Second Ave. Sagas

MTA may overhaul Fulton St. Transit Hub project

Written by

Benjamin Kabak

in

Don’t expect the final version of the Fulton St. project to look like this. (Source: MTA Capital Construction)

That pesky Fulton St. Transit Hub. Years behind schedule and beset with fiscal problems, this expansive project designed to unite all of the subway lines in Lower Manhattan may be reaching a breaking point. In fact, MTA officials are going to meet early this week to debate the project’s future, according to a report in Monday’s New York Sun.

Jared Irmas has more:

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority will meet today to reassess plans for construction of the Fulton Street Transit Center, after a request for construction bids this month attracted just one proposal, which was over budget. Originally envisioned as a downtown Grand Central Terminal, the Fulton Street center was to connect 12 subway lines and house a 23,000-square-foot shopping center under a glass dome. But since ground was broken in 2005, construction on the new facility, slated for completion last month, has been hampered by several delays and budget overruns. Projected costs have increased to $888 million from $750 million, the height of the dome has been reduced by 30 feet, and the planned end of construction has been pushed back to late 2009.

New plans could include scrapping some design elements and building a less elaborate “public plaza,” the executive director of the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA, William Henderson, said in a telephone interview.

This transit hub project has been the source of numerous problems for the MTA. Chief among them are cost overruns. While the federal government is picking up most of this project, the MTA is responsible for cost overruns. Every time this project is delayed — and it’s now a few years behind schedule — the costs increase.

The Sun reports that the MTA declined to comment for the article, and I don’t blame them. I’m not quite sure where the MTA could go from here. They have to finish the project some time soon, and the project Web site gives an estimated completion date of this year. But to what extent should they scale down their plans? We don’t want to settle for some ugly, boxy structure leaving its mark on Lower Manhattan, but we shouldn’t expect the MTA to over-stretch itself fiscally. Decisions, decisions, decisions.

Comments

6 responses to “MTA may overhaul Fulton St. Transit Hub project”

  1. Marc Shepherd

    The main issue with this project is the grand entrance facility along Broadway between Fulton and John Streets. Skeptics pointed out a long time ago that the new building wasn’t really needed for any transit-related purpose. And coincidentally, the project’s main budget-buster has been the cost of demolishing five buildings, acquiring the Corbin Building, and relocating more than 100 small businesses.

    Personally, I was always in favor of the project, but we’re now at a difficult inflection point. Since the demolitions are all completed, there’s now no choice but to build a transit terminal on that site. The real tragedy would be if the new building turns out just as banal as the ones it replaced.

    Reply
  2. twakum

    It has been going on so long the Skanska employees have adopted the kind of attitude, that its “our space, get the f— out of our way”. Safety sucks. Access sucks. The area around the site needs to be more regularly policed for debris.

    If I insured that job, I would have shut it down several times now…thank god I dont.

    Reply
  3. ScottE

    The reason everything is going over-budget is because every major transit project is supposed to be overwhelmingly extravagant. The Fulton Street Transit Center is supposed to be the “crown jewel” of Lower Manhattan, the Second Avenue Subway is the “crown jewel” of Manhattan’s East Side, and the rehabilitated Smith-9th Street Station will be the “crown jewel” of Brooklyn.

    Why does everything have to be built to such excess? If these projects were designed to be functional and somewhat visually attractive, but not cathedral-like, the MTA could save a boatload of money. Leave the cathedral-building to the Port Authority at the WTC PATH station. It can be argued that this is an important, historic site in which visitors and tourists will take the time to pause, appreciate, look around, and reflect on where they are and what once happened there. All you’ll find at Fulton Street are commuters who only care about not missing the train.

    Reply
  4. Marc Shepherd

    Despite the use of the words “crown jewel”, I don’t really see anything excessive in the designs of the Second Avenue Subway or the Smith–Ninth station. I think those projects are being built the way you described: functional and reasonably attractive, but not extravagantly so. If they are over budget, it is not due to extravagance.

    The Fulton Street Transit Center is different, because it has a very large, relatively expensive element—the new building at Fulton & Broadway—that does not serve a transit purpose. You could still make good arguments for the structure. After all, there are reasons why Grand Central Terminal is a treasured public landmark, but the current Penn Station is not. But when the project is over budget and keeps getting scaled back, it’s a reflection on the judgment of the people who concocted it in the first place.

    Reply
  5. Second Ave. Sagas | Blogging the NYC Subways » Blog Archive » And now it’s gone: the Fulton St. Transit Hub dome

    […] in the comments to my piece on the anticipated cuts to the Fulton St. dome, ScottE wondered if the MTA is overshooting on its plans. Does ever new project really have to be […]

    Reply
  6. Second Ave. Sagas | Blogging the NYC Subways » Blog Archive » Maybe granite and porcelain aren’t the best choices for a subway station floor

    […] about the MTA’s construction budget crisis, I keep coming back to Scott’s comment about the MTA and crown jewels. How do you balance form, function and visual […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts