Blog - For The Record — NYC Department of Records & Information Services

Michael Lorenzini

From Marketfield to the Greenmarket, Part II: The Market Man

This is Part 2 of a series. Read Part 1

Thomas F. De Voe in his Jefferson Market butcher stall. Frontispiece to The Market Assistant, 1867. Robert Hinshelwood, from a sketch by T.F. De Voe. Courtesy New York Public Library.

From the earliest days of the Dutch colonial settlement, butchers were at the top of the market hierarchy and their profession was tightly regulated. By the 1800s, their status was signaled by their attire, as they had taken to wearing tall top hats and tails as part of their work outfit—a look that might be familiar from the character of “Bill the Butcher” in the film Gangs of New York. In the 1850s, a well-respected Jefferson Market butcher by the name of Thomas F. De Voe, by his telling, was searching for something to do in his leisure hours. An officer of the 8th Regiment with an interest in military history, he visited the New-York Historical Society and was “bitten by a rabid antiquary.”[1] Discovering the Records and Files of the Common Council [now held by the Municipal Archives] he realized that they contained a wealth of historical information about his profession. (In actuality, he may have been conducting research to better represent himself and other butchers in regulatory matters.)

Petition of Thomas F. De Voe, Butcher, 1854. Board of Alderman, Approved Papers. NYC Municipal Archives. De Voe petitioned the Committee on Markets in 1849 and again in 1854 detailing what he saw as actions by the Superintendent of Markets that undercut the value of his stall. He later had a printed version of his 1854 petition produced but the Market Committee files include his handwritten copy and pages of his testimony before the Boards of Aldermen and Councilmen of the City.

Encouraged by the Historical Society librarian to write a paper on the subject of markets, De Voe soon entered the circle of mid-19th century historians who were preserving the history of the City, including D.T. Valentine, Clerk of the City, and E.B. O’Callaghan, who was busy translating the Dutch records of New Amsterdam. After a well-received 1858 presentation of his paper at Cooper Union, De Voe published in 1862 The Market Book: Containing a historical account of the public markets of the cities of New York, Boston, Philadelphia and Brooklyn with a brief description of every article of human food sold therein, the introduction of cattle in America, and notices of many remarkable specimens. For its time, it is a masterpiece of research. Drawing on his own experiences and using the writings of O’Callaghan and Adrian Van der Donck for Dutch history, and the records of the Common Council for colonial history, he detailed every bit of minutia on markets from the 1600s to the 1800s. The scholarly respect was mutual, as D.T. Valentine commissioned him to write a history of the “Old Fly Market Butchers” for his manual of 1868. Only volume 1 of the Market Book, on the public markets of New York, was published, but in 1866 De Voe published a paper Abattoirs and in 1867 he published The Market Assistant, containing a brief description of every article of human food sold in the public markets of the cities of New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and Brooklyn including the various domestic and wild animals, poultry, game, fish, vegetables, fruits, &c., &c. with many curious incidents and anecdotes. It included several engravings from sketches by De Voe, including a frontispiece of the man himself in his shop.

The original Fulton Market buildings, Fulton Street and Market, 1828. George Hayward for D.T. Valentine’s Manual of 1854. NYC Municipal Library.

Petition for a new market at Fulton-Slip, 1821. Common Council Papers, NYC Municipal Archives.

Petition against the removal of the Fly Market, 1821. Common Council Papers, NYC Municipal Archives.

Catharine Market, 1850. George Hayward for D.T. Valentine’s Manual for 1857. NYC Municipal Library.

De Voe’s descriptions are rich in details not just of food but in character studies. One of his most-cited passages is his description of “dancing for eels” at the Catharine Market.[2] The Catharine Market started in the late 18th Century as a humble butcher shed. Later a fishmonger’s stall was added, but in 1799 a petition was submitted for “a new and enlarged market-house.”[3] The elegant market-house was finished the following year and it became known for its Sunday eel market and as an ethnic mixing place. In the waning days of slavery in New York, enslaved African Americans from towns in Long Island, on leave for holidays such as pinkster, would sell whatever they could gather at the Catharine Market. To make a few shillings more, they would sometimes dance on a thin board or “shingle” for coins or pieces of eel at the close of the market. As these dances became a more frequent tradition, competitors from New Jersey, after dropping the farmer’s produce at the westside Bear Market would hurry over to compete. After a time, free African American residents of Manhattan came to the market to dance as well, and “if money was not to be had ‘they would dance for a bunch of eels or fish.’”[4] This tradition of “dancing for eels,” with competitive dance circles that would be familiar to the modern eye, had a long-lasting influence on dance. A popular mid-century play New York As It Is included a minstrel Dancing for Eels scene, which in turn inspired several lithographs, further cementing it in American culture. Some scholars suggest that tap dance was born here at the Catharine Market from a mix of African and Irish dance traditions. Dance steps developed here can still be seen today in modern hip-hop styles.[5]

The Ground Plan of the Fourteen Markets of the City of New-York, July 1st, 1835. Common Council Market Committee, NYC Municipal Archives. The number of markets in New York City doubled in the early 19th Century, and two new large-scale markets appeared. The Fulton Market was established in 1822 to replace the old Fly Market, but a new market building (shown here) was built in the 1830s. Washington Market in Tribeca was erected in 1813, with expansions in the 1820s and 1834 making it the largest wholesale market in the City. These markets were joined by Grand Street, Greenwich, Gouverneur, Centre, Essex, Franklin, Manhattan, Clinton, Tompkins, and Jefferson Markets. The Monroe Market would replace the Grand Street in 1836, and the Harlem Market was established in 1838, although De Voe notes a butcher shed stood at 120th Street and Third Avenue since 1807.

In 1872 Thomas De Voe gave up his butcher stall to become Superintendent of Markets under the reform-minded comptroller Andrew Haswell Green. The following year he produced a Report upon the present condition of the public markets of the city and county of New York. His report to Green would present “historical incidents as regards the age of the present market buildings; their past mode of management or mismanagement…” in his typically colorful language. He detailed the thirteen markets then active in the City: Washington, West Washington, Fulton, Centre, Clinton, Catherine, Jefferson, Tompkins, Essex, Union, Gouvernour, Franklin, and the 18th Ward Market.[6]

View of Washington Market, Fulton and Washington Street, 1859. D.T. Valentine’s Manual, 1859. NYC Municipal Library.

De Voe first addressed the largest market, the Washington, located between Greenwich, Fulton, West and Vesey streets. De Voe found the state of the market to be “generally in bad order and very much out of repair…. The two-story building on Washington Street (which had formerly sustained the fire-bell in its tower) was imminently dangerous, being in a condition at any moment to fall in and crush all beneath.” Under the floors he found that “black stagnant mud, water, animal and vegetable putrefactions had become detrimental to health and life.” The market was overseen by three “worse-than-useless officials…” who De Voe fired and replaced with “two efficient men” who were able to seize unwholesome food and suspend cheating vendors. He also installed proper sewage, drainpipes and three hydrants to better fight fires and to flush away waste.[7]

New Fish Market, New York City, ca. 1869. Theo. R. Davis, retrieved from the Library of Congress. In 1869 the Fulton Fishmonger’s Association built a new waterfront market opposite the existing Fulton Market where boats could unload their catches directly into the market.

De Voe found similar levels of disrepair and corruption throughout the markets and seems to have attacked the problems with a reformer’s zeal. Catharine Market, once charming, was long neglected and had large holes in the roof. He fixed the holes but stated whenever he looked at the “rusty fronts, roofs and side, their framed windows, doors and other woodwork, I can imagine that I can hear or feel grating on my senses the sound paint! paint!!—paint me!!!”[8] The Jefferson Market, De Voe’s former place of business, was similarly distressed, but work was already underway on the courthouse that would replace it.

Pushcart peddlers in the Lower East Side, ca. 1890. Hand-colored glass lantern slide. Department of Street Cleaning collection, NYC Municipal Archives. After the Civil War, the population of New York increased dramatically, putting enormous stress on the existing markets. As always happened, unlicensed vendors filled both a commercial need and a desire for the ethnic foods of immigrants.

More generally De Voe was concerned with the quality of food coming into the city, especially animals that had been distressed before slaughter or improperly killed. In 1866 the New York State Legislature had created the Metropolitan Board of Health. One of their first targets were outdated market regulations, particularly with regards to butchers and slaughterhouses.[9] Animal slaughtering and processing had already so polluted the Collect Pond that it was drained and filled with landfill in 1811, but the carting of offal and animal hides across town to the candle makers or tanneries was a source of increasing complaints as the more fashionable residents of the city pushed uptown. De Voe worked with the Board of Health to seize animals or meat not fit for market. The markets themselves and the surrounding unlicensed vendors also presented an enormous daily challenge to street cleaning. Numerous 19th Century laws tried to tackle the issue, such as requiring vendors to keep a trash bin at their stalls.

De Voe also called for more oversight to protect the public from “improper and unwholesome” food, better market buildings, and a reining in of unlicensed stalls and pushcarts. Pushcart vendors first appeared on Hester Street in 1866, setting up informal markets. The problem of pushcarts would only grow in the 20th century, with new waves of immigration, to the consternation of a succession of mayors.

De Voe was removed as superintendent in 1876 but reappointed in 1881. He finally retired from City service in 1883, but he continued to lecture on New York history and published a book on the genealogy of the Devaux family. When he died in 1892 the New York Times called him “one of the best known of the old New-Yorkers.”[10]

After De Voe’s retirement, the enormous open-air Gansevoort Market was officially sanctioned in 1884, and in 1889 the City built a new West Washington Market building to replace older buildings used for meat, poultry and dairy. By 1900 the area housed over 250 slaughterhouses and packing plants, earning the name the Meat Packing District.

Photograph showing a portion of the present Gansevoort and West Washington Market, ca. 1912. Brief and Plans for a New West Washington and Gansevoort Market. NYC Municipal Library. In the mid-1800s, meat and produce increasingly came into the city through freight trains and ships. In 1854 a freight depot had opened at Gansevoort and West Streets, and many vendors from the old Washington Market set up stalls near the depot.

In Brooklyn, an informal farmers market that gathered near the Navy Yard consisted of some rough sheds by 1884. The City of Brooklyn decided to grace this market with grand market halls and a prominent clock tower designed in the Dutch Colonial Revival style by William Tubby, who had just completed several buildings for the Pratt Institute. Wallabout Market, looking like a fairy-tale village, was completed in 1896, one of the last hurrahs of the independent City of Brooklyn before the consolidation of 1898. That consolidation and the increasing needs of a growing city would change the ways the City dealt with markets. However, it would be well into the 20th Century for the City to finally implement many of the market reforms that De Voe had called for.

Wallabout Market, 1896. Retrieved from the Library of Congress.

Part III coming soon.


  • [1] De Voe, Thomas F. The Market Book, 1862.

  • [2] Ibid, pp. 344-345.

  • [3] Ibid, p. 342

  • [4] Ibid, p. 344-345.

  • [5] Lhamon, W.T., Raising Cain: Blackface Performance from Jim Crow to Hip Hop, 2002.

  • [6] De Voe, Thomas F., Report upon the present condition of the public markets of the city and county of New York, 1873.

  • [7] Ibid, pp. 4-5

  • [8] Ibid, p. 15.

  • [9] Day, Jared N., Butchers, Tanners, and Tallow Chandlers: The Geography of Slaughtering in Early Nineteenth-Century New York City.

  • [10] New York Times Obituary, Thomas F. De Voe, February 2, 1892.

A Charter for New Amsterdam: February 2, 1653

This week, For the Record recognizes a little-known, but significant anniversary in the history of the City of New York: February 2, 1653.

In 1977, City Council President Paul O’Dwyer successfully campaigned to have the date on the flag of New York City changed from 1664 (the year of the English takeover) to 1625, the year that the Dutch West India Company (the Company) directed a fort and settlement to be built in lower Manhattan. However, although the settlement in lower Manhattan was called New Amsterdam, it would be many years before it became a place that the Dutch would recognize with a separate municipal government.

View of New Amsterdam ca. 1653, copy of a 17th Century painting for I.N. Stokes, Iconography of Manhattan Island, vol. IV plate 9, NYC Municipal Library.

When General Petrus Stuyvesant arrived on the shores of Manhattan in 1647, the Dutch colony of New Netherland was in crisis. The prior Governor, Willem Kieft, was reviled and had been recalled to Holland after starting a brutal and disastrous war with the native peoples. Stuyvesant had been sent to restore order to the colony and reassure the colonists.

Stuyvesant asked the people of New Netherland to select eighteen representatives from whom he created an assembly of Nine Men.[1] The lawyer Adriaen van der Donck would later join the assembly and take a presiding role. Van der Donck soon set about gathering complaints from colonists to send to Holland. Stuyvesant forbade this and when the members continued to meet in secret, he had van der Donck arrested. Eventually van der Donck was released and he drafted a remonstrance, which he and two other members took to Amsterdam to present to the Dutch legislative body the States General. Amongst their demands was a call for a municipal government for New Amsterdam. They had little success at first but van der Donck’s 1650 publication, Vertoogh Van Nicuw Nederlandt, attracted public interest in the colony and raised concern that it was being mismanaged. Fearful that they might lose control over the colony, the Company eventually relented. On April 4, 1652, the Directors informed Stuyvesant via letter that he could form a municipal government with a schout, two burgomasters, and five schepens. Roughly analogous to a sheriff, two mayors and five city councilmen, but the burgomasters and schepens served as the lower court of justice as well as city administrators.[2]

The first page of a letter written by Jacobus Kip, first secretary of New Amsterdam, recounting Stuyvesant’s establishment of New Amsterdam’s government on February 2nd, 1653 as instructed by the Dutch West India Company on April 2, 1652. Kip probably sent this document in 1656 to the Company, where Hans Blumenthal, a director in Amsterdam, made his own copy. Both documents ended up in the Blumenthal papers at the New York Public Library. Reproduction from I.N. Stokes, Iconography of Manhattan Island, vol. IV plate 9. NYC Municipal Library.

Stuyvesant had received word by June 1652 that he could establish a city government, but waited until February 2nd, 1653, Candlemas Day. In Amsterdam, this was the day the Burgomasters and Schepens traditionally took their oaths of office. On this day he issued a lengthy document (a copy of this document is in the New York Public Library) that related how the Directors in Holland would “favor this new and growing city of New Amsterdam and the inhabitants thereof with a court of justice, to be constituted as far as possible… according to the laudable custom of the city of Amsterdam, name-giver to this newly developing city.”[3]

The new court was given legislative authority “between the two rivers to the Fresh Water [the pond at around Worth Street]” but in matters of criminal justice their authority extended the whole of the island and included “the inhabitants of Amersfoort, Breuckelen and Midtwout,” Dutch towns in present-day Brooklyn. The burgomasters were also charged with “alignment of houses, streets and fences… in an orderly fashion,” and developing any needed public buildings “such as churches, schools, a court house, weigh house, charitable institutions, dock, pier, bridges and other similar works….” And also, the ability to designate public officers such as “orphan masters, church masters, surveyors, fire wardens” as the need would arise. It was not quite the representative government that we think of today, but it was the start of the municipal government of what would become New York City.

The court minutes of New Amsterdam start with a prayer on the left page, and then on the right page the clerk recorded the first day of court on February 6th, 1653. Records of New Amsterdam, NYC Municipal Archives.

The Records of New Amsterdam in the Municipal Archives [minus some earlier ordinances issued by Stuyvesant] start a few days after the charter was issued, with a prayer for divine guidance. Some of the sentiments do not age as well as others, but this passage seems timeless: “Let us remember that we hold Court, not of men, but of God, who sees and hears everything. Let respect of person be far from us, so that we may judge the poor and the rich, friends and enemies, inhabitants and stranger according to the same rules of truth and never deviate from them as a favor to anybody, and whereas gifts blind the eyes of the wise, keep our hearts from greed, grant also, that we condemn nobody lightly or unheard, but listen patiently to the litigants, give them time to defend themselves.”

The prayer is undated but was probably written on the 2nd or on the first day of court, the 6th, because the next page starts with this:

“Thursday, February 6, 1653… Their Honors, the Burgomasters and Schepens of this City of New Amsterdam, herewith inform everybody, that they shall hold their regular meetings in the house hitherto called the City tavern, henceforth the City Hall, on Monday mornings from 9 o. c, to hear there all questions of difference between litigants and decide them as best as they can. Let everybody take notice hereof. Done this 6th of February, 1653, at N. Amsterdam.”

The most important feature of this lower court was that any person, male or female, could petition the court, citizen, and non-citizen alike. These court records form the backbone of the Dutch records held by the Municipal Archives and are part of a record of municipal government that extends until today.

The city tavern was renamed the City Hall, the Stadt Huys in 1653. It stood at the corner of what is now Broad Street and Pearl. George Hayward for I.N. Stokes, Iconography of Manhattan Island. NYC Municipal Library.


The government of New Amsterdam was formed when the Dutch were at war with the English. In March 1653, concerned over tensions with the English to the north, the court ordered a wall built to protect the colony. To learn more about the history of the wall that became Wall Street go to New Amsterdam Stories.

What did it mean to be a citizen of New Amsterdam? In 1657 the question was answered with the establishment of the burgher right – essentially city citizenship. To learn more, go to New Amsterdam Stories.


[1] Historical Society of the New York Courts, “The Nine Men and the 1649 Remonstrance of the Commonality of New Netherland” https://history.nycourts.gov/about_period/nine-men/

[2] See also, Russell Shorto, The Island at the Center of the World.

[3] Seymann, Colonial Charters, Patents and Grants to the Communities Comprising the City of New York. P. 177-189.

From Marketfield to the Greenmarket, Part I

Supplying a diverse and teeming city with fresh food has been a constant problem in New York. Farmers’ Markets, which have undergone a resurgence in recent years, are nothing new. In the early days of New Amsterdam, farmers and Native Americans simply brought their crops to town and set about hawking them, usually along the bank of the East River, known as the Strand. While references exist as early as 1648 to “market days” and an annual harvest “Free Market,” the process was unregulated and inefficient. Peter Stuyvesant, the Director General and the Council recognized this….

Surrogate’s Court/Hall of Records: A Public Treasure

In 1961, the exterior staircase to the eastern entrance of the Surrogate’s Court was lopped off when Centre Street was widened, and the vestibule fell into disuse. Around that time, there were plans to demolish the entire building as part of a “new” Civic Center proposal. Landmark designation of the Surrogate’s Court building in 1966 saved the building from further insult, and in the 1970s, the newly formed Department of Records and Information Services (DORIS) moved its administrative staff into offices adjacent to the eastern vestible. In the early 1980s the agency moved all divisions into the building, with the Municipal Library (then called the Municipal Reference and Research Center) occupying the other side of the former Centre Street vestibule.

Sabbath Studies, the Arnold Eagle Interview

In 1980, curator Barbara Millstein conducted interviews and corresponded with several surviving staff members of the New York City unit of the Works Progress Administration (WPA) Federal Writers’ Project (FWP). The knowledge she gained helped prepare interpretive materials for the Department of Records & Information Services’ exhibition “NYC Work and Work: WPA Photographs.” Recent blogs highlighted Ms. Millstein’s interview transcript with  Clifford Sutcliffe and correspondence with Ralph De Sola. Both served as photographers for the FWP. This week, in the final installment of this series, we are reproducing the notes from her interview with photographer Arnold Eagle.   

Sabbath Studies, 1937. Photograph by Arnold Eagle, WPA Federal Writers’ Project collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

Arnold Eagle was part of a generation of Hungarian emigrees who were influential in photography including Robert Capa, Cornell Capa, André Kertész, Brassaï, László Moholy-Nagy and Martin Munkácsi. Although not nearly as well known as his contemporaries, Eagle was significant in his own right as a photographer and photo-educator. Eagle was born December 14, 1909, in Stryi, which was then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. It was later incorporated into Poland before becoming part of Ukraine in 1939.

Eagle emigrated to the United States with his family in 1929. He took up photography soon after and was a member of the Film and Photo League in New York, and then the social justice-oriented Photo League. In 1937, he joined the WPA as a photographer and worked with both the Federal Art Project and the Federal Writers’ Project. He also photographed for the Public Works Administration (PWA), another New Deal program.

Eagle is best known for a book of portraits of the Orthodox Jewish community on the Lower East Side, which was published posthumously by Aperture in 1992 as At Home Only with God. Many images from this project are included in the Archives’ FWP photograph collection.

The following is a summary of Barbara Millstein’s interview conducted with Arnold Eagle on January 31, 1980.


Eagle said that he was on the project for about two years, from 1938 to 1939, but he has some records that indicate that he was on from 1937 [many of the prints from his “Sabbath Studies” project are marked “Jan-Mar 1937”]. After he left the WPA he became head of the photography project at the National Youth Administration.

Eagle said that he was one of the non-relief workers. A Mr. Vincintini, his first supervisor, liked Eagle’s work (a series of photographs on the 3rd Ave. El) and asked him to be part of the project. About 20 or 30 people worked in the photography division. Very few of the photographers did creative work. They mostly photographed paintings, murals, and models. They photographed work for the Index of American Design, and did publicity shots for other WPA agencies, as well as some creative work.

WPA publicity. Photograph by Arnold Eagle, WPA Federal Writers’ Project collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

Eagle seems to have done a little of everything, but he most clearly remembers two creative projects. The first was a series on housing, with Dave Robbins. This took about six months. He photographed slums and also some of the same people after they moved into new public housing [Eagle was probably referring to the Williamsburg Houses, which were built as a PWA project. The photographs are uncredited, but the Municipal Archives’ collections include “before” shots from 1935, and “after” shots from 1937, which might be by Eagle and Robbins.]

Eagle has a book of photographs (and also the negatives) titled ‘One Third of a Nation: A Social Document, by Arnold Eagle.’ Some of the stills were used in the film, One Third of a Nation. The photographs were also exhibited at the Federal Art Gallery. He has no recollection of these or other photographs being used in the Federal Writers’ Project books. He thinks that the Citizens Housing Council had something to do with his work, but not sure exactly what. [One Third of a Nation was a still photograph project by Photo League photographers Eagle, Sol Libsohn and David Robbins from 1935 to 1937 documenting New York City slum conditions. It was made into a 1938 play and a 1939 film by the WPA Federal Theatre Project.]

Sabbath Studies, 1937. Photograph by Arnold Eagle, WPA Federal Writers’ Project collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

His second creative project was Sabbath Studies. He has postcards done recently which reproduce these photographs, dated 1937. He had his own equipment (Speed Graphic and Roloflex cameras), but he remembers that the WPA had equipment as well, although he thinks he used his own equipment when he did his creative work. The WPA provided the other supplies (which he says were plentiful) and darkrooms as well, where he would develop his own work. He feels that he “learned a great deal from his work, even his copying work.” In general, he felt that it was a “helpful and creative kind of thing.” He had great pride in his work and enjoyed doing his work. He had a great deal of respect for the whole WPA as representing a great cultural awakening for America. He and others were trying to get away from Salon Photography, which was considered conservative, and a phony painter tradition.

He felt that photography was communication, and he came out of a documentary tradition, although many of the photographers on the WPA felt like news reporters covering assignments. He had earlier been a portrait photographer, but was always interested in documentary photography. 


After the WPA, Eagle took photographs for Fortune and The Saturday Evening Post magazines and worked with Roy Stryker for Standard Oil of New Jersey. He later became a cinematographer and taught filmmaking and photography at the New School for Social Research from 1955 until shortly before his death in 1992.

Sabbath Studies, 1937. Photograph by Arnold Eagle, WPA Federal Writers’ Project collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

Sabbath Studies, 1937. Photograph by Arnold Eagle, WPA Federal Writers’ Project collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

Sabbath Studies, 1937. Photograph by Arnold Eagle, WPA Federal Writers’ Project collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

Sabbath Studies, 1937. Photograph by Arnold Eagle, WPA Federal Writers’ Project collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

Sabbath Studies, 1937. Photograph by Arnold Eagle, WPA Federal Writers’ Project collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

Sabbath Studies, 1937. Photograph by Arnold Eagle, WPA Federal Writers’ Project collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

Moving the Archives, part III

During the next several months, we will be moving 140,000 cubic feet of historical records in the Municipal Archives to our new space in Industry City. The move date is fast approaching, but there is still so much more to do. Construction delays and the pandemic pushed the project back, but this Spring we will complete the big move. The new facility is in the final stages of construction and extensive move prep is underway. Any move is fraught and tedious but one on this scale is unbelievably complex. Items must be reboxed and barcoded and transferred to the designated locations so they can be located, on demand.

Bush Terminal (now renamed Industry City) was built at the turn of the last century and certainly has its own history, which we have covered in a past blog. Building 20, the location of our new space, had not been seriously renovated in 100 years, and replacing all the old windows with new double-pane windows was a “must” to stop water intrusion and heat loss. The new windows also have film to block UV and Infrared light, which will help protect our collections and reduce cooling costs in the summer.

Removing layers and layers of paint revealed these beautiful pressed-tin freight elevator doors.

New flat files will certainly be a welcome change for some of our maps and architectural drawings.

The new office layout is an upgrade from the current plywood-paneled office, which looks like it could be a set from a gritty 1970s Scorsese film.

 Compact movable shelving is almost completely installed and programmed.

Our new digital lab is also nearly complete, and is just waiting for equipment to be installed.

The public research room awaits the day when we can reopen our doors to the public. Providing research facilities in the Industry City space is an environmentally-friendly move because we won’t be trucking boxes of archival records into our 31 Chambers site.

As the actual move gets underway, we will post more updates.

Powered by Squarespace