NEW YORK | Pennsylvania Station Original Building | 1910-1962

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy

It's not being rebuilt, not now, not ever. Just accept it's gone and you will be happy. There's a reason the preservation movement started and it's because of this one being lost.

When I went to NYC, everywhere I walked around was preWWII except for the maid CBD center. And functionalist buildings are necessary there. Like I said, the main reason for this one being demolished was the massive area it took up. Trains were also becoming more obsolete in that time, as air travel increased and highways were increasing. No need for such a big station when people were using less trains.
That space was better used to make business than to be useless showiness. Plus, buildings like those are really expensive to maintain. What if this one went the route of the Michigan Central Station?

I can't believe you are attempting to somehow justify the demolition of this station

They made a crap, stupid and greedy money grab mistake, no need to justify the worst decision in NY's architectural history.

Most people walking through Penn station everyday don't know any better, but their lives are a little bit worse because of these idiots in the 1960s'.

Area of the station has nothing to do with it, it's just a nice excuse used to push for the demolition. It was greed and philistine behavior, plain and simple. They had to have MSG built there, but they could have placed it in another location. Just complete greed combined with foolish urban planning.

[ThatOneGuy]

I told you why they demolished it, you can't change that, not even with emotional responses.
You can call it 'greed' or 'money grab' but it won't change the fact that there was no other hope for this building. People weren't going to spend massive amounts of money taking care of useless builings just for the sake of architectural image. Not in NYC.

[MolsonExport]

so, tough shit, eh?

[DURKEY427]

What happend to Michigan central station?

[ThatOneGuy]

^^

[vandelay]

I'd hardly call Penn Station useless. It's the busiest train station in North America. It has more than double the daily commuters of Grand Central. It's also at the center of the Northeast Corridor, which will only gain in importance once high speed rail is finally adopted in America.

In 1963, when Penn Station was demolished, "only" 200,000 commuters a day passed through. Today that number has doubled and tripled. They demolished it because they thought rail was dying, and they were wrong.

Also, what use is the Parthenon? What use is the Lincoln Memorial? Or St. Paul's Cathedral? A train station arguably has more usefulness than any of those priceless structures. But you wouldn't dare demolish any of them, why? Because they define a culture, a people, a city. Penn Station was and could have been one of those structures for New York, in addition to serving around 500,000 (and growing) commuters a day.

[RCDC]

Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy

What if this one went the route of the Michigan Central Station?

Detroit is not Manhattan. DC isn't either but still a better comparison would be Union Station in DC:

In the 1950s, when air travel became more and more popular, the number of passengers started to decline and the railway station had become too large. An attempt in the 1970s to turn it into a visitors center failed. By that time, the state of the building had deteriorated to such an extent that parts of the roof started to cave in. Congress and the Railroad authorities debated whether the Union Station would be demolished or renovated. Fortunately, in 1981 a joint public and private venture was set up to restore the building.

[ThatOneGuy]

Originally Posted by vandelay

I'd hardly call Penn Station useless. It's the busiest train station in North America. It has more than double the daily commuters of Grand Central. It's also at the center of the Northeast Corridor, which will only gain in importance once high speed rail is finally adopted in America.

In 1963, when Penn Station was demolished, "only" 200,000 commuters a day passed through. Today that number has doubled and tripled. They demolished it because they thought rail was dying, and they were wrong.

Also, what use is the Parthenon? What use is the Lincoln Memorial? Or St. Paul's Cathedral? A train station arguably has more usefulness than any of those priceless structures. But you wouldn't dare demolish any of them, why? Because they define a culture, a people, a city. Penn Station was and could have been one of those structures for New York, in addition to serving around 500,000 (and growing) commuters a day.

Those didn't take up a massive area of precious city space.

I don't know why you guys are so defensive about this building. It's been dead for 50 years and you know the reasons why. Yes, it was nice, but it had to go.

Be thankful you guys aren't living in my city where many old buildings are just left to rot until their roof collapses on top of them. Then other ones that are perfectly fine are demolished for empty lots that don't even get built on. I always walk past the most famous 'icon' in Constanta, the Cazino, and stare sadly as it crumbles, unused.

[marvelfannumber1]

Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy

Those didn't take up a massive area of precious city space.

Would you be in favor of demolishing St. Peters basillica then? It is FAR too massive for it's own good. I mean a church could just aswell be a shack with benches so why not demolish it right?

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy

Those didn't take up a massive area of precious city space.

I don't know why you guys are so defensive about this building. It's been dead for 50 years and you know the reasons why. Yes, it was nice, but it had to go.

Be thankful you guys aren't living in my city where many old buildings are just left to rot until their roof collapses on top of them. Then other ones that are perfectly fine are demolished for empty lots that don't even get built on. I always walk past the most famous 'icon' in Constanta, the Cazino, and stare sadly as it crumbles, unused.

If you had to travel through that cramped rat-hole every day twice, you wouldn't be so laid back over this. People want to see a new modern Penn station replace the current MSG. There is still hope. People should not just accept the current situation, otherwise the crime will never be rectified.

Even if you say, 'it had to go', it was poorly redesigned and putting MSG on top was pure greed and showed lack of civic duty and terrible foresight.

Given their awful planning foresight of the time, it is worrying to think of what terrible mistakes they are now making about the future. They are probably wrong about many things.

[ThatOneGuy]

Originally Posted by marvelfannumber1

Would you be in favor of demolishing St. Peters basillica then? It is FAR too massive for it's own good. I mean a church could just aswell be a shack with benches so why not demolish it right?

Ok what is with these smart ass comments all of a sudden?

First off, the Vatican is centered around that church, they aren't going to demolish the only good thing they've got. But NYC? How many icons does it have? It already has one beautiful train station, countless townhouses in preserved areas, gothic and art-deco skyscrapers literally everywhere, and you all worry about some oversized train station destroyed half a century ago, in a time of change. Give me a break...
Second of all, the church is centered around a massive religious organization, whereas this one was... a train station.

I have to say, many people here seem to be really spoiled and take quite a lot for granted. Like I mentioned, the most important icon in my city is rotting from the inside-out because nobody wants to use it. Be happy you still have a nice train station left, it's a miracle the preservation comittee managed to save that one in time.

And again, it won't be built, so stop trying. You will only continue to feel bad.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy

I told you why they demolished it, you can't change that, not even with emotional responses.
You can call it 'greed' or 'money grab' but it won't change the fact that there was no other hope for this building. People weren't going to spend massive amounts of money taking care of useless builings just for the sake of architectural image. Not in NYC.

Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy

Ok what is with these smart ass comments all of a sudden?

First off, the Vatican is centered around that church, they aren't going to demolish the only good thing they've got. But NYC? How many icons does it have? It already has one beautiful train station, countless townhouses in preserved areas, gothic and art-deco skyscrapers literally everywhere, and you all worry about some oversized train station destroyed half a century ago, in a time of change. Give me a break...
Second of all, the church is centered around a massive religious organization, whereas this one was... a train station.

I have to say, many people here seem to be really spoiled and take quite a lot for granted. Like I mentioned, the most important icon in my city is rotting from the inside-out because nobody wants to use it. Be happy you still have a nice train station left, it's a miracle the preservation comittee managed to save that one in time.

And again, it won't be built, so stop trying. You will only continue to feel bad.

I disagree with you because it goes beyond sheer iconic value. If you had to use the station every day you would see why NYers are so pissed off at what they lost. Not just the architecture or the iconic nature of the old building, but the fact that the replacement is way overcrowded and unpleasant to be the main inter city rail gateway and the busiest train station in the country. This is NYC, we need to look at cities that are on a similar world size and standing for comparisons. It is obvious that NYC is getting the short end of the stick and not enough investment in NYC's infrastructure is being made.

I will say though that people should continue to hold their feelings of resentment about this crime. Eventually, even though the old building won't be rebuilt, we may get a civilized replacement and a relocation of MSG.

Again if the replacement had been at least a civilized building, the hate you see would not be nearly as pronounced. The current station is simply inadequate for its passenger load and is an embarrassment as the main rail gateway to a the city. Other cities around the country can provide a better experience when entering by rail.

[JG573]

Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy

Ok what is with these smart ass comments all of a sudden?

First off, the Vatican is centered around that church, they aren't going to demolish the only good thing they've got. But NYC? How many icons does it have? It already has one beautiful train station, countless townhouses in preserved areas, gothic and art-deco skyscrapers literally everywhere, and you all worry about some oversized train station destroyed half a century ago, in a time of change. Give me a break...
Second of all, the church is centered around a massive religious organization, whereas this one was... a train station.

I have to say, many people here seem to be really spoiled and take quite a lot for granted. Like I mentioned, the most important icon in my city is rotting from the inside-out because nobody wants to use it. Be happy you still have a nice train station left, it's a miracle the preservation comittee managed to save that one in time.

And again, it won't be built, so stop trying. You will only continue to feel bad.

Well I guess this is where people just have different opinions and you don't need to ram it down their throats. So we should just settle for things happening just because your city isn't using its older buildings to the fullest. Thats like saying well stop whining about high crime in the US while other countries have it worse in the world. That doesn't mean we have to settle for the status quo and no matter what we should always strive for excellence even if we don't get it.

I personally think it was terrible to see that building tore down and it would have been a beautiful addition to the city if it was around now a days. I am glad you have the foresight of the future to see it won't be built again and your probably right it won't but we still share are hopes of it getting rebuilt that is why this thread was made.

[THE BIG APPLE]

Let's make this thread simple. Who ever has ANY criticism about OLD Penn Station (too massive, too short etc.) get the hell out and don't post in this thread, with all due respect. The rest stay. Silly conversations arguing about the architecture of OLD Penn Station is not sanctioned here. Take that to the Twin Towers thread, which is understandable.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE

Let's make this thread simple. Who ever has ANY criticism about OLD Penn Station (too massive, too short etc.) get the hell out and don't post in this thread, with all due respect. The rest stay. Silly conversations arguing about the architecture of OLD Penn Station is not sanctioned here. Take that to the Twin Towers thread, which is understandable.

Are you a moderator? If not, I do not appreciate your bullying and agressive approach. Everybody in this thread is welcome to stay and express their opinions, THANK YOU.

Saying something like debating isn't sanctioned here is ridiculous.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy

Like I mentioned, the most important icon in my city is rotting from the inside-out because nobody wants to use it.

That's too bad for you but I don't see how this at all pertains to the discussion of Penn Station. People used the old Penn before it was destroyed and people use the new Penn now. The folly of the decision to demolish the station is no better illustrated than by the enormous resurgence that GCT has enjoyed. People visit GCT for no other reason than to enjoy the magnificent architecture which now terminals the busiest railroad in the US. It is easily conceivable that within the next ten years over 1M people a day will pass through the station as train riders and/or tourists. Nobody goes to Penn to marvel at a dark crowded hole in the ground retailed with 3rd and 4th tier shops.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by k1052

That's too bad for you but I don't see how this at all pertains to the discussion of Penn Station. People used the old Penn before it was destroyed and people use the new Penn now. The folly of the decision to demolish the station is no better illustrated than by the enormous resurgence that GCT has enjoyed. People visit GCT for no other reason than to enjoy the magnificent architecture which now terminals the busiest railroad in the US. It is easily conceivable that within the next ten years over 1M people a day will pass through the station as train riders and/or tourists. Nobody goes to Penn to marvel at a dark crowded hole in the ground retailed with 3rd and 4th tier shops.

Well, I agree. Although it is sad that old buildings in his city are neglected, that in no way has anything to do with the situation in NYC. I reiterate that the situation is far more than merely the old beauty of Penn, it is about the dire replacement plan that was constructed and the inadequacy of the capacity, passenger experience and future growth.

Regarding the fact that tourists go to GCT and enjoy the building, that can still happen if a fantastic modern architectural creation someday replaces MSG. Sadly, the old building is gone foreever, i don't see how they would reconstruct it like they do in Germany with old buildings.

[jg6544]

Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy

I told you why they demolished it, you can't change that, not even with emotional responses.
You can call it 'greed' or 'money grab' but it won't change the fact that there was no other hope for this building. People weren't going to spend massive amounts of money taking care of useless builings just for the sake of architectural image. Not in NYC.

I can understand that they replaced it. I can't understand that they replaced it with something much, much worse.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by jg6544

I can understand that they replaced it. I can't understand that they replaced it with something much, much worse.

Of course, that is the real issue here which causes the most anger. The replacement is simply awful and MSG benefits from location but rail users suffer. You just can't get over how stupid these people were. I can't imagine how intelligent people couldn't have foreseen a future need for a large station in such a dense city as Manhattan. Did they really think auto traffic growth alone was sustainable and enough to see train travel dwindle?

[vandelay]

In the 1960s it looked like New York City, like a lot of cities in the US, was in decline. All the old industries were leaving the city, shipping, manufacturing, etc.; people were fleeing to the suburbs; the Giants and the Dodgers had left to California. The list goes on and on.

When they destroyed Penn Station the people who made the decision bet against New York City using one of NYC's family jewels, and lost the bet.