Fire Escape Gates?

We moved to the area in late June and used http://www.soslocksmith.com for our gate. They were really good and reasonably priced. However, not same day. They insist on coming to measure the window themselves (for free) and then give you an estimate on what it'll cost. Then about 5 days to make it.

I would think a custom one is better than one that can expand to different window sizes. Those don't seem as secure to me.

We called a lot of places and went with them. Good luck.

You shouldn't need 3 FDNY approved gates if they're all in the same apartment. Just one, to the fire escape, the others can be el cheapo.

Oh yeah, that adds up. When we called around the cheapest we were told was about $250 for a universal one at Tru Value Hardware. (I think the one on Metropolitan Ave in Williamsburg)

The problem is, I'm guessing, is that if the OP wants to say, vent the apartment, there's no way he/she can do so without giving easy ingress to burglars. The point of a fire escape safety gate is to keep burglars OUT. I don't even have a safety gate because my fire escape is at the one room where I have two windows, so I can just keep that window locked at all times.

Unless OP's apartment has a gazillion windows, it's going to get awfully stuffy in that apartment.

modsquad wrote: We're talking about 2 different gates. The FDNY gate is legal on windows next to the fire escape. It can be opened by inserting your fingers into a small box, no keys are needed. The other type of gate is a scissor gate that is secured with padlocks. This gate should be a half to a third the price of the FDNY gate. As long as you have legal access to the fire escape through the FDNY gate you don't have to fit the other windows with the approved gate. The cheaper gate lets more light through and you can reach through it to open the windows, no so with the FDNY gate.

I'm pretty sure the code is written to say that ALL windows that open onto a fire escape require a FDNY approved gate, FYI.

NYC ADC Multiple Dwelling Law § 53.1.c wrote: Iron bars, grilles, gates, or other obstructing devices on any window giving access to fire-escapes or to a required secondary means of egress shall be unlawful unless such devices are of a type approved by the board of appeals and are installed and maintained as prescribed by the board; provided, however, that in a city having a population of one million or more, such devices shall be of a type approved, installed and maintained as prescribed by the fire commissioner, or as previously approved and prescribed by the board of standards and appeals of such city, except as otherwise provided by said commissioner.

To be technical. (link)

modsquad wrote: There is a choice here. "Iron bars, grilles, gates, or other obstructing devices on any window giving access to fire-escapes or to a required secondary means of egress" It says "or" not "and". I choose to comply with the latter part by designating one window as my second means of egress by installing the FDNY approved gate. The other windows become moot. They may be bricked up and I would still be compliance.
I rest my case.

Lol, I don't think that is a choice, but you _do_ have an interesting way of reading it. I would say that this:

"Iron bars, grilles, gates, or other obstructing devices on any window giving access to fire-escapes or to a required secondary means of egress shall be unlawful unless such devices are of a type approved..."

means:

"Iron bars, grilles, gates, or other obstructing devices on any window giving access to fire-escapes shall be unlawful unless such devices are of a type approved..."

and:

"Iron bars, grilles, gates, or other obstructing devices on any window giving access to a required secondary means of egress shall be unlawful unless such devices are of a type approved..."

Meaning ALL those windows, either one, it applies to all. Not that you can pick and choose which ones you want it to apply to. Hence the wording all windows on fire escapes or that provide required secondary egress, either way they need to be FDNY approved.



Points for creativity!

[ALL WINDOWS] -that are- [ON A FIRE ESCAPE] -or- [PROVIDE SECONDARY EGRESS] -have to- [BE FDNY APPROVED].

vs.

[ALL WINDOWS] -that are- [ON A FIRE ESCAPE] -have to- [BE FDNY APPROVED]
--or--
[ALL WINDOWS] -that are- [PROVIDE SECONDARY EGRESS] -have to- [BE FDNY APPROVED]

Or means or but not where you are sticking it! The -or- goes with all windows, not FDNY approved. Were it changed to AND, it would mean something totally different, namely that the windows had to not only be on a fire escape, but also provide a required secondary means of egress. The way it is written, it doesn't matter if the window is providing a secondary means of egress or not, it is required to have a FDNY approved gate. Further, if it is providing a required secondary means of egress, it has to have a FDNY approved gate whether it opens onto a fire escape or not.

No, it is a joke. Lighten the hell up.

I don't even understand your argument. The whole point of an FDNY gate is so that OP can safely open the windows to the fire escape while keeping burglars out, and yet allowing easy egress to the OP should there be a fire, no?

Plus, blocking off some possible means of escaping from fire doesn't seem too smart. My fire escape is in the living room. What if fire had me trapped in the bedroom? I'd be SOL. Since my apartment meets minimum legal fire safety specifications, I'm not about to bitch to my landlord about this. Just pointing out that when it comes to fire safety, OP has it made. OP just has to worry about burglars now.

When I first moved here, I found the window to the fire escape screwed shut. That didn't seem to be too safe, so I removed the screws, and the window fell OUT. The screws were the only thing holding the window together. Fortunately, I was able to get the super to fix that right away. The previous tenant seems to have been a dumb ass, as well as whoever fixed up my apartment before I moved in. (Painted over electrical outlets? Why, you shouldn't have! No, really. You shouldn't have.)

:wtf:

Ok, this thread is going off the deep end fast.

Although this thread has become an academic exercise, as a courtesy to OP I will give advice based on my personal experience with DOB, ISO, FDNY, and forensic engineers working for the city. DOB is obvious, ISO is Insurance Services, working for the insurance companies (they give buildings their fire rating), FDNY involves not only an actual inspection after a 911 call (fire or not) but also 5 yr hydrostatic tests with inspections, periodic fire escape inspections (remove those plants!). Forensic engineers show up after a catastrophic failure. They are the boss at a emergency, directing the search for evidence for possible criminal charges. After 25 years and maybe a hundred or so inspections. One building in SOHO actually has large eye hooks where a ropes were attached to throw out the windows. I've never had anyone require more than one FDNY gate to the fire escape in a single apartment. I wouldn't loose sleep over this. If you are trapped in your bedroom, PM me a "I told you so!!" message. I'll feel real bad.

lilbangladesh wrote: Geez, I wasn't saying that it's HORRIBLE that I only have one fire escape or that every window should have one.

I'm just saying that since OP has THREE, she should take advantage of it.

You have a habit of ever so slightly missing the point.

Except that the whole point here that OP had in the first place was that three FDNY gates were prohibitively expensive, and that they were more concerned with protecting their stuff.

Speaking as to points...

modsquad wrote: What kind of a man bleats about "minimum legal fire safety specifications". Especially one who does drugs.

That's no man!

modsquad wrote: What kind of a man bleats about "minimum legal fire safety specifications". Especially one who does drugs.

I don't where the hell you got THAT from. YOU made that one up. I never responded to it because it was so far out from left field. I don't even drink, and I'm rather well-known on this board for that.