Are these renovations all approved by DOB?

Wow what a beautiful house.

Not sure about your question. This is listed as a one family house I believe.
If so, the basement is just a finished basement. Nothing against the wall about that.

The buyer is up for some fun with Stop Work orders etc. DOB square footage much lower at 7202. And the current owner is an architect who clearly has ability to clear the violations. Why wouldn't they clear them?

https://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/PropertyProfileOverviewServlet?boro=3&block=5094&lot=1

Nice work 300 I probably should have looked it up before I commented.
(Its still a gorgeous house :) )

Well there were 3 violations in regards to landmark and one was cleared.
The last violation with the stop work is because the applicant withdrew from the project.
Ran out of money? Or just cant cure the remaining 2 landmark issues? But nothing to do with a basement.

"BOROUGH COMM. HAS ORDERED ALL WORK STOP UNDER PERMIT#340405706 ON 05/2
2/18 THIS STOP WORK ORDER ISSUED DUE TO THE APPL. OFG THE CONSTRUCTION
HAS INFORMED THE DEPARTMENT OF BLDGS THAT, SHE OR HE HASWITHDRAWN FROM
THE PROJECT/REM: STOP ALL WORK IMMEDIATELY"

Basement is tricky. Legal "Basement" as per DOB NYC is defined as a space which is at least 50% above grade and you can have a kitchen and full bathroom and use it to sleep. However, if the space is <50% above ground, it is legally a cellar in NYC and it is not allowed to have a kitchen and full bathroom in NYC. In this case, you can't say whether it is a basement or a cellar by just looking at the listing pictures. In addition, since it is single family, the regulation is unlikely to be enforced.

Separately, am I the only one who noticed that black and white floor is not made of full square of marble of each color but a cheapo way of doing it for this price point with two color porcelain tiles?

The house is indeed very nice if you ignore the asking price. That brings me to our favorite Streeteasy question of where it will sell? I am factoring in that DOB square footage is 7200 and it seems to be a frame house which likely has not been updated structurally looking at the permits. $7mm ish?

I am tempted to say even $5-5.5mm, at which price the seller may not sell at all, but the Brooklyn single family market is on fire as Keith has mentioned several times on this board.

I checked I-Card as no CofO exists. It checks "C" for Cellar rather than "B".

https://hpdonline.hpdnyc.org/HPDonline/select_application.aspx

The thing that struck me was the same with tiles in the entry way and makes me wonder about quality of all other work done. I also find the staging a bit eclectic (a la Frasier).

>>>Separately, am I the only one who noticed that black and white floor is not made of full square of marble of each color but a cheapo way of doing it for this price point with two color porcelain tiles<<<

Totally! I zeroed in on that right away and just nope. Also, anyone else perturbed by the odd 'waiting room' chairs layout in the bathroom? Just strange.

BTW if you look closely you will notice that most of the fireplaces have the exact same faux firebox (complete with identical roaring fire) photoshopped in. They look ridiculous and make me wonder how many of the fireplaces actually work. Hate it when brokers do this crap.

*photos 1, 2, 9 and 10. Disgraceful

Chances are many fireplaces don't work in such an old building.

Looking closely at the pictures again. The areas which are still historical (reno or original) are beautiful. The shot showing staircase from the top is great. Cabinetry and moldings are very nice. But some parts which are presumably new renovation are a little cheesy as in the glass/mirror tiles in the backsplash.

>>Also, anyone else perturbed by the odd 'waiting room' chairs layout in the bathroom?

A ball room scene from Eyes Wide Shut comes to my mind.

"Separately, am I the only one who noticed that black and white floor is not made of full square of marble of each color but a cheapo way of doing it for this price point with two color porcelain tiles"

I totally missed it. My eyes stayed focused on the room as a whole.

There's a lot to like about the place, but there are also some odd design / materials choices that need to be seen in person to check whether a) they're just bad photoshopping, or b) just plain wrong. e.g.: I don't understand why there's a pot filler faucet all the way across the kitchen from the range (where you'd sort of expect to put the pot after it's filled). I've never understood the attraction of them, but certainly not in it's current location. Also, I do appreciate the renovator's efforts to maintain the original woodwork and room layouts. I have problems with the variety of fireplace surrounds - the kitchen and BR seem to be a mismatch to the rest of the house style.

>>Chances are many fireplaces don't work in such an old building.<<

Exactly. Which is why photoshopping a welcoming, roaring wood fire in all of them is so deceptive.

To respond to the OP's question, it doesn't look like the renovations are approved. In the BIS link provided earlier, you can see that there are 5 job filings. The only filing that is approved is one to relocate an HVAC condenser unit, and even that's a problem because the permit was issued but the job not signed off.

I think "are these renovations approved by DOB?" is the type of question that follows the Betteridge's law of headlines. If you have to ask the answer is no.

It is possible that only reno which was done is cosmetic without moving any walls. No structural or facade work was done.

And not sure if I know all the different ways to look up the plumbing permits. But I didn't find any.

Looks great

How could I find out details about the plumbing permits?

The biggest regulatory crime is how low their taxes are.

Yes. Single family have a tax cap on them of 20% every five years. Taxes are supposed to be adjusted for renovations using DOB cost affidavits but this owner never got any permits for renovations and hence taxes will not be adjusted for renovations.

To be clear, condo and coop taxes are not adjusted for renovations as they are based on rental equivalent.

So, I was looking at an interesting apartment on SE that clearly has some illegal renovations, unless the building is a unicorn that has architectural features not present when it was built. Here is my question: Is there any risk other than safety (not to be discounted) to buying a $4m apartment in Manhattan that has modern day conveniences that were not likely approved by the DOB (or the coop board for that matter - I note that my research suggests this reno was done by a long-time member of the coop board who is now in the land beyond earthly accountability)? In other words, other than safety (which appears to be discounted across the board), why should a buyer care?

Because the co-op board might insist that all the 'non-conforming' or unapproved renovations be taken out (like unauthorized rewiring, or a washer/dryer), and then not permit new replacement work to be put in (so the fantasy of using that sweeping curved staircase from the bedroom loft to make grand entrances to your assembled guests below will have to remain a fantasy).

I think this is where there can be significant value in an agent (yours, or working with the seller's) that really knows the building, the super, and maybe a board member connection, who can make inquiries as to the board's views on how much might need to be taken out or disallowed. It certainly is in the board's interest to have 'approved' renovations if anything becomes a problem.

I was thinking the same thing theoretically, but then was playing out the logistics of enforcement and I can’t imagine this ever happening. Is anyone aware of a situation where this has actually happened and renovations that were done by a former owner had to be undone by new owner?

Even if they don't force the changes to be undone, can't they force the new owner to file paperwork / get inspections&reviews / pay alteration fees in arrears / bring anything up to code, etc..
That is - uncapped cost/time burden.

I don't think there's much you can do pre-purchase.
Board will want to do comms through sellers side, how likely is sellers broker to pass along bad news?
Board can change their mind on next election.
What good is a verbal "sure we'll let it go"?
No board would put the retroactive approval in writing unless $$$$$, etc.

You could try and put something in the contract to protect yourself as a buyer in the event that it came up during the sales process... but once you close, any future problems will be yours.

I have two friends whom this happened to MCR. One tried to do a fairly large renovation of a large home in Long Island, just on the Queens border. The work was almost done, when a boiler worker removing an old oil tank spilled about 10 gallons of oil. He said he had no choice other than to report it, this led to the fire department and the department of buildings showing up. He had to hire licensed contractors to certify all the work and also open up all walls to expose the new wiring and plumbing.

Another friend had a home in Queens he was renting out. A neighbor complained about too many cars in the driveway, department of buildings or some agency came out and noted that there was an illegally installed bathroom(from previous owner) and that the attic had been converted to a bedroom(previous owner had done that work). Bathroom had to be removed and they had to remove the bed from the attic and were told explicitly it could be not used for sleeping. This was a while ago but I think that's how it went down.

Keith Burkhardt
TBG

Interesting examples Keith!
Seems exponentially more risky in an apartment building as there are more eyes.
Further so in a coop which has its own sets of rules & methods of enforcement .. above&beyond what the city wants & can do to you...

Thinking about this further: I'll have to look at my sale contract, shareholders agreement, and proprietary lease, but I think that there is some sort of warranty of habitability on the part of the co-op (as my landlord), so at the time of sale, there might be an implicit co-op approval of the renovations. That said, the co-op could impose conditions on a sale that would force remediation.

In mcr's theoretical case, the unapproved renovations could be a good bargaining chip: "I see that this plumbing / wiring / cantilevered balcony is significantly substandard. I'll pay 30% less than the going rate per share, but will renovate to bring this place up to code." The original owner isn't in a position to complain about it, and the co-op gets a 'correct' renovation. The seller's heirs may not be so happy, but their financial well being is of secondary importance.

Thanks all, helpful. I am thinking that if one wanted to renovate anew, issues would definitely arise, but if one wanted to keep things as is and the Board tried to later come after new owner the new owner would have a bevy of defenses along the lines of coop board’s having unclean hands. I do particularly like using the issue as a bargaining chip in negotiations; given that the property is an estate sale in a UES coop, I’m thinking it’s not exactly going to be a hot property. All of this is asking for a friend of course . . .

The real downside is if you try to sell later and everything might come to a head.

Yes, in theory what could happen with the sale I am watching. I suspect it is not going to trade because aside from modern conveniences that canMt possibly work with the building’s infrastructure, the apartment is an anachronism. I just don’t think people who can afford the price point and maintenance want to live in these buildings. Proximity to the park is the biggest upside for me, but not even I would be compelled by the low price and proximity to the park to live in a potential Sea Side situation.

*Surfside

I feel so sorry for those people. It's kind of why I'm such a hawk about my building.

In my last Coop, Shareholders would try and sneak things in like writing "gas burning fireplace" in tiny letters on the floorplan but making zero mention of running new gas lines where there had been none before and then I was the bad guy for rejecting the applications.

Yes, as it turns out nobody in a position to do anything about it in my building other than me cares. Turns out a few of the board members bought apartments whose renos are clearly illegal so they either don’t care or can’t afford to care because caring would impinge on their fully leveraged lifestyles.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
Upton Sinclair

I did successfully force another shareholder to remediate an illegal renovation that directly affected my apartment, but it was not easy. The most interesting part of that outcome is rumor has it that the architect paid for the fix because he had told the shareholders not to worry about the deviations they had made (at his suggestion). This was all particularly sad because the architect is one of some repute, which makes me wonder if the architects aren’t the ones really at fault. It seems like a huge risk for them to sign off on illegal renos under the self-certification rules, but apparently they do it.

And the craziest part of my particular experience is that the Managing Agent took the position that because my reno had uncovered the other shareholder’s illegal reno, it was incumbent on me to remediate it. And the account rep who was forcefully advocating this was arrogant in his extreme ignorance. I actually felt bad for him because he really believed what he was arguing. Suffice it to say, he is no longer on our account.

Slew of NYC developments found to have faked architect credentials
https://nypost.com/2022/06/15/nyc-developments-found-to-have-faked-architect-credentials/

I have found by calling 311 and registering a complaint, I got results. One was very fast and the other took about three months they said because of the covid backup for on site inspections.

@30yrs - Wow. There you have it.

@stache - The problem is that everything is behind closed up walls and the renovation has either been certified as compliant or there is no record of any renovation's having been done.

The rampant illegal renovation issue is one that I had been blissfully ignorant of until my own renovation uncovered a horror show behind the walls we opened up. Mercifully in our case, the illegal renovation next door had been done in the not-too-distant past, but even then, the resistance from the Managing Agent was crazy, most likely because they had egg on their face for either being in on it or asleep at the wheel after charging the offending shareholders inordinate inspection and architectural review fees during the renovation with the result still being a dangerous renovation.

I would guess that over 50% of the pre-war apartments that have caught my eye in the years since learning of this dirty little secret have had features that have raised my eyebrows (and don't even get me started on what I learned about gas lines). My consolation is that there appear to be few tragedies in this realm, so the odds that any of these are going to blow up on any particular apartment seem to be low? Happy Sunday! :)

When my apartment (60s building) was renovated 10+ yrs ago, the architect came to me one day and said "you know, the crew says that the building super has been dropping by the site every day to see what's going on". At the time I thought it was a bit intrusive, but have since learned that he was watchful because there had been work of questionable quality and safety years before, under the previous super's watch, and it wasn't going to happen again under his.

@Aaron2 - Rumor has it that was going on in our building as well (previous super stopping by all the time), but it has since been suggested that it was super shaking down contractors. The managing agent knew that I had a close relationship with the super in question, so they basically said that my shining a light on the illegal renovation was going to get him in trouble. I spoke with the super, determined he was not on the take in this particular instance, but it became clear to me that he was completely checked out and I could not rule out past improprieties. I suggested that perhaps the time had come for him to retire (he had been at the building for over 30 years I believe). We now have a new super and a new managing agent team, but honestly I am not overly confident that is going to eliminate a problem that neither the shareholders or the board seems to care about it. I am basically never there and nobody else cares; friends in other buildings with whom I have discussed this just laugh and say "Welcome to New York!"

I wouldn't count on DOB. In my last Coop I registered complaints about illegal construction which resulted in multiple violation summons with "DANGEROUS PLACES AND THINGS" written across the top.

Almost 3 decades later the violations are still open and conditions continue unabated with no further DOB action.

I guess it depends on how seriously a building takes complaints. Seems like a lawyer would discuss this with a client during diligence. I would guess a lot of buildings don't want the black marks.