msg & the future of west midtown

8/10/2019 MSG & the Future of West Midtown

1/44

Madison Square Garden:Shaping the Future of West MidtoTHE SECOND IN A SERIES OF REPORTS BYT H E A L L I A N C E F O R A N E W P E N N S TAT I O N October 2014

PENN2023


2/44

Tis report is the second in a series of reportsissued by the Alliance for a New Penn Stationabout the future of Penn Station, MadisonSquare Garden and Manhattans West Side.

Te rst report, entitled Penn 2023, outlinedthe case for a new Penn Station, describedprinciples to help guide development andillustrated the necessary elements for a newtransit hub.

Penn 2023 can be downloaded here:

www.rpa.org www.mas.org

Cover image:
http://www.rpa.org/http://www.mas.org/http://www.mas.org/http://www.rpa.org/


3/44

October 2014

PENN2023

THE SECOND IN A SERIES OF REPORTS BYT H E A L L I A N C E F O R A N E W P E N N S TAT I O N

www.rpa.org www.mas.org

Madison Square Garden:Shaping the Future of West Midtown
http://www.rpa.org/http://www.mas.org/http://www.mas.org/http://www.rpa.org/


4/44

A rapidly changing district...


5/44


6/446

Executive Summary

A new city within a city is emerging in West Midtown, and Penn Station is at the cedecient in many ways and critically unprepared to absorb future growth. Over the

decisions about the futures of Penn Station, Madison Square Garden and West Midensure the economic vitality of the New York region for years to come.

West Midtown is in the midst of tremendous change.

Hudson Yards, the largest private real estatedevelopment in U.S. history with tens of millions ofsquare feet of development, is under construction inWest Midtown. This development will bring hundredsof thousands of new residents, workers and visitors

to the area. The opening of the 7 train extension fromTimes Square to 34th Street and 11th Avenue, and thecompletion of the rst phase of Moynihan Stationwill help serve this growing district, but that alone isinsufficient to absorb the coming increases in traveldemand to and from West Midtown.

Penn Station is struggling to meet current transitdemand and unprepared to absorb future growth.

Penn Station is the primary transit hub in WestMidtown, yet it is critically unprepared to handle anynew growth in travel demand. Built to accommodate200,000 passengers per day; the station is nowhandling nearly 600,000, contributing to Penn Stationsovercrowded, oppressive and increasingly unsafeconditions. With New York Citys projected growth in both population and employment between now and2030, now is the time to enact a plan to increase thecapacity of Penn Station, the regions most importanttransit hub.

The century-old tunnels under the Hudson River

that feed Penn Station need to be replaced beforemajor changes to the station can be realized.

Major expansion and reconstruction of Penn Stationand its 100-year-old tunnels are required to supportthe expected population growth and catalyze economicactivity in the New York-New Jersey-Connecticutmetropolitan region for the next half century.

The Hudson River rail tunnels, which carry more than160,000 passengers on more than 500 trains in and outof Penn Station every day, have long been in need of

major repairs. The urgency about the tunnels conditionincreased substantially after Hurricane Sandy, whichooded the tunnels for the rst time in their history,causing extensive damage. According to Amtrak, bothof the Hudson River tunnels need to be shut down, oneat a time for more than a year each, for major repairs.

With no alternative route into Penn Station, closureof one of these two tunnels would slash rail serviceacross the Hudson River by 75 percent during the busiest periods of the day, severely disrupting travelthroughout the region as commuters shift to alternativeways of crossing the river, such as cars, buses, PATHand ferries. The region urgently needs a new pair of railtunnels to keep traffic moving. Once built, new tunnelcapacity along with the addition of new platformsat Penn Station will provide the swing space therailroads need to continue operating uninterrupted as

major construction activity occurs at and around PennStation.

Leaving the Garden in place severely limits options for improving Penn Station.

With Madison Square Garden and Two Penn Plaza intheir current conguration, options for improving PennStation are severely restricted. Bleak entrances could be upgraded; the maze of concourses could be unied,rationalized, and expanded; and retail space could be built to attract high-quality food and goods. However,

the structural elements supporting the Garden complexlimit potential improvements to tracks and platforms,opportunities to raise ceiling heights and bring innatural light, and more. Leaving the Garden and itsstructural elements in place would also increase thecost and complexity of many other potential stationimprovements. A fresh approach to the design of thearena and station would allow for a vastly superiorstation and more appealing urban conditions.


7/44

This is a unique, once-in-a-generation opportunityto reimagine the future of Penn Station, MadisonSquare Garden and West Midtown.

Decisions about the Gardens future will affect thefuture of Penn Station. Madison Square Garden hasmoved three times in its history; it is reasonableto think it will move again. It is also important to

understand what will happen if the Garden stays inplace. This report examines three potential visionsof the future for the Garden one where the arenaremains in its current location; a second where it movesto the Farley Post Office Annex site, the western half ofthe block across 8th Avenue from the current Garden;and a third where it moves to the Morgan Post Officeand Annex site just a few blocks southwest of the wherethe Garden stands today.

Building a new Madison Square Garden would allow

Penn Station to expand and unlock the potential ofthe West Midtown district.

Relocating the Garden would unlock enormous benetsfor Penn Stations railroads and their riders, MadisonSquare Gardens owners, teams and artists and theirfans, as well as the public. Unearthing the Garden andall of its support columns and utilities would allowfor a complete overhaul of Penn Station, providing anopportunity to build a new city landmark. Likewise,the new Garden could be designed as an ultra-modernentertainment complex that has lower production

costs, attracts even more events and visitors, andsupports and catalyzes the future development of WestMidtown. The Alliance for a New Penn Station believesthat relocating the Garden, and ultimately Two PennPlaza as well, will be necessary to create a new, world-class Penn Station capable of handling the growth inrail ridership that is projected and anchoring the newcity within a city rising in West Midtown.

From the extensive analysis presented in this report,the Alliance for a New Penn Station recommends

the Morgan Post Office and Annex site as the mostsuitable place for Madison Square Garden to go.

The site of the Morgan site, located between 9thand 10th avenues and 28th and 30th streets, is bothlarge enough to accommodate a new state-of-the-artarena and a quick, three- to seven-minute walk fromPenn Station. Relocating the Garden to this site willprovide the city with a new arena and allow for thereconstruction and expansion of Penn Station, each ofwhich can be designed to vastly improve the conditionsof the district.

Addressing all of these challenges will requirecreative, new approaches.

Other cities that have reconstructed old or builtnew major train stations in dense, complex urbanenvironments, like San Francisco, London and Denver,have created a single entity and given it the authorityto act as master builder for the station area. This

method helps to address both infrastructure and landuse challenges and raise the revenue necessary to planfor the future. Similar approaches could deliver thesame results in New York.

The Alliance for a New Penn Station

In the summer of 2013, Regional Plan Association andthe Municipal Art Society led a coalition that convincedthe New York City Council to limit Madison Square

Gardens operating permit from a permit in perpetuityto one that expires in just 10 years. We now have eightand a half years to chart a new course for the Garden.This deadline is a unique opportunity to both rethinkhow this vital transportation hub can better fulll itsrole as a civic anchor and create a new, 21st centuryentertainment and cultural center that could become astrong economic driver for the city. Now is the time toconsider the future of Madison Square Garden so thatwe can plan for an improved Penn Station and WestMidtown district.

This report, the second in a series by the Alliance fora New Penn Station, focuses on the future of MadisonSquare Garden, and more specically on the questionof whether it should remain in place or be built anewon another site. The rst report, Penn 2023 , released inOctober 2013, summarized the vision of the campaignfor a new Penn Station. In it, the Alliance identied theelements of a successful strategy for West Midtown,including a comprehensive plan for the district; acompleted Moynihan Station; an expansion of transitcapacity, achieved through the Gateway Programand an expansion of Penn Station to the south; andconstruction of a new Madison Square Garden on anew site. Future reports by the Alliance for a New PennStation will focus on the numerous transportation andeconomic development issues in West Midtown.


8/448...transformed by a new civic anchor.


9/44


10/4410

The Future

Tens of millions of square feet of mixed-use urban development are under construcMidtown, and even more is envisioned. The realization of this plan will create a newhich will have major implications for the surrounding area and the entire transporNew York City.

The MTAs West Side Yard is currently being deckedover and Hudson Yards, the largest private real estatedevelopment in U.S. history, is rising above it. New York Citys 2005 and 2009 rezoning of the rail yards

and the surrounding district allows for the additionof 25 million square feet of office space, three millionsquare feet of hotel and two million square feet of retail,and 20,000 housing units. A 2011 report by Cushman& Wakeeld projected that current demand for newdevelopment will result in the full build-out of theHudson Yards district by 2041, bringing new residentsand visitors to the area. Many other sites in WestMidtown, including the Javits Convention Center, have been the subject of development plans over the years,some of which could gain momentum as Hudson Yards

is built out, further straining Penn Station and the restof the districts transportation network.

Two important infrastructure projects are underwaythat will help alleviate congestion at Penn Station.First, the 7 train a crucial subway line that connectsTimes Square, Grand Central Terminal, Citi Field,and downtown Flushing is being extended from itscurrent terminus at Times Square to a new stationat 34th Street and 11th Avenue. Extension of the 7train, set to open in 2015, was paid for using a valuecapture mechanism set up by the City of New York.First, the City created a new entity, the Hudson YardsInfrastructure Corporation, to raise revenue throughthe sale of bonds to pay for construction. Eventually,all developments within the value capture district willpay into the Hudson Yards District Improvement Fund,which will be used to repay the principal and intereston the initial bonds.

Second, the rst phase of the long-awaited MoynihanStation project is underway. Once fully implemented,portions of the landmarked James Farley Post Office,directly across 8th Avenue from Penn Station and

designed by McKim, Mead & White, the same rmthat designed the original Pennsylvania Station, will be converted into a new, grand train hall for Amtrakwith new passenger waiting areas and vertical accessto many of Penn Stations platforms via an expandedWestern Concourse. It will also add several newentrances to the Western Concourse and the 8th Avenuesubway station. This project was initially championed by the late-U.S. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan inthe 1990s. Work on phase one began in 2012 and is setto nish in 2016. The second phase of the project is

estimated to cost $700 million. Developers Related and Vornado have pledged roughly $500 million for phasetwo, and the Federal Transit Administration allocatedan additional $13 million earlier this year.

These two transit projects are critical to ensurethe future mobility needs of this growing districtand alleviate congestion at Penn Station. However,they simply will not create enough capacity in thetransportation network to handle the growth in traveldemand that is projected over the coming years.When Hudson Yards is fully built out, the 7 train willlikely carry tens of thousands of riders per day. Butthe 7 train is already congested and future growth inriders from the neighborhoods it serves in Queensand East Midtown could jeopardize its ability to servethe ridership projected in West Midtown. MoynihanStation will relieve much of the current congestion andconfusion at Penn Station, but will not substantiallyexpand the stations capacity to serve projected growthin commuter and intercity rail ridership.


11/44


12/4412

Penn Station is the nations busiest transit hub and a gateway to New York City, serof passengers per day. The station is cramped, crowded, and confusing to navigate, Built to serve 200,000 daily passengers, the station now handles more than half a mtime in its history. It is woefully unprepared to handle the huge increase in travel d

The Problem

Penn Station is operating above itseffective capacity.

Since the 1980s, the volume of passengers using PennStation has grown tremendously, with much of thisgrowth has come from commuters that live west ofthe Hudson River. Since 1980, annual ridership on NJTransits rail network has more than doubled, to 74.6million. Most of this growth is the result of NJ Transitsmajor capital improvements over the years, whichincreased the amount of direct, one-seat rides to PennStation. Ridership on Amtrak trains grew signicantlyin recent years as well, breaking numerous recordson the Northeast Corridor since the opening of AcelaExpress service in 2001. Today, there is virtually nomore room for growth in both trains and people atPenn Station.

Average Daily Ridership at Penn Station(Excluding Subways)

Ridership has grown dramatically at Penn Station since 1980.

Empire Line(Amtrak)

Hudson River(NJT & Amtrak)

East River(LIRR & Amtrak)

Grand Central


13/441

The lack of track and concourse capacity is not the

only problem that plagues the station. Some of PennStations other major issues include:

Train Delays:Train delays are common in Penn Station. Theyare often caused by aging infrastructure at thetrack level, including the Hudson River and EastRiver tunnels. They can also be traced back to thestations narrow platforms with limited verticalcirculation, which slows the process of clearingand increases queuing at platform stairwells andescalators.

Passenger Experience:Penn Station is now infamous for its cramped andoppressive conditions, and complexity that inducesa state of confusion and anxiety in its users.Located underground, the station lacks access tonatural light and air, and its retail spaces are farinferior to those offered at other major transit hubsin New York City.

Waynding:The Penn Station complex is poorly connected andcan be disorienting. There are no visual linkages between many of its public spaces, even oneslocated near each other, forcing the station to relyon signage for way nding. However, most of thestations signage has been installed by one of therailroads to assist its passengers, often ignoring orproviding incomplete information to passengers ofthe other railroads.

Street-Level Visibility:Madison Square Garden and Two Penn Plaza

dominate the streetscape and visual identity ofthe superblock, making Penn Station difficult forpassengers to nd. A Station in Need of Change

With poor visibility from the street, a cramped andconfusing layout, and frequent delays, Penn Stationneeds a near-complete overhaul over the next 20 years.


14/4414

The future of Penn Station is coupled withthe future of the Garden.

Following the destruction of the above-grade portionof the original Penn Station in 1963, the currentstation was rebuilt completely underground beneathMadison Square Garden and Two Penn Plaza. One ofManhattans most beautiful, historic structures waslost forever; gone with it were the buildings grandpublic spaces with high ceilings and natural light, boldstreet identity, and unied design.

Because of the way the new office and sports complexwas constructed, its future became intertwined withthe future of Penn Station. Since the 1960s, Amtrak,Long Island Rail Road and NJ Transit have all made

substantial improvements to the station, but each ofthese efforts has been constrained by the columnsand utilities that support the Garden and Two PennPlaza. Some concourses and passageways have beenexpanded and renovated over the years, but thestations tracks and platforms are largely original.

The footprints of the Farley Post Office (left), Madison Square Garden (center, circle) and Two Penn Plaza (right)above Penn Stations tracks and platforms.

Fixing the stations many problems will be challengingin any case, but the presence of Madison SquareGarden and Two Penn Plaza will constrain our abilityto increase the height of the stations ceilings, bringnatural light and air into the concourses, and makemany of the other potential improvements, includingany changes at the track and platform level, moredifficult and/or expensive because of the need to workaround the Gardens dense network of structuralelements.

To preserve service while making major changesto Penn Station, new capacity is needed to provide

swing space for all of the operating railroads to useduring construction. New tunnels under the HudsonRiver, track and platform capacity at the station anda completed Moynihan Station are also needed. Therailroads could also implement several through-running trains in the peak hours in the near termto ease train congestion and connect new marketsthroughout the region.

Track Alignment at Penn Station


15/441

New trans-Hudson rail tunnel capacity is anessential part of any plan for Penn Station.

Amtrak is currently advancing the Gateway Program,comprised of a suite of projects that together willmake comprehensive improvements to the NortheastCorridor between Newark, New Jersey and New York,as well as replacing the 100-year-old Hudson Riverrail tunnels. The program will double train capacityunder the Hudson River, a critical segment of theNortheast Corridor between Manhattan and all pointssouth, including not only New Jersey, but also the biggest intercity rail markets in the country, such asPhiladelphia, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C.

Construction of the new tunnels began in 2013 with$185 million in federal funding. These funds arededicated to building a segment under the Hudson Yards development site to preserve the future right-of-way for this critical project. It was estimated in2012 that the entire Gateway Program will cost $14.5 billion and could be completed by 2025. Once built,new tunnel capacity along with the addition of severalnew platforms at Penn Station will provide the swingspace the railroads will need to continue operatinguninterrupted as major construction activity occurs atand around Penn Station.

The Gateway Program

(Top) Damage to the Hudson River tunnelscaused by Hurricane Sandy. (Below) The tunnelbox under construction beneath Hudson Yardswill preserve the future right-of-way for theGateway tunnels into Penn Station.

0 500 1000 N

Empire Service Tunnel

Hudson Yards Tunnel Box(Under Construction) Block 780 / Penn South

Hudson River Tunnels

Proposed GatewayTrans-Hudson Tunnel

Existing TracksGateway Tracks (Preliminary Alignment)

The Gateway Project in Manhattan (Preliminary Alignment)

A m t r a k / H N T B

R P A


16/4416

Moving the Garden would be a tremendousopportunity for West Midtown to reinvent Penn Station.

Relocating the Garden would allow for massiveenhancements to Penn Station and additionaldevelopment and retail opportunities. Without theGarden above it, the station could be completelyredesigned from the ground up to provide vastlysuperior transit facilities with better pedestriancirculation and wider platforms to accommodatemore trains and more people, grand interior publicspaces with more air and natural light, and a fargreater urban setting.

A new Garden will be a boon for the owners,teams, entertainers and fans as well as the public.

A new, state-of-the-art Madison Square Gardenwould provide an enhanced fan experience, newamenities, uses, retail opportunities and publicspaces. A new arena would also allow for animproved, modern design that opens up to streetsand improves rather than detracts from thesurrounding neighborhood. A new Garden would also better facilitate back-of-house operations like loading

and unloading, and event management at lower coststo its owners than the current Garden. Likewise, anew arena would be a huge economic catalyst forWest Midtown, further anchoring the enormousdevelopments that are under construction there.

At the urging of the Alliance for a New Penn Station, in 2013, the New York City CSquare Gardens operating permit to just 10 more years, enough time to develop theof Penn Station and Madison Square Garden. While some improvements to Penn SGarden stays in place, moving the Garden would deliver far greater benets.

The Opportunity

The Barclays Center shows how a modern arena caninclude attractive, dynamic open spaces.

Looking to Barclays

j


17/441

New York and New Jersey have built severalnew sports facilities in recent years, proving thewill and capacity to build exists.

In the past decade, the region has seen the opening ofthe Prudential Center (2007), Citi Field (2009), YankeeStadium (2009), MetLife Stadium (2010) and theBarclays Center (2012). As these projects demonstrate,it is more than possible to take on the complex,challenging project of building a new arena. For all ofthe reasons that have been described, we should do itagain.

The Garden has moved three times before.

The Madison Square Garden fans and visitors identifywith today is actually the fourth iteration in a series of venues spanning 135 years and three separate locationsthroughout Midtown.

The rst was built on the site of a rail depot at thenortheast corner of Madison Square in 1879. Thesecond Garden was built on the same site and designed by McKim, Mead and White. The third moved uptownto a larger venue designed by Thomas W. Lamb and built in 1925 located between 49th and 50th streets on8th Avenue. The current Garden, the fourth, was built

on the site of the original Penn Station in 1963. Today,the Garden is the oldest arena in the NHL and thesecond-oldest arena in the NBA.

The current Madison Square Garden isnt the rstentertainment facility to bear the name. In fact, therehave been four other Gardens on three different sitesthroughout Midtown.

The Many Madison Square Gardens

M A S

( T o p t h r e e ) U S L i b r a r y o f C o n g r e s s P r i n t s a n d P h o t o g r a p h s O n l i n e C a t a l o g


18/4418

The Garden has tried to move from its currentlocation before.

In 1986, the Garden revealed plans to build what would

have been its fth rendition atop the MTAs West Side Yard (the current site of Hudson Yards) and redevelopthe site between 7th and 8th avenues. The proposalcalled for construction of a new arena with 22,000seats, along with a new office and entertainmentcomplex. Cesar Pelli, in association with Howard,Needles, Tammen & Bergendorff were selected todesign the arena, while Skidmore, Owings & Merrillpartnered with Frank Gehry won a design competitionfor the redevelopment of the current Garden site.However, the collapse of the real estate market in 1988

led to the abandonment of the project by 1989.

In 2005, talk of a fth Garden emerged yet again. Theteam tasked with executing the Moynihan Stationproject envisioned an ambitious scheme to relocatethe Garden to the Western Annex of the Farley PostOffice and redevelop Two Penn Plaza. By the summerof 2006, a non-binding $7 billion deal was circulated,which involved the Garden moving into the FarleyBuilding annex, building of Moynihan Station,reconstruction of Penn Station and construction of anew commercial complex atop Penn Station equivalentin scope to Rockefeller Center. In the ensuingmonths, the scope of work evolved, but during a stallin negotiations, the effort abruptly ended with theresignation of then-Governor Spitzer in March 2008.Shortly afterward, the Garden announced it wouldrenovate the current structure rather than move.

(Top): Proposed Madison Square Garden, site bounded byWest 31st and West 37th streets, 10th and 12th avenues,designed by Cesar Pelli in 1987, with a model of the proposedredevelop of Penn Station shown below.

(Bottom): An image showing a relocated Madison SquareGarden to the Farley Building, along with improvements to Penn Station.

Previous Efforts to Move Madison Square Garden


19/441

Where Can the Garden Go?

A modern arena needs the width of two city blocks. There are very few sites in West Midtown that meet that requirement. The Morgan site is one of the few double-block sites that is not a park, active development site, or predominately residential area.

Finding a viable site is the next step in relocating Madison Square Garden. A suitaaccessible to mass transit, have neighboring uses compatible with a large entertainenough to accommodate a new, modern multiuse arena.

There are viable sites that could beassembled, but its essential to act now.

Moving Madison Square Garden will be a seriouschallenge, but it is feasible. Sites in West Midtownexist that are large enough to accommodate an arena,have good transit access and could be assembled froma few property owners. However, the most feasiblesites are unlikely to remain available for long.

Double-Block Sites in West Midtown

PENN

PENN SOUTH

TIMESSQUARE

HERALDSQUARE

MORGANFACILITY

STATIONMANHATTAN

1

WEST

PABTBRYANTPARK

JAVITSCENTER

HUDSON

HIGH LINE

CHELSEA PARKPENN STATIONSOUTH HOUSESNYCHA

(WESTERN RAIL YARDS) (EASTERN RAIL YARDS)

CHELSEA HOUSES

YARDSHUDSON YARDS

2PENN

PENN

FARLEY ANNEX MOYN.

NEW

STATION

42ND S

40TH S

38TH S

36TH S

34TH S

32ND S

30TH S

28TH S

26TH S

7 T H

A V E

8 T H

A V E

9 T H

A V E

1 0 T H

A V E

1 1 T H

A V E

As part of the campaign for a New Penn Station, the Alliance formed a working group to look into possiblesites for a new arena. In the end, the working groupchose to look at two sites in greater detail: the FarleyPost Offices Western Annex and the Morgan PostalFacility and Annex .


20/4420

At rst blush, the Farley Annex seems like a logical option for relocating Madison Square Garden; however, it presentsa number of challenges, given its landmark status andlocation above the active tracks leading to Penn Station

(Bottom): Rendering showing proposed improvements as part of phase one of Moynihan Station.

The Farley Building

Alternative One: The Farley Building Annex

The Farley Annex could be a viable site,but presents a number of unique challenges.

The Farley Annex, located on the western half of the block across 8th Avenue from the current Garden,would be a convenient location in many respects.It would maintain a direct connection to MoynihanStation and Penn Station while moving it one blockcloser to Hudson Yards, the High Line and HudsonRiver Parkway.

As part of the previous plan to move the Garden there,a tremendous number of architectural and engineering

studies were done. It was determined the Farley Annexcould accommodate an arena, but it would require anumber of trade-offs. Constructing an arena withina landmarked building and on top of active rail linespresents extraordinary challenges. Because of the sizeof the Farley annex, the site would not offer the sameamount of commercial development opportunitiessurrounding a new arena as a larger site would.

Our working group concluded that the Farley Annexwas an exceptionally challenging site and therefore aless than desirable location for a new Madison SquareGarden.


21/442

(Above): The current Morgan United States Post Officebuilding was constructed in 1933, with its design credited to James A. Wetmore. Originally the site existed within a low-rise residential and industrial context, but with the HudsonYards and Manhattan West developments soon comingonline, the neighborhood context is changing.

(Left): The site of the Morgan Post Office was once hometo the Hudson River Railroad Depot, a terminal facilitybuilt by Cornelius Vanderbilt to accommodate passengersand the citys rst freight lines up and down the west of Manhattan. The line and depot were demolished in 1931 tobuild the current post office facility.

The Morgan Postal Facility

The Morgan Postal Facility and Annex sitecould accommodate a new arena, along withnew public spaces and new additional uses.

On a two-block site in West Midtown, bounded by 28thand 30th streets and 10th and 11th avenues, the site isa three- to seven- minute walk from Penn Station, andclose to the new terminus of the 7 train at 34th Streetand 11th Avenue. Smart planning and context-sensitivedesign could bring new open space and new culturalprogramming opportunities to the area, and ensurethat the new arena is integrated into the surroundingcommunity.

If this is to be the location for a new Madison SquareGarden, steps need to be taken now to secure the siteand facilitate the Gardens eventual move, or it could be lost to another use. Additionally, the building is stillin full use as a mail sorting and distribution center forManhattan, and those uses would need to be relocated.

The working group concluded that the Morgan siteis the most suitable future space for Madison SquareGarden.

Alternative Two: The Morgan Postal Facility

c s . t r

a i n s . c

o m u s e r w a n s w h e e l


22/4422

There a number of reasons why moving MadisonSquare Garden is viable and compelling:

A better Penn StationThe station could be reimagined and a safer, moremodern facility could be built with improvedpedestrian circulation, more light and air, andmore new retail opportunities.

An upgraded districtMoving Madison Square Garden would allow thePenn Station superblock to be better integratedinto the surrounding neighborhood, and newopportunities for retail, open space, and pedestrianamenities. Similarly, the Morgan superblock could

be reimagined and become more welcoming topedestrians and new economic opportunity.

Close proximity to transitIt is true that displacing the arena would moveit farther from Penn Station than it currently is, but not by much. A new arena on the Morgan sitewould be a short 4-7 minute walk to Penn Station,nearly the same distance as Brooklyns BarclaysCenter is to its neighboring transit hub, which is a1-5 minute walk depending on point of departure.

Improved stadium facility and new programming opportunities A more modern arena could bring operationalimprovements, such as simpler loading andunloading, leading to a reduction in operating costsand a broader range of stadium events.

Increased open space and improved pedestrian experienceMoving the Garden to the Morgan site wouldallows drastic improvements to the pedestrianenvironment around Penn Station and would

enable improved pedestrian connectivity to theHigh Line and Chelsea Park. The area around theMorgan site could also be vastly improved withredesigned and more welcoming streets, and astronger connection between buildings on the siteand adjacent neighborhoods.

In November 2013, the Friends of the High Line unveiled adesign concept for the Spur, an addition to the third section

of the High Line at the Rail Yards. The Spur will be directlyadjacent to the Morgan Site, as seen in the images on the following page. The Spur concepts were developed by JamesCorner Field Operations and Diller Scodio + Renfro.

Potential Connections to the High Line

Development of the Morgan site couldallow for a new long-distance bus facilityThe development of the Morgan site could allowfor a new long distance bus facility. Located nearthe Lincoln Tunnel, this site could accommodate

a below-grade bus facility that would connect tothe tunnel via the Dyer Corridor. This would helpalleviate bus traffic and improve traffic congestionin the area.


23/442

A second option would be to locate Garden on the northern portion of the Morgan site between 29th and 31st streets. With thisoption, a new long-distance bus facility could be placed under a plaza along the west or east side of the site depending on theexact placement of the new arena.

This rst concept would locate a new Garden on the southern portion of the Morgan site between 9th and 10th avenues and 28thand 30st streets. This option could accommodate a below-grade connection to the Lincoln Tunnel via the Dyer corridor, whichwould allow for the creation of a new long distance bus facility under the plaza located to the north of the new arena.

Morgan Site: Preliminary Concept One

Morgan Site: Preliminary Concept Two

NEWPENN

PLAZA

PENN SOUTH

NEWMSG

PLAZA

NEWPENN

PLAZA

PENN SOUTHNEWMSGPLAZA


24/4424A New Civic Anchor for the District


25/442


26/4426New Open Space Opportunities


27/442


28/4428

NEWMSG

STADIUM FLOOR 9TH AVE

FORECOURT PLAZA

ENTRY

EXISTINGMSG

STADIUM FLOOR

8TH AVE

+130

1. STADIUM FLOOR BELOW GRADEEXISTING STADIUM FLOOR - 5 LEVELS ABOVE GRADE

2. STADIUM FLOOR AT GRADE 3. STADIUM FLOOR ABOVE GRADE

31ST ST 28TH ST

high LINE

NEWMSG

30TH ST28TH ST+5

29TH ST

FORECOURT PLAZA

STADIUM FLOOR ENTRY high LINE

30TH ST28TH ST 29TH ST

FORECOURT PLAZA

NEWMSG

RETAIL RETAIL

STADIUM FLOOR ENTRY

At the current Madison Square Garden, the stadium oor is ve ights up, making loading and unloading difficult. Thestadium oor of the new arena at the Morgan site could be positioned in a number of ways to make loading easier. Additionally, as highlighted in the third alternative above, accommodations could be made to potentially preserve 29th Street,if deemed necessary because of traffic congestion concerns.

More Options for Positioning the Stadium Floor


29/442

Previous Thinking on the Morgan Site

This working group is not the rst to proposemoving Madison Square Garden to the Morgansite. Previous studies that investigated theidea include:

SHoP Architects

The Morgan site was identied as the preferredsite for a relocated Madison Square Gardenduring the May 2013 MAS Design Challenge for aNew Penn Station and the Next Madison SquareGarden by SHoP Architects. Their proposalsinvolved connecting the relocated Garden toPenn Station through the creation of a new publicpark between 8th and 9th avenues, a block thatis currently fully built-out, and is comprisedof largely residential along the southern half.The SHoP proposal also explored the idea ofextending the High Line to connect to this newpark as a means of avoiding pedestrian conictswith the Lincoln Tunnel exit at Dyer Ave.

University of PennsylvaniaPenn Staion Planning Studio

The Morgan site was also identied as a possiblelocation for a new Garden in the University ofPennsylvania, School of Design 2013 Penn StationPlanning Studio. That report also proposedconnecting a relocated Garden to Penn Station via an elevated open space though does notpropose the Gateway Park. Instead, the elevatedopen space would pass over the sidewalk andparking lane along 31st Street.

Rendering showing SHoPs proposal for a relocatedGarden on the Morgan site. The proposed SHoPscheme would have the Garden be serviced through amidblock loading dock, with the arena surrounded by

additional mixed-used development.

Elevated park proposal along 31st Street, part of theUPenn proposal.

S H o P A r c h i t e c t s

U P e n n S t u d i o


30/4430

Is There an Option for Keeping the Garden in Pl

There are options for making incremental improvements to both the arena and PennSquare Garden in place, but they wont allow us to x many of Penn Stations undeWorse, they could lock in place the current arrangement for another generation.

There needs to be a Plan B.

Madison Square Garden will move eventually. Thequestion is, when? In the event a deal between thestate, city, railroads and Madison Square Gardendoes not get done in the next eight years, there needs

to be a plan for improving Penn Station and thesurrounding district with the Garden still in place.In this case, the Alliance for a New Penn Station hasidentied a few potential improvements, including theconstruction of a retail/office wrap, and relocation ofthe Madison Square Garden theater on 8th Avenue andreconstruction of the 7th Avenue sidewalk and plazasto allow for new grand entrances to Penn Station.

View of potential retail and office wrap around the existing Madison Square Garden and Two Penn Plaza.

Improving the Garden in place could dramatically changethe facade of the building and offer grand new entrances tothe station, but would likely be unable to address the severelimitations of the tracks and platforms.

Adding New Uses to the Current Garden Facility

The Downside of Improving the Garden in Place


31/443

View of a new train hall in Penn Station, made possible with the removal of the Theater at Madison Square Garden.

View of a potential rooftop amenity on top of a new train hall.

Potential 8th Avenue Train Hall

The Garden on Top of the Garden


32/4432A New 8th Avenue Entrance for Penn S


33/44


34/44


35/443

EASTERN RAILYARDS

TRANSFER AREA4.6 M SF

HIGH LINETRANSFER AREA

PROPOSEDPORT

AUTHORITYCORRIDORTRANSFER

AREA

PROPOSED

SPECIAL HUDSON YARDS

DISTRICT55 M SF IN NEW

DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS

SPECIAL MOYNIHANSTATION DISTRICT

1.1 M SF

FARLEY COMPLEXFAR 10

3.7 M SF

2 PENNFAR 151.7 M SF

PENN STATIONFAR 10

2.4 M SF

3.2 M SF

2.7 M SF

Numbers for Midtown West context area reflect as-of-right FARNumbers for study area are as-of-right plus bonus FAR

LEGEND

ZONING DISTRICT

STUDY SITE

PROPOSED BOUNDARY

EXISTING BOUNDARY

TRANSFER AREA

34TH ST

33RD ST

31ST ST

30TH ST

8 T H

A V E

9 T H

A V E

1 0 T H

A V E

PENN SOUTH

PENNNEW

STATION

FARLEY ANNEX MOYNIHAN

STATION

NEW

CHELSEA PARK

HIGH LINE

MANHATTANWEST

HUDSONYARDS

NEWMSG

LEGENDMSG RELOCATION

GREEN SPACE

RETAIL

OFFICE

HOTEL

RESIDENTIAL

This district has tremendous development potential for residential, office and retail projects.Where the development rights are received would have to be carefully managed.

A new Garden on the Morgan site could help create an open space and retail coordior, connecting Penn Station, the High Lineand the river.

Zoning Capacity of the Morgan Site

Pedestrianized Environment and Activated Retail Ground Plane


36/4436

Culture as the Placemaking Driver for the District

As part of the research by the Penn 2023 working group, Grimshaw Architects, in partnership with culture and

placemaking consultancy Futurecity, conducted a cultural resource survey of West Midtown. The process involveda block-by-block survey of West Midtown, taking note of its many cultural assets.

Next Steps: A Cultural Master Plan

Culture plays a signicant part in shaping our urbanfabric. A cultural district/neighborhood can act asan important catalyst for economic development,and a tool for placemaking and social engagement.The cultural resource survey demonstrated theimportance of these assets to West Midtown. A

cultural master plan could answer questions, suchas: How can the city best regenerate the districtand overcome the current stigma attached to WestMidtown? How can we best empower existingconstituencies and communities threatened withdisplacement?

One of the central goals of the Cultural Master Planwill be to encourage private real estate intereststo engage the cultural resources as partners in thedevelopment of the neighborhood.

To conduct the survey, a block-by-block analysis wasdone of all of West Midtown.

Conducting the Cultural Resource Survey

Findings

The cultural resource survey reveals a surprisingmosaic of cultural resources and creative industrieswithin close proximity to the station, the transportgateway and original heart of the city. Theseresources range from small but important privatearts and design organizations, to semi-public event

spaces to some of the largest public venues in thecity. While these assets are numerous and diverse,many are hidden from the public, and there is not yet a successful unifying neighborhood identity orpronouncement that they exist.

There is an opportunity to coordinate among thepatchwork of neighborhood stakeholders to createa Cultural Master Plan that will preserve, cultivate,and promote the districts creative assets.

As the urban population increases,so does the impact and importance ofculture and creativity. Culture is thelifeblood of our cities, it is a major reasonwhy people gravitate to them - to live,work or visit. Culture is deeply embeddedin their social and economic fortunes,hence culture is now at the heart of public policy in most major cities.

- The World Cities Culture Forum

G r i m s h a w A r c h i t e c t s a n d F u t u r e c i t y


37/443

Overlaying the districts cultural assets with BIDs and stakeholder groups highlights the need for a morecoordinated district identity.

The survey ndings were mapped, showing a surprising mosaic of cultural resources and creative industrieswithin close proximity to Penn Station. These resources range from small but important private, behind thescenes arts and design organizations, to semi-public event spaces and the largest public venues in the city.

Mapping of Assets with Stakeholder Overlay

Cultural Resources: Uncovering Cultural Assets


38/4438

The Need for Leadership

Addressing the infrastructure challenges outlined in this report will not be easy. It wleadership from government officials and nancial contributions from everyone whincluding federal, state and city government, as well as businesses and transit users

A few notable examples of innovative project deliveryand management structures from other cities:

Londons Crossrail

Crossrail, Europes largest construction project, isa new rail project that will increase Londons railcapacity by 10%. The entity designing and buildingthe project, Crossrail, was a 50/50 joint venture between Transport for London and the Department forTransport until 2008, when it became a fully-ownedsubsidiary of Transport for London. The $14 billionproject is being paid through government sources,including support from the mayor, transit riders fares,a local business tax levy, and nancial contributionsfrom key beneciaries of Crossrail, includingHeathrow Airport Holdings and Canary Wharf Group.

San Franciscos Transbay

In San Francisco, a new entity, the Transbay JointPowers Authority, was developed to pursue a $4.5 billion project to rebuild the Transbay TransitCenter, extend a Caltrain train line, and create anew community with 2,600 new homes (35 percentaffordable) along with offices, retail and park space.The Transbay Joint Powers Authority is responsible forthe nancing, design, development, construction andoperation of the new transit center and rail extension.

It is also collaborating with the San FranciscoRedevelopment Agency and municipal departments tocreate an adjacent new transit-oriented neighborhood.The TJPA is a joint exercise of powers authoritycreated by the City and County of San Francisco, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, the PeninsulaCorridor Joint Powers Board and Caltrans.

With less than nine years left on Madison SquareGardens current operating permit, New YorkGovernor Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasiohave a once-in-a-generation opportunity to transformWest Midtown by working with the Gardens owners,

the railroads and federal partners. Their leadership,along with that of New Jersey Governor ChrisChristies, is crucial to ensuring that Penn Station andits entire connecting transit infrastructure are able tosupport the New York regions future growth.

New York City has experimented with new models,including the 7 train extension, which relies on thecooperation of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the City, and tax increment nancingfrom developments in the Hudson Yards district,

but the City and State have not yet taken fulladvantage of the opportunities available to buildtransit infrastructure coordinated with surroundingresidential and commercial development. New modelscould help advance reconstruction of Penn Station andthe new Hudson River rail tunnels, along with otherfuture transit projects in New York City.

A huge multitude of stakeholders would be involved ina program to construct new trans-Hudson rail tunnels,relocate Madison Square Garden and rebuild PennStation. A single entity should be created to be themaster builder and district planner, which can raiserevenue and aggregate funding from multiple sources,acquire real property and enforce district plansthrough a combination of incentives and disincentives.This would not be unprecedented. With leadershipfrom key elected officials, other cities around theworld have gured out how to deal with similarlycomplex infrastructure predicaments using innovativeproject delivery and management structures to nanceand build transit infrastructure and transit-orienteddevelopment districts.


39/443

Conclusion

After thoroughly examining the issues laid out in thisreport, the Alliance for a New Penn Station and itsdesign working group have concluded that to createa truly world-class transit hub and entertainmentcenter, our political leaders should: immediately begin

working with all of the property owners, railroads andaffected agencies to develop a plan to relocate MadisonSquare Garden to the Morgan site; initiate criticalnear-term improvements to Penn Station, including theGateway Program; and complete the Moynihan Stationproject.

Relocating the Garden will allow for a new PennStation worthy of this great city and region. Movingthe Garden to the Morgan site offers benets andopportunities to West Midtown in excess of the

benets offered by other viable sites, but not withoutenormous challenges and costs. It provides theopportunity to rethink Penn Station to create vastlysuperior transit facilities with greater capacity andimproved passenger experience, interior public spaceswith much needed light and air, and urban conditionswith additional commercial and retail development. A new Garden would be a huge economic catalystfor West Midtown, further anchoring the enormousdevelopments that are under construction there.

The Garden has moved before and it will move again.Now is the time to plan a new Penn Station to be theanchor of a new city within a city in West Midtownand the central hub of the nations largest metropolitanregion.


40/4440

Sources

Written Sources

Amtrak. Amtrak Sets Ridership Record and Moves the Nations Economy Forward. October 2013. http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/730/658/ FY13-Record-Ridership-ATK-13-122.pdf . Accessed October 2014.

Amtrak. Construction Begins to Preserve Possible Pathway of New TrainTunnels into Penn Station, New York. September 2013. http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/930/618/Amtrak-Hudson-Yards-Ceremony-ATK-13-105.pdf . Accessed October 2014.

Amtrak and HNTB. S tructural Assessment of the Amtrak Under RiverTunnels in NYC Inundated by Super Storm Sandy . September 2014.

Cushman & Wakeeld. Hudson Yards Demand and Development Study .November 2006.

Empire State Development Corporation and AKRF. Farley Post Office Moynihan Station Redevelopment Project FEIS. Chapter 8: Historic Resources. August 2006.

Hudson Yards Development Corporation. Rezoning . http://www.hydc.org/html/project/rezoning.shtml . Accessed October 2014.

Ko, Kathi and Ben Rosenblatt. Land Value Capture in the Tri-State Region. http://blog.tstc.org/2013/08/23/land-value-capture-in-the-tri-state-region . Accessed October 2014.

Moynihan Station Development Corporation. About the Project.http://www.esd.ny.gov/Subsidiaries_Projects/MSDC/MSDC.html .Accessed October 2014.

New York Metropolitan Transportation Council. Hub Bound Travel, 1980-2012. http://www.nymtc.org . Accessed October 2014.

University of Pennsylvania, School of Design. Reimagining Penn Station

Studio. Spring 2013. https://www.design.upenn.edu/city-regional-planning/graduate/work/reimagining-penn-station

Stern, Robert A. M., and David Fishman. New York 2000: Architectureand Urbanism between the Bicentennial and the Millennium. New York: Monacelli, 2006.

World Cities Culture Forum. Overview.http://www.worldcitiescultureforum.com/overview . AccessedOctober2014.

Maps and Data Sources

Romalewski, Steve. Spatiality Blog. http://www.urbanresearch.org/ resources/subway-data-gis-format . Accessed August 2013.

NYC Open Data. Department of Information Technology andTelecommuncations. https://nycopendata.socrata.comAccessed previous iteration of website August 2013.

New York City Department of City Planning. Bytes of the Big Apple.http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/bytes/applbyte.shtml .Access August 2013. Main data source: MapPluto 13v1.
http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/730/658/FY13-Record-Ridership-ATK-13-122.pdfhttp://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/730/658/FY13-Record-Ridership-ATK-13-122.pdfhttp://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/930/618/Amtrak-Hudson-Yards-Ceremony-ATK-13-105.pdfhttp://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/930/618/Amtrak-Hudson-Yards-Ceremony-ATK-13-105.pdfhttp://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/930/618/Amtrak-Hudson-Yards-Ceremony-ATK-13-105.pdfhttp://www.hydc.org/html/project/rezoning.shtmlhttp://www.hydc.org/html/project/rezoning.shtmlhttp://blog.tstc.org/2013/08/23/land-value-capture-in-the-tri-state-regionhttp://blog.tstc.org/2013/08/23/land-value-capture-in-the-tri-state-regionhttp://www.esd.ny.gov/Subsidiaries_Projects/MSDC/MSDC.htmlhttp://www.nymtc.org/https://www.design.upenn.edu/city-regional-planning/graduate/work/reimagining-penn-stationhttps://www.design.upenn.edu/city-regional-planning/graduate/work/reimagining-penn-stationhttp://www.worldcitiescultureforum.com/overviewhttp://www.urbanresearch.org/resources/subway-data-gis-formathttp://www.urbanresearch.org/resources/subway-data-gis-formathttps://nycopendata.socrata.com/http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/bytes/applbyte.shtmlhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/bytes/applbyte.shtmlhttps://nycopendata.socrata.com/http://www.urbanresearch.org/resources/subway-data-gis-formathttp://www.urbanresearch.org/resources/subway-data-gis-formathttp://www.worldcitiescultureforum.com/overviewhttps://www.design.upenn.edu/city-regional-planning/graduate/work/reimagining-penn-stationhttps://www.design.upenn.edu/city-regional-planning/graduate/work/reimagining-penn-stationhttp://www.nymtc.org/http://www.esd.ny.gov/Subsidiaries_Projects/MSDC/MSDC.htmlhttp://blog.tstc.org/2013/08/23/land-value-capture-in-the-tri-state-regionhttp://blog.tstc.org/2013/08/23/land-value-capture-in-the-tri-state-regionhttp://www.hydc.org/html/project/rezoning.shtmlhttp://www.hydc.org/html/project/rezoning.shtmlhttp://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/930/618/Amtrak-Hudson-Yards-Ceremony-ATK-13-105.pdfhttp://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/930/618/Amtrak-Hudson-Yards-Ceremony-ATK-13-105.pdfhttp://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/930/618/Amtrak-Hudson-Yards-Ceremony-ATK-13-105.pdfhttp://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/730/658/FY13-Record-Ridership-ATK-13-122.pdfhttp://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/730/658/FY13-Record-Ridership-ATK-13-122.pdf


41/44


42/4442

MAS Board of Directors

Chair MAS Board Eugenie L. Birch

President Vin Cipolla

Vice ChairFred Iseman

TreasurerJames M. Clark, Jr.

Secretary

Frances A. Resheske

General CounselEarl D. Weiner, Esq.

Enid L. BealPaul R. BeirneElizabeth BelferSerena BoardmanGabriel CalatravaLisa Smith Cashin Vishaan Chakrabarti

Kathryn C. Chenault, Esq.Carol ColettaMichael P. DonovanKitty HawksDaniel HernandezManuela V. Hoelterhoff Michael B. HoffmanSophia KovenDavid W. LevinsonChristy MacLearGregory Morey Julio PetersonCarlos PujolDavid F. SolomonKent M. Swig Yeohlee Teng Alison TocciThomas VecchioneThomas L. WoltzWilliam H. Wright IIGary J. Zarr

Penn 2023 Working Group

Many thanks to the participants inthe RPA and MAS Penn 2023 workinggroup for their insights, leadership anddedication to this project.

David Childs

H3 Hardy Collaboration ArchitectureHugh Hardy

Woods BagotJeffrey HolmesFrank Lupo

Marvel ArchitectsJonathan Marvel

Kohn Pedersen Fox AssociatesJill LernerRobert Whitlock Albert WeiJennifer Pehr Alison Mills

Grimshaw Architects

Vincent Chang Aaron Vaden-YoumansTali Cantor

FuturecityMark Davy Tim Jones

MAS Policy and Planning Staff

Margaret NewmanKate SlevinSami NaimMike Ernst Aileen Gorsuch Alison Brown

RPA Staff

Robert D. YaroThomas K. WrightDaniel Schned

Wendy PollackRichard BaroneJeffrey ZupanL. Nicolas Ronderos

Additional Thanks

Thanks to the following rms for theirwork on this project:

DBOX VISUALHOUSESchlaich Bergermann and Partners

Thanks to the rms who participatedin the MAS Design Challenge for a New Penn Station and the Next MSG :

Diller Scodio +RenfroH3 Hardy Collaboration ArchitectureSkidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM)SHoP Architects

Thanks to James Lima Planning +Development, with support from EncherConsulting, LLC, for their work inproducing Unlocking Penns Potential:Establishing a Penn Station Redevelopmentand Revenue Capture District .
http://www.h3hc.com/http://www.woodsbagot.com/http://marvelarchitects.com/http://www.kpf.com/http://grimshaw-architects.com/http://futurecity.co.uk/http://www.dbox.com/http://www.visualhouse.co/http://www.sbp.de/enhttp://www.dsrny.com/http://www.h3hc.com/http://www.som.com/http://www.shoparc.com/http://jameslimadevelopment.com/http://jameslimadevelopment.com/http://jameslimadevelopment.com/http://jameslimadevelopment.com/http://jameslimadevelopment.com/http://www.shoparc.com/http://www.som.com/http://www.h3hc.com/http://www.dsrny.com/http://www.sbp.de/enhttp://www.visualhouse.co/http://www.dbox.com/http://futurecity.co.uk/http://grimshaw-architects.com/http://www.kpf.com/http://marvelarchitects.com/http://www.woodsbagot.com/http://www.h3hc.com/


43/44

New York City deserves a world-class trainstation and truly dynamic arena. In order tomake this happen, MAS and RPA formed the Alliance for a New Penn Station. Through

this coordinated effort, the Alliance willwork toward planning a new Penn Station

and the next Madison Square Garden.

NEW PENN STATIONJoin the Alliance for a

Send an email [email protected] to join.

Visitmas.org andrpa.org to learn more.
mailto:[email protected]://www.mas.org/http://www.rpa.org/http://www.rpa.org/http://www.mas.org/mailto:[email protected]


44/44

msg & the future of west midtown

Documents