Content area
Full Text
There's no arguing with the basic idea. What could be fairer than this? Some big, rich real-estate developer wants to put up a new building, something even more colossal than the city zoning law allows. The developer expects to make major money off the deal, and the new building is sure to dump a whole mob of extra riders into the nearest subway station.
Shouldn't the developer kick in a few bucks for the subway? At the very least, shouldn't he or she help fix up that deteriorating station, the one that will be further burdened by the developer's new edifice?
Why, of course.
And through the 1980s, that - at least in theory - was the policy of the city of New York: Pay for your zoning variance by making the neighborhood a better place. It was just another cost of doing business here. And the developers, who complained with the requisite bitterness, generally coughed up the dough in the end. They were making out so well in real estate, they could easily afford to pay.
Even today, we benefit from some of these successes.
To see this, get off an E or F train at Lexington Avenue and walk the underground connection to the 51st Street Station on the No. 6 line. Were it not for the concept of developer shakedown, those two lines would still not meet.
But, alas, the easy shakedown days are over.
Much has been written in the past two or three years...