Forum
« Laugh of the Day Flat Roof Leak »
July 23, 2009
Cellar Kitchen Compliant?
We bought a condo duplex with a kitchen in what i understand is officially a basement. Since buying the apartment we've learnt that basement kitchens are not compliant with code and we're advised that we should relocate the kitchen upstairs or risk having problems when we come to sell the property. Given that when we bought the property it came with a certificate of occupancy my question is whether the kitchen can be considered grandfathered in and as such ok to stay where it is.
Comments
Huh? Every brownstone in NYC originally had the kitchen in the English basement. Or is this below grade? That sound dangerous.
Posted by: mopar at July 22, 2009 8:10 PM
If you got a c of o why sweat it? O/W seek the help of a real architect and sue the sponsor.
Posted by: denton at July 22, 2009 9:17 PM
If it's a Basement and not a Cellar, a Kitchen is legal, but your best bet is to check with an architect. They can check the building dept. records and see if the Kitchen is shown at all on the plans or if there were any filings in the past for the installation. Is that the only Kitchen in the duplex, or is there one upstairs as well? If it's the only one and it wasn't installed legally, you can hire an architect and legalize it...as long as you are able to have a Kitchen on that level.
Posted by: Brooklyn Plumber at July 22, 2009 10:11 PM
Its a rear basement because the ceiling is about two feet below grade.
The COO dates back to when a connecting internal stair was put in about 20 years ago allowing the basement to be used as a rec room. The kitchen (the only one in the duplex) was there before we bought it but the DOB records make no mention of this so i presume it was added illegally i believe in 2005 because there are DOB records showing works described as...
"Filing herewith plans indicating interior renovations to an existing apartment. Worktypes to include general construction and plumbimg. No change to use egress or occupancy."
Letter of completion Jan 06. Self cert.
I presume that because DOB know nothing of the cellar kitchen they'd not agree to grandfather it in. That would solve our problem at one.
Posted by: dprxxx at July 22, 2009 10:31 PM
Architect here. It's not that simple a question given the limited info you've offered. Here's a few links that may help identify if your apartment in its current configuration is code compliant:
http://www.housingnyc.com/html/resources/hmc/sub3/art5.html
http://www.nyc.gov/html/hpd/html/owners/illegal-conversions.shtml
Posted by: 60designers at July 22, 2009 10:43 PM
60designers,
thanks for the links.
Tey seem to confirm that the cellar is covered by the COO and is ok for occupancy and use as rec room. the problem come from the fact that the only kitchen in the duplex is in there too and there is no record at DOB of this ever being approved, the addition having been carried out some time in 05 by the previous owner.
our Architect advises us that the only way we can get a fully code compliant duplex out of this is to move the kitchen upstairs to ground level. An expensive project that its self forces a major remodel of the duplex.
Our ideal solution would be to have the Cellar kitchen grand fathered in and i was posting this to see whether anyone else had managed to get something grand fathered that was put in illegally by a previous owner.
Posted by: dprxxx at July 22, 2009 11:06 PM
If the ceiling of the basement is 2 feet below grade, and the DOB is not aware that there is currently a kitchen down there, I see very little chance for you getting it grandfathered in. Does the space have any windows at all? I'm trying to picture the ceiling being 2 feet below grade.
Posted by: setancre at July 23, 2009 8:41 AM
You bought the place without a problem and with a CO? So where's the problem when you sell? And are you planning to sell soon? Why invent problems for yourself?
Posted by: cmu at July 23, 2009 8:52 AM
Just because the job was self certified by an architect doesn't mean it was executed legally. In fact, an architect can lose their license if it is revealed they self certified a job that is in clear violation of NYC code. I read your previous post, so I now see your dilemma more clearly. Listen to your current architect...their suggestions are good. And if you can't afford to make such a renovation, seek legal advice from a law firm other than the one you started this process with.
PS...I'm with setancre. I'm hoping your comment about the ceiling being 2 feet below grade is just a typo.
Posted by: 60designers at July 23, 2009 9:52 AM
Another architect here.
A little about nomenclature first. If your kitchen level ceiling is 2 feet below grade, then it's definitely a cellar. Allowing 10-12 inches or so for ceiling/floor thickness, your upper level floor is therefore at least a foot below grade, and is a basement. As for the term "english basement", this is New York. As far as the DOB is concerned, there's no such thing.
That said, it looks like you're exactly right. It sounds like the kitchen was put in illegally, and there's little or no chance it would be grandfathered, especially given the recent self-cert work. They're really strict about self-cert these days in light of certain individuals who have abused this privilege, making it more difficult for the rest of us honest folks to get things done.
On the other hand, as cmu points out, there's a good chance that the DOB would never know. If the CO says nothing about it and it didn't cause a problem when you bought, you might not have any trouble selling or re-financing later. If you do, of course you could choose to renovate at that time and sell for a much higher price.
Posted by: JimHill at July 23, 2009 9:55 AM
Thanks for the comments.
re the 'below grade'. yes a typo sorry.
the 'cellar' (which at the rear of the building) has a ceiling height of a little more than 7'6" and Grade level (that is the level of the side walk at the front of the building) is at about 6'0" from the floor. I believe that for 'it' to be a basement it this must be at least 2'0".
the 'Cellar is large, covering the entire apartment floor plan, open plan with the kitchen at the rear and with three good sized windows and a door to a rear yard.
Our Architect also advises us that Grandfarthering in the Kitchen is not an option and goes on to we should remedy the code violation because either (i) we'd be liable if we sold the apartment without making the code violation clear to the buyer or (ii) we'd suffer a huge loss of value if we did make the code violation clar.
Clearly our Architect and builder have an interest in this so i wanted to make sure by posting here that we're not (as an appraiser told me yesterday) being "walked down the path" by our architect.
The Appraiser's view was simple....
The architect would say that wouldn't he! And.... there is very little, if any, loss of value because we have the COO and there are thousands of 'illegal' kitchens, bathrooms and bedrooms in cellars all over NYC all selling without any issues. He further adds that its standard in NYC to have a 'bought as seen' clause in the offering documents so there is no exposure to us at sale any way.
Posted by: dprxxx at July 23, 2009 3:13 PM
I guess what really made stop and think is the appraisers assertion that plenty of properties are sold with ' illegal ' features and in the end it makes little if any difference to their market value.
Our assumption that the value of our property is very much lower for not having a 'legal' kitchen has provided the main justification for fixing the problem. Are we being stupid and should just leave it the way it is? the Appraiser clearly believes that our architect is behaving in his own interest and not ours.
Posted by: dprxxx at July 23, 2009 4:19 PM
Based on this info, the entire cellar level is not habitable. A habitable cellar or basement apartment must have 8'-0" ceilings. What kind of ceiling is it? Acoustic ceiling tiles? Do you have the option of raising it to meet code?
Also, this is most certainly a cellar, not a basement. In order for it to be a basement you would need over one half of its height over curb level, which means the floor would need to be less than 4'-0" below grade. You're not even close to that.
Sorry, but your appraiser has a lot to learn if s/he makes comments like that. I realize there are crooks out there, but based on all the info you've provided, it would be clear to any professional in real estate that you should be listening to your architect in this matter. Moreover, your architect is the only one that has proposed legal solutions to get you out of this mess. Do you really want to follow the opinion of an appraiser who so casually dismisses code violations and proposes you solve the issue by tricking another unlucky and naive soul who's unfamiliar with the apartment's legality?
Posted by: 60designers at July 23, 2009 4:35 PM
Market value is one thing. Ethical value is another.
I'm not intending to be harsh here...I know you're in a bind...but...
Posted by: 60designers at July 23, 2009 4:37 PM
I most certainly don't want to trick anyone when we come to sell the property. Frankly aside from ethics i simply couldn't take the open ended worry that a seller might have a legal case against me for misrepresenting the state of the property. No. I'd declare all i know about the property.
What struck me about the appraiser (and i agree that his ethics seem very questionable) is that he clearly believes that properties with code violations exchange hands with little or no loss of value all the time in NYC provided they have a COO.
So the question becomes... why spend all that money fixing a code violation if the property value does not suffer from it?
Some of you will have seen my post on this last year when investing in a property improvement like this may have seemed a sound idea.
Today however, with values already depressed by about 20% or more, equity lines very hard to get and little sign of any recovery in sight, such an investment is a completely different prospect.
Posted by: dprxxx at July 23, 2009 4:59 PM
Let me make clear that I'm not questioning your ethical character at all. I hope my comment did not come across that way. I've read your posts and you are clearly interested in doing what would be acceptable and lawful...without needing to spend an excessive amount of money to fix this problem yourself.
And your appraiser is right...people do sell properties that have code violations. Some do so without informing the buyer, which in my opinion is crossing ethical standards because it sets up the owner to be in the exact same dilemma you're in. Others, like yourself, are more honest.
I personally find it hard to believe the property value will not suffer once you inform the potential buyers of the code violations currently in place. But, then again, New York is a curious city. I'm sometimes baffled by what people buy, sometimes at premium prices.
Good luck resolving this issue. I hope one day I return to this thread and find out that you've found a way to resolve it without too much trouble.
Posted by: 60designers at July 23, 2009 5:37 PM
Thanks to all for the helpful comments. I think It boils to simply this. Fix the code problem now or fix it later.
moving the kitchen also 'triggers' several other changes that mean we're really looking at a significant remodel of the apartment which in a better market woudl probably enhance value.
The fact that spending the money to do this today, however, means that we'll have spent way more on the property than it is worth which is simply the ultimate cost of our poor due diligence when buying the apartment.
Expensive mistake i guess.
Posted by: dprxxx at July 23, 2009 8:24 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.