At a state board meeting today with an unusual amount of open disagreement, Empire State Development Corporation officials unveiled a set of preliminary plans for an expansion and major renovation of the 22-year-old facility at an estimated cost of $1.8 billion, $200 million more than is currently budgeted for an earlier plan.

Now almost a year since the Spitzer administration decided, after a year of planning, to scrap a large expansion plan and instead do a renovation and small expansion, ESDC officials told the board of the Convention Center Development Corporation that they were nearing approval for the first of two phases for the project.

The convention center is one of the largest projects in the state financed almost entirely by the public sector. Expansion plans have been in the works since the 1990s, and while the state has previously obtained both funding and approvals, the project has been repeatedly stalled due to a constant debate over how to best proceed.

For the first phase planned by the ESDC, the state would spend $500 million to renovate the Javits Center's exterior, replacing the leaky black glass with clear glass, along with some interior renovations. There did not seem to be much disagreement among the stakeholders on this phase. The state official in charge of the expansion project, Barbara Lampen, said the first phase could be ready for approval by January.

The $1.3 billion second phase, over which there seemed to be discord among the stakeholders, called for the two-block expansion of the facility to create 90,000 square feet of exposition space and 70,000 square feet of meeting space, built over a garage for 120 truck parking spaces (the lack of which were a contentious issue in past iterations). The second phase would also make major interior renovations, installing skylights in exhibition halls, for instance. (Until this month, officials had planned to expand the convention center just one block north to 39^th Street, selling off the block between 39^th and 40^th streets. Ms. Lampen now says the two-block expansion is a better value.)

The overall concept presented to the board sparked resistance from Dale Hemmerdinger, a board member and the chairman of the M.T.A. After scribbling notes throughout a presentation by project architect Bruce Fowle, Mr. Hemmerdinger criticized the plan for five straight minutes, mostly questioning the economic benefit of an array of design frills such as a green roof, skylights and plants inside the building. Such criticism is rare in public board meetings, which tend to be choreographed and leave disagreements to private conversation.

“I don’t think we or anybody has really thought about the cost of these things,” Mr. Hemmerdinger said. “As a board member, I have trouble with it.

“Well, now we’re proposing flowers inside, plants that are going to grow up, we got trellises that are going to grow. Who’s going to take care of them? Where’s the money in the budget? I think there’s an enormous amount of work that needs to be done with this plan."

The Pritzker Prize-winning Mr. Rogers was brought on for the project by Pataki development chief Charles Gargano in part as a means to draw public support for the project. Mr. Rogers designed, among other projects, Paris’ Centre Pompidou museum with Renzo Piano.

Left with just a renovation (to the tune of at least $800 million) and possibly a modest expansion, the architectural fees grew to a point where the oversight board of the Javits expansion was concerned about costs, according to multiple people familiar with discussions. Last month, the board members were presented with a preliminary yearlong contract of architectural fees of more than $20 million, according to those familiar with the discussions, an amount the board wanted reduced substantially.

Mr. Rogers is not without work in the city—he is the architect for Tower 3 at the World Trade Center, where early construction work has begun.

The New York-based FXFowle, the ESDC spokesman said, is still on the architectural team.

Update: 5:00 p.m.

ESDC spokesman Warner Johnston wrote to say that given the change of scope in the project, "Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners – in full agreement with the ESDC and its joint venture partners, FXFOWLE ARCHITECTS and A. Epstein and Sons International, Inc – believes that the present objectives are best served by the client working with a local team and has withdrawn from its role as lead designer."

The Paterson administration is trekking down the path of a renovation and modest expansion for Javits, with plans for an additional 50,000 square feet of exposition space and a truck storage area. The budget, at least as of a few weeks ago, was $1.3 billion for the whole ordeal, $300 million or so less than the amount approved for a much larger expansion and renovation under the Pataki administration (which the Spitzer folks later found to have a true cost of more than $3 billion).

The Spitzer administration received a flurry of heavy criticism after it announced this plan for Javits via a January New York Times article, mostly due to the previously unannounced intention to sell some adjacent land. The state backed away from its sale of a parcel to the north (the block between 39^th and 40^th streets), though it is unclear what the Paterson administration intends to do with the block between 33^rd and 34^th Streets, which were also slated to go on the selling block.

These most recent plans, along with the above rendering, were presented to Javits’ governing board this morning (we made the mistake of observing via Webcast, which was without sound).

Another item of note: Despite the state chopping down the amount of new exposition and meeting space by more than 450,000 square feet, the project, by and large a renovation at this point, still has starchitect Richard Rogers signed on to its design team, Empire State Development Corporation spokesman Warner Johnston confirmed.

After the governor announced last month that he would proceed with a renovation (and possibly modest expansion) of Javits, he received a major pushback from the Bloomberg administration, Council Speaker Christine Quinn, Senator Schumer, Assemblymen Richard Brodsky and Richard Gottfried, users of the facility, and just about anyone else connected to Javits, so it seemed.

But now the state, by agreeing to not immediately sell the northern parcel (which was months, if not more than a year, away from occuring due to a needed lengthy environmental review), seems to have placated the Bloomberg administration and Ms. Quinn, at least for now, giving the renovation plan more steam to make it through the Legislature, which would need to sign off on it.

“The suspension of the sale of the property north of the Javits Center is a very big step forward," Ms. Quinn said in a statement. "The governor deserves a tremendous amount of credit for recognizing that going ahead with the sale without a plan for the future of the convention center would have been unwise."

The city, Ms. Quinn and others have called for further study of expansion options before selling off the northern parcel of land, so as not to box the Javits Center in without options for growth. The state announced its intention today to convene a panel of stakeholders to recommend further action on the convention center, perhaps identifying sites outside of Manhattan.

On its face, the plan to sell the northern parcel seems to preclude a modest Javits expansion of the type announced by the Spitzer administration. It would be difficult to achieve without selling the northern parcel, meaning that without the sale the result may just be a renovation.

A spokesman for New York’s Empire State Development Corporation declined to comment on this hypothetical, but based on the 2006 general project plan, the state would not have enough money to meet the price tag it’s been using for the modest expansion—$1.6 billion—if it did not sell the northern parcel.

Within that $1.6 billion, $339 million was to come from a sale of a parcel south of the Javits Center. The state still intends to sell the southern parcel, though in an amendment to Governor Spitzer’s executive budget, it earmarked the first $345 million or so to go to an affordable housing fund and capital funds for Hudson River Park and Governors Island.

Given that the land has been appraised at a bit more than $400 million, there would not seem to be enough funds left to meet the $1.6 billion.

Announcement on the task force below:

Of course, the state has not done a thorough financial review, at least not to the public's knowledge, of the sites that are often mentioned as possible alternative locations, and 20 or so acres of available land, even outside of Manhattan, is not so easy to come by.

Sunnyside Yards is often pointed to by planning groups and elected officials; though, again, no public thorough cost estimates have been done. The city is seeking to redevelop Willets Point, and within it, planning for about 400,000 square feet of convention space, though the city has imagined this space as a supplement to Javits that is near an airport. The state likely would like a convention center well over 1 million square feet, at least based on the proposals they were considering for the Javits site.

The Javits debate will heat up again tomorrow, as State Senator John Flanagan is planning a hearing on the subject at 10 a.m.

Joining the two separate projects, the state seemed to be saying that only with the $900 million or so raised from the Javits land sale could it afford the housing plan. “Want a housing plan? Support the Javits proposal,” the Spitzer administration implied.

The land-sale proposal became an instant lightning rod, drawing fire from most anyone and everyone involved with Javits, particularly over the sale of the northern parcel. Selling it would foreclose the possibility of expansion forever, critics charged. (Mr. Spitzer has said the price will forever be far too great to expand there, so selling the parcels makes sense.)

But it now appears there’s been something of a shift, housing advocates say.

Earlier this month, in an amendment to the budget, Governor Spitzer tied the $300 million housing fund to the first $300 million to come from any sale of Javits Center property [PDF document here]. Thus, even if the state did not sell the northern parcel, only selling the southern lot, the housing plan would see full funding.

A spokesman for the state Department of Budget denies a shift, saying the ammendment was a "technical clarification" customary in the governor's ammended budget plan.

Mayor Bloomberg opposes selling the north parcel but is not against the sale of the south parcel. However, others, such as Council Speaker Christine Quinn and Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, are against the sale of either parcel.

The alteration in the budget came after housing advocates expressed worries to the governor’s office about the funding method, said Assembly Housing Committee Chairman Vito Lopez.

“It was an outcome of concern by some people, including myself, that if there was a controversy there, and if it was long-lasting, where would we get the funds?” Mr. Lopez said.

Mr. Lopez also said he is pushing the Assembly to put up about $120 million in capital spending for affordable housing, as the sale of even one Javits parcel could take months; the housing plan does not get funding until the sale is completed. A Democrat from Brooklyn, Mr. Lopez also said he is supporting the sale of at least one parcel of land at the Javits Center, urging housing advocates to do the same.

The money from the first parcel to sell would also go toward funding Hudson River Park and Governors Island, to which the state has committed to giving about $45 million.

If the northern parcel is not sold but the southern parcel is, it is clear how that would affect the state’s plans for the convention center. The state had hoped for a modest expansion of mostly meeting space; though, without funding from a land sale, the state would be about $340 million short of the $1.68 billion budgeted, according to the facility’s 2006 General Project Plan. One outcome, perhaps, would be for the state to just do a major renovation, estimated to cost somewhere around $1 billion.

The state is due to pass its budget by March 31.

Now, the state Senate Committee on Corporations, Authorities and Commissions, led by Senator John Flanagan, is calling a hearing on the matter, inviting Spitzer administration officials, among others. The hearing is scheduled for Feb. 28 at the Senate’s offices downtown.

The Spitzer administration has emphasized that a significant expansion on the site does not make economic sense, as officials have priced out numerous possible options, finding that an ideal convention center would cost around $5 billion, compared with the $1.68 billion approved in 2006 for expansion.

Release below.

Mr.Spitzer has taken the position that he has made a decision on the Javits expansion and is not looking back. Any large-scale expansion on the site would be far too expensive, he has said, and the sale will help fund needed capital improvements, including building out Governors Island and Hudson River Park.

Mr. Bloomberg’s comments, according to a transcript:

The dissent about the Javits plan, and its relationship to the parks and housing program, is not so much about the expensive renovation and modest expansion at the convention center. Rather, the plan to sell two parcels on either end of the facility is raising hackles—so much so that a users group plans to meet today in Albany to lobby against it.

Facing a $4.4 billion budget gap and a desire to increase government programs, Mr. Spitzer wants to sell the two parcels for about $900 million, tying the sale to the capital funding of initiatives such as readying Governors Island for development.

Selling the land would preclude a later horizontal expansion on the site, and also move a truck marshalling yard inside the convention center. With the two acts taken together, now criticism seems to be coming from all sides.

Advocates of the parks don’t like the idea of their funding being tied to an uncertain land sale; Council Speaker Christine Quinn doesn’t want to block further expansion; Mayor Bloomberg thinks it’s bad policy to sell the northern parcel to plug a budget gap; and Assemblyman Richard Gottfried has also raised concerns with selling the marshalling yard (a truck parking lot of sorts).

The facility users group Friends of Javits is up in arms, and plans today to meet in Albany with Empire State Development Corp. chairman Patrick Foye, as well as legislators.

“If businessmen were doing what the state is doing, they would lock them up for being crazy,” said a blunt Ken McAvoy, senior vice president at Reed Expositions.

That the Friends of Javits are so upset about the plan is a bit ironic given that the Spitzer administration reexamined the already approved Pataki plan for Javits in part at the behest of the group’s complaints that the plan was unworkable.

Members of the group also expressed support for Mr. Foye’s plan to just renovate, and perhaps slightly expand, the convention center, though the new plan does two things that have incensed the group, said Mr. McAvoy. Selling the land would both block a workable expansion a few years down the road, and move the truck marshalling yard into the lower level of the building, significantly raising costs for putting on shows.

“Our expense to our exhibitors is going to go up 30 to 40 percent, making Javits too expensive,” he said of the proposal.

The plan would require approval from the Public Authorities Control Board, according to ESDC spokesman Warner Johnston, meaning both Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno would have to sign off on the proposal. Mr. Silver’s office said it is examining the proposal, while a spokesman for Mr. Bruno said the office has questions over the proposal, “most of all, whether or not that’s the appropriate funding mechanism to address our housing needs.”

Governor Spitzer has defended his plan, saying that the extremely high cost of building a desirable convention center does not make economic sense on the site, and a sale will bring in much-needed money for the state.

“When they told me it would cost $5 billion to build, I cannot possibly rationalize that expenditure in the context of the competing demands the state is facing, and therefore I can tell you we’re moving on, we’re done, that chapter is closed,” he said last week.

Update 10:30 a.m.
The state disagrees with the Friends of Javits that the marshalling yard will increase costs, said ESDC spokesman Warner Johnston in an e-mail, as, among other reasons, the conventioneers will be unloading closer to the exhibit space in the new plan.

Much of the rise cannot be controlled, as the acting force is global demand for construction materials, he said, along with the rising costs that come locally from having so much construction.

Though he highlighted the tendency of large projects to only have one bidder as something that is driving up costs and something that needs to stop (the tunneling contract for the No. 7 line extension, for instance, had only one bidder, and came in hundreds of millions of dollars above what officials had hoped).

Mr. Spitzer on potential reforms:

“Some of it will have to do with the schedule on which we take bids—some of it will have to do with putting projects together, or taking them apart, in order to induce more companies to bid, to generate competition in sectors right now where we all too often are only getting one bid, and frankly we cannot survive in that context, any more than could a private developer.”

Mr. Spitzer also defended his decision to substantially scale back plans for an expanded Javits Convention Center, taking a jab at the slow-moving progress of prior administrations:

“All through my career I’ve said delay is the enemy of progress. This is a classic example. Had the Javits Center been built when it was initially proposed—had the Javits Center not been mired in the all too frequent politics of gridlock in New York City and New York State, it might have made sense. But when they told me it would cost $5 billion to build, I cannot possibly rationalize that expenditure in the context of the competing demands the state is facing, and therefore I can tell you we’re moving on, we’re done, that chapter is closed.”