From the NewsWire story it seems like the owner of Madison Square Garden is not all that worried since he still plans to go ahead with his $billion overhaul. I visited the NY Times website to get the rest of the story. The whole thing seems caught up in politics, with all the candidates for Mayor choosing sides. Here is the link to the Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/25/nyregion/madison-square-garden-is-told-to-move.html?_r=0
Interesting. But would you replace the Garden with a close replica of the PRR station demolished in 1963? Or a modern and airy glass trainshed like the one built at Berlin Hauptbahnhof, in 2002?
Personally, I’d like to see a replica of the original demolished in 1963, (maybe opened in 2063, a century after? It would likely take that long to build). But, this is likely too expensive, and thus infeasible.
NY still has Grand Central Terminal as its example of classic RR architecture. I was never a fan of the lattice-work iron columns in Penn Station’s concourse. If it actually gets rebuilt, I would prefer something different.
As much as the original Penn Station was a masterpiece (from the photos I’ve seen), I don’t think anyone is seriously trying to rebuild that. I do hear talk of letting daylight onto the concourses, so that would strongly hint at a new station with some sort of glass ceilings or at least huge skylights. I presume that the Farley Post Office will have to represent the architecture of a bygone era.
With the opportunities of getting rid of MSG (and the other buildings in that block, one hopes), there are all kinds of possibilities to create a magnificent complex that is a welcoming station, as well as a place that people will just plain want to go for other activities.
This would also be a good time to clean up things all the way down to track level. Make any adjustments to tracks and platforms needed to be fit for the traffic volume for years to come. Create new passenger concourses, connecting corridors and so on. After all, when they tore down the old Penn Station, they just sheared off the top, left the old underground stuff and built the MSG and other buildings on top of that.
A new station could be awesome, as long as the architects don’t just all copy current airport architecture.
You’re right, CJTrainguy, the PRR masterpiece of the 20th Century is not to be rebuilt. It is a great moment for commuter rail and Amtrak to pull the image of American passenger rail out of the 19th Century, bring it into the 21st Century and push toward the 22nd. As the population grows, as the metropolitan area changes, as technologies in transportation and communication change, there is more need to do the project from scratch rather than resting on the past.
I would sure like to see Amtrak to get the New York Station it should have, CJ. And but for the short sighted and grasping greed on the Pennsylvania Railroad it would have today. But 10 years is still a while away. I understand Madison Square Garden does not want to leave. It likes the current location and the location works well for the Garden.
The politics seem daunting. Most of the commuters and visitors off the train are from out of town, and thus are not city voters, whereas, many of the sports fans and concert goers are from the city. Also, in many cities, the municipality helps with the financing of sports venues, not kick them out. I have a feeling MSG won’t move until NY (or some other city) helps them build a new arena.
They should go back to the plan floated about 10 years ago where MSG would move to the west side of the Farley Post Office on 10th Avenue. This would allow for an easier rebuild and expansion of the Penn Station complex in the future. The current master plan (at least track-wise) calls for adding 7 tracks to the southside of the station plus two new Hudson River tubes between the Empire Connector and the 31st Street retaining wall. To accomplish the addition of 7 tracks, the city will need to acquire and razor every building on the block surrounded by 31st & 30th street between 7th Avenue and 8th Avenue as well as a few buildings between 8th and 9th Avenues. (Fortunately the city has developers who are interested in building skyscrapers on top of the new platforms once they are complete which should help defer the expansion costs). The new tracks and new tunnels will force the rebuilding of the entire west throat trackage to allow trains from the new Hudson Tunnels to access the higher numbered platforms. This would also benefit Empire Corridor trains that are current restricted to tracks 5-8 under the current throat arrangement. (In a ideal world, the Empire Connector tunnel would be double tracked to welcome expanded Metro North commuter service but that’s another story).
As for a new head house, ideas are still being kicked around for that. The only thing anyone can agree on is that the new place need to be more “roomy” and “airy” (i.e. wider with higher ceilings). Personally I would prefer to see a recreation of the original station’s facade with the Roman inspired columns and statues and temple-like appearance… perhaps the interiors could look the same too with marble/granite pillars and ceilings instead of steel lattice.
I like this plan that moves MSG to the riverfront over by Javits. I don’t have anything against MSG and don’t want to see it leave Manhattan. It also needs to be close to excellent communications. All that is accomplished in this plan, plus it gets off the railroad property.
I’ve studied the Old Penn Station for years and in my own opinion it was a beautiful architectural spectacle, but it was not a practical train station in many ways.
Most passenger movements were actually on the second level above the platform level and below the grand concourse level. It was not an efficient design but more of a grandious faux-classical architecture example.
The dedicated “long distance” train platforms are now being used for commuter service and do a bad job at this. Frankly, this is made much worse do the novel and much-needed Midtown Direct NJT service. The tiny, skinny platforms with many pillars and other obstructions were a severe oversight, especially since the railroad spent so much money and cleared so much land in the first place–why not think ahead? No consideration was made to commuter service from the western suburbs in any way at all. All the platforms should have been built wide and clear like the LIRR platforms.
There are many other major flaws, like stairs to get to the subway platforms. No, we don’t want to replicate the Old Penn Station.
It was beautiful but it was not a good train station.
Metro-North’s beautiful and highly functional and efficient Grand Central Terminal, however, is a great train station.
Oh, and about rebuilding Penn Station? Much of that inertia, if there actually was any, was quashed with the East Side Access project that will provide a convenient one-seat ride for LIRR commuters to alight at Grand Central Terminal, which is in the part of town where most LIRR commuters actually work.
These LIRR commuters, even in the old Penn Station, always alighted in a basement that provided a convenient exit to the street. None of these commuters enjoyed the grandious faux-classical Penn Station even in its heyday.
Aegrotatio, you make some interesting observations and point. The truth is that when built, PRR was using Exchange Pl. Jersey City for the bulk of their commuter operations and were in fact a minor player overall in NJ commuter services with only one line, initially, until the addition of the NJ&LB. (The other roads, Erie, Lackawanna, and CNJ in particular, brought commuters from several routes and more bedroom like communities. At the time, too, the bulk of commuters were Wall St. oreinted businessmen, bankers, stock brokers, etc. Downtown and thus the ferry boats of all the roads were more suitable.) Thus, Penn Sta, except for the LIRR, was designed with long distance service in mind more than commuters. As for the subway connections, I believe more subways came along after the building of the station. The tearing down of Penn Sta with no regard to the future of commuter or long distance passenger services was and is inexcusable and is why MSG must go and a real railroad station system must be built.
This sentence is right on target Aegrotatio. Old Penn Station was built to show off the power and wealth of the Pennsylvania Railroad. It was deliberately more grandiose than Grand Central Terminal to show the world and the New York Central Railroad just who is railroad boss in the U. S. Passengers were strictly a secondary consideration. The old Penn Station for all of its grandiosity was a hugh cavern, freezing cold in winter with frigid blasts coming in form the openings to the tracks. But we passengers put up with that; after all we were in the presence of the most powerful force in the country. So you are right; the station was not built with passengers in mind. And as far as the commuter trains for which the station today is so unsuited, as far as PRR was concerned they had to put up with commuters but the mighty PRR wasn’t about to do more than put up with us.