How Do You Solve a Problem Like Penn Station?

Railroads, elected leaders, and passengers want a world-class facility but many obstacles are in the way

Rendering by Jeff Stykeman for ReThink Studio of Seventh Avenue facade for a rebuilt Pennsylvania Station. The studion’s Rethink Penn Station NYC proposal calls a new Penn Station to serve as the hub for an integrated regional rail network for the New York metropolitan area.

The saga of New York’s troubled Pennsylvania Station has been running for 60 years, seven years longer than the original was in use. It began in 1963 when the eponymous railroad started to demolish the structure, an architectural masterpiece from McKim, Mead & White, to make way for a mundane office building and a new home for Madison Square Garden.

The subterranean station that replaced the original is congested and confusing, dark and depressing. Where once “one entered like a god; one scuttles in now like a rat,” architectural historian Vincent Scully wrote.

While it has undergone numerous renovations and Amtrak has moved its facilities across Eighth Avenue to the new Moynihan Train Hall in the Farley Post Office Building, the station’s problems remain. Commuters, who comprise the bulk of Penn’s users, must contend with overcrowded narrow platforms and multiple stairways and escalators as they move between track level and street level.

The railroads that use Penn Station, New York and New Jersey elected leaders and representatives, and the 650,000 people who use the station each day agree it needs to be replaced. They want the station’s problems corrected and a new, world class station that New Yorkers can take pride in built on the site. Several proposals have been floated to solve the station’s problems.

If only it was that simple. Amtrak owns the station but tenants Long Island Rail Road and NJ Transit are its biggest users. Vornado and MSG, respectively, own the office building and arena on top.

Architects, engineers, and construction companies can design and build a station, and government and the railroads can assemble a financing package, but the future of Madison Square Garden must be resolved first.

In addition, track space needs to be found for the additional trains expected to use Penn Station once the Gateway Program is finished. Further, what MSG decides to do will undoubtedly influence the approach to expanded rail service.

In mid-September the New York City Council agreed to extend MSG’s operating permit, which allows it to hold events with more than 2,500 persons, for five years. The agreement requires the arena operator produce a transit management plan in conjunction with any overhaul of the station. As currently configured, the Garden is no longer compatible with Penn Station, railroad officials contend.

Given the short duration of its operating permit, MSG has two choices. It can either cooperate with the railroads to develop a workable plan with the “promise” that its rights will be extended in the future or find a location to build a new arena.

The Garden is reluctant to move for good reason. Because of the multiple rail lines – intercity, commuter, and rapid transit – that converge there Penn Station is probably the most desirable piece of real estate in New York for a sports/entertainment venue.

This puts the railroads in a position where they can extract all kinds of concessions needed to improve Penn Station. They could force MSG to stop blocking the streets with trucks. They could take the taxiway mid-block between Seventh and Eighth Avenue to create new entryways with a skylight to brighten the station below. They could even demolish the Theater at Madison Square Garden to make room for a grander entrance and street-level mezzanine along Eighth Avenue. All of these have been proposed.

But allowing MSG to stay could open a can of worms. The Gateway Program includes a new two-track tunnel under the Hudson River and rehabilitation of the existing North River Tunnels, which were heavily damaged during Hurricane Sandy in 2012.

Gateway also calls for a major expansion of Penn Station’s capacity by adding tracks, platforms, and a station annex, which would leverage the new tunnels. Building the facility would require condemnation of an entire city block just south of the existing station, which local community interests vehemently oppose for obvious reasons.

The annex could cost between $12 billion and $17 billion, according to a New York Post article. That would be on top of the $16 billion estimated for Gateway and $8 billion to rebuild Penn Station. However alternative to the annex has been proposed that could cost far less.

ReThink Studio, a planning and design firm that specializes in transportation, proposes a regional rail system with trains running through Penn Station instead of terminating there. Through running would facilitate faster train movements and higher capacity. With trains no longer having to reverse direction at a busy transportation center like Penn Station they are less likely to block interlockings and delay other trains. In addition, the number of trains per hour the station could accommodate would rise.

Rather than add more, ReThink proposes to remove eight of the station’s 21 tracks to facilitate through running. Those remaining would be reconfigured as six tracks on the north side for westbound trains and six more on the south side for eastbounds. Platforms would be widened, as well, and the Long Island Rail Road, NJ Transit, and Amtrak would share common facilities. At $3 billion, the estimated cost would be a fraction of the price tag for a station annex between 30^th and 31^st Streets.

However, the hundreds of massive columns installed to support Madison Square Garden are in the way. As long as MSG remains in the picture through running cannot be implemented as ReThink proposes. The Garden would have to be moved to a new arena somewhere else while its owners want to stay put. Consequently Amtrak and the MTA have favored building a station annex with additional tracks on two or more levels, even though it would be way more costly.

Even if MSG was willing to move the Garden to a new a location, it has few options due to the dearth of suitable real estate in Manhattan. The best, IMHO, would be to build across Seventh Avenue on the site of the old Hotel Pennsylvania, which was recently demolished. The property footprint is 200 feet by 400 feet, equivalent to two acres. Penn Station’s transit and commuter railroads will still be nearby.

But, the owner, Vornado Realty Trust, has plans to build a 68-story office tower on the old hotel site. This building was to be the centerpiece of a cluster of properties near Penn Station that would generate revenue to finance its reconstruction. However, in February Vornado announced it was putting that plan on hold due to softness in the Manhattan office market caused by the COVID pandemic.

In the unlikely event MSG finds a new home, either across Seventh Avenue or another location, it would be in a good position to sell the existing arena to make room for Penn Station reconstruction. ReThink proposes to recreate the original on the site.

I like ReThink’s plan, especially the concept of creating a regional rail system with through running and Penn Station as its hub, but it is unlikely to prevail. The sticking point isn’t technological feasibility, it’s politics. The myriad players, i.e., the bureaucrats who run the MTA, NJ Transit, and Amtrak and the elected officials they serve, are more concerned with protecting their domains than adapting an innovative approach that puts passengers first.