By Gus Saltonstall
The Upper West Side looks to be adding a new super-tall building to the neighborhood.
This week, Extell Development filed a new permit with the city proposing to build an 86-story residential property at 80 West 67th Street, on the corner of Columbus Avenue, which is the former home of the ABC campus site.
The building proposed by Extell, now owner of the property, calls for a 1,182-foot-tall building. For comparison, that is around 275 feet shorter than the Empire State Building, and would be easily taller than the current tallest building on the Upper West Side, a different Extell 775-foot tower at 50 West 66th Street.
The new 86-story building would be nearly double the height of the controversial 200 Amsterdam Avenue residence, which critics said was too tall for the neighborhood.
The new building would have 430 residential units, amenity space, roughly 25,000 square feet of retail space, and a garage with 187 parking spots, according to the permit filed by David Rothstein, an executive vice president at Extell.
What is not clear from the building permit filed this week for 80 West 67th Street is the number of affordable units that the address might include. Under the current zoning regulations that cover the former ABC site, Extell is not required to build affordable housing, but Gary Barnett, the founder and chairman of Extell Development, told Upper West Side Community Board 7 in May 2025 that he was willing to allocate some of the Extell site — on West 66th and 67th streets from Columbus to Central Park West — to affordable housing.
As for the height of the project, there are few guardrails that would limit how tall Extell can build within this specific site.
On the former ABC site, there is an enclave of addresses, including 80 West 67th Street, that do not fall within an historic or special district and also have no landmark status, which could impose height limits on a project. The diagram below shows that this former ABC campus site sits outside of the black bolded line, which represents the Lincoln Square Special District.
Not only do these addresses fall outside of any special district, they are also zoned differently.
The area on West 66th and 67th streets, from Columbus to Central Park West, has commercial zoning laws similar to Midtown, where there are not the same height-limit rules that exist in the adjacent blocks of the Lincoln Square Special District.
Besides the zoning situation, Extell can use air-rights rules to build a taller structure. When a single entity owns multiple buildings on the same site in New York City, they are able to combine the unused air rights of other properties to make one building as tall as possible.
It is unclear when construction of the new 86-story building will begin.
Read More:
- What’s to Come for ABC’s Former UWS Campus? It’s Up in the Air…
- Negotiations About ABC’s Former Upper West Side Facilities Still Under Wraps
- CB7 Pushes for Affordable Housing at Former UWS ABC Campus, But Developer Plans Still Uncertain
- Extell Chairman Says He Willing to Include Affordable Housing at Former UWS ABC Site
- Demolition Work Sparks Complaints at Former UWS ABC Site: Possible 1,200-Foot Building on the Way
Subscribe to West Side Rag’s FREE email newsletter here. And you can Support the Rag here.
Hope they “86” this plan.
As someone who supports more building, it really is quite tall and possibly so tall it’s rather out of context for a residential area. Or at least the border between a residential and commercial area.
I don’t understand how this special district — which was intended for a commercial development — can transform into residential super tall, but here we are.
LANDMARK WEST proposed a zoning Text Amendment to limit development and include this project in the Special District. However, clouded by cynical discussions of “affordable housing”, the City ignored the proposal and gave into the developer. It is a long and very disappointing story.
You get what you wish for!
*grabs popcorn and opens comments*
That will cast a long shadow.
No more sunshine. I find this way too high and rather monstrous in a residential area, especially.
Sunshine is overrated.
Only if you’re a mole.
“When a single entity owns multiple buildings on the same site in New York City, they are able to combine the unused air rights of other properties to make one building as tall as possible.” This single sentence invalidates all building height zoning limits.
You obviously haven’t familiarized yourself with the ramifications of one building site using all the adjacent air rights. It means the other sites can never build higher than they currently are.
Good. We desperately need more housing. If you don’t like tall buildings, you can always move to the suburbs.
Are you new here? Few people actually live in these kinds of units. They cost a billion dollars and are investment opportunities for the 1% who live out of state or country. We need more affordable housing for real New Yorkers.
That’s funny. I know many people who live in “these kinds of units”. Perhaps you’re thinking of the suburbs.
You want to know how you get more affordable housing? You build more housing. Wishing for mathematical fairy tales is not solving anything.
thumb
down
thumb
up
Housing for billionaires won’t free up affordable housing for anyone . Trickle dow does work in real estate either!
Where are they going to park their bikes?
We need supportive and affordable housing for every day New Yorkers, not cheaply built luxury housing that act as shell properties for billionaires.
Exactly. The unique personality of the upper west side will be shattered. Build in the Bronx! Replace those fire-prone human warehouses.
Cheaply built? Have you ever been in one?
Have you ever read about the plumbing problems in those skyscrapers around Central Park and 57th Street?
I can assure you this building will be as expensive AF to build (even if it is an oversized eyesore).
They don’t need to live in the Lincoln Square neighborhood. There’s plenty of affordable housing in other neighborhoods and boroughs.
What, exactly, is an every day New Yorker?
An “every day Upper West Sider” is lily white, rich, woke, and generally insufferable.
The kind of people you meet everyday. How many billionaires did you meet today?
That depends on your social circle. You would be surprised what you would learn about many neighbors and what makes the UWS so interesting. What things appear and what things are….
The lawyer-techie couple that makes $1mm+, the old lady aging in place even without much income because she bought her apartment for $75K in 1976, the young teacher with the PhD making $100K instead of $1mm in hedge fund because he chose to teach instead, or the guy who prefers to sleep on the sidewalk and can’t be bothered to go to a free shelter? They all seem pretty set where they are and in their own ways. So who exactly should this be for?
One thing i know for sure: none of the billionaires I may or may not have met are waiting with baited breath for this particular building (or any other) to park their cash.
I don’t think we desperately need more housing for millionaires, which is mostly what this building will be. There’s no housing shortage for the wealthy. If 57th street is any template, this new tower would be mostly unoccupied pied-a-tiers owned by out-of-towners.
Which under current proposals would mean additional tax revenue for NYC.
Destroying New Yorkers’ quality of the life is not worth the shekels you make in taxes. More money to pay for more skyscrapers? Feh!
Again with this “take it or leave it” attitude that periodically crops up here. Stop it, it’s idiotic.
This “ housing” will not be for “normal “ folks but for millionaires who shop for “luxury in the sky” This will not materially change the availability of the housing stock on the UWS much like the tower over the MoMA does not contribute in any meaningful way to more housing choices for midtown. This is about making money not community.
I assume the fix is already in, so the best we can hope for is to extort Extell for some infrastructure improvements in the area. (Improve the 66th subway stop? – even though this is pretty much in good shape already.)
Right. Just bc ppl WANT to live here, or rather, WANT to buy property here, doesn’t mean that ppl who already live in NYC need to move to this neighborhood.
Yes, ppl w/o homes need housing. That is a different issue from the one at hand.
The UWS has roughly 220,000 residents packed into 3 square miles. That is a crazy level of population density. We do not need more housing in this tiny neighborhood.
Enough.
It’s one of the densest neighborhoods in the country. It’s what makes us unique and why living here is a different experience than living in Iowa. The density is what makes it great. Most of the country is low density suburbs. There’s only one Upper West Side.
If you do a bit of research, you will realize that the population of the UWS is significantly LOWER than it was 50 years ago. I’ve seen statistics ranging from 320,000 to as high as 350,000. You forget that all those side-street brownstones were 12-18 tiny studio apartments. They are now again single family homes, or a couple of flats. No, I’m not in favor of more supertall housing for ultra-wealthy folks ‘from away’ but we cannot stop it based on stress on the infrastructure. That’s not a viable issue.
Who cares what it was 50 years ago? That doesn’t refute or address anything I wrote.
220,000 residents in 3 sq. miles is preposterously dense. This neighborhood is crammed full of people. The last thing we “desperately” need is more housing.
Actually, we do desperately need more housing. The vacancy rate on the UWS side was 1.14% as of January 2026. There is a shortage of housing across multiple economic bands.
220,000 residents in 3 sq. miles is wonderfully dense and creates the vibrant street life real New Yorkers cherish.
That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it. How many more hundreds of thousands of people do you want to cram into 3 sq. miles? Why is this necessary? People come and go into the neighborhood, but pretending like we are in “desperate” need of housing like the poster I initially replied to is preposterous.
I am curious why you have decided to live in the second densest neighborhood in the country if you don’t like density? There are a lot of other places you might like better even in the NYC area.
Kinda crazy to think that this will be 86 stories considering how the ABC building was only about 14. But hey, the UWS doesn’t need sunlight, especially in the morning. Extell is doing us all a favor. Anyone complaining is just another ungrateful NIMBY whiner who wants to live in the past.
Compared to the current cyclone of impersonality, hyper-fast futurism, the past on the upper west side was pretty nice. There was a link to the City’s interesting history, the brilliance of intellectual neighbors, the delight of family life in an urban setting connected to parks and vibrant street life, with sunlight. How can Momdani approve of such an impersonal monstrosity?
No more “finger” buildings! (As in, flipping it to the people who actually live here, love human-scale housing, and value the sky.) It’s obstructive, contemptuous of us, and 100% unnecessary — just greedy, insecure developers competing to see whose is taller.
READ JANE JACOBS. A city that loses its personality, loses its humanity
Thanks; yes, I have read Jane Jacobs; still have The Death and Life of Great American Cities, and Cities and the Wealth of Nations. June Jordan, poet, playwright, and essayist, also proposed specific, humane urban architecture, particularly for Harlem; she brought her ideas to Buckminster Fuller. Detractors of both women accused them of gentrifying (“urban renewal and slum clearance”) rather than enhancing their city and communities.
This building arguably accurately represents the personality of the UWS — one of the richest neighborhoods in America.
I agree. There’s something so puerile about the competition for bigger-than-yours buildings mostly based on a phallic architectural model. I’m fortunate to have a south-facing view that extends to midtown, but over the years it’s been marred by one after another super-tall, beginning with the infamous 342 Park Ave, which already is showing its age. The garish new skyline evokes nothing more than a gigantic p*ing contest by a bunch of adolescents who happen to be real estate moguls. Context and community are irrelevant to the boys.
Well-said, CC. Oblivious and puerile, these rich lads with no life, and consequently, bizarre priorities also are ruining urban astronomy, diminishing our opportunities to share science, beauty, and the wonder of things greater than ourselves. They would pave our parks and museums if permitted.
Will there be a driveway so that the M66 is not impacted?
Where will the trash go?
Insufficient sidewalk space for trash for an 86 story residential building – residential buildings generate much more trash than equivalent commercial buildings
Need more housing??? Have you ever noticed the number of vacant apartments on the Upper West Side? Mainly in the newer constructed buildings???
The vacancy rate for the UWS was 1.14% as of January 2026 and that down from 1.34% as of January 2025. Not sure there are as many vacant apartments as you’d like to think.
This is part of the unspoken….the issue is that the apartments that are available are priced too high for many who want to live here? Its like the person who walks on Fifth Ave past the stores and says there is nothing to buy. The UWS used to have more lower end rentals. That changed significantly over the last 30 years. The desire to live here remains but the supply of apartments has changed.
Have you attempted to rent an apartment recently? The vacancy rate is extremely low and rents are extremely high. There are other reasons not to like this, but vacant apartments are just not a problem in NYC.
A lot of empty apartments are not on the market, as landlords are ‘warehousing’ them in hope of more favorable laws so they can raise rents later.
If it goes through, create a new neighborhood from 59th-68th streets called Trump Estates.
Don’t see what Trump has to do with this building. He didn’t build it.
Will be a good way to spy on New Jersey.
Most of the new buildings I’ve seen go up in Manhattan especially over the last 20 years have had nice designs, good lighting on the streets, clean new sidewalks, garbage that is consolidated inside the building and well maintained exteriors.
The tall buildings look great in the NYC skyline. It’s not like the 60’s and 70’s where there were truly awful looking buildings that went up with no regard to exterior design.
Think of it as more pied-à-terre tax money for the city, and don’t forget your sweater & flashlight when visiting Central Park.
We finally agree on something
I am all for new housing but supertalls don’t increase our supply. Locals won’t be trading up to live in these apartments. They will be bought by foreigners looking to park their money in NYC real estate. Won’t help solve our housing problem one bit.
Not to mention in these supertalls, there’s a whole lot of literal dead space in the middle: The bottom floors are reserved for corporate and some residential space (often low-income – gotta get those tax breaks somewhere! though the new law makes it a little tricker, I’m sure they’ll work around it). Then the middle, no one wants to live there at market rate, because it has all the drawbacks of a long elevator ride but it’s not high enough for any of the views beyond the other tall buildings. So between, say, floors 10 and 60, they just build enough of a frame to support the luxury penthouses at the top, but no actual, occupiable floor space.
The big builder found a way around 80/20 requirements. They agree to build low i come housing/affordable housing elsewhere.
What “tax breaks” are you talking about?
Do you even understand what you’re ranting?
Just literally not true. There will be apartments on floors 10-60. “Nobody wants to live on the 30th floor of a newly built building on the Upper West Side so they don’t even bother building them” – people live in 5th floor walk ups, railroad apartments, apartments with no dishwasher, or washing machine. Tons of people would love to live here. It makes me wonder how people can become so detached from the people around them that they think this is how their neighborhood works.
On the bright side these often empty apartments pay Huge real estate taxes, employ lots of people for services and construction jobs while consuming almost no city services.
Not really when you have a 20 million dollar condo assessment at 750k
Size, strength, wealth, are not the same thing
Regarding real estate taxes, I wonder if this building would be getting any tax abatements… anybody know?
Are the foreigners looking to park their money here, or are they avoiding the US at all costs because …how was it…they mock us… can’t stand us and our police state…are afraid of our airports, etc etc.?
I can’t get the narrative straight.
We UWSers proudly embrace foreigners. Except when they want to buy expensive real estate …. Then it’s Get the #### out! 😀
Is it worth self-deluding that we even have a voice in this?
Landmark West has been fighting this and similar projects for YEARS. They can always use more voices.
“Critics” didn’t “say” 200 Amsterdam was too tall; the *court* said it repeatedly, that it violated zoning laws and to stop the project. And the developers said “so what; we’re doing it anyway,” then cried hardship (and won!) when a court told them to knock half of it down.
Please don’t let facts get in the way of your story. The court of appeals found that the zoning lot for 200 Amsterdam was legal and the upper floors could stay.
The developer kept building because nothing stopped them from doing so – perhaps the litigants should have asked for an injunction but they didn’t.
That’s not what happened. An appeals court overturned the original ruling because of zoning interpretation, not hardship.
I don’t have a strong pro or con position on these super tall luxury buildings, but I think everyone could use the reality check of an evening photo of the west facade of 200 Amsterdam, which I can see from my kitchen window. (I just took one with my phone and am happy to share it.) It’s almost totally dark, unlike the neighboring buildings, which have actual human residents who need light to pursue their human pursuits. If an extortionate pied a terre tax goes into effect, as I dearly hope, then let’s build more of these, and have the world’s plutocrats fund our city’s budget!
My apartment also faces towards 200 Amsterdam, as well as several other oversized buildings.
I’m amazed at how the majority of the windows in these buildings stay dark at night, regardless of what floor or high up. In other words, these “pied-a-terres” are not being used as residences.
I agree that if a “pied-a-terre” tax goes into effect, at least this will be a great benefit to the city.
It was always a haven of relative calm and neighborliness, sweet little shops and cafés and vest pocket parks. Now it will be a mammoth, impersonal, stalinesque block of impersonality. So sad.
The Lincoln Square neighborhood has NOT always been a “haven of calm and neighborliness “. I’ve lived here for over 50 years: it’s been glamorous, exciting, noisy, bustling, dangerous, then much safer, dirty, cleaner, sexy, then corporate, bustling, then more bustling, What has changed is that it’s much, much denser and taller and out of reach for those who are moving to NY and getting on their feet.. Decades ago, a friend of mine , a singer at the beginning of her career who lived at 71st and Broadway received a notice from the developer who was building a high rise in the adjoining lot directly up against her building, offering to remove her windows and provide her with “valuable wall space”….for free! That did it. She’d put up with the sirens, the horns, the tumult, as a trade off to living within a short walk to 2 great parks, Lincoln Center, a vibrant restaurant and movie theater scene, etc: She moved to New Jersey. Eventually, when I retired, I also left the neighborhood. I miss it very much, but I had to accept that the neighborhood I loved just doesnt exist there anymore.
Well, we know we don’t need any more parks. No families with kids will be there. And if they do have kids, they’ll play in their indoor park and rooftop park.
We do not need this building in our already densely populated neighborhood. We certainly do not need more residential units, which will increase density around the clock.
Very few people will actually live in this building. There will be lots of maid service however.
Not counting its antenna mast, the Empire State Building is just 1250 feet tall.
Money makes the world go around
The world go around
The world go around
Money makes the world go around
It makes the world go ’round.
A mark, a yen, a buck or a pound
A buck or a yen
A buck or a pound.
Is all that makes the world go around
That clinking, clanking sound
Can make the world go ’round
Money money money money
Money money money money
Money money money
The way things are going we will soon have skyscrapers even on CPN; 30, 60 and 80 story towers overlooking the northern half of the park. Just dreadful. Maybe in a century there will be so many tall buildings the towers will be connected. Thinking of the Marina Bay Sands in Singapore. Central Park could have a roof over parts of it, a marvel of engineering they will say. Ughh!
Disgusting. The UWS is turning into Jersey City.
I am all for progress as much as I am for the landmarks commision and preserving the integrity of neighborhoods, a la Jane Jacobs. If they go that tall up here it won’t be long before there are 10 buildings that tall in the hood and before we know it, we’ll be like the east side wherein you can barely see the Chrysler Building or The Empire State anymore because of monster structures surrounding them!!
Horrible idea! Can it be stopped\?!
This looks like another opportunity for the super-wealthy to invest. We need our new mayor to step in and force an end to this ridiculously tall tower that will loom over residential sections of the UWS. Let the billionaires commute from towers in Hoboken.
Go big or go home!
Sweetie, this IS home. But it becomes less homelike every year.
Extell doesn’t care about you, or your sunshine, or your neighborhood’s character, or your population density. They care about one thing only. It’s surprising that the Lincoln Square/Lincoln Center crowd — a pretty influential bunch usually — couldn’t bring these plunderers to heel. Some of us will remember when this southern end of the park was sunny.
Gross.
These things move. A lot , and even with all the latest damping tech, the skinniest towers like 432 Park and 111 West 57th still push the limits of occupant comfort. They have issues. Looking forward to the public engineering details on its exact damping system.
I particularly like the comments that say don’t build it here on the UWS but put it in the Bronx, Jersey City or Hoboken. How generous of you all – not in my neighborhood but in yours.
Maybe we’re not all serious about that, Erik. The supertalls could be truncated everywhere; no more should be built in our area, not only NIMBY. Streamlined gleaming cities with massive, sleek, sophisticated structures are futuristic science fiction (so far).
Adding more schools? Food shopping? Pharmacies? Recreational facilities?
This is simply gross.
Foreign billionaires don’t go to the pharmacy. Kids are comfortably tucked away at boarding school in Geneva. The maid may order delivery from Whole Foods if ever needed- more likely, Jean Georges and Per Se are down the street for a quick bite Building has all the recreational facilities they might need – for everything else, there’s the limo and the helicopter to Teterboro and St Barts is a quick hop from there.
Same developer, Extell’s Gary Barnett, who gamed the city’s zoning laws to make a massive tower out of 200 Amsterdam. Sadly, profit and ego override architectural and aesthetic integrity. We need you, Landmark West.
Sorry, but the Court of Appeals doesn’t agree with your assessment that he “gamed” the zoning laws. We don’t have to like how he (or any other developer) accumulated zoning lots to acquire extra height for a building, but it was legal.
I think that Freda uses the term “gaming” acceptably, in the sense of manipulating within the loophole-y zoning laws to achieve a detrimental outcome (to many of us UWSiders).
This is the second type of building like this I’ve learned of today where the developer accumulated and stacked air rights. It would be nice if they did anything to instill goodwill with their neighbors and turn these skyscrapers into a general benefit. Maybe build public access to an observation deck?
Real estate developers don’t really worry about zoning heights. Even if there is ruling stopping them they just go ahead anyway. Protests and local advisory boards are just for show. Does anyone really think greed isn’t going to get its way anymore?
Outrageous. No other city in this country allows real estate developers destroy the fabric & essence of the city as NY does.
I’m kind of hoping that’s true, and we’re the only city that must correct its zoning laws. However, ask Philadelphia, San Francisco, and similar major urban areas.
This building is calculated to cast a shadow for eight blocks up Columbus Avenue during winter. Up to 75th Strret. That is the one and only issue with this building. It’s way too tall. It’s going to darken the whole neighborhood. As its new neighbor on 66th already does. Go to Sheep Meadow in the afternoon and see how big the shadow of the existing building is. And the ugly monoliths on billionaire row.
Gross. Billionaire’s Row already ruined the skyline of Manhattan.
It’s ridiculous. That area is turning into Midtown north. 200 Amsterdam was a monstrosity and this is twice as high? Unless over half of this apts are affordable/subsidized, I’d vote a big NO.
Someday, a real hurricane will come and wash all the supertalls off the street.