Page 45 of 176 FirstFirst ... 354142434445464748495595145 ... LastLast
Results 661 to 675 of 2633

Thread: New Penn Station (Moynihan Station)

  1. #661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by antinimby
    Lol. Apparently, you misread or misunderstood my post because what you are saying agrees with what I was said.
    Let me repeat, there is no problem with air rights if MSG moves to Farley. That's what they are proposing but that is not what I was talking about. It's only when we want to see MSG move to some other site (other than Farley), is when the problem of air rights gets more complicated, which was my point.
    Oh, I see. You're talking about the site of the open railyard west of 9th. In that case, to get MSG moved to that site, there are so many other issues to resolve before air rights even come into the picture that I don't think it's even possible to speculate whether those air rights will be a problem or not. Who owns that site now? How would the Vornado/Related team or MSG even go about proposing developing that site? Who's going to build a deck over the rails and who will pay for it?

  2. #662
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    You've got it.
    Now, to answer your question, I did some digging over in the MSG thread and came up with this:

    Quote Originally Posted by londonlawyer
    Does anyone know if Vornado owns the site on the west side of 9th Avenue over the tracks? If so, is the plan to build a platform over the tracks? It seems that that would be expensive.
    ...and then came this reply:
    Quote Originally Posted by TranspoMan
    The sites west of Ninth Avenue are owned by Brookfield Properties (southern portion) and Schulweis Realty (northern portion). Any development would first require construction of a deck over the railroad tracks. Before the Hudson Yards study, there was talk of constructing a NBA headquarters building on one of these parcels.

  3. #663

    Default

    NY Sun
    May 31, 2006

    City Looks to Moynihan Station As Spur to West Side Development

    By DAVID LOMBINO - Staff Reporter of the Sun

    Plans to move Madison Square Garden across the street into the new Moynihan Station could fall through if City Hall holds firm on a plan to tax "the world's most famous arena."

    The Garden has enjoyed a property tax exemption worth about $10 million since 1982, when the arena's owners threatened to leave the city. Garden officials have indicated that they would not move off their current site unless they were able to take their tax break with them.

    Mayor Bloomberg has called for state lawmakers to revoke the deal since last year, when the arena's owners, Cablevision, played a lead role in blocking a football stadium over the West Side railyards.

    Yesterday, the deputy mayor for economic development, Daniel Doctoroff, declared that the "tax exemptions will not travel" across the street.

    State officials say they hope that construction on Moynihan Station will begin this year. A public hearing on the matter is set for today, and final state approval is expected next month.

    City officials have been eager for the Garden to move into the rear of the Farley Post office, which is scheduled to become a train station named after a late senator, Daniel Patrick Moynihan. The move would free up 5 million square feet of space where the Garden currently exists between Seventh and Eighth avenues.

    Two of the city's biggest developers want to renovate the existing Penn Station and build a sprawling residential and commercial complex that would generate tens of millions of dollars a year in tax revenues for the city.

    The developers, the Related Companies and Vornado Realty Trust, which were selected by the state last year to undertake the $880 million plan to transform the Farley Post Office building into Moynihan Station, met recently with Mr. Bloomberg to discuss their ambitious plan.

    Mr. Doctoroff said yesterday that the "enormous transaction" proposed by the developers "is a very - potentially - beneficial project for the city."

    Despite the public spat over the mayor's plans for a West Side Stadium last year - and indications from insiders that the mayor still holds a grudge - Mr. Doctoroff said the city would "put aside what has happen in the past to do the right thing."

    "Obviously we feel that in that case MSG did not act in the interest of the city.The past is the past and it is time to look to the future," Mr. Doctoroff said.

    A spokesman for Madison Square Garden, Barry Watkins, would only say that the Garden would continue to explore different possibilities to move or renovate. A spokesman representing Related and Vornado, Howard Rubenstein, declined to comment about tax abatement issues related to the plan.

    In a sense, the Garden holds the most valuable cards in this negotiation - by occupying most of two city blocks running between 33rd and 31st streets between Seventh and Eighth avenues. By vacating the site, the Garden would clear the way for a much-needed renovation of Penn Station and also unlock enormously valuable air rights over the site.

    Mr. Doctoroff would not speculate how much the current Garden site would generate annually in payments in lieu of taxes if there were a mix of commercial and residential towers. Considering its prime Midtown location, it is clearly worth tens of millions of dollars a year for the city.

    The tax proceeds from a Garden move could be critical to the mayor's vision for development of the far West Side. The current Garden site and the planned Moynihan Station are included in the Hudson Yards District, which means that property taxes generated by development there would not go into the city's general fund, but would pay for infrastructure improvements designed to spur development of the far West Side, such as the extension of the Subway 7 line, and a platform over the eastern end of the MTA's rail yards.

    The city is planning to issue $3 billion in bonds to fund those projects this summer. According to the current plan for the far West Side which was approved by the City Council last year, the city will pay for the debt on those bonds until the Hudson Yards area develops and generates enough tax revenue to pay off the bonds. That is expected to take at least a decade. In the mayor's proposed 2007 budget, about $146 million is penciled in to pay debt service on the Hudson Yards bonds.

    Mr. Doctoroff denied that clearing the Garden site would necessarily help to fund the city's West Side plans. He said that if the Garden project materialized, the eastern side of the Hudson Yards area would probably be developed first, ahead of dense development slated for Eleventh Avenue.

    "Whatever you build on this site, to some extent will compete with other development that could occur further to the west," Mr. Doctoroff said.

    "Having a truly modern and bold gateway to the West Side can't help but help" the plans, he added.

    There are many unanswered questions about the potential Garden move, including who will pay for the ambitious renovation of Penn Station proposed by the developers.

    State officials said they have not been fully briefed on the developers' plans, an awkward omission considering the state is leading the Moynihan project.

    Similarly, the leaders of several city groups are outraged that today's public hearing will not address the development issues raised by moving the Garden into Moynihan Station.

    The president of the Municipal Art Society, Kent Barwick, said he will demand that public officials "put their cards on the table" and provide more information about the Garden move at today's hearing.

    "The plan they are having the hearing on, everyone knows it's not the real plan," Mr. Barwick said.

    Preservationists are worried that moving the Garden into the western half of Moynihan Station will take away from the landmarked front half of the Farley Post Office building. The president of the New York Landmarks Conservancy, Peg Breen, questioned why the Garden cannot move into another nearby site.

    "It's another massive development deal instead of a great public space and public purpose," Ms. Breen said.

    Still, several urban planners and real estate experts raved about the possibility of improving Penn Station, the cramped, underground labyrinth that is the busiest station in America.

    "Dynamite Madison Square Garden. Start all over again," said the director of Friends of Moynihan Station, Maura Moynihan, the daughter of the late Senator Patrick Moynihan, the first champion of the project.

    The president of the Real Estate Board of New York, Steven Spinola, called the Garden plans "phenomenal" and said it would spare Moynihan Station from being an "antique" by giving it a use and the steady traffic from Garden events.

    As for development of the Garden site, Mr. Spinola said that it would be the "next natural step" after Lower Manhattan. With a completion date of around 2014 or 2015, Mr. Spinola said that the new office space would not compete with more than 8 million square feet of commercial space planned for ground zero, which is expected to come online in 2012.

    2006 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC.

  4. #664
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Lots of lawyers are going to get really rich before this gets figured out ...

  5. #665
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    2,636

    Default

    in my opinion, as long as Cablevision, Bloomberg public enemy number 1, is the owner of MSG they will be taxed and no move to the station will happen, as long as he is mayor. There defeat of the Jets stadium put the Hudson yards plan back five years, something that Bloomberg wanted to be part of his legacy

  6. #666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kliq6
    in my opinion, as long as Cablevision, Bloomberg public enemy number 1, is the owner of MSG they will be taxed and no move to the station will happen, as long as he is mayor. There defeat of the Jets stadium put the Hudson yards plan back five years, something that Bloomberg wanted to be part of his legacy
    If Bloomberg, Doctoroff, et al. allow the West Side Stadium debacle to stand in the way of an MSG/Penn Station redevelopment they're fools. The Olympics would have been an albatross for NYC, just like they've been for every city that has hosted them for the past few decades, and Midtown Manhattan is about the worst possible location for an NFL stadium.

    By moving MSG and creating a new Penn Station, Bloomberg has the opportunity to undo one of the city's colossal mistakes. How ironic it would be if he passed on that opportunity because MSG stopped him from making a mistake of his own with the stadium deal.

    As for the tax issue, I oppose giving sports arenas and teams tax breaks in general. Those guys can afford to pay their taxes and still make a hefty profit. But wasn't the city prepared to offer the Jets a tax incentive to move to the West Side, the Nets to Brooklyn? Don't the Mets and Yankees enjoy incentives? To say we'll give a break to them and not MSG to me smacks of sour grapes over the stadium fight, which is not the way this negotiation should be handled.

  7. #667
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    2,636

    Default

    in not saying its right im just saying that there is alot of Hositlity at the city level towards Cablevision, espcially after they killed the stadium and then renanged on a secret deal with the city after that debacle to create over 1,000 new jobs in the city in a building that could have been built at the MSG site

  8. #668

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by panderson
    As for the tax issue, I oppose giving sports arenas and teams tax breaks in general. Those guys can afford to pay their taxes and still make a hefty profit.
    And if they can't, maybe they could shave a little off the players' salaries?

  9. #669
    Forum Veteran MidtownGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    East Midtown
    Posts
    6,832

    Default

    Amen. The salaries made by sports figures denote a society with seriously screwed up priorities.

  10. #670

    Default

    Vornado/Roth own 2 Penn Plaza
    But do the Dolan's own the arena or just the team

  11. #671
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    2,636

    Default

    Dolans own the teams ( Knicks and Rangers) and the arena. they rent office space at 2 Penn for there NYC operations

  12. #672
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by panderson
    But wasn't the city prepared to offer the Jets a tax incentive to move to the West Side, the Nets to Brooklyn? Don't the Mets and Yankees enjoy incentives? To say we'll give a break to them and not MSG to me smacks of sour grapes over the stadium fight, which is not the way this negotiation should be handled.
    I think this is where you're wrong. You don't give tax breaks to a sports team because other teams also have tax breaks. This is not an equal opportunity giveaway. It should only be granted judiciously, on a case by case basis.
    If a team has leverage against the city, like threatening to leave or if an outside team wants to move into the city, then I can see using tax breaks to entice them to stay/come, but in the case of MSG, they ain't goin' nowhere (at least not outside of the city anyway), so they deserve NO tax breaks whatsoever, NONE. And the city should take away what they have now, for good measure!

  13. #673

    Default

    No teams should get incentives, even if they threaten to leave. But this is different. The incentive is to get them to move.

  14. #674

    Default

    Precisely, Zippy. This is different. The Dolans do have leverage. It's a little ironic. In 1982, the owners of MSG threatened to move out of NYC to get tax breaks. Today, the owners of MSG are threatening to stay put.

  15. #675

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp
    But this is different. The incentive is to get them to move.
    Is this a job for eminent domain?

    Isn't that legitimately used to build necessary infrastructure?

Similar Threads

  1. Reimagining A Hub - Jackson Heights Station
    By Kris in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: June 29th, 2009, 12:38 AM
  2. Progress of Temporary PATH Station in WTC 'Tub'
    By NYguy in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 172
    Last Post: August 29th, 2008, 02:50 AM
  3. Neon for the 59th Street Marine Transfer Station
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: August 24th, 2005, 11:04 PM
  4. New Coney Island Train Station
    By BrooklynRider in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: July 22nd, 2005, 09:40 AM
  5. Station Renovation - East New York
    By Gulcrapek in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: July 30th, 2004, 09:59 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software