Dianne, from what our attorney has told us, the pedestrian traffic issue for a psychotherapist (or similar low-traffic business) isn't a problem if the home office is on the first floor of the building. For higher floors, it's more debatable, but still often permitted. Also, to emphasize, the board has the final say in the matter and is never obligated to permit such an arrangement.

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

The "first floor" exception is usually in buidings which have a building permit for this type of occupancy. You are absolutely correct in stating that the board has the final say. However, my point was that in many professions licenses require zoning which permits the business at hand. Therefoe, the board has to make certain that whatever permits or licenses are required are in order.

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

Dianne, you've raised some interesting points. It's true that many buildings are already zoned for commercial activity on the first floor, but our building is zoned residential top to bottom. Nonetheless, our attorney told us that a first-floor "home occupation" with low pedestrian traffic would be allowed without a change in zoning.

We went one step farther and drafted a Letter of Understanding that all prospective buyers must sign and submit with their purchase application. Here's an excerpt:

"We understand and agree that purely commercial use of apartments in the Building is not permitted. Notwithstanding the foregoing, we understand that with the written consent of the Board, a resident shareholder may be permitted to work from his/her apartment if such work is in compliance with the requirements of a 'home occupation' under the New York City Zoning Resolution. Moreover, should any governmental agency issue a violation based upon any commercial use of the Apartment, we acknowledge responsibility for and indemnify [the coop corporation] with respect to the payment of any fines associated with such violation and we agree to undertake the necessary action in order to vacate such violation."

Your point about the board validating any permits for the home occupation is a good question. I don't know whether this is required, but it seems like it would put an undue burden on the board -- especially since such permits typically require periodic renewal.

HabitatReporter, if you're reading this, it seems like a good subject to pose to an attorney. What are some Yes/No/Maybe examples of legitimate home occupations? What steps should a board take when deciding whether to allow a specific home occupation or other commercial use? And does the board have an obligation to validate a shareholder's commercial permits and the like?

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

What if the building in which the home occupation takes place doesn't have a Certificate of Occupancy?
Building predates CO. compliance.
Would a home occupation then fall under the Propietary Lease or ByLaws and not be considered a NYC zoning issue?

> Join the conversation