Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Bangkok_Dangeresque t1_j25qz6b wrote

Maybe I need to re-read the proposal, but I don't think the state is paying for any of the private developments. By designating it as blighted, they can permit reconstruction that skirts normal review and zoning to build faster and higher than the ordinary process and air rights would allow. But the developers would be paying for it, and pay the state a fee which would in theory finance a big a chunk of the reconstruction of Penn Station and expansion to Penn South.

9

rainzer t1_j25x9ux wrote

Cause all the money keeps going to Vornado who in turn intentionally leaves that shit undeveloped and run down to keep getting more money

The article even says as much with the Bloomberg building.

1

Bangkok_Dangeresque t1_j2600pd wrote

>Cause all the money keeps going to Vornado who in turn intentionally leaves that shit undeveloped and run down to keep getting more money
>
>The article even says as much with the Bloomberg building.

I think you may have misunderstood. Vornado doesn't get payouts from the government for keeping their properties dilapidated. Their endgame is to postpone paying to renovate their buildings while waiting for special permission from the city/state to build something larger on the site.

It's shitty behavior if deliberate (it's not specifically alleged in this lawsuit for these properties). But they wouldn't be the only real estate company ever to rationally decide that there was no point in paying good money to refurbish buildings in the shitty part of town. Certainly not while the floor is falling out of the commercial real estate market.

The upshot is that even if it is bad behavior getting rewarded, the city is still going to penalize them by extracting billions of dollars from the company upfront to pay for infrastructure (rather put the city billions of dollars in debt upfront and have to wait for 20 years to make the money back on tax payments).

7