction the old natural cement,
thousbitis not prohibited for cement mortar, Anotber feature
of tjie new ordinance consists in tbe provisions for guarding
window openings. The window-route will not be so easy for
conflagrations in the futu're. As noted last week the fire
limits of the city are extended, but detached frame build-
ing is not prubibited wben not more than eîgbty per cent.
of the lot frohtage is oecupied. Building heigbt for office
structures is limited for tbe first time in tbe bistory of tbe
city, and if tbe new regulations are upheld tbe ultimate
effect will be to spread tbe business section. A natural
consequence of revising a building code is to increase build-
ing costs ra,ther tban diminish tbem, and tbis must mean in
the end higber renting scbedules. It would be interesting to
know wbat tbe exact difference in cost would be for a build-
ing undel- Ciass E, for esample—how mucb more it would
cost to erect under the new law than under the old?







"Bridges and the Ai't Comniission."

To  the Edltor of the Record and Guide:

I am surprised to flnd you wiUing to publisĩi the two openinc
edltorial paragraphs oí your issue of last week. In them you
chlde, softly, anã It is true, and much more in sorrow than in
anger, a contributor to the Architectural Record for an articie
about "Eridees and the Art Commlssion." and incidentally but
necessarily the editor of that periodical for admitting that
contribution.

This In itself is ratber puzzling. Which periodical ig Mentor
and  whlch  Telemachus?   Or  do  they perhaps  take turns?   In