When they get around to bridges over Furman, why not run one from the Squibb Park side of Furman directly over to whatever building(s) they decide to keep and/or build on the river side of Furman? That way, universal accessibility can by taken care of with an elevator that does double duty serving the building as well as the bridge.

(The refrigerated warehouse there now is slated to be replaced by residential development, but if they reconfigure the park financing, maybe they can keep what's left of the warehouse as well. Though aren't they already cannibalizing it for lumber to recycle into benches?)

Posted by: rfr at November 13, 2009 3:03 PM in response to Brooklyn Bridge Park Progress Report

I second the idea of using two covers, one inside and one outside. The trick is to make sure the inside one's edges fit the door slot well, without snagging cornes of the incoming mail.

Most just use gravity to stay closed; some older ones use springs. But we found one from Ives that includes a magnetic strip across the back of the bottom edge to help hold the cover closed. The model we used is probably not right for you -- too modern, and too big -- but you might be able to find something appropriate for your door with similar features: (Ives Magazine Size Letter Box Plate, Product ID: 650 & 651.) Mail carriers have no trouble opening them, the draft is minimal, and they don't flap noisily when the door is opened and closed. (They are a bit noisy when they fall shut, though.)

Posted by: rfr at March 21, 2009 12:58 PM in response to Old drafty mail slot

What does this mean about the surviving sections of rails from the old dock railway tracks? If reinstalled properly as part of the larger project, they can help recall the area's fading sense of its working past, while eliminating the road hassles caused by their current condition. Problem is, they may disappear completely during the work if nobody keeps an eye on them and on the contractors.

It should be part of the project scope and LPC/SHPO review of the project (as the Belgian block should be too), but does anybody know for sure?

Posted by: rfr at January 14, 2009 12:19 PM in response to New Sewer Mains, Belgian Blocks for Dumbo

The photo frames three window bays as if they were a single, symmetrical house, but those three bays include TWO stoops. I'll bet we're actually looking at part of a row of two-bay houses whose relatively modest width is masked, or at least played down, by a more monumental facade whose ins and outs don't correspond to the divisions between the dwellings inside.

The two projecting bays that are cropped off on the right and left sides of the frame look symmetrical. The circular repeats on their uppermost friezes match, and it looks like both have inverted brackets at the "eave" level of the central mansard. (The scroll of the right-hand bracket is only faintly visible.) Both of these "pavilions" (sam, 12:40) probably also have matching pointed roofs (more visible on the left), but they may not mark the ends of the row.

Maybe this can help someone else, because I don't have a clue where these houses are.

Posted by: rfr at December 12, 2008 2:38 PM in response to I.D. This Photo, Win a Book

Not all roof top a/c units need their own separate steel support framing (which is called dunnage, btw). We have two "package" units on the roof of our rowhouse. We were dubious about not needing dunnage too, but after triple-checking with architect, structural engineer, mechanical engineer, expediter, ac contractor, and the city, everything went through. Building inspector came, saw, and approved, and the units have their own DoB permits to show for it. This was all wrapped up last year. It may have to do with weight/size of units. Each one cools half the house (ca. 1500 sq feet each).

Posted by: rfr at June 6, 2008 12:13 AM in response to A/C Compressor in basement