Better Penn Station

jp1822 wrote:Wonder how much they will talk about the Farley Building (re-development). Recently, there was a new sign/image erected at the Farley building mentioning the re-development, and there's been some construction on the stairways.

It's too bad they didn't at least keep the originally building where the current Madison Garden is and put Madison Square Garden on the opposite end of the block where the two office buildings presently are (e.g. across the street from Hotel Pennsylvania). They could have possibly modernized the interior space of the station building - similiar to the interior space that Washington's Union Station has been made into. And then put Madison Square Garden where the two office buildings presently are.

Too bad the Pennsylvania Railroad got ripped off by the city in property taxes and this helped in a big way to cause its destruction. It's GONE.
Noel Weaver

Everyone: Remembering the old Penn Station:

PBS will air beginning this week on American Experience "The Rise and Fall of Penn Station" which should be quite interesting...
I for one will be watching...Noel Weaver and SA previously mentioned this PBS show and I was able to find the link...

Link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/penn/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

MACTRAXX

In regards to your last point, Mr. Weaver, I'd like to know what you would do if you were in charge of redeveloping the PSNY complex from the subgrade to the top of the skyscrapers. For this exercise, you'd have the freedom to spend anywhere between $500 million and $5 billion, exclusive of Gateway or an additional Empire Connection tunnel. The only caveats are that this would be the last major redesign for 75 years, and that this would have to serve as both a grand gateway to New York City and as the major commuter station it is.

(This isn't meant to bait you, I'm truly curious what a veteran to New York City passenger service would do!)

mtuandrew wrote:In regards to your last point, Mr. Weaver, I'd like to know what you would do if you were in charge of redeveloping the PSNY complex from the subgrade to the top of the skyscrapers. For this exercise, you'd have the freedom to spend anywhere between $500 million and $5 billion, exclusive of Gateway or an additional Empire Connection tunnel. The only caveats are that this would be the last major redesign for 75 years, and that this would have to serve as both a grand gateway to New York City and as the major commuter station it is.

(This isn't meant to bait you, I'm truly curious what a veteran to New York City passenger service would do!)

What I would do (that I've thought of for a while) is create 2 new buildings in addition to the present one. The first new building would be in the Post Office building and would house primarily NJ Transit. The current station would house Amtrak (with the existing baggage facilities and waiting rooms) and the 3rd bulding would be in the basement of the Manhattan Mall (where JCPenney currently is) and would house LIRR. Then you would have a new concourse below the tracks which would connect the 3 buildings and provide additional space to board passengers. Although this would further stratify Penn Station (a problem with the current station), it would let each area focus on their customers needs (with the needs of Amtrak long distance passengers being very different from a daily NJ Transit commuter). Proper signage would need to be present in all 3 areas effectively showing where the other areas are in the station.

Meanwhile, in Berlin, you walk from the S bahn across the platform to the ICE....

But, I guess we shouldn't expect connectivity in a world class city, should we? I mean, after all, that's only for cities that were split in two until the mid 90's, and are still rebuilding from that little 'event' in Europe in the 30's and 40's....

(Oh wait, it works like that in Zurich too....)

Why not just build a separate station in NYC for every rail line that comes in? We could have a station for the NEC, a station for the Empire service, a station for the Babylon line....

I would leave Madison Square Garden just where it is and I would leave Penn Station more or less the way it is at present. Big bucks would be far better spent on the infrastructure; ie track, signals, power, wires, bridges, tunnels etc, you get the point. What's the sense of having a palace for a station when the physical plant is literally falling apart? I know this is not what most of you want to hear but believe me, it is far more important.
Noel Weaver

Nasadowsk wrote:Meanwhile, in Berlin, you walk from the S bahn across the platform to the ICE....

But, I guess we shouldn't expect connectivity in a world class city, should we? I mean, after all, that's only for cities that were split in two until the mid 90's, and are still rebuilding from that little 'event' in Europe in the 30's and 40's....

(Oh wait, it works like that in Zurich too....)

Why not just build a separate station in NYC for every rail line that comes in? We could have a station for the NEC, a station for the Empire service, a station for the Babylon line....

I spent 10 days in Switzerland a few years ago doing nothing but travelling the coountry by rail. The trains were always within a minute of the schedule and i never had to wait more than 5 minutes for a connecting train. The US is a third world country when it comes to railroads.....

Oh well, so long as this topic has taken a 'it is so much better over there....we're a third world country', an apparent factor in Chicago's 'first round knockout' to host the 2016 Olympics was the paucity of intercity trains. It would appear the European dominated IOC just couldn't believe there were no trains worthy of being called such between Chicago and Indianapolis and 'only seven' Chicago-Milwaukee.

Thinking back to '09, there was really sentiment around these parts that 'we got it in the bag', and I doubt if anyone thought such would be a factor in the abdication of 'Mayor-for-Life Daley'. On the October 2009 announcement day, I was leaving town for a family wedding in New York; I can recall how the announcement was imminent and the car service driver I use, wanted to see it on TV. I said 'we've got time; come on in and watch'. With this guy having visions of big fares and even bigger tips, he was visibly shook. O'Hare quite simply resembled a funeral wake; and when I returned the Monday following, any paraphernalia regarding the Olympics had been stripped.

But so much for that; pre-Olympics, Sochi apparently did not have all that much in the way of rail service, but 'Putin the Great' (or 'Czar Vladimir'; take your pick) certainly took care of that - how many rubles involved notwithstanding.

Noel Weaver wrote:I would leave Madison Square Garden just where it is and I would leave Penn Station more or less the way it is at present. Big bucks would be far better spent on the infrastructure; ie track, signals, power, wires, bridges, tunnels etc, you get the point. What's the sense of having a palace for a station when the physical plant is literally falling apart? I know this is not what most of you want to hear but believe me, it is far more important.
Noel Weaver

I agree. At the end of the day even if you ripped down the Garden, 1 Penn Plaza and 5 Penn Plaza you'd still be left with narrow platforms with limited points of egress and 1 2-track tunnel to NJ. Even Moynihan station is a waste of money except for some limited additional access points. The perfect example of wasting money on a station is the WTC station the Port Authority is building. Billions of dollars of OVERRUNS on a building to allow people to access a subway station. (Which by the way is ONE block from an almost equally expensive station being built by the MTA.)

Don31 wrote:[

I spent 10 days in Switzerland a few years ago doing nothing but travelling the coountry by rail. The trains were always within a minute of the schedule and i never had to wait more than 5 minutes for a connecting train. The US is a third world country when it comes to railroads.....

You get what you (don't) pay for! Unless, you have warped priorities. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Unless you're changing the physical characteristics of the plant, it barely matters what is erected over it.

Well, Messrs. Weaver and bleet partially answered my question! I agree that operational capability is hamstringing NYP more than the structure itself. What would you actually address, specifically? And, at what point would you say "good enough" to the infrastructure and start investing in the public areas?

ThirdRail7 wrote:

Don31 wrote:[

I spent 10 days in Switzerland a few years ago doing nothing but travelling the coountry by rail. The trains were always within a minute of the schedule and i never had to wait more than 5 minutes for a connecting train. The US is a third world country when it comes to railroads.....

You get what you (don't) pay for! Unless, you have warped priorities. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Unless you're changing the physical characteristics of the plant, it barely matters what is erected over it.

I have to agree with ThirdRail7 and Mr. Weaver.

Let's get a 2nd set of North River tunnels built. Let's do what else we need to get more trains in and out of Penn Station.
Yes, the platforms suck. The concourses are a labyrinth, but if you can't move trains, it doesn't really matter how more efficiently you can move people.

As a whole, this country is going to have to rethink its infrastructure and how to pay for it. And we're running out of time.

Switzerland can build the Gotthard Base Tunnel in less time than we spend debating about THE, ARC and Gateway. And that's just one project in Switzerland.

Greg Moore wrote:
As a whole, this country is going to have to rethink its infrastructure and how to pay for it. And we're running out of time.

Switzerland can build the Gotthard Base Tunnel in less time than we spend debating about THE, ARC and Gateway. And that's just one project in Switzerland.

My point exactly!

Greg Moore wrote:Let's get a 2nd set of North River tunnels built.

Tell that to Christie!

Don31 wrote:

Greg Moore wrote:
As a whole, this country is going to have to rethink its infrastructure and how to pay for it. And we're running out of time.

Switzerland can build the Gotthard Base Tunnel in less time than we spend debating about THE, ARC and Gateway. And that's just one project in Switzerland.

My point exactly!

Any updates on Gateway?

Thomas wrote:

Greg Moore wrote:Let's get a 2nd set of North River tunnels built.

Tell that to Christie!

Why Christie and not the federal government?!