Penncitations

As a partner at SOM, I have been deeply involved in both the adaptive reuse of Moynihan Train Hall and the ongoing renovations of Penn Station proper. And so I read Thomas de Monchaux’s article “Save Penn Station” in NYRA #31 with great interest. I share de Monchaux’s lack of sentimentality when reflecting on the site’s many iterations, along with his admiration for Luckman’s innovative mixed-use station model. That said, I must respectfully disagree with de Monchaux’s representation of the current state of the station and the necessity of the ongoing renovation. However attractive Luckman’s original vision, it cannot overcome a fatal lack of foresight: it was designed to accommodate a third of the passengers that crowd the station today. The congestion creates fundamental safety and maintenance issues that will only continue to worsen. That alone should merit improvement, yet with the planned construction of both the Gateway Program and Metro-North Access project, we are asking the complex to take on even more riders. Something must be done. Ironically, the chosen redevelopment approach is the very route that de Monchaux advocates for—a strategic set of architectural interventions for the existing facility (with MSG remaining in place)—paired with one he opposes (a southward expansion to create sorely needed new platforms). But this isn’t Lincoln Center: a renovation is significantly more costly than the author seems to believe, requiring extensive work to reconfigure the subterranean station. Appreciation for what has come before shouldn’t keep us from pursuing these necessary improvements. McKim, Mead & White and Luckman’s contributions notwithstanding, I believe the best Penn Station is yet to come.