I have no doubt that the cornice protects elements at the top of the wall -
stone, brick, mortar, trim etc.  Not to say that the cornice itself is
invulnerable since it may have exposed vertical joints.  I wonder how may of
the people asked had spent time on lifts and scaffolds plotting damage over
the face of the building?

-----Original Message-----
From: Met History [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 5:24 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Do cornices have a protective function? 1992 vs. 1999


I wrote this in a 1992 article on cornices:

<   COULD deterioration cause a return of cornices to other "scalped"
buildings?
<Of half a dozen restoration professionals interviewed at random, five said
they
<have never seen any evidence of a rain-shielding function by a cornice.
They
<said the problems that followed cornice removal probably arose because the
<alteration itself was poorly done.

<   But one professional, Richard Pieper, has a different view. His
Manhattan
<firm, Jan Hird Pokorny Architects, restored the exterior of the Verona
apartment
<house at 64th Street and Madison Avenue, which has a cornice eight feet
deep.
Terra cotta and other elements at the upper stories -- shielded by the
cornice
<-- were indeed in better condition than those lower down, he said.

If, in 1992, 5 out of 6 professionals said they had never seen evidence of
weather-shielding by cornices, what is the verdict as of 1999?

Christopher Gray