Anxiety Rises as Deadline Looms to Pick Penn Master Planner

After years of squabbling and stasis over the future of Penn Station and its neighborhood, Amtrak will soon make one of the most significant development decisions in the modern history of New York.

The passenger railroad, which owns Penn Station and is in turn owned by the federal government, says that by June it will announce the selection of a Master Developer to be its partner in “transforming” the infamously gritty commuter hub into a world class destination.

As that ambition suggests, picking the Master developer is not like hiring a contractor to redo your kitchen. Amtrak is not just selecting a builder. It is picking a plan—a plan that will alter the very fabric of midtown Manhattan.

Which is why there is increasing restlessness among elected officials, community activists and transit advocates that the selection is being made behind closed doors.

“My neighbors and I believe we should know which plans, if any, are saying they need to demolish our neighborhood,” said Gene Sinigalliano, leader of the Tenants Association at 251 West 30^th street, a building that would be in the path of any plan that expanded the station southward.

“We are steadfastly opposed to this and any other plans that are presenting the demolition of our neighborhood. We want the ability to voice these concerns on a fully informed basis before any decisions are made.”

Sinigalliano’s anxiety does not seem to have been allayed by either Governor Hochul’s statement that she would not countenance the destruction of his neighborhood or by the assurance from Amtrak’s man on the scene, Andy Byford that a southern expansion is for now on hold pending study of the expansion issue.

All he knows for certain, Sinigalliano explains, is that one of the three finalists for the master developer job, Grand Penn Partners, had presented plans that included an expansion onto his block.

That presentation was before Amtrak imposed a blackout on all statements by the contenders. So Sinigalliano has no way to know if expansion remains Grand Penn’s plan or, even if it is, whether Amtrak would select them.

Expansion of the station is only one of several contentious issues:

*Good government advocates worry about the overall cost of the project and who, ultimately, will pay.

*Residents and community officials wonder whether the project will revive a version of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s plan for commercial development around the station to generate development revenue to help fund the station project.

*Transit advocates say the Penn project is a golden opportunity to reinvent how the Long Island Railroad and New Jersey Transit operate so their trains run through the station, rather than dropping all their riders there.

*And the Grand Penn consortium stirred a bunch of news coverage in recent days by hints that maybe, just maybe, the owner of Madison Square Garden was open to their idea to move the Garden to rebuild the station with a park on top. The owner, James Dolan, has said nothing himself to recant his earlier comments that he had no desire to move and Byford, while never shutting the door on moving the Garden, has noted it would drag out the reconstruction timeline, which federal officials like to brag is going at “the speed of Trump.”

Any one of these would be a topic for major public debate. To be sure, there has been much discussion and the general plans of two of the bidders, Grand Penn and Halmar/ASTM, have long been public. But to drive home the point of how much is not known, a third bidder, led by the Canadian developer Fengate Capital, entered late and has said not a public word about its proposals.

There is also the basic question of who exactly has the authority to do what beyond the property Amtrak actually owns, which is the station below street level and a powerhouse just across West 31^st Street, which backs up on Gene Sinigalliano’s apartment building.

The Cuomo Penn District redevelopment plan would have used the state’s power of condemnation to override city zoning and build supertall office towers. But Amtrak has not described what authority it would invoke, or recruit from the state, for any part of its plan that went outside the four corners of the station property it owns.

A group of elected officials weighed in the other day in a letter to Byford. They are pressing Amtrak to release the instructions, its Request for Proposal, that shapes the negotiations currently underway with the three finalists for Master Developer.

Amtrak has said its procurement rules preclude releasing the RFP, but the elected officials poured cold water on that claim. “We request a written response identifying the specific legal basis, if any, for withholding the RFP from public disclosure. In the absence of any such legal basis we would urge you to release the RFP to the public.”

The demand was signed by the elected officials whose districts cover Penn Station and its neighborhood: Rep Jerrold Nadler; Borough President Brad Hoylman-Sigal; State Senators Liz Krueger and Erik Bottcher; Assemblymember Tony Simone.

The RFP is unquestionably a vital document, which Amtrak says it can’t release because it would compromise competitive secrecy.

But the reality is that most of the demands for more information are not about Amtrak’s requests but rather about the proposals from the three bidders.

“We believe more should be done to inform the public of the shape this project may be taking before a final decision is made,” said Samuel Turvey of ReThinkNYC, a prominent advocate.

“Penn Station, when combined with the Gateway Tunnels project, is the largest infrastructure project in the country and one of the largest such projects in our history and has generated tremendous public interest. There are questions that we believe could be answered at some time before a final decision is made.”

Turvey proposed that Amtrak and the three bidders answer publicly in “executive summary fashion” key questions on their plans.

Among these questions, he said, are:

“Basics of how a proponent will fund the project (admittedly easier said than done) ... Does the proponent provide protections of any sort for cost overruns? Does the proponent look to demolish any of the neighborhood in order to accomplish their goals?

“Does the proponent have a position on through-running and whether that could happen within the confines of the existing station or would such a conversion require physical expansion of the station? Does the proponent seek to ask the government to use eminent domain to clear the way for commercial development that can help fund the project?”

Amtrak argues that it has offered extensive information about its goals, including at public appearances by Byford and regular briefings to a Station Working Advisory Group that includes, among others, those elected officials and activists and advocates.

Byford has not yet answered the request from the elected officials for a written response to their demand he release the RFP.

The three finalists are required to submit their final bid to Amtrak on May 4.

“The bid will be evaluated against strict criteria and by a panel (that includes me) that has had no contact with bidders whatsoever,” Byford explained. “Each bid will be judged strictly on its merits.”

A winner will be confirmed by the Amtrak Board in June.