Planting Terrace

east30s

Member
I saw an apartment recently for sale with a rather large planting terrace ie can fit 2 people and a small table easily . There is no door access . Can only be accessed by owner of coop unit via window. Is this terrace considered OWNED by shareholder owner or at the very least, able to be used by shareholder owner? Its a setback terrace so very stable . Its not listed as terrace in offering plan.
 

Noah Rosenblatt

Talking Manhattan on UrbanDigs.com
Staff member
I saw an apartment recently for sale with a rather large planting terrace ie can fit 2 people and a small table easily . There is no door access . Can only be accessed by owner of coop unit via window. Is this terrace considered OWNED by shareholder owner or at the very least, able to be used by shareholder owner? Its a setback terrace so very stable . Its not listed as terrace in offering plan.
Hmm, I would think since its part/attached to the unit, that yes, its part of the shares owned by that unit in the cooperative. Def an attorney and OP question for sure. Curious what others think, but I would say the shares represent that if its unique to other similar units that dont have that feature. FYI, unsure the extra value offered on open market for this given the window access. good question
 

east30s

Member
It seems some attorneys say “ no door” then “no access “ and others says what you said “ if it’s attached to apt and you are only one that can access then it’s yours”… offering plan doesn’t note a terrace and all I get as feedback from management agency is “ there is no terrace” because there is no “T” next to apt in offering plan
 

David Goldsmith

All Powerful Moderator
Staff member
While most offering plans are largely boilerplate, this is one of the few areas that can be particularly different. There is often some language about the definition of "apartment" and "outdoor areas appurtenant there too." There have also been a number of lawsuits over these definitions (ex https://sgrlaw.com/articles/yet-ano...-93rd-st-over-deck-space-next-to-greenhouses/).

There have also been lawsuits when there was no question the Offering Plan allocated an outdoor area to a unit but for some reason the Coop Board/Managing Agent determined the use should be curtailed, or decided to change the rules of use (ex https://therealdeal.com/2020/05/28/sutton-place-co-op-in-turmoil-over-terrace-fees/ ) or revoke permissions (ex https://www.habitatmag.com/Publicat...21-June/Enclosed-Balconies-May-Not-Be-Forever).

If the managing agent/Board is telling you the unit has no terrace and the offering plan is silent you are really taking your chances that at any time you can be told to stop using it.

I agree with Noah that if it doesn't look like there have been extra shares allocated it's harder to show an intent of the Offering Plan to grant the unit extra space. Same if other units under the same Offering Plan are designated with any notation (such as "T," "G," "Ph," etc) and this one isn't.

None of the above should be taken to construe that I'm not aware of similar situations where unit owners have been allowed to use such spaces without incident for long periods of time. Also the same where after using them for long periods something came up and all of a sudden it became an issue.

Question: did the current unit owner improve the area in some way and use it "openly and notoriously"?
 

east30s

Member
Thank you so much for your reply! When current owner was younger , he had plants out there but there was nothing there when I saw it….I wouldn’t put furniture there but might just climb out here abd there to enjoy the air and view
 

east30s

Member
perhaps....but seller will have to ask board....which im sure will probably have a cautious response...better to know before you purchase OR is it opening up a can of worms!
 

Noah Rosenblatt

Talking Manhattan on UrbanDigs.com
Staff member
While most offering plans are largely boilerplate, this is one of the few areas that can be particularly different. There is often some language about the definition of "apartment" and "outdoor areas appurtenant there too." There have also been a number of lawsuits over these definitions (ex https://sgrlaw.com/articles/yet-ano...-93rd-st-over-deck-space-next-to-greenhouses/).

There have also been lawsuits when there was no question the Offering Plan allocated an outdoor area to a unit but for some reason the Coop Board/Managing Agent determined the use should be curtailed, or decided to change the rules of use (ex https://therealdeal.com/2020/05/28/sutton-place-co-op-in-turmoil-over-terrace-fees/ ) or revoke permissions (ex https://www.habitatmag.com/Publicat...21-June/Enclosed-Balconies-May-Not-Be-Forever).

If the managing agent/Board is telling you the unit has no terrace and the offering plan is silent you are really taking your chances that at any time you can be told to stop using it.

I agree with Noah that if it doesn't look like there have been extra shares allocated it's harder to show an intent of the Offering Plan to grant the unit extra space. Same if other units under the same Offering Plan are designated with any notation (such as "T," "G," "Ph," etc) and this one isn't.

None of the above should be taken to construe that I'm not aware of similar situations where unit owners have been allowed to use such spaces without incident for long periods of time. Also the same where after using them for long periods something came up and all of a sudden it became an issue.

Question: did the current unit owner improve the area in some way and use it "openly and notoriously"?
My boy is wicked smaaaat
 

east30s

Member
This is proprietary lease but if terrace is not noted with a T in offering plan , does this apply to a planting terrace ?
 

Attachments

  • 9ED8D3D0-EABA-48E1-8A54-2D6CB3D1192D.jpeg
    9ED8D3D0-EABA-48E1-8A54-2D6CB3D1192D.jpeg
    139.7 KB · Views: 2
Top