We're in a new house and the builder did not offer undercabinet
lighting. I had the electrician run an extra circuit to the backsplash,

wired to a switch, so I could use this later and put my own undercab
lights in.

The outlet is dead center on the wall above the cooktop, not an optimal

location and I don't want the undercab lights to just plug into the
outlet. My options are move the outlet down the wall and inside a base
cabinet (romex isn't long enough to do this) or leave the outlet where
it is. I'm thinking of removing the gfci from the line and just using
wire nuts to make the connection inside the box between the switch and
the undercab lights. Then finish it off with a flush stainless steel
cover plate. But doing this would remove the gfci protection on the
lights. Is this a big deal? I haven't found any in-line gfci modules I
could use or anything along those lines.


I'd really like to relocate the outlet so it's one less wall plate on
the backsplash but that would mean running all new romex between the
switch and box and route through the basement. Not impossible but a
pain. Even if I leave the box where it is and splice another 4' of
romex so I can relocate the box inside the base cabinets, I'd still
need to leave the wall plate to access the connection. So if the wall
plate is staying I'd rather just wire nut the line from the switch to
the lights and be done with it. Thoughts?


Thanks in advance!

The existing GFCI has contacts to feed additional outlets, so use them
for a added length of romex to the light

wrote:
The existing GFCI has contacts to feed additional outlets, so use them
for a added length of romex to the light

That's not a bad idea. Since that box and plate would have to exist
anyway, at this least feeding a hidden outlet in the base cabinet would
mean I'd still have use of the existing gfci outlet. Good call, thanks!

Zach Nelson wrote:
wrote:
The existing GFCI has contacts to feed additional outlets, so use them
for a added length of romex to the light

That's not a bad idea. Since that box and plate would have to exist
anyway, at this least feeding a hidden outlet in the base cabinet would
mean I'd still have use of the existing gfci outlet. Good call, thanks!

not only that but you might need that outlet someday for a kitchen
appliance, like a mixer.

the outlets location and existence are probably required by
code..........

Remember that this outlet (both plugs) are switched. If you expect the
outlets to be always live, you would need to have the existing switch always
on (or bypassed) and have a local switch on the under cabinet lights. Not
what you planned for. Frankly, I think the GFCI protection for the
undercabinet lights is overkill. Just hardwire in the lights as you
probably planned to do originally. Of course for bigger bucks you could put
a GFCI breaker on that circuit.
--
Peace,
BobJ



wrote in message
oups.com...

Zach Nelson wrote:
wrote:
The existing GFCI has contacts to feed additional outlets, so use them
for a added length of romex to the light

That's not a bad idea. Since that box and plate would have to exist
anyway, at this least feeding a hidden outlet in the base cabinet would
mean I'd still have use of the existing gfci outlet. Good call, thanks!

not only that but you might need that outlet someday for a kitchen
appliance, like a mixer.

the outlets location and existence are probably required by
code..........

I should've mentioned, the extra gfci outlet is in addition to the
existing outlets every 3-4' along the backsplash. I had it added with
the undercab lights in mind. I think I'm going to tie the lights
directly into the existing gfci box, remove the outlet itself, and put
a plain stainless plate over top. Much easier than installing a new
hidden outlet down below, etc.

Thanks everyone!