New Single Pane Windows Permitted in Historic Districts?


The front windows in our landmarked brownstone were replaced years ago (prior to the creation of the historic district) with windows that don’t match the original configuration. We have a very clear photo from the 1920s showing the original windows, and we’d like to have them replicated. The windows are fairly typical double-hung units, except that the upper sashes originally had over 40 individual lights. We’d like to get true divided lights for the upper sashes (costly, I know), but if we do that, the only way to match the aesthetics of the originals is to us single pane glass. If we use double pane insulated glass, the muntin bars between the panes would have to be almost twice as thick to support the additional weight, and the wood grid would look disproportionately thick compared to the small squares of glass. My question is this: Does the NYC building or energy code require double pane insulated glass, and if so are there landmarks rules that trump the code and permit the installation of new single pane windows designed to match the originals? I can’t seem to find anything helpful online. Thanks.

Categories: Windows
By LowerUWSider | 04/15/2011 1:53 PM | Comment

Model Homes on Montgomery? (Calling on Montrose)


The houses on Montgomery Place in Park Slope, many of which were designed by C.P.H. Gilbert, are quite varied in style. Someone once told me that the variation was partly due to the fact that the houses were intended to serve as model homes — potential buyers could view them and choose to have them replicated elsewhere in the borough. That seemed a little fishy to me, so I dismissed it as folklore.

Lately, however, I’ve noticed that some of the house styles on Montgomery are in fact repeated in slightly modified form on other streets in Brooklyn. The Gilbert house in the photo above, for example, was completed in 1890. From 1892 to 1894, homes by other architects that are very similar to Gilbert’s (and virtually identical to each other) were built on Carroll, 5th and Dean Streets (all data is from the LPC designation reports). Another Gilbert on Montgomery from 1889 has doppelgangers on 4th Street that were built in 1891.

I still don’t think there’s any truth to the model home story. However, I can’t seem to find any houses in Brooklyn that are similar to Gilbert’s designs and also predate them. It looks like Gilbert inspired a number of copycats in his day. Montrose, any insights or theories?

Categories: History
By LowerUWSider | 04/11/2011 9:58 PM | Comment

Parquet: How thin is too thin?


I live in an 1890s brownstone with typical top-nailed parquet floors. I’m hoping to refinish them, including sanding if possible (as opposed to just screening). There is a tongue in groove subfloor that is just under 1″ thick, and the oak parquet boards on top are about 1/4″ thick (some are slightly thicker — maybe 5/16″). Is that parquet too thin to sand? I’ve found past posts about sanding thin parquet, but I couldn’t find anything specifying what thickness is too thin to sand. I’m planning to get bids soon, and I know that some flooring companies try to up-sell and push for new floors by telling you the old ones can’t be sanded, so I’m hoping to get some background info before I start that dialogue. Thanks.

Categories: Floors
By LowerUWSider | 04/04/2011 10:48 AM | Comment

Could my fireplaces be wood-burning?


I understand that most late-19th century brownstones did not originally have wood-burning fireplaces. However, the four fireplaces in my house (built in 1889) all have fireboxes that are about 30” high x 30” wide x 20” deep, and the masonry flues start at 30” x 20” at the top of the firebox and then taper to about 9” by 9”. Based on what I’ve read, those dimensions seem adequate for a wood-burning fireplace. Also, if I wanted to convert one or two of those fireplaces to gas-burning (e.g., with Peterson’s Real-Fyre logs or somlething similar, but not a simulated coal basket), would I have to have the flues lined (assuming they’re otherwise in good shape)? Thanks.

By LowerUWSider | 12/13/2010 1:10 PM | Comment

Brownstone Insurance Prices


I know there have been several posts about this in the past, but I’m hoping to get some more recent data. We are hopefully closing on a North Slope house in the next month or so, and we’ve been getting quotes for homeowner’s insurance. The ones we have so far seem really, really high — $8,300/year from Chartis and over $10,000 from Fireman’s Fund. The house is a legal two family (although we’re planning to use it as a one family) and has about 3,400 square feet over 4 floors. Each quote is based on a $2.1MM replacement cost for the house and includes an umbrella policy of either $3MM or $5MM. I know there’s less expensive stuff out there (e.g., Everest), but I’ve read some pretty negative reviews. I guess I thought the better policies would be in the $5,000 to $6,000 range, not $8,000 to $10,000. Any thoughts?

Categories: Insurance
By LowerUWSider | 11/04/2010 1:45 PM | Comment

Home Security System in Park Slope – Necessary?


We are closing on a house next month and are wondering if people in one-family brownstones typically have security systems (e.g., ADT). The house is on one of the park blocks in northern Park Slope, and the area is pretty safe, so we’re not sure if getting an alarm would be sensible or just paranoid.

Categories: Alarm
By LowerUWSider | 10/12/2010 8:28 AM | Comment

Center Parlor as Dining Room?


Is there anyone out there with a center parlor brownstone (see floor plan) who uses the center parlor as a dining room? I’m wondering if that arrangement is feasible. It would allow for a formal front parlor and a more casual rear parlor that could be used for watching TV or for larger groups of people (as the rear parlor is the biggest room on the floor). Although the dining table would be bit of a hike from the kitchen, that may not matter so much if you don’t use it that often because, e.g., you have an eat-in kitchen or a small table suitable for dining in the rear parlor. On the other hand, a dining table might really clutter up the middle parlor, which isn’t all that big and is really intended for circulation throughout the house. Any thoughts?

Categories: Configuration
By LowerUWSider | 06/18/2010 9:45 AM | Comment

Park Slope vs. Hamilton Heights


A few months ago, I posted a question on Park Slope vs. the Upper West Side and got a lot of great feedback. To recap briefly, my partner and I live in a great but small apartment on the UWS and have been thinking about buying a brownstone. Our focus has been mainly on Park Slope because we like the housing stock and the amenities. The main drawback of PS is the commute to work, which involves an unpredictable 30-40 minute subway ride, plus walking 5-10 minutes on each end, as compared to the 20-25 minute walk (no subway) that we each currently enjoy.
I don’t want to trouble folks with endless neighborhood smack-downs, but lately we’ve started reconsidering Harlem, specifically Hamilton Heights, and we’re wondering if anyone has any thoughts on HH vs. PS. The reason we’re drawn to HH is that the housing stock is also very good (lots of unique houses in the vein of Montgomery Place and nearby park blocks in PS) and the commute to work is much shorter (about 20-25 minutes total, including the subway ride and the walk on each end). Obviously the amenities aren’t close to those of PS, but there are signs of improvement. One additional plus is the pricing. In October 2007, there was a posting here on “Brownstone Brooklyn vs. Harlem,” and one of the main points of contention back then was that houses in Harlem were more expensive than comparable houses in Brooklyn, even though Harlem offered fewer amenities.
Based on numerous open house visits in PS over the last year (and a handful of recent visits in HH), that situation seems to have reversed. In some cases, asking prices in HH and other parts of Harlem are 40-50% off peak asking prices and are considerably lower than current asking prices for comparable PS houses (and by “comparable,” I mean size, character and condition – obviously the locations are totally different). I would love to get people’s views in light of current market. Thanks again!

Categories: Quality of Life
By LowerUWSider | 05/03/2010 11:43 AM | Comment

Park Slope vs. Upper West Side


I have been reluctant to post this question, but here it goes. My partner of 8 years and I currently live in the West 60s in Manhattan. I have had a thing for Park Slope brownstones since I first visited the area as a teenager in the ’80s, and over the last year or so we have increasingly considered moving into one.

The pros of our current situation are that we have owned our apartment for about 7 years and generally like it a lot. It’s a fully renovated pre-war on a high floor with unobstructed views of Central Park. We can both walk to our jobs in midtown and have many nearby amenities (restaurants, Fairway, Whole Foods, movie theaters, etc.). The cons are that our apartment is only a one-bedroom (a guest bedroom and dining room would be great), it’s costly (maintenance fees, etc. of $2k/month), we’ll never be able to afford a two-bedroom version of our apartment (five-room, park-view condos are double the price of the brownstones we’ve looked at; co-ops are not as bad, but the board requirements are prohibitive) and our neighborhood is becoming less and less of a neighborhood (new high-rises and big box stores all over the place — we mainly live here because of the convenience factor and our view).

The pros of Park Slope are that it has a real neighborhood feel, it’s downright beautiful and the people seem great. Also, we can probably afford a pretty decent brownstone. The cons are the commute to work (30-40 minutes on the subway, based on our test runs), losing the conveniences of a full-service building (doorman to accept deliveries, etc.) and, well, it’s just the two of us and we don’t have kids to fill up a house, so there’s the guilt factor — a whole house for just two people seems decadent. However, I don’t think we would move to Park Slope to live in an apartment — the idea of owning a brownstone is really the draw.

We’ve thought about more “neighborhoody” areas of Manhattan that we like, such as the Village and West Village, but the houses there will forever be out of our price range, we don’t want to live in a loft or a modern glass building, and the pre-war, non-loft apartment stock downtown isn’t that great (mostly one-bedrooms and so-so combinations). Here’s one more fact for the mix — we have a small weekend house about two hours out of the city, we spend at least half of our weekends there and we intend to keep it. So, should we give Park Slope a try, or should we just stay put? Any thoughts would be appreciated. Truly sorry if all this just sounds annoying.

Categories: Quality of Life
By LowerUWSider | 01/19/2010 1:54 PM | Comment