Stoop encroaching in neighbor’s front yard
We are restoring a townhouse with a small front yard and want to install handrails on the stoop that curve out to posts set to the side, similar to what was there originally. However the original location of the post was slightly in the neighboring house’s front yard, which apparently is a common configuration. The front lot line ends before the bottom of the stoop, so that part of the neighbor’s front yard is technically not their property. I’ve tried repeatedly to contact the neighbor to discuss this with them, to no avail (it’s a townhouse chopped up into rental apartments).
Does anybody know if the neighbor would be able to object if we install the post slightly in their front yard?
pgfgyckqcjdvzrjd
in General Discussion 5 years and 5 months ago
15
Please log in, in order to post replies!
15 replies
colonialrevival | 3 years and 1 month ago
Sorry to hear, but thanks for the update.
pgfgyckqcjdvzrjd | 3 years and 1 month ago
Hi, original poster here. We ended up not encroaching on the neighbor’s front yard, which unfortunately has made for an awkward layout of the ironwork on the stoop (the rails are inset ~6” more than usual). As with everything in the house it’s the kind of thing probably only I notice but it does really bug me. I’m thinking of one day trying to have the posts and rails detached and moved over, which I assume is an insanely difficult/expensive/risky to the integrity of the ironwork kind of job, but interested if anybody has ever done anything like this.
hkapstein | 5 years and 5 months ago
Good thinking, but it won’t work. Adverse possession doesn’t apply to locations like sidewalks owned by the city in a governmental capacity. In fact, the city can make, and has made people remove stoops for sidewalk projects, because the stoops are typically partly outside the property line. Does any of this make sense? Nope. But that’s how it works in bk.
shahnandersen
in General Discussion 5 years and 5 months ago
Do you per chance have a copy of a survey from the previous owner that shows the handrail encroaching on your neighbor’s property? If so you probably can demonstrate your rights under “adverse possession” if anyone challenged the location of the post.
yudashasom | 5 years and 5 months ago
@northheights, and OP, you don’t need a DOB permit to install/replace a handrail. You might need LPC approval, but definitely not DOB.
Huge mistake contacting the owner IMO.
Townie | 5 years and 5 months ago
I would do a quick search on nyc municipal archives for your property’s 1940 tax photo. It might have an intact stoop photo. When we changed our root raised sidewalk out front I was amazed at the number of agencies it took to get the job done. The parks tree people came out and determined that no root pruning would be necessary if the tree pit was greatly enlarged to 12 feet wide. DOT inspectors came out twice. When it was all done we got Anonymous 311 complaints that the sidewalk was two small for strollers and pedestrians and that it was way to big. It cost us $1200 for a new iron guard for the pit. Every time you try and do the right thing there always some slob who’s going to ruin your day.
NorthHeights | 5 years and 5 months ago
OP is not replacing the handrail in-kind, they’re designing a new handrail. There’s no doubt that requires a DOB permit.
If you don’t find “it’s the law” to be persuasive, then also consider that without a permit, OP may run into problems when they sell the house for having done non-permitted work and/or adding encroachments on the public way (even behind the areaway fence).
hkapstein | 5 years and 5 months ago
Why would you apply for a DOB permit to replace the handrail on your stoop?
I believe that would be among the worst possible actions that the OP could take at this point.
NorthHeights | 5 years and 5 months ago
@urbandad — I agree DOT on its own won’t ever come to check the placement of the stoop, but DOB (when they’re paying attention) checks the lot diagram and won’t give you a permit to build/restore outside the lot on the public way unless you show them the approved consent from DOT. Though, it’s probably a viable strategy to file plans with DOB that don’t mention the consent, and only do it if DOB notices and makes you.
BKALLDAY | 5 years and 5 months ago
I did mine a decade ago. I didn’t rebuild a missing stoop just fixed all the stairs and returned the original newel post, handrail and fat balustrades. My neighbor (or rather) her garden apartment tenants and the owner complained but I had Landmarks and Buildings approve the plans and went ahead. The only kerfuffle was they refused to let us enter their yard to access the side wall. We solved that by using the area in line with the first step which juts out about a foot and those lovely men climbed down every day and did the cement and anchor work and then skim coated the brownstone. Some people are just born miserable and only feel good if they are making misery for others. Not sure if you have filed plans but you should be at least able to do the work with no problem other than ingress and egress. But check with an attorney or as in my case pray you are in a landmarked hood.
hkapstein | 5 years and 5 months ago
I wouldn’t apply for the revocable consent to build something behind the areaway fence unless I thought it would be challenged. How often does the city come to check the shape of your existing stoop?
NorthHeights | 5 years and 5 months ago
I agree with Putnamdenizen. You need a revocable consent from the city to put a stoop on the public right of way, and I think you’ll find it’s impossible to get that consent for a location that’s not in front of your own property. In theory you could come to an agreement with the neighbor for THEM to seek the consent, but that seems super complicated and even in the best of circumstances (like, they answer your calls) would be a big nuisance for them. Also keep in mind that while the annual fee for the revocable consent (in a landmark district) is only $25, there are significant up-front costs…you need an architect to submit plans to DOT, you need to pay a hefty application fee ($500-$1000) that covers advertising a public hearing, and you need to put down an even heftier “deposit” ($5000-$10000) to cover potential liability to the city (you’re never getting that deposit back). This is why getting the neighbor to obtain the consent for a piece of your stoop in front of neighbor’s property seems to me to be the same probability (zero) as getting the city to give it to you.
I’d just come up with a design that stays in front of your own house (and if it encroaches on the public way, doing the consent process).
Putnamdenizen | 5 years and 5 months ago
Is this design necessary? What may have made sense when an entire row of buildings were constructed by the same developer, or before the front court fence was installed, sounds pretty ballsy now. And not in a friendly way. By your reasoning a street vendor could set up her (much less permanent) stand selling books in your front yard. I think although the front area may not be “owned” by your neighbor, her interest and control of it is superior to yours.
pgfgyckqcjdvzrjd | 5 years and 5 months ago
Thanks Urbandad, very helpful. I realized my original post may have been unclear. The stoop at our house (and the neighbor’s) doesn’t come down to the actual sidewalk where the public can walk by; it is in an enclosed front yard, with a fence a few feet past the bottom step. Nevertheless the lot line falls before the end of the stoop, so technically the rest of the yard is on city land even though it is behind the fence. Which means the post we would potentially place at the bottom of our stoop, while technically on city property because past the lot line, would be behind the physical fence enclosing the neighbor’s front yard.
Does this change your answer?
hkapstein | 5 years and 5 months ago
So here’s the deal. (preface: this is not professional advice)
You can build certain things on the sidewalk, which belongs to the city in a municipal capacity. A stoop is one of them. But technically to do it legally, you need a revocable consent from the city, which means doing a bunch of paperwork to determine if it complies with the rules, and also paying an annual fee as long as the construction exists. Things built before a certain date are grandfathered and don’t require the fee. I think the fee is fairly low for stoops in landmarked areas, but you’d have to check the details.
If they wanted to give you a hard time, they could try to make the city force you to obtain the revocable consent, and see if they could jam up that process by saying its not in front of your property or somehow otherwise non-compliant.
But look, it’s not on their property, and it will improve the general appearance of the two houses. The landlord next door probably doesn’t really care, and if you do reach him/her, it will be easier for him to say no then to worry about the legal implica tions. So if you just go ahead and build it, the worst that could probably happen is the neighbor finds a way to make you take it down, which seems like a very unlikely outcome.
If this involves modifying their fence in some way, or significantly encroaching on the neighbors’ areaway, that would be a lot more aggressive than I imagined above, and I would not want to do that without consulting them.