Rebuilt waiting room at the proposed new Penn Station. (By Jeff Stikeman for Rebuild Penn Station)
Not much news lately on the idea of rebuilding Pennsylvania Station as it was originally designed by architects McKim Mead & White in 1910. The station was torn down in 1963 and replaced by the existing mess of a rail hub, underneath a hulking sports arena.
An excellent and eminently feasible proposal to rebuild the old Penn Station is being pecked to death by ducks.
Surveys suggest that rebuilding Penn Station would be popular – more so than several rival proposals, some better than others, but none with the advantages of rebuilding the old station, updated to adapt to today’s market realities. Restoring its vaulting beauty would bring economic benefits unlike those of any other major development project imaginable today.
Instead, New York’s city and state leaders want to surround a half-assed renovation of the station with ten supertall office buildings – doomed to remain empty as long as the work-from-home phenomenon prevails, undermining the real-estate market possibly for decades.
At a forum yesterday sponsored by the Regional Plan Association and the Municipal Art Society, the convoluted and probably corrupt railroad interests (Amtrak, New Jersey Transit and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority) argued weakly against “through-running,” the concept of treating Penn Station as one stop in a series of stops, as opposed to treating it as it is now: a terminus. Through-running, which many cities in Europe and Asia have embraced, would connect Penn Station and its regional railroads together with far greater efficiency than the current tangled “system.”
The train interests have been coy and secretive about the details or lack of details in their plan, if they even have one. The public deserves to know much more about their plan.
My own interest, and I suspect that of most readers here, is to rebuild Penn Station as it was originally designed. That would boost the regional economy even more than through-running, which – don’t get me wrong! – is a damned good idea. But it seems to me that the idea of rebuilding Penn suffers when the concept of through-running is emphasized by those who back rebuilding the station. Through-running is a worthy, transformative idea, but it lacks pizzazz. Once rebuilding Penn has been settled upon as the main goal, once the idiotic idea of demolishing a whole block of Manhattan south of the station and surrounding it with ten more towers has been jettisoned, and once Madison Square Garden has been relocated, the project of rebuilding Penn would pave the way for New York to adopt through-running quite easily and naturally. But first there’s a lot of work to be done: focus on the big picture, please.
A simple and great idea would run interference for a great but complex idea better than the other way around.
It grieves me to say this, as I am a great fan of ReThinkNYC, whose chairman, Sam Turvey, has been pushing both ideas. He wrote about the forum here. Lately, he seems to emphasize (and overemphasize) through-running at the expense of rebuilding Penn. The railroad interests are finding it easier to kill through-running than to kill the grander idea, in my opinion, because it lacks the glitz that rebuilding Penn would provide. Rebuilding Penn Station would ensure that through-running goes through – and ensure that ramming more towers down the city’s throat will not happen.
Drawing illustrates through-running proposal at Penn Station and its region. (ReThinkNYC)
Architecture Here and There 
When the above-ground station building was torn down in 1963, the existing underground rail hub, which dated from the station’s opening in 1910, remained essentially unchanged. The problem was providing access to the tracks when the access hall had been removed. So they put a mess of a concourse in the basement of the sports arena and hoped it would do.
Through-running is explained in some detail at https://www.rethinknyc.org/through-running/
LikeLike
As of the general topic of the blog, in Europe, beginning in Sweden, there have been various successful projects for the reintroduction of traditional architecture, projects pushed by massive popular demand. Search for ‘The Revolution That Is Changing Architecture’ on Youtube for instance, or the City of Gothenburg.
https://theaestheticcity.com/resources/youtube/upproret-build-your-own-architecture-uprising/
LikeLike
A quaint stroll thru NYC subways Inundated with litter, trash, needle strewn remnants.
Recent news Alvin Bragg who brought up the prison charges on ex Marine who choked to death deranged man violently assaulting people on the subway….Also, A similar man was released on BAIL; after trying to stab a bus driver in the face.
Penn Station will never be rebuilt. Penn Station was horribly expensive to maintain even back when it was full of busy trains….And originally the proposal for the station was that a high rise building would be added to top it to seek rent attractive offices with direct access to it. Downscale market 60s midtown Manhattan and Historic preservation committees opposed projects. In current economic climate rebuilding Penn is financially impossible. Long Island rail carries less than Two thirds it’s passenger volumes, the Hudson tunnels which carry 50% nations train traffic are still falling apart.
If the Benefits of urban population density were advantageous, MTA wouldn’t have to enact a 15 dollar surcharge on Auto drivers to pay for infrastructure they don’t even use. It’s inconsequential, since most fees will be diverted. How do we know, because not the first time….
2010’s Port Authority/NYC raised bridge/tunnel fares thru New York and New Jersey, to pay cost overruns for this, the Vagina/Stegosaurus shaped PATH station.
Reminder that the economies of scale of density is far out stripped by the enormous cost of urban infrastructure. Once you replace the city streets once dirt underneath with Concrete; economies of scale require ever greater costs to maintain.
And New York is not salvageable, because nothing to fix; it’s populace can afford to do. I say this with heavy heart , New York City will not be saved. Progressive policies that neuter cops and reward bad guys are but response to voter base. Years ago I wrote how low iQ groups cannot sustain a democracy or beneficial form of personal governance.
Beyond that effects of mass migration pander as voter base. Average Hispanic iQs (most AOC voters base) are in the mid 80s, Sub-Saharan Africans 70s to low 80s. It has been tracked for 4-5 generations, and is effectively permanent. Only less than 3% of Whites and 2% Asians score that low. You can’t hand reigns of civilization over that 3% and expect long-term positive outcomes. Violence, fanaticism, poor decision making, inept financial literacy follow these brackets. Geopolitical stability and personal freedoms cannot survive average iQ below 90. Lock up and leave.
LikeLike
As usual, Lazy, you make a compelling argument for doing nothing to try to solve the problems that beset New York. But can we just sit back, do nothing, and watch as things get progressively worse? I don’t think so. An inspiring good idea carries far more power than you can imagine, and so we should try like heck to make rebuilding Penn the leading option, and allow it to pull us through the slough of despond.
LikeLike
Penn station doesn’t need to be rebuilt, it would serve no purpose; rail ridership at present is even LOWER than it was when the original was demolished…… meaning the financial woes that befell the first generation station would occur upon complete; who get’s into ownership; the original penn station was owned by private railroad……… Under government management… would be left to Rot again.
LikeLike
I agree with you? Why was the station torn down in 1963 and replaced by the existing rail hub? Even if 53 years of use had left a mess, surely rebuilding would have been cheaper and more historically acceptable than building from scratch?
Hels
Art and Architecture, mainly
LikeLike
To answer your question, Hels, the station was demolished because stupidity prevailed. I’m not sure what needed to be done to save the station from the wrecking ball, but however expensive, it would have been preferable to what we have today. – David Brussat
LikeLike
I agree with you? Why was the station torn down in 1963 and replaced by the existing rail hub? Even if 53 years of use had left a mess, surely rebuilding would have been cheaper and more historically acceptable than building from scratch?
Hels
Art and Architecture, mainly
LikeLike
I’m not sure I follow the anti-through-running argument. Amtrak already runs through Penn Station, and anything else through running would require NJ Transit and the LIRR to be the same agency.
LikeLike
I cannot find a map that contradicts your observation, though I had thought that maybe Amtrak trains heading north or south pull into the station and back out in order to continue north or south after disgorging and taking on passengers. I found no evidence for that, but might it not be the case? And might that not be contrary to through-running?
Perhaps someone from RethinkNYC will write in to clarify. – David Brussat
LikeLike