Can you call your city government, or another source where you can find the code information pertinent to your area? If it's a universal code, hopefully someone can post. This is how I think of it: if you needed to shut the unit off immediately for safety reasons, it would be much easier with a disconnect switch. Is the unit in question yours?

With regard to electrical receptacles, the electrical code is the more likely to address that issue. The NEC merely requires that such receptacles be GFCI protected. But I never know about NYC or California codes.

I'm not sure if local code permits NM wiring behind Crown molding. Besides, if anything, I'd use armored. Reason? Crown is usually installed with a pneumatic nailer. Although your NM would be anchored to the wall, a misplaced nail would cause a short when the breaker is turned on (should have off while nailing) Worse case scenario would be if you did inadvertently got the jacket but just missed the copper. This would cause an arcing situation. (remember, ARCwelding is how iron workers melt metal.) An arc would cause a fire and not set off 95% of the breakers out there unless it were an arc-sensing one. IMHO, I'd go with armored regardless for the run, and make sure the NM to that point is grounded to the box the armored terminates in.

A little history and explanation may help. Older houses typically had one circuit for kitchen countertop appliances and it wasn't uncommon for that circuit to feed other things as well, such as nearby lighting. When folks started added toaster ovens, cuisinarts, electric coffee makers (which draw a lot of power!), large microwaves, blenders, bread makers, eight-slice toasters, bun warmers and a myriad of other small appliances, fuses started blowing and breakers started tripping right and left so the code (NEC) was changed to require two 20-amp circuits for kitchen countertops. Heck, some kitchens these days have darn near the power requirements of small factories. :-) To keep these circuits available for all this equipment, the code also restricted using them for other purposes (limited purpose sharing with recepacles in pantry and dining room being the exception). That's the general rule and I think what LoneSparky's saying is that his local inspector will allow for a little bit of latitude (like a bit of under-cab lighting) but, sigh, that's really not code--it's more a matter of some common-sense give-and-take that you shouldn't presume. (Slap me upside, 'Sparky, if I'm out of school here.) The bottom line is that you're better off and safer (code-wise) to draw the power for under-cab lighting from some other circuit, preferably the lighting circuit. Whether $450 per bank is outrageous or not is hard to say. Does this include cost of the fixtures and, if so, how expensive are they? Also, what other electrical work will be done. Not long ago, I had the water pump replaced in my car and I told the mechanic to replace the fan belt while he was at it. I got the bill and saw that I'd been charged the so-called "Chilton Book" labor amount for changing a water pump plus the book amount for replacing a fan belt. (Note that a mechanic changing a water pump has to take the fan belt off and put it back on even if it's not being replaced.) This is a classic case of getting ripped off by fixed per-task fixed pricing and they backed off the fan belt labor after I protested. But it's a good case on point to consider. If that's the way the home center is pricing everything--so much for the labor of wiring a bank of under-cab, whether or not the sparky is doing other wiring as well--it is entirely possible that you're getting hosed if you're getting several electrical tasks done. If so, you may do better by laying out the whole set of requirements and getting a combined estimate for the electrical/installation work.