Landmarks are extremely contentious and doesn't always prevent the shady actions suggested in the original article. One example from recent memory: http://www.

Landmarks are extremely contentious and doesn't always prevent the shady actions suggested in the original article. One example from recent memory: http://www.ibtimes.com/save-rizzoli-bookstore-effort-heats-57th-street-building-defaced-critics-say-nyc-landmarks-1567229 http://www.ibtimes.com/save-rizzoli-bookstore-effort-heats-5... http://gothamist.com/2014/04/04/everybody_has_been_bought_off_-_bre.php http://gothamist.com/2014/04/04/everybody_has_been_bought_of... > Sources say Vornado Realty Trust (NYSE:VNO), which co-owns the three properties at the center of the dispute, deployed contractors to deface the exterior of the buildings in a premeditated effort to derail the landmark-evaluation process. “Preemptive demolition,” as the tactic is known, is not an uncommon strategy for property owners, which have been known to purposely disfigure a building’s distinctive features after catching wind of an effort to designate a property for landmark protection. Once the building is defaced there is no going back in the eyes of the LPC (rumours of the LPC being bought off is another matter, but even proof of such actions would not reverse this point). Generally though it is indeed a "workable system".