Attention NYC building owners (commercial and residential) and apartment owners

This is assuming the building can actually support an additional floor on the roof. Most can't, because they were not designed as such.

So you're talking about penthouses?

Here Matt is actually correct. Plus I wonder how ADA handles new walk-up penthouses in elevator buildings (or new second stories in existing top-floor apartments in elevator buildings, if you prefer).

how does this apply in landmark districts where most stock is pre-1962? I thought you can't build anything new that would be visible from the street.

To NYCMatt: One could still add a dwelling room, sunroom, solarium or greenhouse to the extent the roof would support it. Many pre-1962 buildings are actually over-engineered to support weight.

To spinnaker1: Not only penthouses. An entire floor could be added to a rooftop or a setback terrace.

To alanhart: We are talking here about building "as of right" under the Zoning Regulation--on buildings which already exceed current square footage (FAR) limitations. ADA and other building code requirements will still need to be complied with--but you never get to that point if the building is already an "overbuilt grandfathered" building. Now if you have the parapets, you can get past the zoning restriction--which previously would have stopped you in your tracks from doing any such addition.

To KISS: See my answer to alanhart above. Landmarks, like ADA, must still be complied with. But many pre-1962 buildings are not landmarked. We are talking here about a range of buildings from small to very big, both residential and commercial.

NJR2009, so you're saying that the elevator would need to be extended (essentially impossible), or a 2-floor elevator added (unlikely, but not impossible), or lots of space wasted on a 10-foot ascent ramp (hard to imagine)? Or that ADA doesn't have any such requirements in the case of such additions?

I hope nobody on my board sees this. Many years ago an architect on the board confirmed what we could all see at the DoB for ourselves, that we were already over our FAR. The thing is, if you have parapets that tall, you have to build way above the roof level in order to get any views. Then, as alanhart said, there're the hundreds of thousands of dollars to extend the elevators up to roof level.

All this works best where there's already an underutilized top floor, like at Astor Court, where they tore out a floor of maid's rooms and put the terraces on the inside.

To Alanhart: I own a duplex co-op apartment with a very nice spiral staircase. These kinds of problems are not insurmountable. The main point is that now, under the crazy interpretation by the DOB (not meant to be seen outside of DOB), additions can now be made on all pre-1962 residential and commercial buildings, on pre-1962 terraces (whether on setbacks or rooftops) if there are pre-1962 parapets going more than halfway around the terrace.

To NWT: You realize I totally disagree with what DOB has done. They have been doing this secretly, through the usual group of "fixers", without the public (including most architects and engineers) knowing about it. And the point is not just to get views. More space means more money for owners and landlords.

If anyone does not believe what I have described, just call First Deputy Commissioner Fatma Amer at the NYC Department of Buildings. She is the one who signed the ruling which permits, as a matter of zoning, such additions on setback and topmost roof terraces. I have the document in my hands, and a letter from DOB's Legal Department confirming that this is DOB precedent.

You can also call DOB's Public Relations/Press Department about this.