You’re wrong about your eminent domain analysis. Current law gives the government a pretty wide berth to do as it pleases with property seized via eminent domain. Anyhow, the injuries of the displaced businesses are no longer redressable, so the issue is legally moot. Nothing a court does now can put things back the way they were. What’s more, it was always intended that there would be commercial space there in some form or another.

You are right about the bigger story later in the article, though wrong about the interpretation. It’s not that they’ve de-prioritized ESA and SAS. They’re the same priority they always were: important, but not as much as keeping the existing system running. If the fools in the legislature fail to fund the MTA properly, management will choose to maintain the current system. What else could they do? You don’t build a new house if you can’t afford upkeep on the house you’ve already got.

The more interesting point is that Sander is putting a high priority on getting the rest of the system ready for CBTC.

Anyway, I think what Horodniceanu meant when he said the design would be “Similar to what we have seen”, he was referring to what we’ve seen at the corner of Fulton and Broadway for the last year or so: a barricaded construction site where buildings used to stand. I believe the reason for not considering a commercial structure above the station is that the property was taken by eminent domain, restricting its use for public (not private, commercial) purposes. At this point, though, the lawsuits that would arise from “abusing” eminent domain (if the commercial option is implemented) would likely be better than the costs of deferring the project for so many years.

An interesting quote a bit farther down the article, when he references mega projects like Second Ave Subway and East Side Access — they’re not quite the priority they once were.