Landmarks Preservation Commission and Window Bars

Generally speaking, architectural features that were added/removed prior to a neighborhood's designation as a historic district can remain as is. Once a major repair/rebuild is undertaken (rather than an "ordinary repair"), Landmarks tends to require the owner to return the building's facade to it's original historic features. (For example, your brickwork appears painted. If it is, you can repaint using the same color, but you would not be Landmarks-compliant if you ever change the paint color.) Having removed your straight bars, it is possible that you might be prohibited from installing *anything* in their place, including the previous straight bars. Check with Landmarks: 212-669-7817
http://www.nyc.gov/html/lpc/html/faqs/faqs.shtml

Posted by: guest at July 2, 2008 4:40 PM

Tread lightly... they may have a problem with those windows.

Posted by: guest at July 2, 2008 5:09 PM

Your house looks lovely. I think it's crazy when landmarks gets in the way of sanitary and safety concerns. Our place wasn't allowed to get screens on the windows. Yours has to meet some yet-to-be-determined standard for security bars....

Posted by: guest at July 2, 2008 5:51 PM

"forcing people to have a certain look might as well live in a gated community...."

Actually, it's that "certain look" the neighborhoods already have - the very look that attracts people in the first place, the very look that Landmarks is preserving, nor forcing. (Or shall we run the table for the Novo?)

Posted by: guest at July 2, 2008 6:56 PM

holy cr*p, thank goodness I live 1 ave. west of PSlope landmarks zone.

I will NEVER support landmarking the rest of Park Slope for this (and MANY other) reasons.

Landmarks = NIMBY heaven.

Posted by: guest at July 2, 2008 7:07 PM

These replies take the gold medal for most typos and craziest grammar. Whew!

Posted by: guest at July 3, 2008 9:57 AM

So called non-compliant bars on other buildings may have been grandfathered in, as they may have already been there when the neighborhood was landmarked. The LPC will not retroactively declare something as non-compliant, so even if your windows do not meet their requirements, if they were in place when your building was landmarked, they can stay. If the building gets new windows, then you would have to apply for a permit, and you would only be permitted to have certain kinds of period appropriate windows installed.

If you ignore their letter, they have no enforcement arm to come get you. They only have to wait until you need to do other work which would need a permit, and they will not sign off on it until you are compliant in everything. I don't think they can force you to remove any security bars on a permanent basis. Even a city agency understands the need for bars, they aren't that hide bound to the past. Most row houses in this city have had bars since they were built, so security issues are not news.

Personally, I don't think they look bad at all. You might just want to give it a go, and see if they will approve them. I'd take lots of pictures of neighborhood security bars so they can see how yours fit into the entire neighborhood.

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at July 3, 2008 12:07 PM

Check it out Montrose. Unfortunately, if owners ignore the letter it can be unfortunate. Check your facts before giving people bad advice: http://www.nyc.gov/html/lpc/html/faqs/faq_enforce.shtml
"How is the amount of a civil fine determined?
The amount of a civil fine is dependent on the severity of the violation. The Landmarks Protection Law defines two types of violations: type A and type B.

Type A violations include serious alterations to important architectural elements, such as cornices, stoops, windows, and storefronts; additionally, construction of rooftop or backyard additions may fit into this category. First-time type A violations are punishable by a fine of up to $5,000, if a second NOV is issued, there will be a fine of up to $250 per day, with a minimum fine of $5,000.

Type B violations include all other, less serious infractions, such as painting a facade a new color, replacing a single window, or installing a light, sign, flagpole or banner. First-time Type B violations are punishable by a fine of up to $500; if a second NOV is issued, there will be a fine of up to $50 per day, with a minimum fine of $500."

I'm not saying that I'm for, or against this. I just think you should know what you are talking about before being so free with bad advice that could end up costing an owner some bucks -- especially if a change is small and might be legalized retroactively for no cost at all.

Posted by: guest at July 4, 2008 7:41 AM

"When I mentioned that I see window bars in the neighborhood that curve out to accommodate air conditioners, the said those window bars do not comply with Landmarks standards either"

So Landmarks doesn't allow people to have both security and an air conditioner at the same time??? Oh my god, please. It shows they believe the human population is such a lesser concern, that we should have severe health and safety risks inflicted on us just to comply to THEIR sense of aesthetics.

SICK. What obsessive uptight freaks, I'm sorry. I like pretty buildings too who doesn't, but let's all remember..

FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION

And come on, the OP's building does not look bad at all!

Posted by: guest at July 4, 2008 11:07 AM

7:41, since MOST of the advice given on this, or any other forum, is anecdotal, at best, I hardly think you need to jump down my throat. If I am wrong, I apologise to the OP, but I was going by advice given to me by others who had dealt with LPC.

I still stand by my other advice to try to get them legalized by showing them photos of other houses in the neighborhood, and giving them more information than they could possibly need to argue your case. Perhaps crime stats, specifically break-ins in the neighborhood, a report of some kind from the local precinct extolling bars as a deterrent, or some such. I still find it hard to believe that they would ban security bars, or allow for curved ones. LPC people all live in the city, too. They know what is realistic and necessary.

Good luck to the OP.

MM

Posted by: guest at July 4, 2008 12:23 PM

If LPC wants to start handing out grants to install central AC so we don't have to have window units, great.

Otherwise they need to get a grip on reality and shut up about it.

Posted by: guest at July 4, 2008 1:33 PM

It is tough to reconcile maintaining the 1890's look of a facade with modern needs for AC and security.

Back then, they had awnings to cool buildings, and people died much younger of heart or pulmonary disease rather than live to be old with it. And, they didn't have AC, so they had no other option.

As to security, while ground floor brownstones seem to have always been built with bars on the windows, they seemed not to worry about the upper windows, or doors. Maybe because someone was likely home when the windows were open - they had larger households, so the children, women and servants were around - maybe this scared away burglars. Now, we go to work all day and leave the home unattended.

Landmarks should come to understand that the modern needs for AC and security have to trump the 1890's look. I like your bars. The problem is, it is very much in the eye of the beholder - I have seen some I wouldn't like at all.

At least if landmarks set standards for what was acceptable for curved bars that allow window ACs, then people would know what to do to be in compliance with them. Saying that the curved bars that fit ACs aren't acceptable isn't really helpful.

And if they are OK with the square cages of straight bars that allow for window ACs (don't know if they do), that's just dumb, as neither is authentic from the 1890's, and the square ones are so much uglier than the curved ones, which tend to look nice, as do yours.

Posted by: guest at July 4, 2008 2:49 PM

Where did you get those? Where they custom?

I'm not landmarked and have been looking for something EXACTLY like that so I can install window A/C's on our first floor in the rear of the building.

Sorry you're having a hard time of it with the LPC!!

Posted by: guest at July 5, 2008 9:37 AM

I believe what Montrose Morris was trying to say was that the LPC does not have the manpower to roam landmarked neighborhoods looking for violations. And they don't- they have a very small staff. Montrose was not implying that LPC has no enforcement powers- it quite obviously does.

And homeowners also have the right to fight the ruling.

Posted by: guest at July 5, 2008 2:58 PM

If I was going to break in to your house I would break the upper sash glass or use the fire escape to access the upper floor apartments. Thanks for the photo.

Posted by: guest at July 5, 2008 7:46 PM

Good point. I failed to notice that these bars are just for decoration and really don't function as security bars at all - they'd have to cover the entire window to do that. Still, they do look nice as decoration.

Posted by: guest at July 7, 2008 10:51 AM