Then There Were 3: Mystery Bidder Unveiled; Will New Penn Plans Push MSG?
An obscure federal posting last week identified one of the unknown bidders for the job of developing a master plan for the much-delayed Penn Station overhaul, cutting the short list from four to three developers.
| 21 Jan 2026 | 02:54
A big question as three developers vie for the multi-billion-dollar contract overseeing the redevelopment of Penn Station is what happens to Madison Square Garden which has sat atop the station since the late 1960s. (
)
One of the rotating ads on the huge outdoor billboard on the side of MSG says: “the search for your next ‘where to’ starts here.” Three developers who are vying for the multi-billion-dollar master planner contract for the Penn Station could be forgiven if they thought the ad was directly targeting them. (
)
One early plan that was circulated by the American arm of Italian developer ASTM proposed knocking down the Theater on the Eighth Ave. side of the station and building a new grand entrance that would keep Madison Square Garden in place but allow a lot of sun light into a new subterranean station. (
)
Some early plans also said that Penn Station’s footprint proposed expanding to the south into block 780. Taht would mean that the block that stretches between 7th and 8th Avenues. and 31st to 30th Streets would have to be knocked down. (
)
Three International developers–Australian, Italian and Canadian—have been selected by Amtrak as the finalists in its competition to select a master developer for the rebuilding of Penn Station and, perhaps, some of the neighborhood around it.
One of the developers is brand new to the competition and little is yet known of their plans. That is the Toronto based company Fengate, which specializes in investing union pension funds in infrastructure and other real property.
The other two finalists are part of development groups that have been actively pursuing the Penn Station project for years. They are Halmar, the US subsidiary of the Italian infrastructure firm ASTM, and Macquarie Group Limited, the Sidney based investment company, which has teamed with the Grand Penn Community Alliance.
In the latest development, Amtrak and its executive managing the selection, Andy Byford, said nothing about the selection other than to post the list, in alphabetical order, on the national railroad’s contractor portal.
As far as could be discerned, the selection was based primarily on the deep pockets and extensive development experience of the three bidding groups, rather than their architectural plans, although Byford has advised the bidders to be aware of President Trump’s desire to revive classic architecture.
Eliminated was a fourth contender, the architect Richard Cameron, who has long campaigned for the revival of a classical station like the original Penn Station, built in 1910 and torn down in the 1960’s as the Pennsylvania Railroad spiraled into insolvency.
Allies said he lacked a development partner with convincing resources and experience.
“We do applaud Richard Cameron in particular as he has championed a great above ground station modeled on the Charles McKim original for decades,” said one of his supporters, Samuel Turvey of ReThink NYC. “We very much believe Richard’s efforts have already informed and will continue to inform the Penn Station that is eventually built.”
The next four months will presumably produce an answer to the question of what kind of Penn Station will be built.
That is the timeline announced by Byford for selecting from the short list of three the one developer to be appointed as the Public /Private Partner to Amtrak in what the railroad calls the transformation of Penn Station, a result devoutly wished for by generations of commuters and long deferred by the three railroads that use the station–Amtrak, New Jersey Transit and The Long Island Railroad.
Byford said he will submit his recommendation to the Amtrak Board in May.
Between now and then he will negotiate with each of the three contenders to arrive at a final proposal. The negotiations are far more complex than simply selecting a builder. As a public/private partner, a technique used in various infrastructure project, the master builder is a financial partner as well as a designer, engineer and builder
In various public comments in recent months, Byford has set a number of goals for that proposal.
Overall cost
Byford has refrained from setting an overall cost for the project, saying he wants to see proposals first. But he has in recent months emphasized that the overall cost can’t create obligations that the railroads would have to repay with higher fares, or their owners, state and federal government, would repay with higher taxes.
That is a pretty direct message to the private bidders, who will recoup their investment in the project through long term payments from Amtrak, the owner.
One key question is how much government’s will kick in for the project. New York State had, for example, said it would put up $1 billion, but governor Hochul pulled that back when The Trump administration took control of the rebuilding away from the MTA, a state agency and gave it to Amtrak, which then appointed Byford.
User experience
Byford has said any plan must eliminate the labyrinthine, multi-level Penn Station of today with a simple one level station that is easy to navigate. But how that will be achieved is wide open.
The Grand Penn/Macquarie group proposes to move Madison Square Garden and build an elevated park much like Bryant Park with the station below it (as the NY Public Library stacks are below Bryant Park). Halmar on the other hand would leave Madison Square Garden in place but tear down its theater on Eighth Avenue to allow a grand entry to the station from Eighth Avenue.
Nothing is known publicly of Fengate’s plans. Their group includes builders and architects who have worked extensively in and around New York: TutorPerini; SOM; Grimshaw; Parsons and ARUP.
Expansion
Penn Station today serves 600,000 daily riders, three times its intended capacity. Yet its future will be even busier, transit planners at Amtrak and New Jersey Transit say. They want to double the capacity of the new station.
For a long time the railroads proposed to do this by expanding the station, most likely to the south into the block from 30th to 31st street. But Byford has put that on hold, pending a study of how the station could accommodate more trains within its present footprint.
The results of that study will be incorporated into the plans negotiated with the master builder, he has said.
Robert Yaro, chief planner for the Grand Penn Community Alliance, specifically noted in a statement that the groups plan envisions that moving the Garden would allow increasing the stations capacity by the “removal of hundreds of columns currently holding up MSG that now obstruct access and egress from trains.”
Architecture
The debate over the look of a new station is now decades old, although it is clearly only one factor in the selection process. Gov. Hochul had promised a public contest to select a design, but that did not happen before the process was taken away from her state agency, the MTA.
Byford has said nothing about whether there will be any public presentation of proposals between now and the Amtrak Board vote in May.
He has advised the bidders of President Trump’s executive order promoting the restoration of classic architecture in public buildings. But how tightly that needs to be followed is not clear.
The Grand Penn Community Alliance is strongly supported by a Trump ally and promoter of classic architecture, Tom Klingenstein. https://www.ourtownny.com/news/a-new-classical-penn-station-this-backer-s-plan-inspired-by-grand-original-IY4450587
Halmar’s lead architect is Vikram Chakrabarti, who has long advocated for a modern reinterpretation of Penn Station. However, in recent months he has told colleagues he is tinkering with his plans to give a more classic feel.