I guess the question is why the contract needs extensive editing...the AIA, or other 'industry standard' contracts are useful because they're ready to go off the shelf...things may need to be tweaked a bit to reflect the specifics of your project, but if you're re-writing the thing, you're going to spend lots of $, and lots of time, to do so.

The fact that your lawyer doesn't have a standard edited (even extensively edited) AIA ready to print up tells me that they're not too familiar w/ the document...or with some of the standard checks and balances that any contract for construction should have. I would find a lawyer who has an edited version ready to go, as she'll be well versed in the issues.

I've encountered a few lawyers over the years who say "the AIA is garbage, and here's a better contract." This presents several problems for the architect or contractor.

First, I have to get my lawyer involved...that costs $, and I'm going to pass this cost, which to me is unneccesary, on to you.

Second, many of the one-off contracts are horribly one sided, and no reputable contractor would sign them.
I understand that an aggressive attorney sees himself as protecting his clients interest, but if no one will sign the contract, you have a problem.

Third, all parties have to be very careful that by using a one-off agreement, they haven't inadvertently created gaps in responsibility/protection/etc...again this takes time and $ to do properly, where with the standard contract language it's been well vetted by legions of lawyers being available to the public.

So think carefully before completely reinventing the wheel.

Posted by: jcarch at November 19, 2009 9:08 PM in response to AIA contracts

The objections on FAR are potentially problematic...if your architect maxed out the allowable FAR and made some square footage disappear by calling the basement a cellar, and by calling too much area 'mechanical', then you're going to have a real headache on your hands.

I hope this isn't the case.

Your architect really shouldn't be charging you to fix his own mistakes.

I agree w/ the suggestion that you attend the meetings w/ the plan examiner as things move forward...you want to see first hand how things are going, not be getting second hand accounts.

Posted by: jcarch at November 18, 2009 3:02 PM in response to DOB Audit

You'll need to have a landing, whose depth is at least equal to the width of the staircase.

Does your building have a C of O for a two family, or is it a one family that's been used as a two family?

If you don't have either a fire escape for the upper unit, or sprinklers in the stair hall, then you're probably a one family.

If you're a one family in the eyes of the city, you'll need to get a new C of O, which will likely mean other areas of the building may require work to obtain city approvals.

Posted by: jcarch at November 17, 2009 12:32 AM in response to Door Placement Code

op...just curious, but why did you have several engineers in? Wouldn't one have done the trick?

Did your engineers look at the entire project, or only diagnose problems you knew about? I'd hate to see you posting in 6 mo's about bounding floor joists and sagging ridge beams.

Posted by: jcarch at November 3, 2009 9:50 AM in response to 2x4 Framed House

Unless I'm lighting artwork, or doing task type lighting over counter tops, etc.), I go very easy on the recessed lights.

The main reason is simply that they only throw light in one direction...down. These are overused all the time, and you get this sort of zebra striping of light/dark that's very harsh on the eye.

Instead, use well chosen surface mounted or pendant fixtures that throw light in all directions for general illumination...put them on dimmer switches to you can really control how much light they throw off. You also need to take into consideration how big the room is that you're lighting. Don't pick a fixture that can only take one 60W bulb for your big living room.

This looks better, and you can actually save some serious $ in the reduction in the rough in and the fixtures.

Posted by: jcarch at October 29, 2009 12:43 PM in response to Thoughts on Recessed Lighting

Sorry to hear about your situation, and understand you don't want to be raked over the coals, but for the sake of those who haven't yet gone down this road but are reading now:

An owner should never be in a position where you've paid for work that has not been done.

The only exception to this is for your initial payment, but this should be credited back to you immediately on the contractors first invoice.

Not only should owners not pay for work not done, you should withhold 10% on what has been done. So if your contractor's done $60K of work, you've paid him $54K. You pay this retainage at the end of the job, when the punchlist is taken care of.

You also don't pay for work that can't be verified as having been done. So if the contractor wants $10K for the cabinets that are being worked on off site, unless he can show your cabinets, and that $10K of work is actually done, you don't pay.

These are the rules of the road...any contractor who doesn't want to abide by them should raise large, brightly colored, and vigorously waving red flags.

I hope you get your money back.

Posted by: jcarch at October 25, 2009 1:41 AM in response to ISO Construction Lawyer

Focus first on zoning/code issues, if you pass each of these tests, then spend time/effort on costs:

The City Bookstore sells a very useful Zoning Handbook that summarizes and illustrates the basic requirements for each zone on one page. You can find what zone you're in by going to the DCP website and looking at the proper zoning map online.

1. Will you exceed the allowable lot coverage or open space requirements?
2. Will you exceed the allowable FAR (Floor Area Ratio).
3. If your property isn't entirely w/in 100' of the end of the block, you'll need a 30' rear yard. From the info you give, as long as you have less than a 10' deep front yard, you'll be o.k. on this.
4. Will the proposed addition create a situation on the first floor where you have habitable rooms (basically anything except a kitchenette or bathroom) that won't get the required fresh air/natural light? You may be able to label a landlocked room as an accessory use space to get around this.

If you pass these tests, talk to architects who've done either additions or small new buildings, they'll be able to give you pricing guidance, and avoid pitfalls that will increase costs. If you're talking w/ someone who's only done interior work, keep in mind that they're out of their element.

Good Luck

Posted by: jcarch at October 22, 2009 3:40 PM in response to Cost for Adding Extension?

I'd be concerned about whether the DB guys drawings/specs are complete enough/documented enough to just hand off to another contractor...if I was building something myself, I would not have the same level of detail in my drawings as I would if a separate contractor was building it.

That said, get rid of the DB guys. If they're a nightmare now, they'll be worse during construction.

Posted by: jcarch at October 14, 2009 10:06 AM in response to Changing Design/Build Midstream?

If that's really it, your budget should be fine...is there more to it than that...new appliances, reconfiguring fixture layouts, etc?

If not, then talk to more contractors.

Posted by: jcarch at October 5, 2009 11:36 AM in response to Contractor Estimates

Any change in egress requires review and approval by the DOB.

But the only regulation I'm aware of that would impact this would be the 40' limit on egress from a dwelling unit...measured from the furthest corner of the furthest room to the centerpoint of the egress door/window.

If you didn't violate this, I wouldn't worry about it.

Posted by: jcarch at September 27, 2009 9:34 PM in response to Permit Needed for Door?

I would not allow a client to pay until a couple of weeks before work was to start (a specific date, not "around the holidays).

bmfesq...w/ your 3x1/3 payment schedule, at 2 points, the owner's very exposed financially if the contractor disappears... and at the end the contractor is exposed if the owner decided not to pay.

It's a small job, but have the initial payment credited against the first invoice from the contractor, and pay only for what's done/on site after that. For a job this size, this may mean paying once a week so that the contractor's not too exposed, but that's fine. Withold 10% for the end, when absolutely everything's been done.

This is all very standard. If your contractor balks, its a red flag.

Posted by: jcarch at September 24, 2009 11:43 AM in response to Contractor Deposit-Too early?

I'm confused...when you got rid of the original architect, you didn't have him replaced w/ the new, and either close out the original filing or amend it w/ your new architect and alt2?

It sounds like you just left the old filing sitting there, and now it's biting you on the behind.

Do you have an expediter? You should be able to withdraw the old filing, but you'd want someone very familiar w/ DOB practices to guide you through this.

Posted by: jcarch at September 14, 2009 10:46 PM in response to Architect Fired, Big Mess

I usually recommend that the contractor get 10% (for a small job, less for a large job) deposit on signing of a contract w/ the owner. That amount is credited against the contractors first requests for payment.

At the same time, 10% is deducted from each payment request from the contractor, and is withheld until the job is done.

Review payment requests in detail. Never pay for more than has been done on site, and never pay for items that are off site (i.e. "I need $15K for the kitchen cabinets, they're built but won't be on site for two weeks").

In case anything goes wrong, you want the contractor to be owed money, not the other way abound.

Posted by: jcarch at September 11, 2009 1:32 PM in response to Contractor Deposit

the rec to visit the day after it rains is a good one...we're supposed to get rain this week.

and flashing (where the roof meets the parapet and any bulkheads) is critical. A lot of roofers skip this if you don't keep an eye on things.

for the warranty, when people talk about a 10 or 20 year roof, that's the warranty on the membrane...but not on the installation...If there's a leak, it'll almost certainly be because of the installation, not because the membrane started to disintegrate.

Posted by: jcarch at September 8, 2009 9:47 PM in response to Should We Walk Away?

I'm not a landlord, and my sympathies tend to lie w/ tenants, but those like the OP are exactly what gives rent control/stabilization a bad rap.

If I was the OP's landlord, and I found out my tenant was cheating the system and me, I'd get him out of that apartment asap.

Posted by: jcarch at September 8, 2009 4:31 PM in response to Questions About Subletting

You say the roof is'almost' flat. did the inspector give you any numbers...i.e. 1/8" per foot? If not, find out.

Ask the developer for the specifications on the roof membrane (both the manufacturer and the specific product name). You can then go online and pretty quickly find what the required minimum pitch is...if your building has less than the minimum, I'd walk away.

For ponding, many flat systems actually allow some ponding. The spec's might say ponding is allowed on no more than 10% of the roof area. But this is only because where the seams in the membrane overlap there's a slight bump...inevitably a very small amount of water will get stuck on the uphill side of the bump, but the amount is so small it will evaporate quickly.

Good Luck.

Posted by: jcarch at September 8, 2009 4:24 PM in response to Should We Walk Away?

That seems insane. I've done work in many condo/coops, from small modest buildings to big fancy ones. I've never heard of an owner having to bond his project. Maybe the 'or agreement' language means you have to get insurance coverage for that amount, but that's crazy too, unless you're ripping the roof of the building or something similarly intrusive. To procure a bond you have to pay (I think) 5% of the face value...so if you can't get around this, you have to drop $100K to meet this requirement. $2M in insurance coverage will cost you a fraction of that, but will still be an additional cost.

Usually deviations from the norm in the alteration agreement are because some genius on the board decides that they can build a better mousetrap, and better protect the building's interests. The problem is that once you go off the beaten path, you create all kinds of problems.

Years ago there was a building that wanted really outrageous umbrella insurance coverage for the contractor for a small kitchen/dining renovation...I think the amount was $10M. Other than very big (i.e. they build new buildings, or very very high end (they build $10M apartments) contractors had that kind of coverage, and the building wasn't willing to get their requirements in line w/ every other building in the city, so the project was canceled.

Just out of curiosity, is this a super high end building? Is it a recently constructed one?

Good Luck.

Posted by: jcarch at August 14, 2009 4:07 PM in response to Bond for renovation work

If this was a new building, you'd be spot on, but it's an older building, and doesn't look like it's been enlarged, so they wouldn't have taken advantage of the community facility zoning bonuses in the first place.

So as long as the zoning allows residential use on the first floor, which it likely does, you probably could get the C of O changed.

But I agree that the ad makes it sound very simple, like renewing your drivers license, but this would be a long bureaucratic process...it could easily take 6 months or more. I wonder if the building's board would let you move in before the space was legally residential use? And I'm sure the buyer's bank would be thrilled when the situation was explained to them. I think I'd pass.

Posted by: jcarch at August 12, 2009 3:04 PM in response to Commercial C of O

If you're moving a partition, you're supposed to file. The city's interest is to make sure that you don't block fire egress, or create rooms that don't meet code for light/air.

As long as you're replacing fixtures in the same location (not moving the rough piping), sound like the other items on your list don't require filing.

You say there's an open complaint...do you mean complaint, or violation? A complaint doesn't mean anything, just that someone called in...a violation would have to be dealt with. And is the complaint/violation recent, or old? If there's an old violation, the plumber might not be able to file until it's cleared up. You can check this on the dob's webiste, just enter your address on the right side of the site.

If it is a complaint, and it's recent, they'll likely complain again. Assuming you're not home all day when the work is going on, you can instruct your contractor not to allow anyone, including a DOB inspector, into your home. If you can prevent access until you're finished, then the issue should die on the vine as far as the DOB's concerned.

Posted by: jcarch at June 28, 2009 8:22 PM in response to What to do: Active Complaint DOB

sam, no offense, but that's an idiotic post.

I'm sure you're a whiz at enlarging windows in masonry walls, but you know nothing about this situation, none of us do.

You don't know if the o.p. is thinking of enlarging the opening from 30" to 120"...you have no idea if the window in question is on the first floor or top floor of a 5 story building (big difference), whether the wall is 2 or 3 wythes of brick, or what the condition of the 100 + year old wall is.

So speaking so authoritatively about things is not smart.

I'm sure the owner of the building that collapsed in F. Greene earlier this week had a similar 'expertise' to yours about the crack in his building.

I'll be the first to admit that 99 out of 100 times, these things work out fine, the crack doesn't result in a collapse, the enlarged window doesn't end up undermining the stability of the brownstone...but you don't want to be unlucky number 100 because your grasp exceeded your reach.

Posted by: jcarch at June 26, 2009 9:16 PM in response to Enlarging a Backyard Window

yes, we need more info to comment...why has this become an issue if the condition is old enough to be grandfathered in? If you're making changes in other parts of the building, what's the extent of the work?

Posted by: jcarch at June 25, 2009 5:26 PM in response to 2nd bedroom light/air req

As per 'sam', knowing why are you applying for the new C of O could be useful.

'jelly donut' is right, you'd need to legalize the change.

Unfortunately, in my experience, the odds that there won't be serious, maybe fatal problems w/ the extension in zoning/code terms are very low.

Good luck.

Posted by: jcarch at June 25, 2009 5:14 PM in response to Building Footprint Changed

If you're happy w/ the current layout, you don't have to gut the place. But you will have a huge amount of patching to do to close up all the holes/channels that the electricians and plumbers create to get their work done. Beyond the patching, you're probably looking at skim coating (and removing any bad plaster even in areas that were not opened up) every wall and ceiling.

Have some $ set aside for structural repairs...it's very common to find joists that have rotted away under showers/tubs, and to discover that a plumber in 1932 cut out huge chunks of some of the floor joists to get his waste line installed with proper pitch.

Good luck.

Posted by: jcarch at June 21, 2009 4:48 PM in response to gut reno a must?

If you've been spoken w/ the city, and know the allowable s.f. and footprint...as well as other zoning issues like setbacks, allowable uses, etc., you should be fine.

I'm not sure what other kinds of stipulations you'd be worried about.

I would be sure to check for asbestos, underground oil tank, etc. And if they are present, factor the cost of legally removing them into the purchase price.

Posted by: jcarch at June 15, 2009 3:03 PM in response to New Residential Building

No...as long as everything is as of right, the community board is not involved.

Posted by: jcarch at June 15, 2009 2:53 PM in response to Building Plans & Community Board

the city has a very handy zoning handbook that you can buy at CityStore...which is at the east end of Chambers Street, in the Federal Building (NE of city hall).

The handbook has 1 page summaries, along w/ drawings that illustrate the typically allowable building bulk for each type of zone.

To figure out what zone you're in, go to this page of the city planning website:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/zone/zonedex.shtml

click on your borough, then click on the right grid square to open the corresponding pdf map.

Good luck.

Posted by: jcarch at June 8, 2009 9:51 AM in response to researching zoning regulations?

Ipe's very durable...we use it on rooftops all the time, with some installations I've done getting close to 10 years old w/out problems.

But my concern would be what's behind the Ipe. Because whatever is behind it is doing the actual work of keeping water out of the building.

To maintain the surface that's actually doing the work...repairing a leak, recaulking a window, etc...wouldn't you have to remove the ipe in that area first?

So my intuition tells me that the Ipe will be fine, but the costs of maintaining the 'real' building envelope will be higher than usual because of all the extra work to remove/reinstall Ipe make that surface accessible.

So I'd ask about what's involved in removing the Ipe...would a contractor have to remove 4 screws on each individual board to remove one piece, or do 4 screws hold in a larger module, say 8'x10'.

Also, how is the Ipe mounted to the building? It looks like there are horizontal mounting brackets at the floor lines...are there an unusually large number of penetrations through the building skin to support these? Or was it designed w/ minimal penetrations? Each penetration is a possible leak, and would need to be maintained (which almost no one does properly) to avoid future issues w/ water when the sealant around the penetrations start to degrade from UV exposure.

From this one photo, I like the look of the Ipe, hope they detailed it in a thoughtful way that will hold up.

Posted by: jcarch at May 27, 2009 3:15 PM in response to Facade Maintenance New Condo

This all depends on your contract w/ the G.C.

Done 'properly', you haven't paid for any work not yet completed, and have been withholding 10% of what was completed as retainage, so that you have the upper hand. Your contract should also stipulate that if the contractor is fired for cause, you're allowed to deduct the cost of undoing any of his mistakes.

Since you're asking on this forum, I'm guessing you don't have a comprehensive agreement, so you're working w/out a roadmap. If that's the case, it's almost certain that you and your contractor will see things quite differently, and he'll likely file a lien. If you're in the unfortunate position of having paid him more than the value of what he's done on site, you'll have to spend time and money to try to recover those funds.

In either case, write him a letter spelling out why you're terminating his services, and how you'll account for any outstanding $ owed him. Your lawyer should sign off on, or ghost write, this. If things haven't soured too much, review it in person or on the phone w/ him. Sometimes this more informal approach can be more productive.

Posted by: jcarch at May 23, 2009 12:28 AM in response to firing a contractor

Assuming that all paperwork was filed properly, there's not one thing any architect can do to speed up the C of O process.

That said, make sure that all non-C of O paperwork (TR-1's, electrical, schedule b, etc.) for your paperwork, and any outstanding past violations, even from before you owned the building, are completed/cleared up. If any of these are open, nothings going to happen with the C of O.

Good Luck

Posted by: jcarch at May 22, 2009 10:17 AM in response to C of O change stuck in DOB!

listen to what many have said here...do not do this on the fire escape.

1. it's illegal...if discovered by the city, you will get a substantial fine...if there's a fire, the occupants of the upper floors will have to jump for it (you'll be blocking access to the ladder). Assuming they don't break their necks, they will sue you, they will win, and then the city will give you that fine to top things off.

2. Structurally, there's a big difference between short and long duration loads. You do not want to putt a 500 lb point load on an aging fire escape.

3. The water pressure argument for raising the holding tank doesn't really hold water (ha). The pressure's coming from the water in the tank. Compared to that the water in the hose contributes almost nothing.

I love the idea...in fact I think this should be required/encouraged on a large scale...just do it smartly.

Posted by: jcarch at May 1, 2009 10:05 PM in response to Water Collection

I believe you're not allowed to have a curb cut w/in 60' of a corner. So if the filing was self-certified, they didn't know this or ignored it, and it was caught by DOB.

If they'd maxed out the FAR, which is likely, they're probably now over, because that enclosed space should now be counted as floor area, even if it's not accessible.

Posted by: jcarch at May 1, 2009 12:29 PM in response to It Came From 4th Ave!

If I understand you correctly, you're saying you'd have to use the egress hall to move from room to room of some of the rooms, rather than handle that circulation internally in the apartment.

This would not be legal.

Posted by: jcarch at April 20, 2009 10:45 AM in response to 4 Family to 2 Family Hallway

Make sure that you don't have any gaps in coverage...either in the amount of coverage, or in the scope of coverage. Some homeowner's policies exclude damage during construction because of the increased risk that construction can entail. You may need a builder's risk policy, or other additional coverage.

Also, you should really make sure BA actually looks at this thoroughly. I had a client a while back who used them, and added extra coverage. Then during construction the insurance company came by and said to the owner "this work is more extensive than brown. agency told us, and you're not covered. Pay us more or we'll cancel the extra coverage (but keep the premium you've paid)." That was despite the fact that BA had been sent complete plans and a very clear scope of work. Not a happy surprise for the owners.

Posted by: jcarch at April 8, 2009 9:42 PM in response to Renovate and homeowner insurance

on the inspections, you should sit down with the contractor and architect and clarify what inspections the project requires, and who's responsible for what.

The plumber and electrician should absolutely be getting their work signed off by the city, and the GC responsible for making sure that this happens. But there are items that your architect and engineer are responsible for insptecting (structural stability, firestopping, etc.)...and other more technical items that may require an independent testing agency (welding, concrete strength, etc.).

If you have any of the last category of inspections, talk to your architect, as they'd normally coordinate this, with the owner paying for it. For those sorts of things, you don't want your contractor to be responsible, he may be motivated to cheat/bribe to pass inspections on substandard work rather than ripping it out and doing it again.

Posted by: jcarch at April 3, 2009 5:59 PM in response to Concerns about Contractor

Step 1 is to figure out when the extension was built. If you can document that it went up before 1938 (when the 'old' building code was enacted), then you're likely grandfathered in. There are 3 ways to do this: First, check for a pre-1938 C of O on your building. It should list the extension if it existed then. You can check this online at the DOB website. Second, you can go to HPD to track down the I-card for the building, which will have plans and a description of the building in the early 30's. Third, you can also go to the main NYC library, to the map room, and look at the Sanborn map (make sure it's a map from pre-1938, and not one of the newer versions) that covers your property. If there was an extension, it will be shown on the map. Again, w/ the Sanborn, you should be grandfathered in (though DOB considers an I card stronger evidence, as there's more information on it).

If there evidence of the addition existing before 1938, then step 2 is find out if it can be legalized under current zoning and building code....Do you comply w/ lot coverage and FAR requirements, light and air requirements, fire rating requirements, etc.

If you find that you cannot legalize, then you're stuck. If DOB doesn't know about this, hope they never find out. If they do, then the addition's coming down.

If you can legalize, you still have a sticky problem. As part of the filing process, your architect/engineer, and the plumber and electrician all sign documents confirming that the work is built to code. So you'll need to find people who'll do this w/out really knowing, as everything is closed in or covered up.

Posted by: jcarch at April 2, 2009 1:46 PM in response to No Permit on Extension?

I believe he wants you to pay him...give me $800 and I'll take it off your hands

Posted by: jcarch at March 23, 2009 9:31 PM in response to Own a piece of DUMBO History

See if you can change the frequency that the fan/light's control is using. The user's manual will let you know if this is possible, or you can call the manufacturer.

Some models have this option, others do not.

Good luck.

Posted by: jcarch at March 18, 2009 6:04 PM in response to Ceiling fan/light - pls. help!

Yes, it is true that they're sending inspectors to addresses where work has been filed, but not yet approved.

Work without a permit only if you're prepared for a fine and stop work order that will cost $ for your architect/expediter to clear up....don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

Posted by: jcarch at March 16, 2009 3:52 PM in response to Damn buildings dept: start reno?

KAZ...people skills are one thing, but all of what you're asking about is contractual, i.e. what's his payment schedule. I haven't worked with Scott, so don't have anything good/bad to pass on about him specifically, but if I couldn't get straightforward answers to your questions, it would worry me.

Posted by: jcarch at February 24, 2009 9:53 AM in response to Scott Schnall: Questions

To point out the obvious...wouldn't it be much more efficient to ask Scott these questions directly?

Posted by: jcarch at February 24, 2009 1:28 AM in response to Scott Schnall: Questions

Based on 10 or so Brooklyn projects over the last few years, and factoring in that you should get good pricing in this environment.

Including engineering/architecture/expediting/filing costs, you should work with $200 a foot. That's for a gut interior renovation, with very nice, but not crazy expensive finishes/appliances, etc, preserving detail where feasible.

If you're leaving the existing layout, costs would go down.

If you're doing any substantial structural work (removing large sections of bearing walls, etc.) add $20 a foot.

If you're redoing the building's exterior, add that on top too.

While most projects end up in this price range, we do sometimes find bidders coming back w/ pricing in the $400 a foot range....we don't ask them to bid the next project.

Posted by: jcarch at February 23, 2009 4:38 PM in response to Pricing for Townhouse Renovation?

Agreed. Until B'stoner gets a chance to fix it, I've found that the same search, directly on google, will point me to the right page on brownstoner.

If it doesn't work right off the bat, do "your search" and then throw in 'brownstoner' into the google search line and that has always led me to the page I know is out there but can't find directly through B'stoner's search function.

Posted by: jcarch at February 18, 2009 5:10 PM in response to Brownstoner Search..............

Sputnik13...I don't think you're that far off, but your low end seems very optimistic....and you've got too little for the shell, and too much for the finishes (but they balance out together pretty well.

The devil's in the details, but as a ballpark number, I'd go with $225 psf...that would cover both construction and design/engineering/filing. This would get you a well designed building w/ above average finishes and fittings.

To go lower than this you'd quickly end up w/ a Fedders building.

To go higher is easy...if you want a professional kitchen w/ all the very best appliances...add $...have to have solid walnut flooring instead of engineered flooring w/ 1/8" of walnut as the wear surface...add $....do the adjacent buildings need shoring?...add $...etc. You get the idea.

One real question is what exactly does "classic styling" mean to the OP? To really recreate the level of original detail found in classic brownstones would be very expensive.

Posted by: jcarch at February 9, 2009 3:49 PM in response to Cost to Build a New Brownstone

I'm an architect as well, with experience on a number of partial/full brownstone renovations, so come at this with experience, but also from a particular vantage point, but...

Just to emphasize what JimHill said. Signing a contract w/out a properly documented scope of work leaves you just about 100% at the mercy of your contractor, and for a gut renovation, there would be hundreds of issues that will be open to interpretation. Once the job's halfway done and there's a dispute, you have very little leverage in resolving the disagreement.

It's always dangerous to generalize, but it's very likely that your contractors are assuming a best case scenario in determining their pricing. But it's unlikely that that's how things will unfold.

If you do decide to go ahead w/out an architect, you should assume that the job will take 50% longer than the contractor estimates, and cost 25% more as well. Hopefully this won't be the case, but plan for the worst and hope for the best. Search the forums for people w/ horror stories about these sorts of situations and you'll find many examples.

A bad architect (just a quick down and dirty set of plans) would be a waste of your $. Hiring a good architect (full services and a track record of creating great looking functional spaces on a budget) will be a good investment. I can almost guarantee you that with a good architect you can reduce your construction budget by 10%, spend that 10% on the architects fees, and end up with a better final result, done on time/budget, all w/out spending one extra $ on the overall project budget.

Good luck

Posted by: jcarch at February 3, 2009 12:17 PM in response to The Need for Construction Plans?

Try Gus Almiroudis at Zoom Contracting (718) 626-7979, or Mike Zych at Zych Construction (718) 417-3100. Both do good quality work, and their pricing is very reasonable.

I've worked w/ Zoom many times, always w/ good results. They just finished a brownstone renovation on 8th Street in P. Slope.

Zych is about 75% of the way through gutting the top floor, and adding a new floor, on a 13th Street brownstone, and has done a very good job to date.

Good Luck

Posted by: jcarch at February 1, 2009 2:58 PM in response to looking for contractor-recommend

Wow...2 years is a long time to wait. You say it's a renovation. Is it extraordinarily complicated? If the project has been reviewed at DOB, your architect has an objection sheet that details every reason why the project was not approved. If you haven't seen this, get a copy from your architect to get a clear idea of what needs to be addressed to get the approval.

The standard AIA contract allows the owner to cancel the project or fire the architect w/ or w/out cause. There may be a kill fee for termination w/out cause, but that could be waived if both parties agree.

The real issue is, who has the rights to the design. The answer is likely that the architect retains the ownership of the 'design', which means that if another architect just takes their work and files, they/you could open yourselves up to legal action by the original architect. I would address this w/ your current architect, getting them to sign the rights for the design over to you. Once you own the design, you can have another architect take over.

With another architect, you'll also have to restart the DOB process from scratch, which means new expediting costs.

Sounds like a lousy situation, I hope you can get it resolved.

Posted by: jcarch at January 29, 2009 2:36 PM in response to Getting out of an AIA contract

Shahn Andersen is correct. You do not need an elevator.

Have you checked to make sure that you can add the extra square footage w/out exceeding the allowable FAR? If more than 50% of the lower level is above grade, you have to count it towards FAR as well.

If you exceed the FAR, you could dig out the basement so that more than 50% is below grade, making it a cellar. Cellars do not count towards FAR.

Also check to see if your building is listed as a converted dwelling (if your building was once a one/two family dwelling, is now 3 or more families, it's converted). the NYS Multiple Dwelling Law doesn't allow converted structures to be enlarged, but since you're going back to a 2 family, you should be able to get the converted designation removed, clearing the way for the enlargement. If your building is converted, DOB will probably initially reject the whole thing, and your architect/expediter will have to sit down with them to explain things.

Posted by: jcarch at January 29, 2009 10:12 AM in response to Necessity of an elevator?

Good point jp2...I was assuming a 20' wide lot w/ full width addition, but that might not be the case.

Posted by: jcarch at January 26, 2009 5:18 PM in response to Extension

A few things to consider.

If you haven't already, you need to do some research into whether zoning would allow for an extension. There are limitations on lot coverage, open area, floor area ratio, rear/side yard depths, etc.

There would also be code issues to take into consideration. All habitable rooms must have adequate light/air via a window or skylight. By building an extension, you may be blocking light/air to a habitable room. If the extension is enlarging an existing back room, rather than adding separate rooms, you're more likely to have success meeting code requirements.

Prices can vary greatly depending on the particulars of the project. Based on similar work, I'd start with a baseline of $200 psf, with that number going up if you were thinking of high end finishes, using the roof as a terrace, etc.

Depending on how much of the wall is left, recycling the existing bricks into a new wall would be the most eco-friendly option.

Good Luck.

Posted by: jcarch at January 26, 2009 2:21 PM in response to Extension

While they contain the same information, exhibit I/III are not the same as the title/schedule A. DOB will not accept the title/schedule in their place. Ask your title company for the exhibits, and they'll know what's needed as it is a standard document.

SD 1 & 2 are provided by an architect or (more typically) an engineer, and detail the sewer connections.

Soils report is provided by the soils engineer who has borings done and analyzes the results to determine the bearing capacity of the soil.

If your project is an interior renovation, or small vertical addition, you should not need any of these items. With DOB's new procedures, they are now often getting included as initial objections even though they're not needed. If this is the case they should be removed by your architect or expediter.

Normally these is something that your architect or engineer would be taking care of for you. You should have them take care of this for you.

Posted by: jcarch at January 21, 2009 5:49 PM in response to DOB needs some documents...help!

Recessed lighting, hunh? You sure you wouldn't prefer track lights? To go with your granite countertops and stainless steel appliances?

mmmm... taste-y....

Posted by: bfarwell at October 29, 2009 11:55 PM in response to Thoughts on Recessed Lighting

Would be very nervous about recessed lighting and updating--it's the kind of thing that will go out of fashion, and which turns off a segment of buyers. And it's expensive.

In general, I'd think going with classic fixtures--wall sconces, ceiling lights, etc--is the smart bet. Using fixtures that are modern (ie, don't turn the gaslights back on) but consistent with the turn of the century "look" of the house is probably the safest thing to do. There's a danger of doing something that screams "2000" and then trying to sell in 2020, when something else is fashionable.

That said, if you're staying a long time, do what YOU like. It's your home.

Posted by: bkrules at October 30, 2009 11:12 AM in response to Thoughts on Recessed Lighting

Basements and garden levels definitely should have recessed lighting IMO whether you're staying "period" or not. It's not just a ceiling-height issue but it brightens a room that's always shadowy thus somewhat depressing even when it's relatively well lit by windows.

I also like it even in parlors when there's a big space that's not adequately lit by sconces or lamps and isn't right for a chandelier. We have a spot like that and when we do the next round of renovations in a few years I want some recessed lights on a dimmer there. I'd like to add the lights now but there's a whole thing to do with the ceiling so we have to put it off a while. I need to brighten a shadowy section in the middle of an open space in the parlor where we plan to have our son's play area. So if you have a spot like that in your house you think you'll use for children's play, or future owners would, it may be worth it to add recessed lights overhead. People live lives in these houses so the decor must be functional not just faithful to the period. The lights don't have to be huge and they don't always have to be turned on just because they're installed.

Posted by: traditionalmod at October 30, 2009 12:36 PM in response to Thoughts on Recessed Lighting

I don't like dark spaces. The gloomy Victorian vibe is not for me; brownstones are naturally dark, since most have light from front and back and no natural light from the sides, to state the obvious. It was extremely important to me to have lots of light in my place. In the double parlor I have two nice chandeliers which work well with another hanging fixture in an alcove. Downstairs where I have the kitchen, dining room, hallway and bedroom, I have a lot of wattage in the kitchen and that is recessed lighting. The rest of the downstairs I have Center ceiling fixtures. I think you need a lot of light in a kitchen - you need to see what you are doing and recessed lighting is very good for that. But in other spaces I prefer center ceiling fixtures. I also hate ceiling fans. I think they look so awful; I don't know if the increased air circulation offsets the spinning propeller look.

Posted by: donatella at October 30, 2009 10:31 PM in response to Thoughts on Recessed Lighting

Contact Erick The Skilled Park Slope Electrician Reliable & Trustworthy @ (347) - 512-4869

Posted by: OldManSam at November 2, 2009 12:17 AM in response to Thoughts on Recessed Lighting

Contact Erick The Skilled Park Slope Electrician Reliable & Trustworthy @ (347) - 512-4869

Posted by: OldManSam at November 2, 2009 9:09 PM in response to Thoughts on Recessed Lighting

Having cut my teeth in residential architecture in the burbs, I can tell you that 2x4's at 16" o.c. is perfectly fine for two-three stories. Any structural engineer will tell you not to worry as long as the framing was done well.

In the burbs in our area, it continued to be the standard up to the mid-90's, not 70's, when it was replaced by 2x6's, not only because of the additional insulation, but also because the 2x4's were coming from such new growth trees that they were very unstable and subject to serious warpage. Contractors were throwing away huge amounts of them because they were so curved they couldn't be used for framing.

Now, in terms of your insulation, bully for you for using Icynene. It's a great product and does a great job of insulating between framing. It expands to fill all voids and hardens quickly so it doesn't get compressed and lose R value. In addition, it provides a vapor barrier which keep the moisture out of the insulation, preventing condensation within the walls. This barrier also prevents any air movement which fiberglass, or even cellulose does not. In addition to all that, it does provide a very high R-value per inch, exceeding code requirements within a 2x4 wall.

I think what you're seeing in this thread is an opinion biased by working in New York, where buildings are habitually over-structured in order to provide the required amount of fire prevention. If it weren't for fire issues, we wouldn't be building everything out of concrete block. There's no other reason why a three-story row house needs to have the same structural system as a 6-story apartment building.

Now, having said (ranted) all that, it wouldn't hurt to have the engineer look at your plans and make sure that the rest of the framing is sufficient, and to make sure that what was spec'd was actually installed. From your post, there's no reason to believe otherwise. After all, you didn't say that the plans called for 2x6's and the contractor installed 2x4's. It sounds to me like you're doing everything just fine. Just make sure the work is done well.

Jim Hill, RA, LEED AP
Urban Pioneering Architecture

Posted by: JimHill at November 3, 2009 11:46 AM in response to 2x4 Framed House

Two families don't require fire escapes and/or sprinklers, as far as I remember the code; only 3 families or more, irregardless of whether there is a C of O or not. Most 3 storey buildings (one or two family) built before 1938 (?) do not have C of Os.

I've seen many, many buildings with this setup installed. I'd just go ahead and put it up if it was me.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 17, 2009 8:07 AM in response to Door Placement Code

As jcarch said, you'll need a landing. Regardless of the C of O and as a matter of safety, I recommend a fire rated division - vertical and horizontal - between the two units. Ed Kopel Architects, PC

Posted by: edkopel at November 17, 2009 10:31 AM in response to Door Placement Code

Why not just put one door in the divider wall for access to the 2nd floor of the lower unit.

This way the vestibule entrance is directly into the 3rd floor unit and the lower unit is accessed from the 1st floor.

Posted by: SenatorStreet at November 17, 2009 11:33 AM in response to Door Placement Code