My remark about 50 W 66th was a bit vague when I used the term FAR regard the height dispute. I was thinking specifically on the issue of the claim that the mechanical floors were said to have “excessive ceiling heights” that were used as a means of making the building taller. I believe the claim was found to have merit and as a result the building codes regarding the ‘ceiling heights’ for mechanical floors have been limited. I am going on my general recollection on some of those issues with the allowable floor height for ‘mechanical floors’ . I do know the mechanical floors are not calculate in FAR ; so my comment about FAR in connection with 50 W 66th street was not exactly the ‘issue’ I was trying to reference - it was the ‘mechanical floor’ dispute that I was thinking about in that case.
I will try to bet back on-topic with 77 W 66th. 
Good to hear about the AOR details for 77 West 66th - thanks.
BTW. Here is a good link to the other thread were they referred to this as “massive mechanical voids” used only to elevate the height/views of the penthouse apartments. They were considered to be “loopholes” in the zoning laws - but not outright violations.