Few places inspire the kind of mean-spirited public ballyhoo that Penn Station and Madison Square Garden do. The Garden sits on hallowed ground–the site of the original Penn Station, which McKim, Mead, & White famously designed in 1910 (it looked like a giant Doric Temple) and tragically demolished in 1963. In exchange for air rights , a new, smaller Penn Station was built beneath the Garden for free and given a stake in the complex.

Ever since, grassroots campaigners, cultural figures, and enlightened politicians have tried to reverse that “monumental act of vandalism” (charges a New York Times op-ed of the day) by various means of agitation and politicking. Now, perhaps for the first time, conditions are ripe for change.

But surely not change like this. The Municipal Art Society (MAS) recently invited four architecture firms to reimagine how the site could be made afresh. That includes both a rebuilt or reconfigured Madison Square Garden and Penn Station, though the ideal arrangement would be the relocation of the former and a new, iconic entranceway for the latter. The designs the architects came up with are “flashy,” “futuristic,” and, perhaps more accurately, “unbuildable.”





Proposals by Skidwell, Owings, and Merrill (SOM), SHoP Architects, Diller Scofidio + Renfro (DS+R), and H3 Hardy Collaboration Architecture offer different solutions to the same objective: Without any economic, planning, or political barriers, how would they transform Penn Station into a vibrant central hub for commerce, transit, and innovation?

The greatest barrier–Madison Square Garden–was conveniently swept aside. This year, the Garden’s 50-year operating contract expired, opening up a swell of opposition that wants the sports arena gone and Penn Station back to its former glory (or something akin to it). Last week, the New York City Planning Commission shot down a bid by the Dolan Family, owners of the Garden, to extend their rights to the property “in perpetuity.” As a New York Times report stated, the unanimous vote prolongs the Garden’s stay by 15 years, in which time the Dolans would have to lay out a plan for evacuating the site or staying and making significant improvements to the area.





Needless to say, not all were pleased with the commission’s decision. Some, like the Times‘ architecture critic Michael Kimmelman, felt that the ruling, which needs to be ratified into law by the City Council within the next 60 days, didn’t go far enough. They noted the apparent vagueness of the commission’s call for improvements, the specifics of which have been irresponsibly left to the discretion of the Garden’s owners. Critics wanted to see the extension shortened to 10 years and the city apply pressure on the Garden to actively seek a new home.

MAS has called Penn Station’s facilities “grossly inadequate” and, given its structural ties to the Garden, ultimately unsalvageable. They argue that the issue is being seen the wrong way round: The Garden serves 20,000 patrons on a daily basis, while Penn Station serves 640,000. Yet, Penn Station can’t be moved, while the Garden very well can.