[log in to unmask] wrote:

> I examined the installation more closely today (just before being 
> forcefully informed by "George", the foreman, that it was 
> unequivocally "illegal" to take pictures of "private property",

News to me that you can't photograph private property... depends on the 
kinda private property George wanted to hide I guess. Though I do know 
that images of icons, such as the Chrysler Building, may be vigorously 
defended. Though it seems to me a really odd situation these days where 
you can't get away with taking whatever photographs you want... though I 
remember last time I had a problem was with Tibetan long horns in the 
Houston art museum. But I don't think that was private property.

>  There are three kinds of joints in play on this project (nwc 86th & 
> Park). 
> 1) At the building/sidewalk joint there is a 1/2" joint, which is 
> filled with caulk-type material.  
> 2) At intervals of three "flags", there is also a 1/2" joint, also 
> filled with caulk.

These two would be joints where concrete is separated... that the slabs 
are not in contact with each other.
I have not yet figured out why anyone thinks caulk does diddly in a 
sidewalk joint.
I have certainly installed plenty of them just can't imagine why it 
makes any difference.
We used every few years to have to caulk the expansion joints in a 
swimming pool on the North Shore of Lung Island w/ a bottom that had 
been built below sea level. That was a pain in the ass. Caulking to the 
tides. JP Morgan's golf club... I don't think they like me any more 
since the new company did not honor the efup of the old company, which 
is fine by me.

> 3) At the  sidewalk/curb joint, there is also a 1/2 " joint, but this 
> is not filled with caulk, but rather a black, fibrous material - same 
> material as cheap pipe insultation which was not set sufficiently low 
> enough, and projects up enough that, in a few spots, it has been 
> abraded so that the top 1/2" has parted from the body, and is flopping 
> around like a Jersey tourist in a plaid leisure suit on Nantucket main 
> street.

Go to Home Depot and if you are lucky you can find this stuff in the 
concrete materials area. As to the installer nobody cares if it sticks 
up and gets abraded.

> 4) There is a fourth kind of joint on this job, the kind Steve first 
> alerted me to, saw cuts between the "flags".  Unlike the 
> unversally-used tepid little depressions between "flags" - the kind 
> you'd make with a pencil eraser at a 45 degree angle, no deeper than 
> 1/8 inch - these were, indeed, cut 1 or 2 deeep into the concrete.

Where are these located in relation to the others? According to the 
Occam's Razor Law no effort should be expended in any project that is 
not absolutely required so I am wondering if this extra step does not 
represent an early caught F up of some sort.

>  I can see how this last joint - identified by Steve as the "control 
> joints to deal with the cracks that form from shrinkage" - would 
> indeed concentrate shrinkage cracks, instead of letting them run haywire.

 But these sawn joints are left unfilled (work was finished a week 
ago).   Won't they allow water in and thus freeze-thaw damage?  Or, the 
work being done in May, the contractor (who is, in my experience, unique 
in making these saw cuts) counting on fillage by dog shit, grit, spittle 
and other sidewalk depositions?

I would vote that they are not counting on anything. Not even counting 
on dog shit.

][<en

--
To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
<http://listserv.icors.org/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>