Chris, Ralph:
 
My mistake (I am, forgive me, only an engineer and not a PE at that). I guess someone got lazy when doing the letterhead and left out the mullions (probably not what they're called?) that define the slit windows and other details related to the columns of windows. Of course, as Ralph pointed out, when the building is viewed in elevation rather than obliquely the windows do seem to be large and the "mullions" small. It almost seems like a lot of window for a warehouse but maybe the architect was trying to save on electricity by using natural light and foreseeing the need to make it easier to use those dial telephones that would come into popular use in the late-20s.
 
Question: What does the "battered walls" terminology refer to? Is it the recesses between the windows that are in vertical rows? My reference suggests the term refers to the sloping of a wall, not vertical recesses (but then it was edited by Kornelius Smit who is an RPI engineer, not a Registered Architect).
 
Another technical question: We can't seem to get concrete to last more than a few years here where I work (granted it is SUNY construction by the lowest bidder and exposed to rock salt for snow & ice removal and litigation remediation). Some of the worst failures were stairs and a sidewalk overseen by someone who supposedly was a mason with extensive concrete experience (and don't get me started on the terrible duct work that was overseen by a guy whose name is synonymous with tin-knockers in this town). I would imagine that a waterfront building in NYC (a freeze/thaw climate) with even this modest amount of detail would have spalling at the corners of the mullions between the vertical rows of windows (please excuse my lack of terminology). I would expect that they must've had a tough time getting decent quality control back in 1913 or so when this was built yet the building seems to have held up well (at least from a distance). (Of course there is Steve's leaking roof explanation.)
 
Bruce

-----Original Message-----
From: The listserv that takes flossing seriously! [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 1:07 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [BP] Cass Gilbert warehouse


In a message dated 12/9/2005 12:01:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, some misguided, credulous person, possibly a CIA mole (or mohel?) writes:

From looking at the original rendering of the building it looks to me as though the gun-slits came much later.

Sweethearts, that ain't the "original rendering" of the building.  Among other things it bears a seven-digit phone number (which took place well after the building was constructed).  It's a letterhead, subject to all sorts of foolishness (since not designed by Registered Architect, among other things).  Not sure why somebody put the windows, but they aren't there now, and weren't there originally.  
 
Find very early photograph 2 pages down in the following document, clearly showing present "slit window" conditions:
 
http://mas.org/Contentlibrary/Austin%20Nichols%20Fact%20Sheet%20SLJ.pdf
 
Sincerely yours,  Never Really Liked Cass Gilbert, Nothwithstanding