HERE6 - Scapegoat The 1871-1906 San Francisco City Hall
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 12. 2014
- When completed in the 1890’s, city hall was San Francisco’s grandest building. City hall's collapse during the 1906 earthquake and fire storm was attributed to shoddy construction, rooted in political corruption. But an examination of the 1906 earthquake damage suggests otherwise.
I came here from a comment you left on another historic channel, and I have to say that you give so much more depth to the history of San Francisco..... I'm from Michigan ...... the opposite end of the US but you have made San Francisco's history fascinating to me❤
Thank you
This is fabulous stuff, a knowledgeable and insightful view of San Francisco's early U.S. history - it was, until 1846, part of Mexico. It's as well done as any I have seen, and I've spent several decades studying it's history. My kudos to everyone involved. It's sad that only 615 of us have seen this so far. James Dalessandro, author, 1906: a novel.
Thank you very much for sharing this. Some of the pictures are astounding, the historical narrative, when seen from a different view is quite telling.
You're very welcome
You really knocked it out of the park with this series of documentaries. Bravo. Super interesting and well done.
Thanks, it's interesting that the documentary on the 1971-1906 City Hall proposes a series of civic/political events that are not in the standard history of San Francisco. I did a presentation of this documentary at the SF Main Library several years ago with Gray Brechin and Chris Carlson on the Q&A panel. The one challenge to the view this documentary takes was from a supporter of the City Beautiful design viewpoint who was convinced, simply "improving the layout of the central concourse design" who make everything work well again.
@@lymarchvideo Can you give a recommendation for some good (well-written) source texts for someone like myself who is interested in the history of civil engineering projects in SF and in SF history in general?
Big topic. I am not an expert but here are some that you might find interesting or starting points. "Bracing for Disaster: earthquake-resistant architecture and engineering in San Francisco 1838-1933" by Stephen Tobriner Heyday Books. "Streetcar to Subduction" by Clyde Wahrhaftig. This latter book is seminal and out of print but is supposed to be reissued in conjunction with a new meeting of the American Geophysical Union. Warhaftig was a professor at UCBerkeley and the teacher of Doris Sloan who wrote "Geology of the San Francisco Bay Region" UCPress. Are you in the Bay Area?
Perfect blend of entertaining documentation and historical fact letting. Like a great TV comedy without a laugh track. n.
Great, thank you.
What an interesting account not only of the building itself but also of the physical and social changes occurring in San Francisco from the middle 19th century through the early 20th century. Totally fascinating. Thank you and congratulations for producing such an excellent and informative video.
Thanks you.
@@lymarchvideo This is a very well-made documentary. I also have Tobriner's book, and your documentary does a masterful job of adding onto Tobriner's research on City Hall. I am a volunteer at the State Capitol and the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake & Fire is one of our biggest Living History events. I am also planning a trip to San Francisco for our volunteers' association next fall, and our theme is the Earthquake & Fire. One of our stops is City Hall, and I will certainly use this documentary as an educational tool for the history of the 1871 City Hall.
@@cfinigan5092 Thanks for the comments. Yes Tobriner's book is amazing. BTW this video was done at the same time as HERE5 which deals with the creation of flat land in what originally was the very hilly central and eastern parts of San Francisco. czcams.com/video/aXO3ll24334/video.html
@@lymarchvideo It's curious why they didn't adhere to the stringent codes of the 1880s and '90s for City Hall and re-engineer the foundations for the dome to better accommodate the new dome. I am also curious what vulnerabilities Tobriner mentioned for the Court of Appeals that the earthquake exposed. I'm assuming these are all structural vulnerabilities: I know one was the U-shaped plan of the building, but I don't think he really explained what other structural vulnerabilities there were.
@@cfinigan5092 As Tobriner might have written, there were in San Francisco, no city or state or national structural codes. The standards used on Commerical and institutional buildings were the standards created sometimes or adopted by the consultants hired. Codes would come into being sometime in the first part of the 20th Century. So the 1871 City Hall was dependent on the "skill" of its "designers". the skill of architect Lever was high. But the dome was not built under his supervision. Clearly the folks who did the dome in the 1890's we expedient. In contrast the Federal work on the US Mail/now Court of Appeals Building were top notich for the time. Same for the folks that built the SF Chronicle/de Young office and Sprinklers/Call Bulletin buildings at Market and Third/Kearney.
This is brilliant. Thanks for creating this!
I love your videos, very well done. I just found hundreds of large negatives in a box of my great grandfather's of San Francisco and the surrounding area. From 1890's-1910. Including a lot of the days of the 1906 earthquake and fire. I am not familiar with the landmarks, i sure could use someone like you to see what is on them.
Check with the following as they might be interested in the material....
www.outsidelands.org
and
www.shapingsf.org
Wow! that was incredible.
Thanks !
A absolutely brilliant video. thanks
Thanks. This video sheds a different perspective on SF history than what had developed in the mainstream. It seems to have been a very successful coup and coverup! Actually it parallels the story that Chris Carlsson has told about Tom Mooney and the labor rights movements' containment in SF about two decades later.
so very informattive⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Glad it was helpful!
I have a feeling there is a deeper story hiding under this city.
Yup.
I like the new City Hall and it's surrounding buildings. They are Beaux Arts masterpieces. The old City Hall was an ugly Victorian nightmare.
great video!!
one question: do you know what happened to the fountains in the plaza in front of the current city hall?
thanks!
The fountains that were originally there when the Plaza was remodeled to put a garage and what was then a convention hall under the plaza started filling up with soap suds from pranksters. Eventually the fountains were removed and replaced by a variety of other landscape features until the decomposed gravel that we have today were installed, gee about a decade ago?
so the fountains disappeared ? somebody must have them or were relocated? they were beautiful!
@@lymarchvideo ; don't know if I'm buying that one...everyone knows that soap subs can be eliminated by adding salt to the water...just saying.
@@crisf69 They kept draining them during droughts because the water use was seen as wasteful.
Where are the people in the old full city photo @18:41? It is always alarming to see this and many other photos of late 19th century cities void of occupants. Does anyone have an answer to this?
The pic you refer to was part of a 360 panorama shot in 1877 by photographer Eadweard Muybridge from the tower a top the Mark Hopkins Mansion at the top of San Francisco's Nob Hill. In other shots as he pans around, you will find lots of people walking and at work, but in these shots out over the city stretched out below, its hard to see folks. commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Panorama_of_San_Francisco_by_Eadweard_Muybridge,_1878.jpg
The new city hall today is much prettier than the old one.
Whatever became of the statue atop the dome? I've come across contradicting stories with some saying the statue was completely lost, other saying it ended up at Knott's Berry Farm (not sure of the name--going from memory) and others say fragments were preserved. And still other conclusions. It probably wasn't anything special, but civic and government buildings had some interesting statues that garner little notice today.
I may be wrong, but I think it ended up a top the column in Union Square.
The statue is known as The Goddess of Progress. She was carefully removed from the dome in 1909. She was placed in a drey wagon and the securing cable around her waist caused her to fall off the wagon and she broke in two pieces. The head was salvaged and given to a friend of Mayor James Rolph. She languished in a basement of a business in the Mission District for many years. Rediscovered in 1949, she was given back to the City, where she was placed in a storeroom in the new City Hall and in 1957 she was sold to Knott’s Berry Farm an amusement park in Orange County. In the 1970’s she was returned to San Francisco and placed on display at the Fire Department Museum. In 1989 she was placed on permanent display in the Court of Light in San Francisco City Hall, where she has been ever since.
I think the abundant open space in the center of the "public realm" is also an area where citizens can gather to protest their grievances.. rather appropriate for San Francisco's generally liberal views. The large boulevard-lite roadways surrounding the square is the true travesty in my opinion
To me the successor the 1871 City Hall was that it had a real public entrance that opened directly onto a small square and transportation rather than two divided entries opening to a vast open space not directly connected to the places that people arrived at the area.
@@lymarchvideo that is very true. The missing links at the two entrances of City hall leaving something to be desired; perhaps if the road was abolished an instead replaced with a square.. maybe even a statue. That would be delightful
100/100
Thanks
Rincoin hill is still a neighborhood for the wealthy
Yes starting in the 1990's it began to gentrify. Prior to that it was quite seedy.