7 ms·

That the old Penn Station was destroyed in 1963, in favor of what stands today really sounds like some kind of horrible urban planning debacle no one likes to t

That the old Penn Station was destroyed in 1963, in favor of what stands today really sounds like some kind of horrible urban planning debacle no one likes to think about or talk about anymore. But New York was a different place back then, or so I'm told. Penn Station, the way it is now is just something you sort of shrug at, given the way Midtown is, in general. Everything on 8th Avenue from 23rd Street to 59th Street is seedy and weird, but the creeps and transients really occupy a strip between 34th Street and 42nd Street. I've always figured it was a legacy of The Old 42nd Street, from the 1970's. That place ancient New Yorkers still talk about, from a time before Giulliani's Disnified Times Square took root in the 90's, but honestly who knows. Somtimes I wonder, though, if that part of town would be different now, if Madison Square Garden weren't there, and the original, grander Penn Station had still remained. Throughout the 20th century many other parts of Manhattan endured similar transformations, and even Grand Central went through a period of neglect, but to compare Grand Central to Penn Station now, is like night and day. I figure there's something to that.

cfmcdonald 10y ago
Though it happened years before I was born, it frankly still makes me sick to my stomach to think that this secular cathedral: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Station_(1910%E2%80%9363)#/media/File:Penn_Station1.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Station_(1910%E2%... Was destroyed to make way for this rat warren: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Station_(New_York_City)#/media/File:Penn_Station_LIRR_concourse.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Station_(New_York...
- massysett 10y ago
  I always think of Penn Station as the Edith Keeler [0] of buildings. It had to die. Nationally, Penn Station is worth more as it is now than it ever would have been worth in its original state. I have even (only half-jokingly) mused that it should be landmarked as-is as a cautionary tale. That's what I like about this plan. It takes the evil Madison Square Garden and saves it rather than just tearing it down as Penn Station was. The plan does something new rather than just trying to re-create the old Penn Station. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_City_on_the_Edge_of_Forever https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_City_on_the_Edge_of_Foreve...
  - Aloha 10y ago
    Agreed - the demolition of Penn Station kicked off the historic preservation movement, and has saved many thousands more buildings.
    - ghaff 10y ago
      >the demolition of Penn Station kicked off the historic preservation movement That's the retconned mythology. Based on what I've read, it's not clear how true it is. It's probably also worth noting that Penn Station had been decaying for years and, with the bankruptcy of Penn Central because of a long-term decline in rail traffic, it's not clear what the mechanism to save Penn Station would have been at the time. I don't disagree it's a pity--especially given how generally uninspired that whole area of Midtown is. But the NYC of fifty years ago was a very different place.
      - cfmcdonald 10y ago
        The same mechanism that saved Grand Central a decade later - legal intervention. The situation was pretty much the same. A bankrupt railroad wanted to demolish a beautiful landmark to make money.
        ghaff 10y ago
        Fair enough. I actually hadn't realized that they were both Penn Central stations. (I assume that at some point they were terminals for two different railroads--hence the lack of decent connections between them just like Boston.)
        gaadd33 10y ago
        They were from two different railroads. Pennsylvania Station was from the Pennsylvania Railroad, Grand Central from the New York Central. They merged in 1968 to try and save both of railroads but it ended up not helping.
sotojuan 10y ago
Midtown is a strange combination of seedy, dirty, weird, sketchy, and "cleaned up" tourist destinations. It's busy, full of massage parlors and bad souvenir stores, safe, and full of families on vacation. Probably my least favorite part of Manhattan to work in.
- eric_h 10y ago
  What's amusing about that whole neighborhood is that it really is a tourist destination and as such is the only part of New York that many tourists see. It is very much unlike the rest of the city and yet, that is the impression that tourists will get of what New York is. The reality is quite different.
  - pavement 10y ago
    Tell me about it! I grew up in the tri-state area, and thought Penn Station was The City for most of my childhood. There's a ghost of this sensation that still haunts me, when I'm in that part of town. Most of the time, trips to Manhattan were by train. A smaller handful of outings were field trips by school bus or by driving in, and arriving at a parking garage. It wasn't until my late teens that I began to explore the rest of the city, and find new places without the lid of parental supervision or chaperones. It wasn't until my 20's that I realized there were parts of NYC that weren't littered with tourist trap schlock shops brimming with statue of liberty figurines and empire state building miniatures. The really funny part is that my siblings still think that way, and in their mind, when I describe hanging out in the city, I think they imagine me hobnobbing with vagrants in front of the Arby's on 8th ave.
    - harmmonica 10y ago
      Such an interesting comment for me given the plan in the article. I grew up in the tri-state area as well, but north of the city and so my access point was always Metro North and thus arrived at Grand Central. Every time I'd show up there I'd have this unbelievable excitement to see Grand Central's soaring ceiling, the clock at the information booth, even the feeling of the heavy (are they?) bronze doors to 42nd or Lexington... There really is something magical about an epic entrance to a city and our very different experiences speak directly to it. I see the comment about the traffic stats not necessarily justifying spending dollars on the experience of Penn Station, and I partly agree with that, but there's something you can't quantify about how important a first impression is (or maybe you can quantify it; I imagine you, pavement, and all the folks like you, who might have been turned off by that Penn Station experience flipping to Grand Central as the entryway and how many more dollars you might spend in the city over the course of your lives as a direct result of that improved first impression).
lmm 10y ago
I'm never quite convinced. The ugliness of the present station apparently hasn't stopped it serving 3x as many passengers as it was designed for. Meanwhile Madison Square Garden has provided a lot of value to a lot of people over the years. Of course a pretty building is better than an ugly one, but not if it comes at the cost of a lot of space that could be used for something else.
bogomipz 10y ago
There is a silver lining however in that the destruction of the station precipitated the passage of the New York City landmarks law shortly after. Fun fact - Jackie Onasis was a high profile proponent of this legislation as well as raising awareness of architectural heritage in the city.

cfmcdonald 10y ago

Though it happened years before I was born, it frankly still makes me sick to my stomach to think that this secular cathedral: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Station_(1910%E2%80%9363)#/media/File:Penn_Station1.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Station_(1910%E2%... Was destroyed to make way for this rat warren: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Station_(New_York_City)#/media/File:Penn_Station_LIRR_concourse.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Station_(New_York...

massysett 10y ago
I always think of Penn Station as the Edith Keeler [0] of buildings. It had to die. Nationally, Penn Station is worth more as it is now than it ever would have been worth in its original state. I have even (only half-jokingly) mused that it should be landmarked as-is as a cautionary tale. That's what I like about this plan. It takes the evil Madison Square Garden and saves it rather than just tearing it down as Penn Station was. The plan does something new rather than just trying to re-create the old Penn Station. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_City_on_the_Edge_of_Forever https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_City_on_the_Edge_of_Foreve...
- Aloha 10y ago
  Agreed - the demolition of Penn Station kicked off the historic preservation movement, and has saved many thousands more buildings.
  - ghaff 10y ago
    >the demolition of Penn Station kicked off the historic preservation movement That's the retconned mythology. Based on what I've read, it's not clear how true it is. It's probably also worth noting that Penn Station had been decaying for years and, with the bankruptcy of Penn Central because of a long-term decline in rail traffic, it's not clear what the mechanism to save Penn Station would have been at the time. I don't disagree it's a pity--especially given how generally uninspired that whole area of Midtown is. But the NYC of fifty years ago was a very different place.
    - cfmcdonald 10y ago
      The same mechanism that saved Grand Central a decade later - legal intervention. The situation was pretty much the same. A bankrupt railroad wanted to demolish a beautiful landmark to make money.
      - ghaff 10y ago
        Fair enough. I actually hadn't realized that they were both Penn Central stations. (I assume that at some point they were terminals for two different railroads--hence the lack of decent connections between them just like Boston.)
        gaadd33 10y ago
        They were from two different railroads. Pennsylvania Station was from the Pennsylvania Railroad, Grand Central from the New York Central. They merged in 1968 to try and save both of railroads but it ended up not helping.

sotojuan 10y ago

Midtown is a strange combination of seedy, dirty, weird, sketchy, and "cleaned up" tourist destinations. It's busy, full of massage parlors and bad souvenir stores, safe, and full of families on vacation. Probably my least favorite part of Manhattan to work in.

eric_h 10y ago
What's amusing about that whole neighborhood is that it really is a tourist destination and as such is the only part of New York that many tourists see. It is very much unlike the rest of the city and yet, that is the impression that tourists will get of what New York is. The reality is quite different.
- pavement 10y ago
  Tell me about it! I grew up in the tri-state area, and thought Penn Station was The City for most of my childhood. There's a ghost of this sensation that still haunts me, when I'm in that part of town. Most of the time, trips to Manhattan were by train. A smaller handful of outings were field trips by school bus or by driving in, and arriving at a parking garage. It wasn't until my late teens that I began to explore the rest of the city, and find new places without the lid of parental supervision or chaperones. It wasn't until my 20's that I realized there were parts of NYC that weren't littered with tourist trap schlock shops brimming with statue of liberty figurines and empire state building miniatures. The really funny part is that my siblings still think that way, and in their mind, when I describe hanging out in the city, I think they imagine me hobnobbing with vagrants in front of the Arby's on 8th ave.
  - harmmonica 10y ago
    Such an interesting comment for me given the plan in the article. I grew up in the tri-state area as well, but north of the city and so my access point was always Metro North and thus arrived at Grand Central. Every time I'd show up there I'd have this unbelievable excitement to see Grand Central's soaring ceiling, the clock at the information booth, even the feeling of the heavy (are they?) bronze doors to 42nd or Lexington... There really is something magical about an epic entrance to a city and our very different experiences speak directly to it. I see the comment about the traffic stats not necessarily justifying spending dollars on the experience of Penn Station, and I partly agree with that, but there's something you can't quantify about how important a first impression is (or maybe you can quantify it; I imagine you, pavement, and all the folks like you, who might have been turned off by that Penn Station experience flipping to Grand Central as the entryway and how many more dollars you might spend in the city over the course of your lives as a direct result of that improved first impression).

lmm 10y ago

I'm never quite convinced. The ugliness of the present station apparently hasn't stopped it serving 3x as many passengers as it was designed for. Meanwhile Madison Square Garden has provided a lot of value to a lot of people over the years. Of course a pretty building is better than an ugly one, but not if it comes at the cost of a lot of space that could be used for something else.

bogomipz 10y ago

There is a silver lining however in that the destruction of the station precipitated the passage of the New York City landmarks law shortly after. Fun fact - Jackie Onasis was a high profile proponent of this legislation as well as raising awareness of architectural heritage in the city.