Dedicated to the preservation of Long Island's 'gold coast' estates and other things old.
Zach, has there been a credible guestimate as to the square footage of Beacon Towers? While it's externally large I wonder if it actually exceeded 25,000 sq ft. Was the foreground of the picture just low tide or was there always a grassy/marshy area between it and the Sound?Such a great picture.
"Kellsboro" . . . Refer to the aerial of Beacon Towers posted on June 5th. One can see how much solid ground there was between the retaining wall, along the edge of the beach, and the house itself. Also in this view one can see, by the lines of the seaweed how high the tides were at times. This view, and also today's, were taken during a low tide. One can almost smell the brine !
Ooops ! Zach's posting on September 19th, 2009, shows even a better example of the levels of seaweed left by the different tides.
Kellsboro, just for the heck of it, I just did a very rough, very quick calculation of square footage based on the floor plans published in an earlier post (and taking into consideration the sub-basement and attic floor not pictured, and I came in around 22,000, so you're right. The later additions by Hearst probably pushed that figure up another 5,000And of course, while doing this, I was entranced anew by the idea of the circular elevator in the turret of the entrance tower. There's also something a little bit Buck Rogers about the placed---you know, like the palace of the king on some foreign planet...
Another really terrific view of Beacon Towers from the water. Fantastic photo of a pretty spectacular house. archibuff
If you include the basements and third floor, I would be the place is pushing 30,000 sq ft. Pretty sure my house would sit nicely on that back balcony
I wonder if this would have survived if it was built further back from the sound?
TDED - thanks for calculating that estimation. While I have some doubt about the accuracy of the often quoted Oheka size of 109,000 square feet, it does put the two structures into perspective.25,000 (plus 5k for the staff areas) is perfectly manageable by comparison ;>Bob, I'm sure they could've ventured out just yards into those waters and had the makings for a great clambake.Someone last week pointed out a few cracks in the foundation with the great b&w photos. You have to assume that high tide and less than bedrock ground continually worked against the structure.
"Kellsboro": If one studies all of Zach's Beacon Towers postings it will indicate that the water never reached the base of the house. There was a slope downward from the base to the stone retaining wall at the head of the beach. Brush overgrew in that area of solid ground. The visible structural cracks in those early 1940s photos indicate age and possible deferred maintenance.
Bob you are probably correct, the concrete stucco exterior cracks are cosmetic plus the building was eventually torn down in the mid-1940's, not exactly a good era for unloading fantasy castles. This by far is my favorite long island mansion. RT
Heck, I might as well weigh in on this one. It is apparent, even obvious, from the basement floor plans that this house was solidly engineered, and that no doubt the pilings were substantial and deep. As RT says, the cracks in the stucco are likely cosmetic---the result of natural settling and weather.
RT: You are not alone calling this your favorite Long Island mansion. All Honorary Children of Ludwig II of Bavaria are drawn to Beacon Towers! I'm waiting for someone to submit a view taken of it from across the Sound in one of the shorefront communities.
ha ha Good Old King Ludwig, now he was a guy who knew how to build castles. Good old Alva gave him a run for the money though with this place. Would loved to have seen this in person from land and sea. C of L, I too am surprised a photo from a boat or distant shore has not surfaced showing this place yet. Anyone holding back? RT
Post a Comment