Javits Center Expansion (& Cancelled Jets Stadium)

[kliq6]

you dont want to have "filler development" prime sapce should not be wasted just to fill.

[NYguy]

If the MTA is going to spend money to build a platform, it doesn't make sense to build on that one and leave the railyards open just accross the avenue. It would still leave any development there cut off from the rest of the city by open railyards. But maybe its also a move to get the JETS off their ass on this. Even if the JETS were still able to by their share of the development rights, the MTA would have to sell the remaining 2/3 to other developers.


Jets, Nets on clock to negotiate rights to build venues


THE JOURNAL NEWS
July 28, 2005


The fate of the air rights to construct over the Hudson rail yards on the West Side of Manhattan and over the Long Island Rail Road yard in Brooklyn came up at yesterday's Metropolitan Transit Authority meeting. The end result is that the Jets are now on the clock for about a month and the Nets are on the clock for 45 days.

The Jets were given until Aug. 31 to decide whether they want to go through with their $250 million purchase of those rights in order to build their controversial $2.2 billion West Side stadium. But the MTA also gave itself the right to explore other sale options with the stipulation that the Jets would receive notice if the agency finds one. The team has taken that to mean that it still has first dibs until the deadline.

It's just that any momentum stalled on June 6 when state legislators Sheldon Silver and Joseph Bruno effectively blocked a $300 million state contribution. The Jets have talked to the Giants about sharing a new stadium at the Meadowlands while also looking for ways to keep the West Side possibility alive.

The Jets still privately have some reservations about the economic sense of a Queens alternative.

"We respect the MTA's desire to have closure regarding future development of the Western Railyards," the Jets said in a statement. "At this time, we are weighing all of our options and we have agreed to notify the MTA regarding our intent to go to contract by Aug. 31."

Bruce Ratner, meanwhile, wants to build a new arena for his Nets at the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush avenues in Brooklyn as part of a larger redevelopment plan. There were bids for the air rights by two companies — Forest City Ratner and Extell — and the MTA chose in a 13-1 vote to open a 45-day window for exclusive negotiations with Forest City Ratner.

The Nets' owner said in a statement that he was very pleased.

[pianoman11686]

Mayor Backs M.T.A.'s Railyard Plan

By ROBIN SHULMAN

Published: July 30, 2005

After the failure of his effort to build a stadium for the Jets on a giant platform on the site of the West Side railyards, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said yesterday that he supported a plan by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which owns the site, to use surplus funds to build a platform anyway and sell development rights for office and residential towers.

Officials of the agency have said that the sale of space on the platform, which would represent one of the authority's most ambitious forays into real estate development, could generate more than $1 billion.

Of course, the M.T.A.'s first priority should be to assure reliable and secure transportation, the mayor said in his weekly radio appearance on WABC-AM. "Then they've got to make the investments in the infrastructure," he said. "And this one for the West Side is a very good deal for the M.T.A. and a good deal for the city."

The project would bring new development to the West Side, Mr. Bloomberg said, and if the authority moved its headquarters to the railyard site - as its officials have suggested - that could also bring funds to the agency from the sale of its old headquarters building.

Money to build the platform would come from the authority's anticipated $833 million surplus, which stemmed from a surge in tax revenue. The executive director of the authority has said that $12 million of the surplus will be used immediately for service and security improvements.

The authority conceded earlier in the week that its original plan to sell the West Side railyard rights to the Jets to build a stadium was, for practical purposes, dead.

Gene Russianoff, a lawyer at the New York Public Interest Research Group and a longtime transit advocate, said it was creative of the authority to consider using its surplus to venture into real estate development. "One of the huge problems for the M.T.A. is it has no money for capital repairs," he said. "It can get money for its operating budget from politicians, but it's hard to get money for capital repairs."

Meanwhile, breaking with the national Republican line, the mayor also said in his radio address that he opposed legislation debated yesterday in the Senate that would shield firearms manufacturers and dealers from liability in lawsuits stemming from violent crimes committed with their weapons.

The bill, sponsored by the Republican majority leader, Bill Frist, is supported by the White House and backed by the National Rifle Association. It would bar third parties from bringing civil liability actions against gunmakers, dealers, distributors and importers.

"This is one of the great disgraces of Congress," Mr. Bloomberg said. "They ought to go home and hang their heads in shame. I don't care how powerful the N.R.A. lobby is."

"There are too many guns out there," the mayor said, adding that the right to bear arms must be weighed against the dangers of automatic weapons and bullets that pierce bulletproof vests.

The Police Department recently released statistics showing that in the week that ended last Sunday, there were 56 shootings in New York, injuring 75 people, while during the same period in 2004 there were 33 shootings. Between Jan. 1 and July 24, 2005, there were 841 shootings, up from 769 for the same period last year.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

[pianoman11686]

The project would bring new development to the West Side, Mr. Bloomberg said, and if the authority moved its headquarters to the railyard site - as its officials have suggested - that could also bring funds to the agency from the sale of its old headquarters building.

True, but knowing the MTA, they will find a way to spend those proceeds (and more) on an unnecessary new headquarters. That certainly doesn't justify it.

[Alonzo-ny]

Does this mean it will be easier for someone to develop the site and therefore garner lots of intrest and hopefully big imaginative designs

[kliq6]

If the MTA put the platform more developers would be intersted as it would save them time to do this and they could get to work on there ideas right away.

Plus if the MTA leaves there Madison Ave building, it would open thatup to new tenants with a location righ tin the heart of the Midtown district.

[BPC]

The MTA's proposal to build the platform itself and then sell the development rights only make sense if you believe that the MTA is a better, smarter real estate developer than any of the City's actual real estate developers. If that is not the case (and who in their right mind believes it is), then the MTA can make more money selling the development rights as-is then in building the platform itself. As for the issue of its hq, that can be divorced from the platform issue. The MTA can contract to move its hq to the West Side regardless of who builds the platform.

My proposal would be to take the $900M surplus, and the $500M or so that the MTA can get from selling the development rights to the West Side railyards as-is, and use it to get the Second Avenue Subway started NOW.

[JMGarcia]

Finding a developer to take on the whole site and build that platform may be less profitable in the long term that building the platform which give the MTA the ability to sell pieces of the site to different developers at different times.

There is also little sense in the MTA using its own funds for 2nd Ave. when it is quite realistic that outside sources will ultimately pay for it.

[kliq6]

Only thin ggoing on behalf of thinking maybe thi stime the MTA could pull off a development deal is that Kalikow is a developer.

he is the reason they didnt approve the ratner deal right away, he knows he can get more from him and he will.

[NYatKNIGHT]

Though it's a good discussion and worth keeping, I have moved the posts pertaining to the Second Avenue subway to that thread. We can keep it going there:

http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/sh...9645#post59645

[kliq6]

Javits kick-off meeting is next week

[ZippyTheChimp]

August 8, 2005
New Proposals Afoot for Javits Expansion and Now-Jetless Railyards

By CHARLES V. BAGLI

Hotel and tourism executives have wanted a bigger convention hall to attract even bigger trade shows ever since the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center opened its doors in 1986.

Last year, they got a plan nicknamed Javits Lite, a smaller-than-desired proposed expansion that was linked to the rezoning of the West Side for large-scale buildings and a controversial plan to build a stadium over the West Side railyards. Some convention proponents worried that the expanded Javits would still be undersized the day it opened.

But with the stadium proposal now dead and state officials moving forward with plans to build a new $930 million train station east of the railyards in honor of the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, some developers, tourism officials, urban planners and architects are now quietly circulating three alternative plans for a larger expansion of the convention center and ideas for what could be built over the railyards.

It remains to be seen whether any of the proposals will be embraced by Gov. George E. Pataki or Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, but they have gained support among civic groups, developers like Douglas Durst and Jeffrey S. Katz and the Hell's Kitchen Neighborhood Association, which opposed the stadium.

"There is a terrific opportunity here, a chance to reconceive what should happen on the West Side now that the railyards are available and the Moynihan train station is moving ahead," said Kent Barwick, president of the Municipal Art Society, a private planning organization. "It's a chance to build on the work the city has already done and to bring together groups that have been divided over the past few years by the stadium and the rezoning."

The most radical plan, known as the "flip," involves building one of the nation's largest convention centers over the two railyards, stretching from 12th Avenue to 10th Avenue, from 30th Street to 34th Street. Developed by the Newman Real Estate Institute at Baruch College, this plan puts the center over a 26-acre "hole in the ground" that has long discouraged development.

Unlike the current Javits Center, which forms a five-block wall between the city and the Hudson River, Newman's convention hall would be perpendicular to the waterfront and part of an east-west corridor that extends from Herald Square to Madison Square Garden, the new train station and the river.

Proponents say this proposal would spur commercial development along 30th and 34th Streets. And once the convention hall is built, the state could knock down the old Javits Center, which sits on 22 acres along 11th Avenue, from 34th Street to 39th Street, and sell the waterfront property for an estimated $3 billion to residential developers.

"This alternative makes a new convention center, rather than a new stadium, the centerpiece of development on the Far West Side," said Henry Wollman, director of the Newman Institute "It would provide a 21st-century convention facility combined with extensive retail and commercial development that will be an integral part of the urban fabric. The east-west axis organically links the Far West Side to Midtown."

Although the proposal has won admiring reviews from Assemblyman Richard N. Gottfried, the Municipal Art Society and others, many people worry that its $7 billion price tag is prohibitive; its future is dim unless there is major political support.

Some state officials and tourism executives say that a switch to the Newman proposal would further delay, and perhaps scuttle, the long-sought expansion of the Javits, which was approved last December by the State Assembly. The Javits Development Corporation is in the process of selecting an architect for the $1.4 billion project (the so-called Javits Lite plan), which would extend the convention hall from 39th Street to 41st Street, expanding the exhibition space, in the first phase, from 760,000 square feet to 1.1 million.

"There's nothing wrong with the idea; the problem is the money," Charles A. Gargano, chairman of the Javits Development Corporation, said of the Newman proposal. "We want to move forward as quickly as possible with the northern expansion."

Amanda M. Burden, chairwoman of the City Planning Commission, said her office had worked up several different site plans for the West Side, although she was not ready to unveil them. Speaking generally, she said she was considering an expansion of the Javits over the railyard on the west side of 11th Avenue in combination with a mix of office space, housing and cultural space that would provide a catalyst for development. But she said any plan must provide the Metropolitan Transportation Authority with money for the railyards, while remaining consistent with the city's rezoning and financial plan for the West Side.

Tourism executives favor pushing forward with the current expansion plan, but they also want still more exhibition space for the Javits, which they say currently ranks as the 18th largest convention center in the country. They say that a bigger hall would allow the city to compete for conventions that now go to Chicago, Las Vegas or Orlando because the Javits is too small.

"We like any idea that affords us more space for the Javits," said Cristyne L. Nicholas, president of NYC & Company, the city's convention and visitors bureau. "We should be looking at the railyards as a natural extension of the Javits. Even after we get the expansion of the north, the Javits still won't be the size we need."

But Robert Boyle, who runs the Javits Center, said that the Javits had to avoid getting too large, given that every large and medium-sized city in the country has been expanding its space even as the number and size of trade shows has declined. The Javits could end up with more than it needs, Mr. Boyle said.

Under the second proposal quietly circulating, the developer Douglas Durst has been working with the architects Meta Brunzema and Fox & Fowle on a proposal that would extend the Javits south - rather than north - but only over the railyard on the west side of 11th Avenue. Mr. Durst argued that there is still time to consider alternatives because there is a budget but no architectural plan for the expansion of the Javits.

His proposal would allow the Javits to expand to 1.3 million square feet, the same size as the two-phase expansion to the north. It calls for four towers - a hotel, two office buildings and an apartment house - to be built at the four corners of the convention center, a 10-acre park atop the center, and a tree-lined promenade along 39th Street, linking the neighborhood to the river and the ferry terminal.

Mr. Durst is also interested in buying the 13-acre railyard on the east side of 11th Avenue when the M.T.A. puts it up for auction.

"You need to think about the east and west railyards as a single opportunity," said Anna Levin, co-chairwoman of Community Board 4's land use committee. "The potential in either the Durst plan or the Newman plan is clearly worth considering."

The Municipal Art Society agrees with Ms. Levin, although its own proposal calls for expanding the existing Javits Center to the west, over the West Side Highway. Any expansion to the north, Mr. Barwick said, would extend the barrier between the city and the water and the new ferry terminal at 39th Street.

Mr. Barwick also favors establishing a three-block corridor along 32nd Street from the west end of the central post office on Ninth Avenue, which would be transformed into the Moynihan rail station, to the waterfront, with a parklike strip lined by commercial towers. Developers will be attracted to the area, he said, with or without the proposed $2 billion extension of the No. 7 subway line from Times Square to 34th Street and 11th Avenue, because of its proximity to the city's busiest transportation hub.

"Expanding to the south, onto the yards, would produce as big a convention center as we need," said Mr. Katz, a developer who owns three development parcels on the West Side. "It should be studied before the option disappears."

• Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

[lofter1]

7 Billion!?!?!

Still it will be interesting to see what the proposals look like.

[kliq6]

Id go with the Durst Idea, the man has always known what he wants and goes for things no matter what the situation. Case in point, 25 years to gather the Bank of AMerica site, but nothing would stop him from doing it and building

[krulltime]

YES! I just heard an answer to my prayers... from other people that will like to see this a reality... Of course it makes sence to move the convention center on the tracks and let new towers go up where the old convention center is... But I know this will take alot of talk within the government.

Oh just imagine if they agree and spend those 7 billions... well they can get 3 billion from the old convention land I guess. I just dont know about the rest.