NEW YORK | 655 Madison Ave. | FT | FLOORS

„We’ve emptied out a building in the Plaza District. SL Green (SLG) had 625 Madison, ours is a stone’s throw away at 655 Madison.

We’re going to see those buildings get torn down and replaced probably by a mixture of retail, hospitality, and residential. And I don’t have to tell you that all three of those uses are very desirable in the Plaza District.“

1 Like

Michael Cohen is now a real-estate developer?

Same thing actually happened to Eliot Spitzer.

I guess it’s a lucrative second act for folks who have failed at whatever it was they first did with their lives.

In Spitzer’s case it’s the family business.

Pretty sure it’s a different guy. Two people can share a name


Yup, visibly not the Michael Cohen of Trump fame. Although that guy did have a brief career flipping apartment buildings too…

Another 1,000’+ tower designed by RAMSA here will command big bucks.

New York! America!

1 Like

One wonders if he has given thought to using a middle initial, such as the actor Michael B Jordan or the playwright Michael R Jackson.

It’s particularly confusing since both Michael Cohens are connected to Manhattan real estate.

1 Like

Without any additional air-rights an AOR development that is purely residential would be smaller than the neighboring 520 Park Ave.

A RAMSA tower here would have more likely a similar massing to 200 East 83rd St with air-rights, which is less than 500’ tall. It wouldn’t make sense to build a narrow tower on a large footprint regardless of the project program (commercial, residential, etc). 520 Park Ave is tall because it has a narrow footprint, 200East 83rd is squat and mid-height because it has a “sizeable” footprint.

Another? Where’s the first? There are no supertall (984’) buildings in NYC designed by RAMSA.

220 CPS is 950’.

Thats not a supertall or 1000’ though as you mentioned.

Either way, everything I mentioned previously still holds up, a slender tower will be built on a slender lot, not a sizeable one that would make it more squat, withholding any additional air rights.

1 Like

950’ is close enough. Don’t be pedantic.

1 Like

Dont make false statements then :man_shrugging:t2:

Like I said regardless, examples like 220 Central Park south and 520 Park Ave are slender and tall because their lots are slender/narrow, this lot is not narrow.

You said 1000+, im not gonna argue with that, and im not gonna lead others to similarly question what supertall RAMSA buildings there are in NY when there arent any.

For all intents and purposes, its the same reason Ping An IFC isnt a megatall just because its .9m away from being classified a megatall. Close enough doesnt cut it.

Anyways, getting back to the actual topic of this thread, there is a possibility for the site to purchase additional air rights should the developer want to purchase neighboring air rights. But that still doesnt mean this is suddenly going to be a supertall, its just a possibility.

1 Like

There are actually 10 RAMSA supertalls in Midtown alone.

1 Like

There are zero RAMSA supertalls in NYC, let alone in Midtown.


Also not a supertall, but don’t forget 30 Park Place!

950 is not close enough. Standards need to be observed.

He’s being a smartass.

1 Like