Second Ave. Sagas

Real Estate developers lobby for sensible 7 extension

Written by

Benjamin Kabak

in

,

As the 7 line extension’s tunnel boring machines continue their treks toward the existing sections of the route, the elimination of a stop at 41st St. and 10th Ave., killed for lack of funds, has become a sore point for the project, and now, real estate developers are calling upon the city and MTA to act sensibly. As Lori Weiss noted in The Post, Mary Anne Tighe, the head of the Real Estate Board of New York, believes the long-discarded stop should be built. She wants the MTA and city to anoint it a shovel-ready project so that it would be eligible for stimulus funds. However, others say there just isn’t money — some estimates put the price tag at $500-$800 million — available for it.

I’ve long wondered why the real estate lobby hasn’t been more vocal on this issue. New developments line 42nd St. far west of any current subway route, and Related is planning on constructing a building at 41st St. and 10th Aves., right above the new 7 line tunnel. It’s still not too late for the city and MTA to set this project on a better path, but time is short. Construction of a station there after the fact will be even more costly than it will be today, and as I’ve said in the past, this station would greatly improve the utility of this expensive subway extension.

Comments

22 responses to “Real Estate developers lobby for sensible 7 extension”

  1. Russell Warshay

    “She wants the MTA and city to anoint it a shovel-ready project so that it would be eligible for stimulus funds.”

    The one question that have is, “if the MTA does just this and the Federal Government approves this, what percentage of the project is paid for by Washington?” If the answer is “100%,” than this is a no-brainer.

    Reply
  2. Boris

    The MTA should develop a program under which private entities pay for transit improvements they want. There’s nothing wrong with the Real Estate Board kicking in a few $100 million towards the station if that’s what they desire.

    Reply
    1. Christopher

      It’s called Tax Increment Financing. And it’s pretty standard practice for cities to pay for infrastructure improvements (as well as general placemaking, depending on the city) with funding like this. DC recently opened a station on New York Avenue that was not originally planned for, the money for that project came specifically from the land-owners that would benefit from it. DC is also building a line to Dulles, similarly paid for through a special taxing district.

      I’m all for a station at 10th and 41st, but these landowners should pay for it.

      Reply
      1. kvnbklyn

        The extension is already being paid for with tax increment financing. According to this article from 2006 (http://bit.ly/ceQRTn), one of the main reasons the tax increment financing couldn’t cover the 10th Avenue station was because the development in that area is and will be residential which, according to the article, cannot be taxed to pay off the bonds. I don’t know why that would be and this is actually the first time I’m hearing that, but it is an interesting explanation for the city’s unwillingness to fund this station.

        Reply
  3. R2

    “I’ve long wondered why the real estate lobby hasn’t been more vocal on this issue”

    Ummm…..that’s because they want to have their cake and eat it too. They are among the biggest beneficiaries of this expansion but yet I haven’t seen them pony up any $$$

    Reply
    1. Kid Twist

      They pay taxes.

      Reply
      1. AK

        Not exactly. They received massive, controversial tax incentives from Mayor Bloomberg for these projects. See:

        http://www.nysun.com/new-york/…..-up/37262/

        and

        http://www.nysun.com/new-york/…..-up/37262/

        Reply
        1. AK

          Oops, same link 🙂 just click one…or Ben, if you could eliminate my error…

          Reply
  4. AK

    While federal funding would be great, I don’t care whether we get it or not– this HAS to get built, now. If it doesn’t, every subsequent generation will rue our complete lack of foresight, reason, and comprehension of basic economics.

    Reply
    1. pete

      NYC public transit hasn’t had foresight for 40 years. Archer Ave subway (an incomplete replacement of an elevated). 63rd street subway (no connection to IRT, 15 stories underground). EAS (no connection to GCT, no through routing, 5 minute escalator). ARC (tunnel to nowhere, 10 minute escalator ride). LIRR Brooklyn to Lower Manhattan failure. Extending Path, failure. South Ferry replacement, no overshoot track as MTA promised ( “The new South Ferry Terminal will be built with sufficient overrun track south of the platform to allow trains to safely enter at higher speeds.” http://www.mta.info/capconstr/sft/description.htm ) Fulton Street Dey Street out of system passageway. I won’t begin about the demolitions.

      The small transfer passageway projects at Jay Street and Court Square and West Side yard are the only foresight over the last decade or 2 I see.

      Reply
      1. Duke87

        Actually, there is provision for the ARC and ESA tunnels to connect to each other in the future.
        But yeah, I’m not holding my breath for that to actually happen.

        Reply
      2. Alon Levy

        Pete, just one correction: the through-routing failure is for ARC, not ESA.

        Connecting ARC to ESA is a waste – it’d be just a deep-level doubling of the existing NJ-Penn-LI tunnel, swinging under Grand Central. Connecting ARC to Grand Central as opposed to ESA would be far more useful; it would even be possible with the deep-level cavern after Water Tunnel 3 is completed, but it would cost too much and not connect to the East River Tunnels.

        Reply
  5. Jerrold

    I know that I’ve said this here before, but just to remind everybody:

    As currently planned, the distance between the Times Square station and the Javits Center station will be the LONGEST gap between any two consecutive stations in the entire subway system, except where you cross a river.

    Reply
  6. Jerrold

    Just WHAT are EAS and ARC?

    Reply
    1. Benjamin Kabak

      I think Pete means ESA, which is the East Side Access project, and ARC is Access to the Region’s Core which is the new Hudson River tunnel.

      Reply
  7. aestrivex

    sure, there should be a station at 41st and 10th, no brainer.

    regardless, i find it very hard to blame the MTA for not funding this station at all — if the city is too stupid to recognize the benefit of a station here, how could the MTA possibly justify a decision to bail them out?

    perhaps related to my perception of the situation is that i have always sort of (and perhaps unjustifiably) seen the 7th avenue extension as by far the least important of the MTA’s ongoing capital projects.

    Reply
    1. AK

      I think most of us feel similarly on that point, aestrivex, but to channel Space Balls, the extension becomes borderline ludicrous without the station at 41st and 10th.

      Reply
  8. Emil S

    I dont understand how this project can cost 500-800 million.

    – The tunnels are already going to be there, it will be a matter of digging and entry and exit point for stairways leading into the 41st station, and widening the space a little bit for a platform. The tunnel boring machines are already in place in the Hudson Yards area – how much more expensive could it possibly be to widen the tunnel in that section enough for a station platform?

    I would pay to see a breakdown of the costs of material and labor to create this hypothetical project.

    Reply
    1. Alon Levy

      I dont understand how this project can cost 500-800 million.

      It’s New York.

      Reply
  9. Older and Wiser

    If the #7 line should stop ANYWHERE enroute to the Javits, it should be Penn Station, assuming the TBS could negotiate sharp enough curves to enable that. Of course, there’d be one glaring problem with a direct connection between Penn & GCT – EAS would become even less needed at $9 billion than it already is.

    Reply
  10. dennis

    I’m with Emil S. Someone explain how a mere subway station–a mere hole in the ground with stairs, a platform and subway tiles–could possibly cost $800 million. Especially now when construction costs and the cost of condemning any additional real estate required for the station–have declined considerably. I totally don’t get it.

    Reply
  11. Think twice

    I hope that both sides can negotiate it down to a station shell at the very least. Lobbying for a finished station is a start.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

More posts