Proposed Jets Stadium on West Side

[NYguy]

Daily News...

Mayor carrying a torch for new W. Side stadium

By MICHAEL SAUL

Olympics or no Olympics - Mayor Bloomberg still believes a new stadium on Manhattan's West Side could be built.

Bloomberg, who leaves for Colorado Springs tomorrow to deliver the city's final pitch for the 2012 Summer Games, said he favors a massive expansion of the Javits Center complex.

"Our ability to attract conventions here is declining precipitously, and it's a very big worry for us. There are so many jobs involved," Bloomberg said.

"What the actual nature of that would be and whether it would be used for football eight Sundays a year ... it will be part of the Javits Center. And we need to do that regardless."

The U.S. Olympic Committee will choose New York or San Francisco as its nominee on Saturday. The International Olympic Committee will choose the host city in 2005.

NYC2012, the group pursuing the Olympic Games on the city's behalf, has proposed building an Olympic stadium as part of an expanded convention center.

The development of the "West Side Olympic complex" has already begun with the multimillion-dollar commitment to design the extension of the No. 7 subway train, which would serve the area and the proposed Olympic stadium.

Deputy Mayor Daniel Doctoroff, NYC2012's founder, told the Daily News yesterday that construction of the subway extension will begin by mid-2005, regardless of the city's Olympic quest.

Officials with the New York Jets are eager to build a stadium at the West Side site and have talked to the city about how it might be funded. Yesterday, at the NFL owners meeting, the Jets gave a presentation about sponsoring a Super Bowl here.

But not everyone welcomes a West Side stadium. The Clinton Special District Coalition released a document yesterday detailing why a new stadium would hurt the city.

According to the group, a stadium would lead to more than $5 billion in new taxes, a delay or termination of the Second Ave. subway project and further congestion on Manhattan streets.

Doctoroff dismissed the criticism, saying the area surrounding the convention center has suffered from decades of "no development whatsoever."

"It's a wasteland," he said. "There is no there there. It is Manhattan's last frontier."

Meanwhile, the state Olympic Games Commission announced it will sponsor a reception Saturday at the World Financial Center's Winter Garden for various officials and special guests to watch the announcement.

And what if New York loses?

Jennifer Farina, a spokeswoman for Gov. Pataki, exuded confidence. "There is no possibility of that happening," she said.

[NYguy]

NY Times...

In the Excitement of an Olympic Bid, a $1 Billion Stadium

By CHARLES V. BAGLI

COLORADO SPRINGS, Nov. 3 — The latest proposal for an Olympic stadium, a striking glass and steel structure that would sweep down to the edge of the Hudson River, was unveiled Saturday before New York won its bid to be the United States nominee to serve as host city for the 2012 Summer Games.

The billion-dollar stadium complex, to be built above the West Side rail yards in Manhattan, was described to the United States Olympic Committee here by Daniel L. Doctoroff, founder of New York's bid committee, as the most environmentally advanced in the world. It is also the single most controversial element of the New York City bid's $5 billion proposal for new parks, sports complexes, subways and housing.

"The big question mark is the Olympic stadium," said Richard T. Anderson, the president of the New York Building Congress, a trade group that supports the Olympic bid. "The good news is that we can build anything. The real question is political: Is there the political will and public consensus to do it?"

The stadium is opposed by neighborhood groups and the local community board and will almost certainly need an extensive environmental review. Mr. Doctoroff said the 86,000-seat stadium would be paid for largely by the Jets and the National Football League (it would become the Jets' home after the Summer Games end). But under the proposal, taxpayers would pay $500 million or more for a retractable roof and a platform to build the stadium over the rail yards, between 30th and 34th Streets and 11th and 12th Avenues.

"The New York Jets' own study predicts 10,000 more cars in gridlocked Manhattan," said John Fisher, president of the Clinton Special District Coalition, which opposes the plan. "A stadium in Queens would likely cost about one-third as much as one in Manhattan and it would be closer to the team's fan base. Just when Lower Manhattan needs help and the city is scrambling to pay for its firefighters, Mayor Bloomberg and Doctoroff are pushing this boondoggle just for a little glory."

The city's bid committee, NYC2012, does have a backup plan to put the stadium in Flushing, Queens, but Mr. Doctoroff, who is the city's deputy mayor for economic development, dismissed many of the criticisms. He said the stadium would enliven what many people see as a largely barren neighborhood and raise the possibility that the Super Bowl might be held in New York City. The stadium itself, he said, would normally be used for 10 football games a year, on Sundays, when traffic congestion is at its lowest.

The proposal unveiled in Colorado Springs is actually the latest commissioned by L. Jay Cross, president of the Jets, who was part of the New York delegation to the United States Olympic Committee's national meeting this weekend. Mr. Cross has been quietly showing the designs to state and city officials since the spring, and more recently to real estate developers and others. But in deference to the politically charged nature of the proposal, state officials had urged him not to show it publicly until after Election Day on Tuesday.

On Saturday, Mr. Cross declined to discuss details of the stadium.

The original proposal described a venue that would be used for the opening and closing ceremonies of the Games, as well as for track and field events. The stadium would then serve as both a home for the Jets, which now share a stadium in the New Jersey Meadowlands with the Giants, and as an expansion of the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center, just to the north of the rail yards.

But the chairman of the Javits Center, Robert E. Boyle, said he would not consider the stadium a substitute for what he contends is a badly needed expansion of the convention hall. He favored extending the Javits north to 42nd Street, rather than south to the stadium.

So Mr. Cross went back to the drawing board. He largely abandoned the notion that the stadium would become an addition to the Javits Center, although the latest plan does show an underground connection to the center, which would allow the stadium to be used occasionally for events like boat shows.

Mr. Cross also came up with a new look for the stadium, with a nearly transparent exoskeleton of glass and steel and wind turbines and solar panels to provide power. According to people who have seen the plans, the basic stadium (without the platform it would be built on) would cost about $800 million. The Jets and the N.F.L. have told city officials that they would put up more than $400 million toward the cost; they presumably would borrow the rest.

But Mr. Cross's most elaborate plans call for the building to be used, at separate times, as both a 75,000-seat football stadium and a new Madison Square Garden, which could seat 23,000 for basketball and hockey. He has had promising talks with Cablevision, which owns Madison Square Garden, according to several people familiar with the talks.

Cablevision, however, has told city and state officials that it thinks the property tax exemption that Madison Square Garden received in 1985 would remain in place if it moved to the rail yards. Under that exemption, the city has foregone more than $100 million in taxes, even though the Knicks and the Rangers are among the most valuable franchises in their respective sports.

Many residents of the area around the convention center say they are resigned to its expansion, but remain opposed to a stadium, Olympic or otherwise.

"We are not against the Olympics," said Simone Sindin, chairwoman of Community Board 4, "but we are against the siting of the stadium in Manhattan."

[NYguy]

NY Post...


W. SIDE TEEMS WITH TEAMS

By FRANKIE EDOZIEN, KENNETH LOVETT and IKIMULISA SOCKWELL-MASON

The proposed $1.6 billion West Side Stadium could become home to not just the New York Jets, but to the Rangers and Knicks as well, it was revealed yesterday.

David Cornstein, chairman of the New York State Olympic Commission, told The Post that Gov. Pataki isn't sold on building a stadium solely for the Jets, and that the proposal is more ambitious.

"I know the governor feels strongly about this. You cannot build a stadium for 10 days a year," he said. He described a world-class "tri-sport arena" where football, basketball, hockey and concerts would reign supreme year round.

The revelation came a day after the city won the bid to be the U.S. candidate for hosting the 2012 Summer Olympics.

It had previously been thought that after anchoring the Olympics, a new stadium would serve only as a home for the Jets and an extension of the Javits Convention Center.

"This stadium needs something beyond 10 football games a year. It needs a partner . . . one could be a new Madison Square Garden," Cornstein said.

Among the plans percolating around the stadium idea are: a $1.5 billion transit hub including the extension of the No. 7 train, a $1 billion expansion of Javits and a $229 million Olympic park.

The total tally is estimated at $6.5 billion.

"There's no question in my mind that we'll have the support from the private sector and from others to make sure that if we're chosen as the final designee . . . we'll do it well," Pataki said at a Brooklyn campaign stop.

A bulk of the funding of the project is to come from the sale of bonds, including a $1.5 billion transit bond backed by the promise of increased tax collections on future developments in the area. Cornstein said a goal was for the projects to be done with zero taxpayer dollars.

Still, many are not sold.

"I think the idea of West Side stadium is a bad idea," said Councilwoman Christine Quinn (D-Manhattan). She said similar projects have turned out to be "municipal flops."

Mayor Bloomberg said the plans - including the stadium - were not subject to change and include improvements the city needs anyway.

"We didn't just have a p.r. thing [for the Olympics]. We actually put together a plan of how we would do it," he said.

James Sanders (D-Queens) chairman of the City Council's Economic Development Committee, said the needs of New Yorkers are important.

"The council will step up to the plate and ensure sustainable development," he said.

[NYatKNIGHT]

As a Giants fan I am jealous the Jets will have a brand new stadium in Manhattan, but of course I'm all for it. It's high time that New York starts competing again with smaller cities for our country's major sporting events.

[Stern]

At Saturday's Olympic Comitee decision, a rendering of the new Jets Stadium was shown for the very first time. I would love to see it, if anyone could get a hold of it. Its a KPF design, and from what I hear spectacular.

[NYguy]

Quote: from Stern on 11:56 am on Nov. 4, 2002
a rendering of the new Jets Stadium was shown for the very first time. I would love to see it, if anyone could get a hold of it. Its a KPF design, and from what I hear spectacular.

The proposal unveiled in Colorado Springs is actually the latest commissioned by L. Jay Cross, president of the Jets, who was part of the New York delegation to the United States Olympic Committee's national meeting this weekend. Mr. Cross has been quietly showing the designs to state and city officials since the spring, and more recently to real estate developers and others. But in deference to the politically charged nature of the proposal, state officials had urged him not to show it publicly until after Election Day on Tuesday.

We should be seeing it real soon...

[NYguy]

Newsday...


Olympic Foes Fighting On

By Bryan Virasami

Civic activists in Queens and Manhattan are vowing to intensify their efforts to keep the 2012 Summer Olympics out of New York unless the city scraps plans for a West Side stadium and major alterations to Flushing Meadows-Corona Park.

West Side civic groups said opposition to the games will be stronger in light of Mayor Michael Bloomberg's newly announced support for a stadium over the West Side rail yards even if the city fails to win the 2012 Summer Games.

"There's absolutely no need for a stadium being in that area," said Robert Trentlyon of Community Board 4 in Manhattan. "I understand putting a stadium in places where you need it for economic development but that's not necessary for the West Side."

Maria Garcia of the Chelsea Owners and Tenants for Neighborhood Preservation said many people now oppose the 2012 Summer Games altogether - not just the stadium.

"The mayor is going to have a real fight on his hands," Garcia said.

On Saturday, the U.S. Olympic Committee voted to back New York City as its candidate to host the 2012 Olympic Games.

The decision means New York will have to compete against several foreign cities to host the games. A final decision will be made in 2005.

While many civic groups are behind the mayor's efforts to bring the games to New York for its potential economic benefits, opponents are marshaling their arguments, citing potential traffic, environmental consequences, terrorism concerns and costs.

While community boards in Flushing and Astoria are overwhelmingly in favor of having Flushing Meadows-Corona Park host rowing, canoeing, tennis, swimming and other events, some activists in Queens read only bad news in the glossy NYC2012 brochures.

Patricia Dolan, president of the Kew Gardens Hills Civic Association, is skeptical that the new construction will benefit residents of the borough.

Some of the plans for Flushing Meadows-Corona Park call for the merging of the two man-made lakes, new soccer fields and a new whitewater rafting facility.

"They [will] come in here and rip the heart out of our park and 17 days later they will pack up and go back to Manhattan," Dolan said.

Asked after Saturday's win about community opposition to the Olympics, Bloomberg downplayed its significance.

"Our objective is to get every single New Yorker to sign on to this and in the end I think we will have 99.9 percent on board," he said.

John Fisher, president of the Clinton Special District Coalition, which represents 34th to 59th streets, said NYC2012 and the mayor are downplaying the real financial cost.

"Nobody has a problem with athletes," Fisher said. "But that's not what we're talking about. It's team real estate, not team New York."

Queens Borough President Helen Marshall said she is jubilant about Saturday's decision but is concerned about how long the park would be closed for repairs.

In addition, she has asked organizers to make sure that the 4,400 apartment units in the planned Olympic Village in Long Island City would be affordable for middle-income New Yorkers.

[Evan]

Don't New Yorkers see the benefits of the Olympics??? *The very fact that New York would actually be building on a large scale and making drastic improvements outweighs the "inconvencies" of the Olympics. *The Olympics will force New York to make drastic improvements. *New York will have to build new subway lines and enhance thier existing lines. *New York will have to make better connections between the buroughs, which benefits everyone in the city, and Long Island. *New York will tremendously improve their athletic facilities, including the construction of new stadium that would house the Jets, so its not like its going to waster. *Also, the Jacob Javitz convention center would be expanded,w hich would help the West Side Area, and bring in more conventions to the City. *I am sure that the city would also invest in new parks and recreation sites with all their refurbishing too. *Finally, an Olympic Village at Queens West would be the first step to the development of Long Island City. *How nice would it be fore the city to stop losting jobs to jersey city and Hoboken. *Those same companies could not go across the East River to Long Island City. *

[TAFisher123]

ok, but dont you start complaining when it costs 3.50 to ride the subway and your paying 15% more in income taxes. *It will be privately funded, ok, then we need 1000 companies each to give 6 million each...nyc is in a huge hole right now, where is 5-7 billion going to come from to build all these things, some projects which be useless (canoeing and rowing facility?) when the olympics leave

[NYguy]

Quote: from Evan on 11:33 am on Nov. 5, 2002
Don't New Yorkers see the benefits of the Olympics??? *The very fact that New York would actually be building on a large scale and making drastic improvements outweighs the "inconvencies" of the Olympics. *

Are you serious? *You can't use logic and common sense to argue with NIMBY'S, who's only response to any kind of change, be it positive or negative, is "NIMBY!" *They have a proud tradition of whining about anything and everything. *Just look at the guy I hilighted in the last article.... "I understand putting a stadium in places where you need it for economic development but that's not necessary for the West Side.".....his statement alone is enough not to take these nuts seriously. *Have you ever seen the West Side?

[NYatKNIGHT]

And unfortunately these NIMBYs are giving the impression that that's the attitude of New Yorkers.

[Evan]

Quote: from NYguy on 3:09 pm on Nov. 5, 2002
Quote: from Evan on 11:33 am on Nov. 5, 2002
Don't New Yorkers see the benefits of the Olympics??? *The very fact that New York would actually be building on a large scale and making drastic improvements outweighs the "inconvencies" of the Olympics. *

Are you serious? *You can't use logic and common sense to argue with NIMBY'S, who's only response to any kind of change, be it positive or negative, is "NIMBY!" *They have a proud tradition of whining about anything and everything. *Just look at the guy I hilighted in the last article.... "I understand putting a stadium in places where you need it for economic development but that's not necessary for the West Side.".....his statement alone is enough not to take these nuts seriously. *Have you ever seen the West Side?


LOL. *What I don't understand is that if these NIMBY's are opposed to change, development, improvement, why don't they move the suburbs. *They can then live in an area where the tallest structures are the phone lines. *

[Zoe]

Because moving to the suburbs would also be a change! *
NIMBY's are partially a by-product of the "everyone is a victim" culture that the media and some politicians helped create in our country today. *What rational, well balanced person would complain about the investment of billions of dollars into the redevelopment of their neighborhood that today is marginally better than trash? *I mean seriously, if they are home owners then their property values will go thru the roof, transportation will improve by leaps and bounds, even the schools in the neighborhood would improve over time. *
These people are living in the center of the capitalist world but want everything to stop changing around them. *This is not a very mature or realistic viewpoint. *Their neighborhood will change, whether it happens from the Olympic bid or in 20 years from now, it will change and there is nothing they can do to stop the hands of time. *Luckily for them it will happen within the next 10 years and they will all get to benefit from this change (this reminds me of my parents making me eat my vegetables).

[Stern]

How bout they build the Mets a new stadium, and share it with the Jets?

[Evan]

Quote: from Stern on 5:35 pm on Nov. 5, 2002
How bout they build the Mets a new stadium, and share it with the Jets?

I thought that the Mets were getting a new stadium that would be built in the parking lot of Shea. *

[Edward]

The view of midtown Manhattan (http://www.wirednewyork.com/manhattan/default.htm) and the site of "West Side Olympic complex" from North Hoboken. On the left - construction continues on 10 Times Square (http://www.wirednewyork.com/skyscrapers/10xsq/default.htm). 7 October 2002.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/manhattan/images/manhattan_midtown_hoboken_27oct02.jpg

[Edward]

One more picture taken from the Lincoln Harbor.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/manhattan/images/lincoln_harbor_27oct02.jpg

[chris]

Actually, building a stadium there is a really bad idea. There is no transportation infrastructure to support it, it will most likely cause property value in the neighborhood to go down, not up, and besides, studies have shown that the majority of the target audiance for a sports stadium live in the Queens Brooklyn area anyway. Build it where the fan base is. This is Manhattan. A football stadium on the West side is an atrociously bad idea.

[Eugenius]

Actually, if the stadium is built, then the 7 train will be extended to reach it. *Furthermore, even though the target audience is in Queens and Brooklyn, Manhattan is still the easiest borough to reach from just about everywhere in NY. *Just try going from Queens to Brooklyn using public transportation. *It's a nightmare, and you probably wind up going through Manhattan anyway.

[NYatKNIGHT]

Jet fans from Queens will have an easier time getting to the west side than to the Meadowlands, especially since they'll be able to take a subway there. There are also numerous ferries that already go to Javits, so that's pretty decent transportation, no? In fact, I bet the fan base grows with so many more people being able to take in a Sunday afternoon game.

[NYguy]

Quote: from chris on 1:47 am on Nov. 6, 2002
Actually, building a stadium there is a really bad idea. There is no transportation infrastructure to support it.....and besides, studies have shown that the majority of the target audiance for a sports stadium live in the Queens Brooklyn area anyway.

There is the 7 train extension that was mentioned, which is being done not only for the stadium, but to revitalize that entire neighborhood (Far West Midtown development). Also, the stadium will sit above the LIRR railyards. *If the fanbase from Brooklyn, Queens, and Long Island can make it to Jersey, getting to Manhattan shouldn't be a problem. *And who says residents of Manhattan won't go to a stadium? *Build it, and they will come....

(Edited by NYguy at 2:49 pm on Nov. 6, 2002)

[chris]

Give me a break...

Statistically, two type of people attend live sporting events: families with children (come on son, let's go to the ballpark) and blue collar workers. That's a statistical fact. Single or married without children cosmopolitan professionals don't make a dent. There is a reason why all of our sports stadiums are in one of these areas: That is where the customers are, the burbs or blue collar neighborhoods.

Additionally, I'm not generally a Nimby, you can build whatever residential or commercial towers you want around here, I'm all for it but there are a few things I don't want built blocks away from me: a nuclear power plant, an airport, a prison, or a sports stadium. I own a home in this neighborhood. My life savings is tied up in the value of my home. It is typical that the building of any one of these things will destroy the value of the surrounding residential property. Like others that are opposed to this, in a worst case senario I could lose everything if they build this stupid thing.

Nobody in Manhattan wants it. That is what is so crazy. It is overwhelmingly opposed by the people that actually live here!

If you actually LIVE in Manhattan, or specifically, if you live on the west side then speak-up. If not, then shut the f*ck up. You're just a wanna-be anyway.

(Edited by chris at 3:07 pm on Nov. 6, 2002)

[Eugenius]

As someone who lives in Manhattan (albeit on the East side), I feel I have the right to participate in this debate...

Anyway, if a brand new, architecturally sound, high-tech stadium is built over what is now a barren field of rail lines, and in addition a major subway link is established into what is a grossly underserved area, I don't see how that would bring down property values. *Historically, apartment buildings near subway stops have gone up in value. *Also, a stadium would likely bring along with it a wealth of retailers and restaurants. *That can't be bad as well.

On a different note, I feel that nuclear power plants have unfairly gotten a bad rap. *How can you compare a clean, efficient power plant (less pollution than wind power) to an airport or a prison ;)

[NYatKNIGHT]

I live in Manhattan. How can you say no one wants it - we must live in completely different circles because everyone I know wants one there, whether single, married, with kids, men, women, and not blue collar. I have no idea where you got the statistics about who goes to professional sports, but I am an avid sports fan and season ticket holder for three sports and that is not who I am seeing at these games. To be honest, it's at least as many professionals as blue collar, they have money, and I'm not seeing families from the burbs except at baseball games.

I have lived in other cities where the stadiums are in the heart of town and that is the best! I wish all the stadiums in New York were in Manhattan, how fun would that be? You really do go to events more if they are close by. In cities across America stadiums are being built in the heart of downtowns, and completely revitalizing the neighborhoods like what Coors Field did for Denver, or Camden Yards for Baltimore.

I can't believe you would lose everything Chris, especially since what is there is one of the worst parts of Manhattan - an embarrassing eyesore. The stadium may well save the neighborhood.

(Edited by NYatKNIGHT at 10:38 am on Nov. 7, 2002)

[Edward]

Nuclear power plants are cleaner than coal or gas power plants and do not kill birds like wind farms. They are unpopular because of widespread misconceptions.

I am used to Manhattan property values going only up. I would be curious to know whether ANY area in Manhattan declined in value let's say in the last ten years and a reason for the decline.

And, chris, the forum is open not only to residents of Manhattan, but also to residents of Queens and Brooklyn, illegal aliens and even citizens of some European countries.

[Agglomeration]

"Maria Garcia of the Chelsea Owners and Tenants for Neighborhood Preservation said many people now oppose the 2012 Summer Games altogether - not just the stadium.

"The mayor is going to have a real fight on his hands," Garcia said.

On Saturday, the U.S. Olympic Committee voted to back New York City as its candidate to host the 2012 Olympic Games.

The decision means New York will have to compete against several foreign cities to host the games. A final decision will be made in 2005.

While many civic groups are behind the mayor's efforts to bring the games to New York for its potential economic benefits, opponents are marshaling their arguments, citing potential traffic, environmental consequences, terrorism concerns and costs.

While community boards in Flushing and Astoria are overwhelmingly in favor of having Flushing Meadows-Corona Park host rowing, canoeing, tennis, swimming and other events, some activists in Queens read only bad news in the glossy NYC2012 brochures.

Patricia Dolan, president of the Kew Gardens Hills Civic Association, is skeptical that the new construction will benefit residents of the borough.

Some of the plans for Flushing Meadows-Corona Park call for the merging of the two man-made lakes, new soccer fields and a new whitewater rafting facility.

"They [will] come in here and rip the heart out of our park and 17 days later they will pack up and go back to Manhattan," Dolan said. "


(Get me my barf bag. This is not Copenhagen. These "activists" are turning from NIMBY's to TEDAO's (Tear Everything Down At Once). If they had any more power they would be deliberately tearing down all subways, all shopping districts, all factory areas, and all skyscrapers, including the Chrysler Building. Wake up you TEDAO's! This is not West Side Story!)

(Edited by Agglomeration at 10:12 pm on Nov. 6, 2002)

[NYguy]

Quote: from chris on 3:05 pm on Nov. 6, 2002
Give me a break...There is a reason why all of our sports stadiums are in one of these areas: That is where the customers are, the burbs or blue collar neighborhoods. *Additionally, I'm not generally a Nimby, you can build whatever.......If you actually LIVE in Manhattan, or specifically, if you live on the west side then speak-up. If not, then shut the f*ck up. You're just a wanna-be anyway.

Are you aware that the Giants, Yankees, and Mets all played games at the Polo Grounds? *A stadium in Manhattan? *Are you aware that Madison Square Garden, in the middle of Manhattan no less, is almost always sold out? *You say that you are not a NIMBY, but you sir are the worst kind of NIMBY. *You may own a home in Manhattan, but that doesn't make it your own personal kingdom. *And you had to know that large developments take place in Manhattan all the time, so you sir, gimme a break...

[NYguy]

Daily News...

Mayor tries on one-size-fits-all
W. Side stadium

By MICHAEL SAUL

Officials are considering a new high-tech West Side stadium that can shrink from a massive sports arena into an intimate concert hall with the flip of a switch.

After meeting with the U.S. Olympic Committee yesterday, Mayor Bloomberg said the stadium could be the new home of the New York Jets - and the Rangers and Knicks.

"There's no reason why ... you could not have multiple uses and multiple-size venues within the same building," he said.

An 86,000-seat stadium is a key component of the city's bid to play host to the 2012 Summer Games, but officials say the construction is going ahead regardless of whether New York wins.

The Incredible Shrinking Stadium is based on Japan's Saitama Super Arena, where the walls, ceiling, floors, seats, concession stands - even the plumbing - move.

The arena can be used as a stadium for more than 30,000 soccer fans, an arena for 20,000 or a hall for 5,000. The bathrooms can shift in 20 minutes to match a crowd's male-to-female ratio.

"It's a totally different world," said Dan Doctoroff, deputy mayor for economic development and rebuilding.

David Cornstein, chairman of the state Olympic Games Commission, called a shape-shifting stadium an intriguing idea but added, "The devil is in the details."

Doctoroff estimated the cost of the West Side development - a new stadium, expansion of the Javits Center and extension of the No. 7 subway train - at $3 billion.

He said it would be financed with a combination of private money, largely from the New York Jets, and taxes generated from the development of the surrounding area. Stadium tickets also might carry an extra charge.

[Eugenius]

I am having difficulty believing that a small technological miracle as a shifting stadium in Manhattan will only cost $3BN. *Nevertheless, given the expense of everything else in Manhattan, I think fans would be willing to spend an extra few dollars on tickets to help pay for the cost.

[NYguy]

More from the NIMBYs...
http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/61747.htm

[TheinSiDer]

yes, sadly the cost of the proposed jets stadium will come from out of our pockets, but never the less i can't help but be blinded by such radical proposal to be injected into our new york city fabric. The latest monumental addition, just in time, seeing... we just lost one of our greatest...this stadium will strengthen our cities integrity. it will only aid our lost. Maybe bloomberg's using this to be in the light, but it will not darken our recent tragedy. this project's been on the drawing boards way before 9/11. the lucky sculptors, Kohn Pedersen Fox architects, heads the design, famous for monuments all around the world. with this... i am confident in the outcome of this project

www.kpf.com *

[ZippyTheChimp]

I was originally opposed to the west side stadium plan:
1. The land is too valuable for 8 football games a year.
2. Ticket holders generally drive. Hard to tailgate on the subway.
3. I'm a Giants fan *;)

But a multiuse (shrinkable?) stadium incorporating Javitts Center makes more economic sense.

Any models of the stadium?

[billyblancoNYC]

Can you find the plans on the KPF site? *I thought it was done by someone else.

Anyway, there is nothing bad about this proposal except maybe some extra traffic. *So what - this is Manhattan. *It'll be better than the current MSG traffic, since it is much more remote (by the West Side Highway, etc.).

It, with the Javits expansion (finally) to the North will cause a "boom" in development in a tragically indeveloped slab of Manhattan. *Odd that it has been this long for any real plans to go forth in that area. *

It will be great - there should be a lot of bars, restaurants, hotels, and residences in the area to make it have a real "downtown" feel. *If you've been to Chicago or Boston or Baltimore, etc. you know how great it would be.

Amazing how people in the most dynamic city in, maybe, the world could hate change so much. *Carzy, really.

[TheinSiDer]

my site's down, but if u guys wanna see some pix of what the stadium looks like so far, email me at:

dkpdt@aol.com

the designing of this things still in progress so keep in mind that it may look totally diferent from what it *looks like now

[BrooklynRider]

It seems the chorus of voices opposed to this project is similar to the small loud group of victim's families who believe that if they yell loudest they are somehow right.

A stadium not only in Manhattan, but in this particular location makes great development sense. *It sits atop a transportation hub that draws from every suburb and every borough. *The argument about traffic is not applicable, because a auto transportation is eliminated from the equation by location.

[Derek2k3]

Here are some renderings of it. It looks pretty good.
http://images2.fotki.com/v17/free/c9cc/3/39399/194918/JetsOlympicStadium1KohnPedersenFox-vi.jpg?1044324311
This is from TheinSiDer. Thanks by the way. The big version is here. \http://images2.fotki.com/v17/free/c9cc/3/39399/194918/JetsOlympicStadium1KohnPedersenFox-or.jpg

Some other renderings from AIANY. *\http://www.aiany.org
http://www.aiany.org/designawards/2002/project/jpegs/282a.jpg
http://www.aiany.org/designawards/2002/project/jpegs/282b.jpg
http://www.aiany.org/designawards/2002/project/jpegs/282c.jpg

Thanks to KPF.

[billyblancoNYC]

That's pretty f***in nice. *That would look great on the water. *Plus, it could be a Javits addition (plus going North), a home for the Jets, Knicks, Rangers, maybe the MetroStars and will be able to host all those mega concerts that go to Nassau and the Meadowlands now.

I can't see how this is bad for the city, really.

[Stern]

Great looking stadium.

[TLOZ Link5]

oooh, gorgeous.

[Derek2k3]

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1840&dept_id=112392&newsid=6945604&PA G=461&rfi=9

Chelsea residents vow to fight city on stadium

By: Albert Amateau February 05, 2003




A few hours after Mayor Bloomberg on Jan. 23 outlined his vision for the west side of Midtown - including an Olympic stadium, high-rise office towers and an expanded Javits Convention Center, Chelsea residents and elected officials vowed to resist the plan they fear would overwhelm their neighborhood.

More than 60 residents ventured out in the freezing weather to gather at P.S. 33 in Chelsea to denounce both the proposal for a stadium to serve the 2012 Olympics and the Jets football franchise and for an extension of the No. 7 subway line to 10th Ave. as a wasteful use of public funds.

"The stadium is being foisted on a community that doesn't want it," said Kathy Kinsella, a Democratic district leader who moderated the forum.

Assemblymember Richard Gottfried, State Sen. Tom Duane and City Councilmember Christine Quinn ridiculed the Bloomberg administration's view that the redevelopment area - roughly between 24th and 43rd Sts. from Eighth Ave. to the Hudson River - is "dead space."

"Deputy Mayor Daniel Doctoroff described it as a place where nothing happens and City Planning says that only 150 people live in the area - they're describing my district," said Quinn. The population estimate of 150 might apply to three blocks directly across from the rail yards, but it's absurd considering the proposed redevelopment area, Quinn declared. "The planning is for tourism, sports and entertainment and there's no planning for housing or schools," she added.

City Planning has scheduled a Feb. 10 hearing at 6 p.m. at the Javits Convention Center, Hall 1E, on the proposal, known as the Hudson Yards Master Plan. Quinn noted that the stadium and redevelopment plan must go through the city Uniform Land-Use Review Procedure, with final review by the City Council, a process that takes at least seven months. "We need to involve other neighborhoods and boroughs because the City Council is where the plan could be stopped," said Quinn. Elected officials also denounced the Tax-Increment Funding proposal to pay for the subway extension and part of the stadium with future taxes based on the enhanced value of the redeveloped neighborhood.

"The city is looking to take future tax revenue for the No. 7 line extension and for the billion-dollar platform over the rail yards for the stadium - that's money that won't be used for city services," said Gottfried. "Not a single constituent has ever said we need the subway extension - subways have always been a development tool. We want people to come to the West Side, but not tens of thousands of them who want to party after a football game," he said.

Gottfried said the No. 7 subway extension would "have a devastating impact" on the Second Ave. subway proposed for the East Side. "We have a good shot at defeating [the No. 7 line extension] because [Assembly Speaker] Sheldon Silver's district includes the Second Ave. line," Gottfried suggested.

Duane also criticized the Tax-Increment Funding proposal. "I don't want to see future taxes go to support overdevelopment," he said. "We need a movement like the one that stopped Westway," he added, referring to the defeat in 1985 of the $4 billion federal landfill-and-highway project along the Hudson River between the Battery and 59th St.

Joseph Rappaport, a former policy analyst with the New York Public Interest Research Group and the Straphangers' Campaign and currently with the Transport Workers Union, said there have been no studies to show the benefits of a No. 7 line extension. He contended the extended track would have curves that would force trains to go slowly and result in fewer trains per hour on the line which links Flushing and Shea Stadium with Manhattan.

John Fisher, a founder of the Clinton Special District Coalition, said the stadium and redevelopment proposal would add 20 million sq. ft. of office space and allow for 30 high-rise office buildings. "There is now 44 million sq. ft. of vacant space in Manhattan, about 14 million of it Downtown," Fisher added.

The Bloomberg administration's view of the Hudson Yards and stadium proposal is on the City Planning Web site, reachable through www.nyc.gov.

The forum was sponsored by the Chelsea Reform Democratic Club.


He acts like the towers will be built next week. All 150 of them are fools. I can't believe they are even trying to stop the 7 line.

[Evan]

Is there any area in the city that welcomes development??? *I don't think those residents have much of a chance to kill the plans. *How 150 people have more say than the entire metro area of NYC is unfathomable. *The whole metro area would benefit from a stadium and an expanded Javitz Convention Center. *Having the Jets, Rangers, and Knicks in brand new stadiums will fetch more revenue for the city, especially because the Jets were in Jersey. *The Knicks and Rangers are horrible. *If they get a new stadium, fans might come out to see them again. *The Javitz center is too small for major conventions. *Making it bigger will bring more and bigger conventions to the city. *Hotels will see more occupancy, and the city will beneift from having more tourists who like to buy things.

[billyblancoNYC]

Obviously, Evan, you have a problem.

The problem is that you think with your head NOT up your a**, just spewing logic left and right.

Why would the city not want to develop all that land, it's much better serving the area as garages, warehouses, and vacant buildings and lots. *Why would you want to a world class facility bringing in all these taxes and development. *

Why can't Manhattan go back to the days before it was bought for $24 - ahhh, the good life.

[NYguy]

A little more on the stadium...
http://real.ny1.com:8080/ramgen/real3/000403A9_030206_171138hi.rm
http://real.ny1.com:8080/ramgen/real3/000403A9_030206_171138lo.rm

[Evan]

Quote: from billyblancoNYC on 11:22 am on Feb. 7, 2003
Obviously, Evan, you have a problem.

The problem is that you think with your head NOT up your a**, just spewing logic left and right.

Why would the city not want to develop all that land, it's much better serving the area as garages, warehouses, and vacant buildings and lots. *Why would you want to a world class facility bringing in all these taxes and development. *

Why can't Manhattan go back to the days before it was bought for $24 - ahhh, the good life.


LOL billyblancoNYC. *That was excellent satire!!!

[NYguy]

New Jets Stadium on West Side?
NPR, January 29, 2003
by Fred Mogul

The New York Jets have released drawings for a proposed West Side stadium almost covertly. You have to go to a museum in Washington to see them. The proposed stadium wouldn't just be Jets green,' it would be the country's first environmentally green arena, too - complete with solar cells, wind turbines and rain catchers. WNYC's Fred Mogul takes a look at the plans.

The High-Line is a weedy, abandoned overpass -- a linear vacant lot that connects the West Village's old meatpacking district with the midtown rail-yards near the Javits Convention Center. It's been years since anyone has used it to ship meat and produce uptown, but if architect Bill Pedersen has his way

Pedersen: we can potentially integrate the High Line into the movement system of the stadium and bring people into the stadium on the High Line itself. And drawing the character of the High Line and drawing the physical aspect of the High Line into the design of the stadium was a very important consideration for us in the design for us.

Can you integrate a glistening 75,000-seat stadium into a gritty urban neighborhood and a proposed riverside park? Pedersen and his team at Kohn Pedersen Fox & Associates started with the old ocean-liner piers nearby, that jut into the Hudson.

Pedersen: And those piers have a very specific architectural language, which is predominantly a steel skeleton which arises high above the body of the pier and forms two very strong parallel walls extending out into the Hudson river. In many respects, we can almost think of it as an inland pier.

The proposed stadium on 11th Avenue and 32nd Street also echoes the George Washington Bridge, and its gauzey screens of interlocking beams and girders. But Pedersen wants this 20-story-high rectangular box to be both industrial and natural. What landed his plans in a new exhibit called Big n' Green, at the National Building Museum in Washington, is the stadium's environmental sensitivity.

Pedersen: We believe that this building has the potential to be a power plant as opposed to just a consumer of energy, and we're able to generate energy from sustainable sources.

The retractable-roof stadium would have solar tubes for heat; large, channeled roofs for collecting water; and photo-voltaic cells to produce electricity -- which would also be generated by a series of wind turbines -- two long horizontal rows of slowly-twisting fan blades extending the length of the stadium sides. Pedersen says these will make the structure kinetic. Architectural motion' is one thing, but local neighborhood activist John Fisher is concerned about another kind of activity: traffic.

Fisher: That's 10,000 cars, and that's the Jets' own study that predicted that, on a Sunday afternoon. That's the quiet time for this neighborhood. During the rest of the week, we're inundated with gridlock, day in, day out.

Fisher thinks the Jets are using environmentalism to sell a controversial project. He's concerned that the stadium will be used much more than eight autumn Sundays a year. There are plans that would temporarily expand it into an Olympic stadium in 2012, and regularly contract it into an indoor arena that could someday replace Madison Square Garden. Its palatial floor could be used as an expansion for the Javits Convention Center, if Mayor Bloomberg has his way. Felix Bermudez lives two blocks away, and as far as he's concerned, the more activity, the better.

Bermudez: It's NYC, it's part of our life -- the traffic the noise the blowing of the horn everything congested. That's us. That's New York. That's how we live. That's how we get along. And I'm all for it, and hopefully I get an offer for my apartment from some rich millionaire.

The City planning department is holding a meeting on the Hudson Yards area at the Javits Center on February 10, a week from Monday. Approval for the stadium and the extended neighborhood-development plans -- if approval comes -- will take months, or even years. And if Pedersen's creation does gets built, it will be interesting to see how much of the artist's rendering - and his vision -- remains.

For WNYC, I'm Fred Mogul.

Find out more about the Hudson Yards from the City Planning Dept. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/hyards/hymain.html

Visit "Big and Green" at the National Building Museum
http://www.nbm.org/Exhibits/current/Big_and_Green.html

[billyblancoNYC]

Thank God for the Bermudez-s of the world!

[dbhstockton]

From http://www.nyobserver.com

After a Huddle, Jets Start Rush For West Side

by Greg Sargent With Tom McGeveran

The Jets are preparing to launch an all-out political and public-relations blitz designed to build support for their plan to move to a new stadium on the West Side of Manhattan, The Observer has learned.

The team has hired Bill Lynch, the veteran Democratic operative, former deputy mayor and long-suffering Jets fan, to help win over elected officials, community leaders and members of the city’s labor elite. The Jets have also commissioned a poll designed to create a detailed profile of New Yorkers’ attitudes towards a new stadium, making it easier for the team to market the idea.

"In the next few months, we’re going to put on the full-court press," Mr. Lynch said in an interview with The Observer. "We’re going to win support from one end of the city to the other."

The poll, which is currently being conducted among likely voters in New York, will also help the team counter the campaign that in coming months will inevitably be waged by community opposition groups. Many of them are already mobilizing to block the plan, even as some midtown real-estate developers—such as Douglas Durst, the builder of the Condé Nast building—are publicly questioning its financing scheme.

The stadium is part of a broader proposal, unveiled by the Bloomberg administration on Feb. 10, which would include a sports facility, an expansion of the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center, and a host of other amenities on the west side between 42nd and 28th streets. But it’s the stadium that has fired up the opposition.

So the Jets are planning an intense effort to win public support. Jets coach Herm Edwards, and possibly Chad Pennington, the young, rookie quarterback who carried the Jets into the playoffs, are expected to play a role. Mr. Edwards is being honored on Feb. 27 before a group of top New York City executives organized by the Association for a Better New York and 100 Black Men of America, a national group devoted to helping African Americans. While the Jets’ future location won’t be the focus of his remarks, Mr. Edwards is expected to tell his audience that he’d love to bring the team back to New York. Mr. Lynch said he’d advise the Jets to get Mr. Edwards and Mr. Pennington to promote the idea in speeches or in visits to community groups.

"We want to build on the success the Jets had last year," said Mr. Lynch, who reports to Jay Cross, the President of Jets Development, which was set up to build the new facility. "With the rise of Chad Pennington, there’s a buzz out there in the city about the Jets," Mr. Lynch continued, "and I think the team ought to capitalize on that. We will develop an outreach campaign that relies on the general goodwill that the Jets have provided. I want everyone to be wearing a Jets cap in this city. I want New York to become Jets-town."

The team has been discussing sending out mailings promoting the stadium plan to season ticket holders, and according to sources, the Jets organization is discussing a possible a media campaign similar to the one used by the city last year to entice the Olympics to come to New York, which included mailings and TV ads.

Mr. Lynch is hardly the only person involved in the campaign. Others include high-profile public relations men John Marino and Dan Klores, as well as a team of consultants operating out of Albany who are charged with lobbying the Governor’s office. But it’s Mr. Lynch who will have the extremely difficult task of winning over local elected officials and grass-roots leaders. Mr. Lynch, who helped engineer the rise of David Dinkins, has extensive credibility for many of these leaders. The question is whether this will prove at all persuasive to opponents of the project, many of whom harbor a suspicion of vast capital projects that was forged during the struggle against Westway a generation ago.

Critics Lash Out

Indeed, some opponents are already casting the Jets’ nascent lobbying efforts as those of an all-powerful corporate entity bent on subverting the will of the community.

"It seems somewhat unfair that the Jets are going to dump all of their corporate resources into this when they are up against unfunded community groups who are just trying to protect their neighborhood and fight for responsible development," said Council member Christine Quinn of the West Side. "That said, I’d still bet on the West Side residents."

Enter Mr. Lynch, a lifelong New Yorker and Jets fan, whose reputation will be key to making the case that the facility will be friendly to the neighborhood, bringing prosperity and new amenities to a district of grimy warehouses and vast, empty thoroughfares.

"We have to make sure this is not seen as a project that’s being forced down the community’s throat," Mr. Lynch said. "We want to get the message out that this will be community-friendly. That’s going to be key."

The plan for a Jets facility in Manhattan is at the center of a vast proposal that would require billions of dollars in public investment. It calls for a string of new office towers across 11th Avenue from an expanded Jacob K. Javits Convention center. It would include parkland, mixed income housing, a waterfront esplanade, ferry terminals, hotels and a new tree-lined boulevard. The number 7 train would be extended from Times Square to 34th Street and 11th Avenue.

The new stadium—which would be home to the Jets and, possibly, the Olympics, should it come to New York in 2012—would be built on a huge platform atop the rail yards in the west 30s. While the Jets would pay for much of the stadium, the city and state would put up the money to build the platform.

Some elements of the project—which needs City Council approval and relies heavily on state investment—have already stirred fierce opposition from west side residents and local politicians. Some groups fear the destruction of local housing, while others are afraid that congestion will discourage visitors to the nearby theater district.

Meanwhile, some state officials and real estate developers are questioning whether the new office towers will succeed in generating enough revenue to help finance the rest of the development. They are wondering if the plan will go belly up and force the taxpayers to bail it out.

"The Jets have done a great job of listening to all the interested parties, and the physical plan is very well thought out," said Mr. Durst, the real estate developer, whose family owns a number of office towers in midtown. "However, I don’t understand the economics. I don’t see how you project demand for 30 million square feet of office space. If they are going to finance it with revenues from those rentals, it seems to me to be a very risky approach. It’s possible that they could end up with some of the financing, but go bust. Then what would happen?"

Mr. Bloomberg and deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff have already undertaken an intense, behind-the-scenes effort to win support for the proposal among business, labor and civic leaders. In speeches and in private briefings, the Mayor has been telling these leaders that the city’s finances are in terrible shape and that the city’s future depends on its ability to grow its way out of the crisis. The west side plan, the Mayor has been saying, is key to that effort.

Now the Jets are launching their own effort. Mr. Lynch has been lobbying public officials throughout the city, many of whom know and trust him from past campaigns. Mr. Lynch’s love of the team is driving his efforts—he has been a fan since the 1960s, when Joe Namath was wearing Brut and throwing passes into the wind at Shea Stadium, and these days, his 27-year-old daughter sports a jersey featuring the name and number of Curtis Martin, the Jets’ All-Pro running back. The Jets moved from Shea in 1984 when the team’s then-owner, Leon Hess, complained about conditions at the stadium, especially, he said, the overflowing toilets in the men’s bathrooms.

Mr. Lynch said that he believed that New Yorkers would support the new Jets stadium, which presumably will feature the latest in bathroom technology. That prediction is supported by two polls the Jets commissioned in the past to gauge public backing—one in 2001 and the other in 2000. One survey, Mr. Lynch said, noted that in 1984 the Jets moved from Shea Stadium to New Jersey, and asked if the Jets should come back to New York. Sixty-five percent said yes.

The new poll commissioned by the team is intended both to gauge whether that support is still there and how support and opposition breaks down by race, age and other demographic categories. "We’re trying to find out the reasons people support or oppose the proposal," Mr. Lynch said. "That will enable us to make the case."

In the end, Mr. Lynch hopes to emulate teams who built stadiums in San Francisco, Toronto and London, where, he said, the projects were largely embraced by the local populations. "In these economic times," Mr. Lynch said, "we should create a big project that is both community friendly and helpful to the economic health of the city."

You may reach Greg Sargent and Tom McGeveran via email at: gsargent@observer.com and tmcgeveran@observer.com.

[Derek2k3]

I remember reading that one of 150 people who live there wants a height limit of 66 feet for the West side ...I hope that whore's house is the first to be demolished for a 100 story skyscraper. Then she can decide if the cardboard box she'll be living in is consistent with the neighborhood.

[JMGarcia]

Christine Quinn is against everything. There has never, ever been a proposal she has been in favor of in her entire tenure in public life.

[DominicanoNYC]

The Jets need to come to their REAL home any way. I'm a Jets fan and I've really wanted to see the game live instead of in TV.

[JerzDevl2000]

JMGarcia - Agreed 100%. I get the Hell's Kitchen mailing list and I can vouch for her Super-Nimby attitude.

These times, they are a changing! West Siders can admit it, or lose the growth to another part of town.

[dbhstockton]

Those NIMBY's that own property in the area won't be complaining if they ever decide to sell or utilize their equity. *Shit, if I had the resources, I'd start buying up properties in the area. *I know someone who bought a townhouse in the west 40's in the 1980's. * Needless to say, the return on that investment has been astronomical. *There is a nice traditional nyc brownstone neighborhood in Hell's Kitchen (I'll never get used to "Clinton"). *It was already on its way to becoming and upscale traditional nyc brownstone neighborhood before all this talk of developing the Hudson Yards. *

[NYguy]

NY Post...
WEST SIDE LANDING
By ROBERT HARDT Jr.

March 1, 2003 -- The New York Jets yesterday unveiled their blueprint for a $1.2 billion retractable-domed football stadium on Manhattan's West Side - but don't expect to have a tailgate party there.

Jets President Jay Cross said the 85,000-seat stadium - which could also be used for the 2012 Olympics, conventions and rock concerts - won't have any additional parking spaces in the area for the thousands of Gang Green fans.

"We're not building parking," Cross said at a conference at Baruch College, where he unveiled elaborate drawings of the football stadium that would be built above the railyards near the Hudson River.

The Jets honcho estimated that only about 7,300 cars would come into Manhattan for one of the team's eight regular-season home games - a far cry from the 30,000 cars that park in the Meadowlands at Giants Stadium for football games.

"I don't think there is a potential site in the entire world that has more transit," said Cross, who estimated that 70 percent of the 85,000 fans would take trains or ferries to get to the games.

New Jersey fans will be able to take ferries across the Hudson River to help alleviate traffic - which is one of the biggest concerns of many local residents who are opposed to the project.

The stadium is part of Mayor Bloomberg's vision of redeveloping the West Side - which would include an extension of the No. 7 train, an expansion of the Javits Center and the creation of new office space in the barren neighborhood.

The Jets - whose current lease at Giants Stadium expires in 2008 - have said they would pay for most of the stadium if the city and state would build a $250 million concrete deck over the railyards on which the arena would sit.

The site had been previously eyed by officials of the New York Yankees when they sought to relocate to Midtown.

Cross said that the arena - which he called the "New York Sports and Convention Center" - would not greatly add to traffic congestion in the neighborhood because the team would play on Sundays.

But Cross outlined a "multi-use, multi-audience" program for the stadium that included arena rock concerts, conventions and theater productions.

Cross also said the stadium could host the NCAA's Final Four of basketball and an annual Big Apple bowl game for college football.

While the Bloomberg administration and many business leaders were immediately bullish on the Jets plans, several people at the conference immediately opposed it.

"The neighborhood needs to be developed - but not at this scale, not at this density, and not to this degree," said Joe Restuccia, a member of Community Board 4, which includes the West Side.
.................................................. ..................

Here's a rendering from the Post...

http://www.pbase.com/image/13798806/large

http://www.pbase.com/image/13798803

[Evan]

Quote: from NYguy on 8:05 am on Mar. 1, 2003
The Jets - whose current lease at Giants Stadium expires in 2008 - have said they would pay for most of the stadium if the city and state would build a $250 million concrete deck over the railyards on which the arena would sit.

This should allay some of the complaints that the city is gratuitously spendind during times of big deficits. *Hopefully the West Side Opposition will be stifled.

[Anonymous]

I heard about that stadium so this is not new to me.

[Stern]

Also notice the large commercial buildings. This could very well become the heart of New York City, revitalize the city as a whole. I however feel this is a vision that won't be substancizied.

[dbhstockton]

Man, I hate that west-side highway. *Seeing that little strip of trees in the rendering where a highway should be just reminded me. *The NIMBY's that defeated Westway must love it when they roller-blade past my car as I idle in traffic.

[Thomas]

This will be a huge success, and kudos to Mr Woody Johnson and the Jets for coming up with the money.

The transportation links will be vast, from the bottom rendering it looks like a nice ferry terminal connected to the stadium, plus LIRR, NJ Transit, #7 train, Amtrak and eventually Metro North via the West Side Connector.

[ddny]

Quote: from NYguy on 11:05 am on Mar. 1, 2003[

Here's a rendering from the Post...

http://www.pbase.com/image/13798806/large

http://www.pbase.com/image/13798803


I don't like the look of the stadium. Who is designing it?

[Kris]

KPF. It's not spectacular for an Olympic Stadium, but it seems elegant and refined (albeit simple and conventional). I'd like to see detailed plans and descriptions.

[dbhstockton]

Apparantly there's a lot of high-tech environmental design going in to it. *I think they're saying that it has the potential to generate power as well as host stadium functions.

It is disapointingly square. *Stadiums are often an opportunity for cities to put up something trully futuristic and UFO-like, but KPF took the safe route.

[ddny]

Are there chances for modifications of the design? You're right...it's too square for me.

[Kris]

Well, its construction won't start before a while. I do like the transparencies. It looks rather open to the river and the city.

[Fountainhead]

Interesting design, looks pretty good. How does it fit into the NYC 2012 overall plan? It looks like it would just host football and possibly arena-size events like basketball if used for the olympics......the stadium is too small to accommodate an athletics track even with moving tiers. There does not seem to be much space beside it for other venues, warm up facilites etc. I am guessing that the venues for the 2012 bid would be spread out all over the city, and not just in a single location?? Does anybody know if any other details of the bid are public right now?

[Evan]

Quote: from Fountainhead on 5:36 am on Mar. 3, 2003
Interesting design, looks pretty good. How does it fit into the NYC 2012 overall plan? It looks like it would just host football and possibly arena-size events like basketball if used for the olympics......the stadium is too small to accommodate an athletics track even with moving tiers. There does not seem to be much space beside it for other venues, warm up facilites etc. I am guessing that the venues for the 2012 bid would be spread out all over the city, and not just in a single location?? Does anybody know if any other details of the bid are public right now?

The pictures in the post were just renderings. *The real stadium will look different and probably have more features. *The stadium could also be modified for the oympics with temporary additions. *This project is till a couple of years off because the Jets lease at Giants stadium doesn't end until 2008.

[Fountainhead]

Thanks Evan, I am particularly interested in this project because I am an architect in a firm that specializes in stadia! I am currently working on a design competition for the main olympic stadium in Beijing (100K seats in olympic mode), and I am always keen to see what is coming up! It just seems like this stadium is not envisaged to host athletics, as it is being designed primarily for football - so I was just wondering what other stadia are planned to be used for the NY games bid, as it takes more than just one stadium to host an olympics:)

[Thomas]

Stadiums can be altered , Turner Field in Atlanta was the Venue for the 1996 Olympics. After the Games the fiedl was altered to make it a baseball stadium for the Atlanta Braves.

[billyblancoNYC]

Fountainhead....

www.nyc2012.com

[TonyO]

I used to live in Seattle and was adamantly against the new Mariner's baseball stadium there. *It was largely publicly financed and pretty much forced down the throats of the public (as most things are). *I was completely against it at the time.

After it was built, however, I changed my tune. *It was amazing...and a great place to see a game. *It was worth it, and I was wrong.

Here, there are different issues of course. * This stadium appears to have a major financer - good. *It is not going to require the major destruction of standing buildings, because it is being placed over rail yards. *It is a huge boost to a NYC olympic bid.

I don't live in that neighborhood, but I've been through it many times. *It sure looks like it would be an improvement.

Its so interesting to hear people living there complain about increased traffic! *It's the center of the city! *That's what the infrastructure was built for - traffic.

[Anonymous]

If built it will be the new home for the NY Jets after the Olympics, though I wouldn't care much b/c I don't really follow any football.

[Fountainhead]

Quote: from billyblancoNYC on 11:48 am on Mar. 3, 2003
Fountainhead....

www.nyc2012.com


now, it all makes sense!!

thanks:)

[chris]

Nice alias, Fountainhead.
You also could have called yourself Howard Roark.

Welcome to the board.

[VeritecF]

yea everybody got the fountainhead reference chris. *

don't be ostentatious.

[chris]

Me ostentatious?

As your 2nd post ever to the forum you "confront" a longstanding member over the phrasing of how I choose to politely greet another new member... and then label me the ostentatious one. That's rich!

No, you're not ostentatious pal, you're an _ _ _ _ _ _ _.



(Edited by chris at 3:45 pm on Mar. 5, 2003)

[Stern]

hey now...

Lets not get riled up, we're all friends here.

[chris]

I see dbhstockton called this other newby a sh*thead on another recent post. dbhstockton is well respected on the board. Should I use that as precedence, and change my blanks back to @sshole, or should I leave it alone? I also noticed Edward recently admonished NYC4ever for posting BULLSHI* on another thread... but he didn't remove the post or ask him to edit it...

Sorry, I just couldn't resist. You're a good man Stern.

[dbhstockton]

Yeah, I may have been a little hard on tonyo, but the tone of this board had just been getting more and more juvenile. *I just snapped.

[VeritecF]

you should be flattered by my honesty chris. *honesty is one of the few signs of respect.

and btw, i do not confront "a longstanding member." *i simply make a statement to another member. *the validity of the statement is irrelevant to the status of the number of posts said member has made.

[Fountainhead]

WHOA.....peace guys:) I don't want to change my alias to "Firestarter";)

[chris]

you should be flattered by my honesty chris. *honesty is one of the few signs of respect.

and btw, i do not confront "a longstanding member." *i simply make a statement to another member. *the validity of the statement is irrelevant to the status of the number of posts said member has made.

Back-peddle if you wish.

You earn the respect of your peers by participation. With only 2 posts, your line of credit on respect hasn't even been established yet. Your current account balance is effectively in overdraft. Members that have hundreds of posts have a long line of credit to draw against. An occassional flippant remark draws little against the balance of a longstanding member: As a percentage of total participation, it will account for less than 1% of total forum participation. As only your 2nd post, that makes 50% of your participation that of an @sshole.

As for Fountainhead, from one Ayn Rand fan to another, I merely wished to welcome you to the board with a comment establishing common ground. I hope this unfortunate incident doesn't misrepresent to you the atmosphere of this forum.

I have nothing else to say on the matter.

[VeritecF]

i was not back-peddling, but rather simply stating a fact. *however you choose to see that is your own decision. *as to your grand analogy, it is again irrelevent to anything of a factual nature in terms of the validity of any of my statements. *if you disagree with me, perhaps you should re-read some of your Ayn Rand, because you seem to have missed some key points.

however, you are correct in that ones respect must be earned only through ones thoughts and actions. *which is one of the reasons i am always honest. *for that respect, self and otherwise, is part of the selfish nature of honesty. *

and i won't respond to any comments of vulgarity, it only insults you.

but perhaps you are right, that the matter is one best laid to rest.

[NYguy]

A look at the railyards, site of the potential new stadium...

http://www.pbase.com/image/14195853

http://www.pbase.com/image/14195869

[dbhstockton]

You can see the start of the High Line on the right of the second photo, if anyone cares.

[billyblancoNYC]

What a shame to mess up that wonderful area with new parks, towers, and a stadium.

[Stern]

lol... I know you are joking.

The highline is incorporated into this proposal. I love this new type of master planning.

[Fountainhead]

That is an incredibly huge and complex area to build over. The only similar situation that I can think of is Federation Square, which was built over a railyard in Melbourne and recently opened at the end of 2002.

http://www.federationsquare.com

http://www.bonaccigroup.com/Images/fedsqdeck.jpg

http://www.mybestlife.com/Ambientecostruito/4-2000/immagine2.jpg

http://www.theage.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1034561542568_2002/10/23/fed1,0.jpg

The architects, LAB Architecture Studio
http://www.labarchitecture.com
worked for Daniel Liebskind as students, before winning this project as their first commission!!

[JMGarcia]

I had always said to myself that Fed. Sq. looks a lot like Libeskind could have done it except its slighty different in form. Its a bit more globular where as Libeskind himself is a bit more angular.

I really like Fed. Sq. though. Its an excellent addition to Melbourne.

[Kris]

http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2003/03/30/realestate/30COV.468.jpg
Rendering of the proposed Jets stadium shows the two panels making up the retractable roof.

[TLOZ Link5]

Ugh, I don't like the renderings of the new buildings near the new stadium. *I know that they're just for massing purposes and won't be of that design, but there's too many rectangles...it looks like Pyongyang.

[Evan]

Looks Great!!!

[Edward]

The view of midtown Manhattan (http://www.wirednewyork.com/manhattan/default.htm) and the site of "West Side Olympic complex" from Hudson river. On the left - construction continues on 10 Times Square (http://www.wirednewyork.com/skyscrapers/10xsq/default.htm). 9 March 2003.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/manhattan/olympic/jets_stadium_west_side_olympic_9march2003.jpg

[Kris]

http://www.kpf.com/Projects/jets.htm

[chris]

Thanks Christian,

The renderings of the stadium on the KPF site are much more flattering (as could only be expected) than the others I've seen.

http://www.kpf.com/images/Projects/Jets/n1379%203001z.jpg

[chris]

I know this posting is too little too late (it's going on right now)... but I'm not crazy about the stadium anyway, right? This is the sort of NIMBY activism I spoke of. From my former involvement in the block association I frequently get forwarded this sort of stuff from one of these Socialist political action groups.

-----------

> From: "Councilmember Christine C. Quinn"
>
> Subject: TOMORROW NITE IMPORTANT STADIUM HEARING
>
> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 18:17:20 -0400
>
> *
>
> *
>
> Tomorrow, June 5th their will be an important public meeting co-hosted
> by both the City Planning Commission and the Metropolitan Transportation
> Authority regarding their proposed West Side Stadium and other large
> scale development in Hell's Kitchen, known as the Hudson Yards Plan.
> This important meeting will involve public testimony and is being held
> in our community in the evening.
> *
> *
> WHAT: City Planning/MTA Public Hearing Re: Proposed West Side Stadium
> and Hudson Yards Plan
> *
> WHEN: Thursday, June 5th at 6:00 pm
> *
> WHERE: Fashion Institute of Technology (FIT) Haft Audotirum - Bldg C on
> 27th Street b/t 7th & 8th Aves
> *
> *
> It is critical that we have a large community turnout to show the City
> Administration that we do not want a stadium
> in our neighborhood. The administration is telling people that only a
> hundred or so residents will be effected by the proposed stadium and
> development. To counter this falsehood, we need a large turnout of local
> residents and businesses to show that their are, in fact, many many more
> people that will be negatively affected.

[JMGarcia]

Christy Quinn. The mother of all NIMBYs. Blah!

[Jack Ryan]

That stadium reminds me of the Port Authority bus terminal.

[TLOZ Link5]

The Port Authority Terminal is to buses what Penn Station is to trains. *It ought to be remodeled.

[chris]

I just had this forwarded to me. If you really want to find your enemy, attend this:

> From: "Housing Conservation Coordinators"
> Reply-To:
> Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:56:32 -0400
> To:
>
> HELL‚S KITCHEN/HUDSON YARDS ALLIANCE
> to
> Fight the Stadium and Protect Our Neighborhood!
>
>
> KEEP INFORMED! · GET INVOLVED! · MAKE YOUR OPINION KNOWN!
>
> Attend the next
>
> GENERAL MEETING
>
> of the
> Hell‚s Kitchen/Hudson Yards Alliance
>
> DATE: * * Thursday, June 19, 2003
> TIME: * * 7:00 PM
> PLACE: * * Metro Baptist Church
> 410 W. 40th Street (between 9th and Dyer Aves)

[Evan]

Does Housing Conservation Coordinators have a reason for the fighting the stadium??? *It just seems to me that these people want to be heard and to feel important. *

[chris]

The main gripe I hear is:
It is going to create huge congestion problems in an area that already has traffic congestion problems. I live in this area and happen to agree with that point. I also think that, on the night of games, it is going to attract and undesirable crowd to the neighborhood (see my previous post).

Other concerns that factions in this group have are:

The zoning for the neighborhood (including height restrictions) are being/have been changed to accommodate this development. I think that is a positive thing. I'm pro business growth, I just don't think this is the right place for a stadium.

Among the oposition, there are a LOT of elderly people (little old ladies)... among any of these anti-development groups that are opposed to any kind of change. It's the "nostalgia factor".

The group that is responsible for organizing all of this is a small handful of women affiliated with the American Socialist Workers Party. They don't put their name on anything, but the core group of organizers are members. They also have ties with a city council woman named Christine Quinn. Mostly they are rabidly anti Capitalist and they see all developers as "Greedy Capitalist" that must be stopped in all their pursuits. It's a bizarre ideological thing. Amazing that they don't seemed concerned about all the "Workers" that are employed by the construction industry.

[billyblancoNYC]

Or the stadium for that matter. *

I can see how traffic might be an issue, but look at MSG, they survive (albeit on a smaller scale). *

It's just good for the city - olympics or not. *They'll have ferries, the 7, maybe commuter rails, too. *

It just bothers me that so many people (or at least so many loud people) never want anything built or improved. *Do they LIVE in a field? *No, at one point, someone built their dwelling, causing increased traffic, etc. *It's just life, expecially in the capital of the world. *

It's revenue, a bit of prestige, jobs, a draw to the area, and GOOD for NYC. *I keep referring to how great Wrigley(ville) is in CHI. *All the bars, restaurants, activity in that area. *NYC needs something like that. *NYC needs a football team and a venue for major events and concerts. *This is it. *It's on the west side on the water, by the highway, out of the way of most things.

They just need to do it, already. *

[chris]

I wish it were in a different location, but I'm not fighting it. I think the Olympics would be a really great thing for New York.

[JerzDevl2000]

Way to expose those socialists Chris! One of these days, the West Side will get one of those "greedy capitalists" as a rep. and that'll be the end if it. I bet the people who used to live on 6th Ave. in the 1950's felt bad that they're pristine neighborhood had to give way to the "overdevelopment" on it now!

I'd sooner take a REAL development than the Olympics for the next 20 years. New York city's population could be over 10 million by 2020. A new stadium on the west side won't do one bit of good for Water Tunnel #3, the new subway lines that will make just the SAS look like a hold in the ground. We will need, reclamation of the waterfront and MASSIVE *infrastructure improvements including the Cross-Harbor Freight Rail Tunnel, a new and hopefully underground Gowanus Expressway, the rebulding of lower Manhattan, access to the regilons core, and many more that the Olympics will divert.

I hope for God's sake that we do not get attacked again. Many have said that we lack redundancy in our transit system and infrastructure. I could care less about this stadium on the west side and the city should too. It should be first and foremost concerned with redundancy in our transit facilities and leave the free-market up to putting a stadium there. It's time to plan for the future correctly, rezone the west side, and get to more pressing issues!

[TonyO]

Quote: from JerzDevl2000 on 3:26 pm on June 19, 2003
It should be first and foremost concerned with redundancy in our transit facilities and leave the free-market up to putting a stadium there.

Actually, the free market is going to be putting up the cost of the stadium itself. *That was announced when the plans were unveiled. *That's better than a lot of cities (Seattle in particular) where the public pays for multiple sports stadiums for private sports clubs.

[JerzDevl2000]

If this stadium turns out to be for the Jets only and not just for the Olympics, then I seriously doubt that Robert Wood Johnson IV (a.k.a. "Woody" Johnson) would put up all of the money for this. He's worth billions and could easily foot most or all of the bill.

It's a shame, most of the Jet fans are on Long Island, and there's a lot of room next to Shea. Am I missing something?

[ZippyTheChimp]

The area next to Shea Stadium will be used for the new Mets
home, when they decide to build it. Combination football/baseball stadiums don't work well. The vast junkyards to the east of Shea were considered, but they are a toxic wasteland, and cleanup would be long and expensive.

If the city wins the 2012 Olympics, the preferred (by Doctoroff at least) location for the Olympic stadium is the west side railyards.

The Jets and NFL have stated that they would pay for most (I
don't know what most is) of the stadium if the city builds the platform over the railyards.

There will not be parking facilities for 30,000 cars as in the Meadowlands.

Supposedly, the stadium will be multiuse, able to accommodate convention functions, concerts, basketball, and hockey.

[STT757]

Woody Johnson has committed to put up $600 Million of his own money, the City is going to pay for the deck above the rail yards which the stadium will be built upon and other various infastructure improvements.

[NYguy]

Businessweek...
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/nov2003/nf20031113_9011_db038.htm


A New York State of Mind for the Jets
The NFL franchise is set to announce a $1 billion Manhattan stadium that the Big Apple hopes will ultimately help land the Olympics

The Jets are flying back to New York. The National Football League team that has been playing across the Hudson River in Giants Stadium in East Rutherford, N.J., for 19 years is expected to announce in the next two months that it will build a $1 billion, retractable-dome stadium on Manhattan's West Side, BusinessWeek has learned. The stadium would be a big boost to New York's bid to host the 2012 Olympics.

Under owner Robert Wood "Woody" Johnson IV, an heir to the Johnson & Johnson (JNJ ) fortune, the Jets will pay for the bulk of the project, with taxpayers footing a still-undetermined bill for infrastructure, including transportation upgrades. The new stadium, which will also serve as a convention center and arena, will be built on a platform to be constructed over Midtown rail yards between Penn Station and the Hudson River on Manhattan's West Side. The NFL would provide some financing through a special loan program for new stadium construction.

SUBWAY DELIVERY. A proposal for a West Side stadium was first trumpeted by former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani in the late 1990s, when the New York Yankees were threatening to abandon the Big Apple. Mayor Michael Bloomberg was less enthusiastic at first but, along with Governor George Pataki, he has since embraced the idea, hoping it will help win the Olympic games and even possibly a Super Bowl. The International Olympics Committee will vote on the site for the 2012 games in 2005.

City officials have estimated that such a complex could eventually generate $2 billion a year in new tax revenues. Nearly 70% of those attending Jets games would use public transportation to get to the stadium, according to economic development officials.

Spokespersons for the Jets, Bloomberg, and Pataki declined to comment about an announcement, but sources say Jets President Jay Cross, hired in 2000 to help get a stadium deal done, has made great strides in recent months. Cross helped the National Basketball Assn.'s Toronto Raptors and the Miami Heat build new arenas. A Manhattan stadium announcement could come before the end of the NFL season in January, say sources.

ONE RING. The Jets would play their first season in Manhattan in 2009 under the plan. The team's lease at Giants Stadium in the New Jersey Meadowlands complex expires in 2008. The Jets earlier this year opted out of participating in a $300 million renovation of that stadium.

Struggling this year with a 3-6 record, the Jets made the American Football Conference playoffs last year, but have made only one Super Bowl appearance -- a dramatic victory in 1969 -- in their 40-year history. Under owner Johnson, the team now hopes a return to Gotham will change the course of history.

[krulltime]

Awesome!!! 8)

[NYguy]

DAILY NEWS...

Mike: Stadium deal closer

By MICHAEL SAUL

Mayor Bloomberg is looking to bring some greenery to Manhattan's West Side - as in Gang Green.

Bloomberg said yesterday he's hopeful the city will soon strike a deal with the New York Jets to build a stadium there.

The administration is proposing to expand the Javits Convention Center and construct the stadium for the Jets nearby. The stadium is a major component of the city's bid for the 2012 Summer Olympic Games.

"If I can get the Jets to help pay for part of the Javits Center expansion and all they've got to do is use it eight Sundays a year, that would be a great deal for the city," Bloomberg said yesterday on his weekly radio show.

A spokesman for the Jets declined to comment yesterday, but the mayor said he's hopeful a deal will be struck within the next year.

Others have said that an announcement may be only months away.

Bloomberg said the area surrounding the convention center is "phenomenally valuable" and needs to be developed.

To make the neighborhood more accessible, the city is moving forward with plans to extend the No. 7 line from Times Square to the far West Side.

The city's Olympic bid calls for a stadium to be built for the opening and closing ceremonies and the track and field events.

The city, however, won't find out until 2005 whether it will be the Olympic host city.

[kliq6]

the stadium is a good idea bnut the seven line extension and Javits expasion are the keys to this area being redeloped

[TLOZ Link5]

One subway line will not be enough to provide sufficient access to a 40 million square-foot business district. I've heard that there are plans for a light rail or monorail loop around the perimeter of the development area.

[kliq6]

yeah i heard they will loop the seven train from 34th and iith back to the new Penn Station. Is it really 40 million sf of space, i thought there would be more residntial buildings then commercial space

[billyblancoNYC]

I think 40 office and 12 residential. Nice.

In addition to the 7, there might be a light rail, above ground train looping around 42nd down to 34st, I think.

[emmeka]

This is the kind of thing that i like to hear, giant projects that involve creating a whole new area.

[NYguy]

I think 40 office and 12 residential. Nice.

In addition to the 7, there might be a light rail, above ground train looping around 42nd down to 34st, I think.

I think its 28 office and 12 residential, but I could be wrong. One good thing about the location of the new stadium: It would be over the LIRR rail yards, where shuttles could easily be run from Penn Station on game days. But its also just a short walk from Penn Station, which no doubt the majority of people would probably do rather than cram a crowded train.

[ZippyTheChimp]

My initial enthusiasm for the stadium has changed to acceptance as a last resort. The key to the project is development over the railyard, and with the stadium, the city gets NFL funding for a facility that can be used as convention space.

A more integrated design would be to expand the convention center, with possibly a park on top that connects to the waterfront. The funding, as stated in an article, could be done with Liberty bonds.

Considering the Olympics, the stadium makes more sense in Flushing Meadow. Corona Park is already part of the planning by
NYC2012. (http://www.nyc2012.com/news.20020613.1.html)
As for the Jets, if they are willing to partially fund a stadium on the West Side, why not in Flushing?

In my opinion, the proposed stadium is unremarkable in design, and seems to be constrained by its location. Perhaps something more interesting can be developed in an open area.
http://forums.wirednewyork.com/viewtopic.php?t=1335&start=0

[Stern]

Here's a new rendering of the Jets Stadium and another of that mysteriously tall tower:

http://galleries.soaringtowers.org/albums/Stern/Jets.jpg

[TLOZ Link5]

It looks like Union Square in Hong Kong.

[kliq6]

Ive heard the city plans, 30 million sf and over 4,000 new aprtments

[emmeka]

It looks like Union Square in Hong Kong.

Thats exactly what I thought but I like the stadium more now.

[billyblancoNYC]

Ive heard the city plans, 30 million sf and over 4,000 new aprtments

I think 28 mill of office and 12mill of residential, so it should be more than 4K.

[ZippyTheChimp]

November 29, 2003

Jets Stadium in Manhattan Moves Closer, but Issues Remain

By CHARLES V. BAGLI

State and city officials say they are inching toward a tentative agreement with the owners of the New York Jets to split the $1.5 billion cost of building a new football stadium over Manhattan's West Side rail yards.

An announcement could come as soon as January, the officials said. Under the terms of what officials said would be a nonbinding agreement, the Jets would pay up to $800 million for a modern riverfront stadium, which would also serve as an Olympic stadium if the city wins its bid for the 2012 Summer Olympics. The city and the state, in turn, have generally agreed to pay $300 million to $400 million to build a retractable roof, the air-conditioning system and a platform structure over the rail yards on which the stadium would sit.

But lurking beneath the expected announcement are a number of contentious unresolved issues that could delay or even scuttle the stadium project.

There is no agreement on how to pay for the extension of the No. 7 subway line from Times Square to the stadium, which is considered a crucial element of the West Side redevelopment. Nor is there consensus on the size and scope of a related project, the $1.5 billion expansion of the nearby Jacob K. Javits Convention Center, say state and city officials involved in those projects. Proponents of the Javits expansion contend that it is more important than the stadium to the city's economic life.

Finally, the city has yet to release its long-promised financial plan for the transformation of the West Side, including the stadium, an expanded convention center, new zoning for commercial and residential construction and parks and the subway extension, as the cost has climbed to $5 billion from an estimated $2.68 billion. The financial plan would presumably detail how the various projects could be turned into reality without tapping into the state's or city's current revenues, something the city has promised not to do.

"There are a series of questions that have yet to be answered about the financing, phasing and urban design," said Robert D. Yaro, president of the Regional Plan Association, a nonprofit research and advocacy group for the metropolitan region. "This is the city's most ambitious and important economic development plan in the last quarter century."

Nevertheless, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg dropped broad hints during his weekly radio program just before Thanksgiving that he hoped the city would soon strike a deal with the Jets, just as Business Week reported that a deal was imminent. But in an interview Friday, Daniel L. Doctoroff, deputy mayor for economic development and the founder of the city's Olympic bid committee, refused to set a date for any announcement.

"Progress is continuing to be made on virtually every front," Mr. Doctoroff said. "But this is an incredibly complicated jigsaw puzzle. We want to make sure that we have all the right pieces in all the right places."

In an effort to cut costs, city and state officials are considering scaling back the expansion of the Javits Center and reducing the number of stations on the subway extension, at least in the first phase. Mr. Doctoroff has said that the city's stadium obligation and the subway extension will be financed under a still unreleased plan using tax revenues from new development in the area over the next 30 years.

But the city has several reasons for wanting to move more rapidly on the stadium. The team owners, who have spent $10 million on lobbyists and designs for a stadium, have demanded that the state and the city issue "a letter of intent, or some kind of moral commitment" for the project before the team spends any more money, according to a team executive. The Jets' lease at Giants Stadium in New Jersey, their current home, expires at the end of 2008 and the team wants a home of its own for the 2009 season. That means construction has to begin soon.

Officials say the Bloomberg administration also wants to convey a sense of momentum for its Olympic bid with an announcement about the stadium, which would be used for Olympic opening and closing ceremonies. The International Olympic Committee will not select a 2012 site until the summer of 2005, but competing cities have to show some progress on their plans before then.

"It's important that decisions about the stadium get made fairly quickly," Mr. Yaro said.

The Jets and city and state officials point to the team's $800 million commitment as the largest single contribution toward stadium construction by any professional sports team. But the cost of the proposed West Side stadium is also double or triple that of the new stadiums built in Seattle, Philadelphia and Chicago, which cost $400 million to $500 million, according to the National Football League.

Many economists contend that stadiums are relatively poor public investments because they do little more than enrich the teams. But city and state officials say that the economic value of the Jets stadium is enhanced by its links to the Javits Center, whose site is between 34th and 39th Streets along 11th Avenue, just north of the rail yards. With a retractable roof, the Jets say the stadium could be used for 150 other events a year, including convention meetings and plenary sessions, concerts and other sporting events.

But there still is a great deal of controversy surrounding the stadium, its connection to Javits and other issues related to the West Side plans.

The city's stadium plan and rezoning proposal for commercial and residential development will face almost inevitable legal challenges by community groups and others who oppose the projects. Jerry Schoenfeld, chairman of the Shubert Organization, which owns half the Broadway theaters, has become increasingly outspoken about what he says are the potentially negative impacts of a stadium on the nearby theater district, Times Square and the surrounding neighborhood.

"This is all fantasy," said John Fisher, a member of the Westside Coalition, an amalgam of 35 community groups, referring to the size and complexity of the city's plans.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority has said it favors extending the No. 7 line, which would bring office workers and football fans to the West Side and spark development of the relatively low-slung neighborhood. But the agency says it has no money in its capital budget for the project, whose cost ranges from $1.6 billion to $2.3 billion.

Peter S. Kalikow, chairman of the M.T.A., has also made it clear that his agency wants to be compensated for allowing the Jets to build over its rail yards, on the blocks bounded by 11th and 12th Avenues, between 30th and 34th Streets. But in what could be a stumbling block, Mr. Kalikow wants to be able to sell far more development rights from the yards than the city now envisions in its proposed rezoning of the West Side.

But the most public dispute reveals the fault line between stadium supporters and advocates for the expansion of the Javits Center over the pace and priority of their respective projects. It also illustrates the interlocking relationship between the stadium, the convention center and the subway line.

On Nov. 19, the board of the Javits operating corporation passed a resolution stating that the city's and state's current plans for the Javits center were "unacceptable," because they would result in a long delay.

For nearly a decade, the Javits Center's operating corporation and the hotel industry have sought to double the size of the convention center by expanding north to 42nd Street, which they said would generate an additional $600 million a year in convention, hotel and restaurant business. Robert E. Boyle, chairman of the Javits operating corporation, has expressed doubts about how much the stadium could really be used for conventions, and the agency's Web site does not even mention the plans to the stadium.

"The mayor constantly refers to travel and tourism as being an industry that is ripe for growth," said Jonathan M. Tisch, chief executive of Loews Hotels and chairman of New York City and Company, the city's convention and visitors bureau. An expanded convention center, he said, "would be an enormous catalyst to achieve that goal."

State officials tried to quell the uprising, telling reporters that the resolution adopted by the Javits board was unauthorized. They said that the planning and development of the Javits Center would be handled by the center's development corporation, which is headed by Charles A. Gargano, chairman of the Empire State Development Corporation.

"We could have several alternatives," Mr. Gargano said. "We're working with the governor and the mayor on a plan that will work."

One problem is that the M.T.A.'s Michael Quill bus depot lies in the path of the Javits expansion, on 11th Avenue between 40th and 41st Streets. The M.T.A., which bought and renovated the depot in the mid-1990's for about $120 million, does not want to give up the garage until a new one is built, probably under the stadium platform.

But it now appears that construction of the new $400 million garage cannot start until 2009. That would delay the Javits expansion until the garage is completed in 2013, which infuriates the hotel industry.

One possibility is that Javits would be expanded only to the Quill garage on 40th Street, until a second phase could start sometime in the future, a move that Javits supporters greet with dismay.

"We need to get this built," Joseph E. Spinnato, president of the Hotel Association of New York City, said of the convention center. "This is a moneymaker for the city and the state. But to be held hostage to any other part of the West Side development is not something that we're particularly happy about."


Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

[billyblancoNYC]

So frustrating in so many ways.

[tmg]

What's frustrating is Doctoroff's and the mayor's breathtaking lack of honesty and transparency on this whole project.

I, for one, would love to see something spectacular happen on the Far West Side. But the city needs to (1) stop trying to strongarm the Javits Center into embracing a stadium that it doesn't need, and (2) come clean with the public about how much this whole thing will cost and how it will be financed. The idea that this could be funded with tax increment financing, without competing with other city or MTA investment needs, is just silly.

I think DCP is doing a great job with its planning efforts for Lower Manhattan, Downtown Brooklyn, and other areas. But on the Far West Side, the city seems to be wearing honesty blinders loaned to it by the Bush Administration.

[krulltime]

WHY does it have to be SO complicated??? :? Just built something...The area needs something to start the whole West Side Development. If the stadium is being offer half/half of $$$... well that sounds fair. Doesn't it?

[krulltime]

'Many economists contend that stadiums are relatively poor public investments because they do little more than enrich the teams.' By CHARLES V. BAGLI, November 29, 2003

:? - If they refer when stadiums are built in areas where it doesnt benefit the city at all such as in Philadelphia...where the Football and Beseball Stadiums are being built in an area where they are surrounded by parking garages and no restaurants or nothing else that benefits the community in the 'Cities' as opposed to the 'Suburbs', then I agree with the economists. But if they are built within an area where there are stores, restaurants, hotels, and public transportation and who knows other uses that can be used to revenue in taxes that will sure benefit the city then built the thing. That area in the West Side has nothing but car dealerships, wherehouses and parking garages. While most of manhattan feels like 24/7, not a single soul is found in that area after night fall. Lets bring people and put it to more use.

[kliq6]

the javits expasnion is the most important, leave it to NYc to build bus depot, above grtound in one ofthe most valuable undrdeveloped areas in the whole world

[ZippyTheChimp]

Krultime,

The key word in that statement is relatively. If you compare the benefits of the stadium to what's there now, of course the benefit is obvious. In this case it should be weighed against the convention center expansion.

The stadium itself is being promoted as mixed-use, as a facility for the Javitts.

[Pottebaum]

http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2003/03/30/realestate/30COV.468.jpg
Rendering of the proposed Jets stadium shows the two panels making up the retractable roof.

Are there actually going to be rather large buildings around the new stadium?

Thanks :)

[emmeka]

Most probably. Any excuse for a skyscraper. ( Which im not complaining about, the more the merrier)

[BPC]

Are there actually going to be rather large buildings around the new stadium? Thanks :)

The skycrapers depicted in the drawing do not actually exist. Nor have any developers been lined up to build them. Rather, they are just wishful thinking by Doctoroff et al, who want to claim that this boondoggle will generate sufficient new tax revenues to pay back the billion of dollars in city bonds necessary to fund the project. Personally, I have a hard time believing that there will be much interest in such huge office towers in that neighborhood. If there were, they would have been built already. Eight extra Jets home games on winter Sunday afternoons won't make the neighborhood any more marketable in that respect.

Incidentally, although it is not altogether clear from the p