No. 7 Extension Won’t Include 10th Ave. Station

By William Neuman
No. 7 lineThe No. 7 line is being expanded to the Far West Side of Manhattan. (Photo: Frank Franklin II/Associated Press)

The westward extension of the No. 7 subway line will be built without a new station at 10th Avenue. That became even clearer this week after the city and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority let a deadline pass on a contract option for preliminary construction of the 10th Avenue station.

The bottom line: in a time of budget cuts neither the city nor the authority wanted to pay for the extra station.

The city is financing the rest of the work, which will bring the No. 7 line west of Times Square to Jacob K. Javits Convention Center, with a new station at 34th Street and 11th Avenue. It is an important part of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s plan to spur development on the Far West Side of Midtown.

Early plans called for the project to also include a station at 10th Avenue and 41st Street. But as cost estimates rose, the station became expendable in the eyes of the city — and it became increasingly clear, by last fall, that financing for the new station was unlikely.

Last fall, the authority signed a $1.14 billion contract with a company to dig the tunnel and excavate the 34th Street station. The contract contained a $450 million option to excavate a cavern for the 10th Avenue station as well. But the authority would have had to agree to the option by last Saturday. The deadline passed with no agreement.

Transit advocates and some public officials have been critical of plans to build the extension without the extra station, saying that it would bypass a growing area in need of subway service.

“Failure to build a full 7 train extension is a huge missed opportunity to promptly realize the complete potential of the Far West Side,” Senator Charles E. Schumer said in a statement.

But city and M.T.A. officials defended the decision. Andrew Brent, a spokesman for Robert C. Lieber, the deputy mayor for economic development, said in a statement:

Unlike the extension to 34th Street and 11th Avenue, which the city is funding, a 10th Avenue station is not necessary to drive growth there. A Tenth Avenue station would be nice, but it’s really a straight transportation project versus an economic development catalyst. We do recognize the difficult financial situation in which the M.T.A. finds itself as pressure on all of our budgets intensifies.

Jeremy Soffin, an M.T.A. spokesman, said in a statement:

We currently do not have the funding necessary to pursue a second station as part of the 7 extension, and were forced to allow the option to expire. While we would prefer to include a station at 10th Avenue, it is not critical to the success of the overall project. If funding is identified at a later date we will revisit the issue.

Comments are no longer being accepted.

Tom T. September 19, 2008 · 9:18 am

Big mistake by the MTA, incredibly short-sighted. Where is Michael Bloomberg, the champion of development, when he’s really needed to influence an outcome. Funny how he’s all for development except when it involves long-term public interest vision — the transportation hub at ground zero, the 10th Ave station, etc. Too much money, he says, we can’t afford that kind of investment in our future. Meanwhile, he was all in favor of the MTA’s giveaways of the west side railyards and huge tax breaks to big corporations. Funny world our mayor inhabits, his way station to heading the SEC…or the Fed…or the World Bank. For all that sizeable ego in respect of your next job, Mr. Mayor, you’re selling short the city’s future. Didn’t you hear that short-selling was being banned?

Corey W. September 19, 2008 · 9:26 am

The fact that the City and State governments will not come up with the funding to build a 10th Av subway station in an area starved for mass transit, shows that Major Blumberg and Gov. Patterson are not really committed to improving mass transit for all the people of the city and region. Yet they subsidize highly profitable private enterprises such as the Yankees and Mets with huge expenditures. We have lost sight of our priorities.

Ellen September 19, 2008 · 10:00 am

That’s dumb — do it now while everything’s already torn up – there is a desperate need for more (any) service on 10th Avenue

George September 19, 2008 · 10:02 am

I think the spokesman for the Deputy Mayor was using political double speak when he said: “A Tenth Avenue Station would be nice, but it’s really a straight transportation project versus an economic development catalyst.”

Merely extending the subway line to the expanded Convention Center indicates that it is simply a development project. Including a station in an growing residential area would show that it is a mass transportation project.

This so-called spokesman may be a “smooth talker” but he’s full of it.

YYY September 19, 2008 · 10:28 am

Perhaps west-side development will still succeed, but to say this is absolutely ridiculous and short-sighted:

“it’s really a straight transportation project versus an economic development catalyst”

There’s no such thing as a straight transportation project, transportation automatically has a economic development outcome. By not building the station, the area around 10th Avenue has less of an economic development potential.

jeffrey blustein September 19, 2008 · 10:55 am

Except for crossin over or under bodies of water, this is probably the longest stretch between stations. Why there’s are Beverly Road and Cortelyou Road stations so close to each other may one day in the future be seen as much a mystery of why there won’t be a 10th avenue stop on the 7th train. Maybe the 2nd avenue subway will have been completed by then too.

Caesar September 19, 2008 · 11:04 am

Do these politicains think we are fools? Anyone who has visited the area around Tenth Ave. knows that it is becoming heavily populated and would be better served by a subway station.

Stop trying to sugar coat your lies. I would rather a simple lie like “we don’t have the money for it” than all of the BS about “straight economic project versus an economic development catalyst”.

Instead of talking about “revisiting”, try visiting the area around Tenth Ave. and asking the ever growing number of residents what they need!

Al D September 19, 2008 · 11:08 am

the purest of shortsighted folly

hell’s Kitchen Guy September 19, 2008 · 11:13 am

Do these people open their eyes? Can they see what 42nd St. between the West Side Highway and 9th Avenue looks like now? It’s probably the most congested part of the entire city. How can this part of town NOT have its own subway station?

I don’t know how much extra it would cost, but it certainly would be cheaper to do now than later — because it’s going to have to be done eventually.

jonathan September 19, 2008 · 11:13 am

This is outrageous. We spend taxpayer money to fund new stadiums and all we get out them are more expensive seats. However, for mass transit which helps everyone, we can’t allocate funds. Anyone who has ever had to walk West from Port Authority knows that a new station would greatly help the area. Let’s get our priorities straight.

TonyW September 19, 2008 · 11:20 am

I wonder how much of the needed $450M could be raised privately from developers, merchants, banks, and others who see the possibility of increased values from the presence of a subway station at 10th Avenue. As others have noted, the additional station seems like an opportunity to be seized.

DonO September 19, 2008 · 11:21 am

How about extending the Flushing line east to the Nassau County border?

agb September 19, 2008 · 11:22 am

Oh come on, you can’t walk a block or two to the subway? Saving $450,000,000?

Peter Lee September 19, 2008 · 11:25 am

“Unlike the extension to 34th Street and 11th Avenue, which the City is funding, a 10th Avenue station is not necessary to drive growth there. A Tenth Avenue Station would be nice, but it’s really a straight transportation project versus an economic development catalyst.”

In other words, a station that “only” serves to improve the transit needs of ordinary city residents isn’t reason enough to build. The horror that the city should support a project based solely on its benefit to the lives of city residents! No, stations need to be “an economic development catalyst,” i.e. they should line the pockets of real estate developers, corporations and companies that will ask for taxpayer-funded handouts and tax breaks, which of course the city will grant regardless of how wealthy and profitable the firms are because they provide “economic development catalyst.” A Mayor for the People indeed.

tom mcgann September 19, 2008 · 11:28 am

this is a pretty stupid decision.

if the train is going by 42nd and tenth then there s/b a station there. this would open up access to a whole new section of the city.

again this is governemnt taking too long to do something and then not seeing the forest because of the trees

tom

bklyngirly September 19, 2008 · 11:30 am

It is simply unbelievable that they would let this opporunity slide by. It is a slap in the faces of the folks that live and work over there.

kalaresh September 19, 2008 · 11:31 am

Another example of how overrated Bloomberg is. He always goes for the big money and he forgets that this city needs the medium-size money just as much. Without the 10th Avenue station, which I have a hard time believing they ever seriously considered, the 7 extension is basically just a very expensive, taxpayer-funded shuttle for out-of-town businesspeople. This is obscene and in my opinion negates the entire purpose of the project.

Tom September 19, 2008 · 11:35 am

We used to build dozens of bridges, extensive highways and lofty infrastructure throughout the 5 boroughs. Now we can’t even handle an extra subway station.

Garbanzo September 19, 2008 · 11:39 am

$450 million to build a subway station — not even, just to dig a big hole? That’s a good fraction of what some cities spend to build an ENTIRE subway system. Some public watchdog group should take a look at that — the Sandhogs are making away like bandits!

But that issue aside, there are no subway stations close to either river, and this is a great opportunity to fix that. In addition to making Larry Silverstein happy, it would likely make ferries much more viable (and further decrease Manhattan street traffic by reducing the need for the Waterways buses and encouraging more people to ferry in to NYC). It also would make the far west side more suitable for development, taking the pressure off other areas.

Barry Smuckler September 19, 2008 · 11:40 am

Extending the IRT #7 Flushing train to the Javits Center does not make much sense given the fact that it would cost over one billion dollars and that shuttle buses could be provided to carry people the short distance between there and Times Square at a relative minimal cost. The money instead could be better used to relieve “sardine-like” conditions for passengers on this IRT #7 line by making it four tracks, as opposed to the current two, from Times Square to Queensboro Plaza.

starpower September 19, 2008 · 11:40 am

A station at 10th Avenue & 41st Street would be a good idea at this time if the funding was in place. Perhaps, the construction of a station at this location could be authorized after the tunnel to 34th Street & 11th Avenue were built, when funding might become available. Amplifying projects now doesn’t seem like a good idea, though.

Joe September 19, 2008 · 11:43 am

No station at 10th Avenue? Yougottabekiddin!

Frank September 19, 2008 · 11:43 am

I lived for some years on 44th near 10th Ave, and must say that these good people protesting are exaggerating a bit. It would take me five minutes to walk to a 42/10th subway station to get a train heading east, but in 12 minutes I could walk to Times Square and go east, north, or south. And the 42nd crosstown bus provides good service as well.
Hell’s Kitchen can get along without the 42/10 stop.

But I admit, the spokesman’s “straight transportation project,” as if this were something of lesser importance, is laughable. What is a subway if not transportation?

Ben September 19, 2008 · 11:44 am

Awww… I (thankfully still, until today) work on 33rd and 10th and take the 7 from Queens… It would have been nice…

jake September 19, 2008 · 11:45 am

If developers who have invested in this area feel that they need a station on 10th to get a full return on their investment, maybe they should help defray the cost. The issue here is not desire – I am sure the city would build this if they could. God knows they would love to have yet another bourgeoning neighborhood paying higher and higher property taxes. The issue is that with this current economic insecurity, the city has to be exceptionally careful about what long term obligations they take on. There is no Fed or Treasury for the city. They can’t just bail themselves out or print more money, and what money they thought they would have coming in is dwindling by the hour.