Frequently Asked Questions

Who is ReThink Penn Station NYC?

We are an initiative of ReThinkNYC, a not-for-profit organization dedicated to applying innovative thinking to the future of New York and its region. We focus on transportation infrastructure, land use, governance, and socio-economic issues.

ReThink Penn Station NYC is a founding member of the Empire Station Coalition (Penn for All), which includes the 29th Street Association, City Club of NY, CNU NYC, Council of Chelsea Block Associations, Environmental Simulation Center, Historic Districts Council, Human-Scale NYC, ReThinkNYC, Limited Equity & Affordability at Penn South (LEAPS), Midtown South Community Council, Penn-Area Residents Committee, The Murray Hill Neighborhood Association, Save Chelsea, TakeBackNYC, and the Victorian Society of New York.

We stand in opposition to the proposals for the Penn Station neighborhood, denominated in The Pennsylvania Station Area Civic and Land Use Improvement Project and Master Plan put forward by Gov. Kathy Hochul and the Empire State Development Corp. (Hochul/ESD plan)

What’s your mission?

We are battling to replace the present, grim, airless, dungeon-like Penn Station with a new, revitalized, and commuter-friendly Penn Station. We stand in opposition to the proposal put forward by Hochul/ESD and immediately call for:

- A halt to federal funding.

- The retention of an independent infrastructure firm with experience in peer international cities to evaluate how through-running can be implemented within the footprint of the existing Penn Station/Moynihan Train Hall complex.

-The removal of Madison Square Garden (MSG) to one of the three locations recommended by ReThinkNYC, including: the Port Authority Bus Terminal/West Midtown, 34th Street and Sixth Avenue/Herald Square, and the remaining undeveloped rail yards at Hudson Yards.

- The reconstruction of a New Penn Station inspired by McKim, Mead and White’s original configuration.The new station will include through-running, a modernized circulation plan, and new transit technologies, and will be  part of a larger adaptive reuse effort in the 34th Street/Hudson Yards neighborhood. New Penn Station would incorporate social services in spaces previously occupied by railroad company offices. Construction would feature green construction technologies.

- The reuse of historic architectural sites on 31st and 30th Streets along with the other structures threatened by the Hochul/ESD’s proposal.

- A new governance model. No longer will the public be “left out” of the process and forced to respond after-the-fact to infrastructure issues without proper information. A Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) process should be utilized before any project, including the present one, moves forward.

- Affordable housing, including permanent affordable middle-income dwellings and high-quality homeless services staffed by a first-class provider of such services. 

What’s going on in the Penn neighborhood?

The Pennsylvania Station Area Civic and Land Use Improvement Project and Master Plan (Penn Station proposal) calls for the demolition of vast amounts of the Penn Station neighborhood as recommended by New York State’s unelected Empire State Development Corporation (ESD).  This proposal by former Gov. Cuomo and rubber-stamped by Gov. Kathy Hochul is being developed under the purview of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA).

The Hochul/ESD plan is profoundly flawed. It repeats the same errors made by discredited urban renewal projects of the recent past. It demolishes a unique and vibrant New York neighborhood while Penn Station itself remains buried beneath Madison Square Garden (MSG). The Hochul/ESD plan declares the Penn neighborhood to be “blighted” in what is a deceitful and self-serving ploy in service to politics. 

The only blight in the Penn Station neighborhood is Penn Station itself. ReThinkNYC calls for the rescue of neighboring historic buildings which would be destroyed as per the Hochul/ESD's plan—displacing hundreds of apartment dwellers (seniors and long-time city residents) and small business owners. Irreplaceable historic buildings and structures, including the fabled Hotel Pennsylvania and the Gimbel’s skybridge, would be demolished. (Note: As of June 2022, interior demolition of the Hotel Pennsylvania continues.)

ReThinkNYC sees the Hochul/ESD plan for what it is–a cynical land grab by real estate interests in exchange for political contributions. Their proposal is corrupt and places the desires of the well-connected over the needs of the public. Lynn Ellsworth of Human-Scale NY calls it “a reverse Robin Hood. They [Hochul/ESD] are taking from the poor to give to the rich.” Merely “lipstick on a pig,” the Hochul/ESD plan is a handout to developer Steven Roth of Vornado, leaving the truly urgent problems at Penn Station unaddressed. 

The Hochul/ESD plan lacks a coherent transit proposal, the project’s raison d’être. Under their proposal, Penn Station would remain a terminal station subjecting tens of thousands of commuters to crowded, dangerous and soul-crushing conditions—in spite of the so-called “world class” improvements Roth and Vornado have promised. ReThinkNYC’s New Penn Station plan would modernize, streamline, and expand transit operations at Penn Station by implementing through-running of commuter trains. 

What’s most disturbing is that experienced transit and other professionals, including former MTA Head Richard Ravitch, can’t seem to figure out the financial aspects of the Hochul/ESD’s proposal. (See Ravitch’s Daily News op-ed: "Derail this Penn Redevelopment Plan".)

In a letter to the New York City Planning Commission, dated January 27, 2022: “The Commission urges ESD to address the financing for the GPP [General Project Plan]. It is a topic that must be concretely resolved prior to affirming the GPP.”

From a financial brief issued by New York City’s Independent Budget Office, dated May 2022: “Without more data on projected costs and revenues, it is impossible to know whether revenues will meet debt service costs. The plan does not address what should occur if revenues fall short of costs, with no details on how those costs would be covered or by what level of government.” (See Thomas Di Napoli’s PABC comment and letter.)

ReThinkNYC unreservedly opposes the Hochul/ESD plan. New York City deserves a distinguished above-ground train station with modern transit operations and proper customer amenities—not a shopping mall. Our plan does NOT displace hundreds of residents and businesses and does not bulldoze our irreplaceable architectural heritage. 

Now is the time for the construction of an inspiring above-ground station, specifically, a thoroughly modernized original McKim, Mead and White Penn Station to serve all New Yorkers for the next 100 years and beyond.

How does the proposal to rebuild original Penn Station relate to the new Moynihan Train Hall?

As the central hub for Amtrak, Moynihan Train Hall serves only 20% of Penn Station’s commuters. This does not include NJ Transit or most of the Long Island Rail Road, which primarily use the section of the station under MSG. New Penn Station, updated for today’s needs, would serve an estimated 80% of riders.

What is the relationship between a new train station and a modernized transit plan? Just what is “through-running?”

Most modern international cities of New York’s size utilize trains that run “through”—in other words, they do not terminate at the station. Through-running would allow us to implement unified and cohesive regional transit in the New York region, effectively expanding the region’s core beyond Manhattan. It would allow for easier reverse commutes–a substantial need before COVID that is now increasing. At New Penn Station, through-running would mean, for example, a passenger on Long Island’s LIRR could ride, in one seat, to any New York area regional destination, whether it’s to the City, upstate New York, New Jersey, or Connecticut.

This operating model is in place or being implemented in London, Paris, Hong Kong, Toronto, Philadelphia, and Los Angeles. Through-running eliminates congestion caused by sending trains back to their points of origin empty. Through-running allows for fewer tracks, which, at New Penn Station, would permit the widening of platforms and staircases and for the installation of escalators. ReThinkNYC’s plan enhances vertical circulation and eliminates overcrowded platforms.

ReThinkNYC’s through-running plan provides capacity similar to what the Hochul/ESD plan promises at approximately half the cost. ReThinkNYC estimates $9.75 billion based on figures provided by the MTA’s own study of through-running at Penn Station, compared to the NEC Future’s estimate of an approximately $18 billion budget for Penn Station South a/k/a the Penn Expansion). This analysis was submitted to the Federal Railroad Administration in response to its request for commentary on its Northeast Corridor budget. (See our July 25th, 2022 submission to the Federal Rail Administration.)

Through-running could be implemented within the framework of the current Penn Station without a need to expand the station’s footprint. This means there is no need to demolish a block and a half of Midtown, no need to displace its residents and small businesses, and no need to destroy historic architectural sites. Our hope is that through-running would dampen this desire to demolish so much of our pre-war architecture and built environment, opting instead for a saner, more human-scale approach to civic planning. ReThinkNYC’s plan leads the way with adaptive reuse first, demolition second. Google's retrofitting of the St. John’s Terminal, a “ground-scraper,” is a great example of how 21st-century employers are making productive use of our as-built environment while preserving the unique New York City “look and feel.”

 See our videos on through-running, below.

Why should the design of a new Penn Station be inspired by the original?

Why not? The original Penn Station was built not just for its time, but for all time. Like other legendary works of art like Van Gogh’s The Starry Night or Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel ceiling, Penn Station was an unsurpassed architectural masterpiece.

There is widespread agreement that demolition of the original Penn Station in 1963 was an enormous blunder. Building New Penn Station will not only right this historic wrong, but will form a powerful connection to our past. New Penn Station will inspire, it will instill “a pride of place,” becoming a touchstone for generations of commuters, residents and visitors. It will, in a short time, evoke the strong feelings that New Yorkers associate with other legendary NYC landmarks like Grand Central Terminal, the Empire State Building, Rockefeller Center and others.

Can the historic design accommodate today’s transportation needs?

There are train stations in use today built around the same time as original Penn Station that are more than capable of meeting modern transit needs. Among them are Grand Central Terminal, Washington, D.C.’s Union Station, Philadelphia’s 30th Street Station and Denver’s Union Station. These stations demonstrate the continuing architectural, cultural, transportation and urban planning benefits of such structures.

To address 100-year-old design limitations, our plan calls for significantly wider track-level platforms, improved vertical circulation and the conversion of the former 33rd and 31st street taxiway lanes into outdoor arcades to provide enhanced connectivity to the street and subway for the convenience of pedestrians. 

Rebuilding the station will be exorbitantly expensive. With so many pressing problems in the region and country, isn’t it irresponsible to build such an opulent station?

Rebuilding New Penn Station will likely cost an estimated $6 to $7 billion and serve more than 600,000 customers each day. That is more people through Penn Station than all New York area airports combined. Or, in other words, the population of the City of Boston. In contrast, Lower Manhattan’s Calatrava “Oculus” PATH station, which serves only 65,000 commuters, cost $4 billion dollars. 

New Penn Station would benefit from modern construction techniques and computer-aided design. For example, the stone columns in the rebuilt station will be cut using CNC (computer numerical control) machines. Thanks to modern panelization technology, New Penn Station will take just one-fifth of the stone used for the original. Modern panelization has recreated the classical architectural features at 90 West Street after the September 11 attacks. Further, 3-D printing, currently employed in London’s Crossrail project, would also reduce New Penn Station’s construction costs.

Given its appeal, a rebuilt and fully updated original New Penn Station would pay for itself through positive economic impact. New Penn Station would be a catalyst for economic development, helping the New York region to become an even more desirable place to live, work, and visit.

Rebuilding a modernized Penn Station is more than economics, however. As the architecture critic, Ada Louise Huxtable wrote in 1963 about the destruction of the original station, “any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and ultimately, deserves … tin-can architecture in a tin-horn culture.”

Instead, New Penn Station makes the best use of a time tested world-class design. It demonstrates that society need not suffer from a “poverty of ideas.” It posits that regular people do have the power to effect change and to lift-up society.

We have Moynihan Train Hall now, why rebuild Penn Station? 

The short answer is: Moynihan does only twenty percent of the job. It does not provide access to tracks 1-4 and 17-21 and is primarily an Amtrak station, as Governor Hocul regularly acknowledges.

In January 2021, the Moynihan Train Hall opened in McKim, Mead and White’s U.S. Post Office building on the west side of 8th Avenue, across from Penn Station. The postal facility now houses Amtrak, a Long Island Railroad concourse, retail stores, and office space.

In March of 2016, former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said about Penn Station, “it is a disgrace… it’s the most heavily traveled transportation hub in the hemisphere and imagine what [passengers] say when they get off, ‘This is New York? Looks like the seven levels of hell.’”

Cuomo is also quoted with regard to the original Penn Station: “[It] had majesty…  the grand and triumphant entrance that New York deserved.”

In January 2018, Cuomo correctly noted that the construction of Moynihan Train Hall was “insufficient to solve the fundamental problems at Penn Station” and called for an overhaul of Penn Station. Madison Square Garden (MSG) is the oldest arena in the National Hockey League and the second-oldest in the National Basketball Association. It suffers from a lack of premium seating, a difficult-to-use loading bay, and an arena whose floor sits inconveniently five stories above ground. It has moved three times in its history. MSG can and must be relocated again to “daylight” Penn Station and provide proper air flow. Moving MSG would be in the best interests of owner James Dolan, since the aging arena’s special zoning permit ends in 2023.

Unless MSG moves, any renovation of Penn will leave the majority of the station in underground conditions. Penn Station’s platforms are inefficient and dangerous to navigate due to MSG’s structural support columns that interfere with passenger circulation. 

The decision to demolish the original Penn and consign its successor to MSG’s basement must have struck 1960s planning boards as the best solution, but it was an unmitigated disaster for the neighborhood, the city, the state and the region. For these reasons, there is a growing consensus that MSG must move, a position supported by The New York Times, the Regional Plan Association, and the Municipal Art Society, among others.

Proposals for a new location for MSG include: the site of the Port Authority Bus Terminal in West Midtown, 34th Street and Sixth Avenue (Herald Square), and the remaining undeveloped rail yards at Hudson Yards.

ReThinkNYC’s proposal for New Penn Station—along with plans from Vishaan Chakrabarti, the late Hugh Hardy, and Alexandros Washburn’s (with the Hettema Group)—would at least liberate Penn Station. However, the Hochul/ESD Penn proposal would continue to consign Penn Station to MSG’s basement.

Moving MSG will be an expensive multi-year venture requiring coordination between three railroads. However, it is an essential component of an effective transit plan and should not be viewed as a cost burden, but as an investment. MSG must move and we believe now is the time for it to do so.

Didn’t the original Penn Station present an imperial architecture that will not resonate with the diversity of today’s America?

The design of the original Penn Station was inspired by the ancient Roman Baths of Caracalla, which were built not for the exclusive use of the Emperor, but as a public space for all Romans.

The design of Charles McKim’s Penn Station was no less democratic than the design of the U.S. Capitol, the Jefferson Memorial, or the New York Public Library. All were inspired by Roman models.

Authors and poets have celebrated the original Penn Station. In his ode to the station, Langston Hughes wrote:

“The Pennsylvania Station in New York

Is like some vast basilica of old

That towers above the terror of the dark

As bulwark and protection to the soul.”

 We could digress into more history, but Charles McKim’s intentions are clear. He was not attempting to promote imperial ambitions any more than New York State does with its moniker, The Empire State. McKim’s station was a great gift of public art to the City of New York. It was a station for all people and will be again.

Is it really possible to construct a classical station today? Can we achieve the same craftsmanship?

As recent precedents in Europe demonstrate, the reconstruction of monumental historic buildings is imminently feasible. 

In Germany, the 18th-century Frauenkirche church in Dresden, destroyed during World War II, was rebuilt in the 1990s. The historic Berlin Palace was also reconstructed, utilizing digital drawings and state-of-the-art stone cutting technology. Moscow’s 19th-century Cathedral of Christ the Savior, destroyed by Joseph Stalin, has also been rebuilt. Colonial Williamsburg is a home-grown precedent, as is the North Hall and Library at New York’s Bronx Community College, which emulates McKim, Mead and White’s Boston Public Library and complements the existing Stanford White campus. Most recently, following the fire at Paris’ Cathedral of Notre Dame, an exact reconstruction is under way.

Where do we go from here? 

The 1963 demolition of Pennsylvania Station was a public desecration, a singular loss of not only a unique work of architecture, but of the people’s station—a place that held the sounds of time. 

ReThinkNYC’s transit infrastructure and economic strategy plans, anchored by our proposal to rebuild a modernized original New Penn Station and to adaptively reuse the Penn neighborhood, represent a tremendous opportunity to unlock the New York region’s full potential.

With New Penn Station’s integrated transit plan and world-class architecture, New York can transcend the COVID tragedy and ease into a healthier, fairer, less congested, and more sustainable city.

Former Gov. Cuomo’s uninspired rehash of fifties urbanism, which survives largely intact in the Hochul/ESD Penn Station proposal, would freeze-frame some of the worst design elements at Penn Station. If their proposal, or some semblance of it, moves forward, New York will have to live with that mistake for the remainder of this century. 

The Hochul/ESD Penn Station proposal is a giveaway to self-centered and myopic real estate interests. It is a failure of imagination, a monument to mediocrity with super-tall skyscrapers that block out the sun, obscure views of the Empire State Building, displace small businesses and residents, demolish historic buildings, and suffocate the wonder and romance that is essential to New York’s sense of self. 

ReThinkNYC’s New Penn Station will unify regional transit by converting operations to through-running, a model that allows New York to keep pace with Los Angeles and Philadelphia, as well as London, Paris, Hong Kong, Tokyo, and Munich—all of which employ through-running to their economic advantage.

Perhaps the one thing Penn Station’s demise wrought is the birth of New York’s Landmarks Preservation Law. Unfortunately, it also left us with the architectural calamity that is today's station. We should build New Penn Station—a modern version of the original which once stood shoulder-to-shoulder with New York’s Grand Central Terminal, Philadelphia’s 30th Street Station, and London’s St. Pancras as symbols of urban excellence.

The Penn Station neighborhood, which in no way meets any fair definition of “blighted,” should not be indiscriminately bulldozed to create a redux of Hudson Yards. If the Landmarks Law is to remain relevant, numerous sites must be landmarked, including those threatened with the wrecking ball due to the Empire State Development Corporation’s unethical use of eminent domain. We need to see the Penn Station neighborhood now under threat as an asset that contributes to New York’s greatness and vitality, not as cannon fodder for big real estate.