Why the need to remove a kitchen when combining apartments?

http://realestateqa.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/too-many-kitchens-in-the-apartment/

Thanks for the link. The comments seem to leave lots of questions unanswered since it seems like lots of people actually do have 2 kitchens. Also, if anyone knows why there is such a law, I'd be curious.

Here's what happened: normally, you would have to file for a whole new C of O, etc. but a few years back, Buildings Dept set up and expedited process for combining Coop apartments with a limited filing. As part of that set of regs, it was stipulated that the new unit have one of the kitchen's removed and plumbing capped.

"There was much fanfare several months ago when the press announced that the New York City Department of Buildings ("DOB") had agreed to simplify its requirements for the legal connection of two adjacent apartments in the same building. In fact, the DOB's procedures for such simplification had been in effect for many years--the reason for the fanfare that greeted such announcement was merely recognition of the fact that the DOB had streamlined one component of the process. A simple review follows.

Under the new appellations which have been around since computerization at the DOB, there are three kinds of Alteration filings at the DOB. Alteration Type III applications are the simplest and relate to one kind of work type only--a plumbing fixture, a boiler, minor carpentry--in essence, a minor amount of work. Alteration Type II applications are more complicated and are used when there are several trades involved-- for instance, plumbing and carpentry and masonry on the same project--when there is no change to use, egress or occupancy.

These are the most common form and used to be called Directive 14 Building Notices". Alteration Type I applications are the most complicated because they relate to the use of several trades or when there is a change to use, egress or occupancy. These are used when a project adds square footage, or a commercial building is converted to residential, or when the egress flow out of a building is to be altered. These Type I applications require a New or Amended Certificate of Occupancy ( CO") at the completion of the project, which is a timely and expensive proposition.

In the old days, prior to the announcement about the simplified procedure, it was widely perceived that the only way to combine two adjacent apartments would be to proceed with an Alteration Type I application and change the CO. It was little known that in 1968, the City Charter was amended to allow the combining of adjacent apartments without a CO change, provided that the application received a Reconsideration from the appropriate DOB official allowing such change. The new" procedure announced in several months ago and officially approved and distributed in a Departmental Memo dated November 3, 1997, allowed for the legal combining of two adjacent units without such Reconsideration process or essentially as-of-right. In announcing the rules, the Memo stated:

"An Alteration Type II application may be filed for such combining of apartments with the following restrictions:

1. The combining of apartments shall be permitted either on the same floor or adjacent floors by interior access stairs connecting not more than two stories, and must result in equal or lower number of zoning rooms. New layouts may maintain existing legal non-complying conditions.

2. Natural light and air requirements shall be in compliance for each new habitable room and shall not be diminished for existing non-compliant rooms.

3. Egress from any floor of the building (stairs, corridors, passageways, lobby, fire escape, etc.) shall not be altered under this application.

4. The second kitchen shall be eliminated and plumbing connections shall be capped, unless the approved application plans indicate an alternative use of the connections, such as for washer, dryer, bar sink, new bathroom, etc.

5. If the units are condominiums, a new tentative tax lot number must be obtained from the Department of Finance for the newly created unit prior to filing.

Plan examination by the Department and completion sign-off by a Professional Engineer or Registered Architect shall be limited to the apartments being altered.

Upon sign-off of the completed work, the Borough Office shall issue a letter of completion. The letter of completion issued shall clearly state at the end, The Department of Buildings does not require a new or amended certificate of occupancy for combining these apartments."

It is clear that this procedure results in a decreased number of dwelling units in a building or on floors without an officially changed and documented Certificate of Occupancy, which can only be accomplished under the Alteration Type I procedure. Therefore, prior to proceeding under this simplified format, the Building, Coop or Condominium Owner must determine the ramifications of this type of filing unrelated to Building Department issues. For instance:

-- Will a change to the number of units affect the underlying mortgage? Must a mortgagee by notified? Will it affect a shareholder's Coop or Condo loans?

-- Will a change to the number of units require an Amendment to the offering plan at the Attorney General's office? Will this result in a reallocation of shares or will the now combined units still be classified as individual entities?

-- Will an undocumented unit count change inhibit the sale of the unit(s) years down the road, when a buyer's attorney may not be satisfied with the now legal combination?

These issues can only be reviewed by competent legal and/or tax counsel and are unrelated to architectural or Building Department issues. "

http://www.hollanderco.com/articles/archived/DepartmentofBuildingClarifiesRulesforJoinderofApartments.htm

I think you can get away with a near-kitchen as long as it's an art room, a bar area, or something similar. The tricky part is the stove, so if you can live with countertop cooking alternatives, you might wind up with what you want. Plus I'm sure there are some art media that require boiling liquids, so maybe you can make a case for that. Or put in electrical connections for a kiln, leave room for an electric stove, and install after you're all inspected and approved.

But why do you want two kitchens?

if the 2 kitchens are on opposite sides of the common wall, you can probably combine them and make 1 big kitchen. However, an advantage to keeping 2 kitchens is that you can spearate the 2 apts. when you go to sell since that might make the job of selling easier.

30 yrs, thanks for the very informative post. So, it seems like one could combine apartments and keep two kitchens under an Alteration Type I? How impractical is that?

alanhart, without getting into too many specifics, there are all sorts of reasons one might want two kitchens (e.g., food allergies, religious reasons, to name two potential ones). Do you have a sense the reason would make a difference.

Finally, if one were to purchase two adjacent apartments, is one required to make a "legal combination" of them in order to knock down a wall and live in both?

"30 yrs, thanks for the very informative post. So, it seems like one could combine apartments and keep two kitchens under an Alteration Type I? How impractical is that?"

basically, just a significant amount more paperwork, filing and expediting. What happened was there was a rash of combinations and since it was to big a hurdle to file properly, you had all these "illegal" combinations. So I think the decision was made to make it more "doable" and then make people file, you'd end up with more filings matching reality.

"Finally, if one were to purchase two adjacent apartments, is one required to make a "legal combination" of them in order to knock down a wall and live in both?"

I believe the answer is "yes"