Update on McKim, Mead & White's Hotel Pennsylvania

Primary links

Submitted by derekjeter on Thu, 2007-11-01 12:34

Yesterday, Manhattan Community Board 5 voted 6-1 to recommend Hotel Pennsylvania be designated a New York City landmark, possibly saving it from being demolished for a new 60-story Vornado Trust building (rumored to be the new Merrill Lynch headquarters). There will be a vote November 8 at the Landmarks Preservation Commission to see if it actually happens. Interestingly, the Municapal Arts Society did not recommend landmarking the building. Judith Matz of the Municipal Arts Society called it "banal" and designed by "lesser junior staff" of McKim, Mead & White (McKim and White were dead when the building was completed in 1919). She also said, "It is not a significant design, nor is the facade of exceptional interest." It's interesting that the Municipal Arts Society is not defending the building, calling out that while it was done of a firm of note, it's not one of their home runs and not worthy of being preserved. What's your take on it? Should the building really be saved because of its designers' pedigree or should it be torn down because it is not particularly remarkable?

Bookmark/Search this post with:

Add new comment

Save the preservation battle for a better building...

Submitted by pdxstreetcar on Mon, 2007-11-12 22:57.

DerekJeter, I disagree that the location by the station isnt important anymore. This is Penn Station, the busiest train station in the country by far. If you are coming in by train and many many people still do to NYC, a hotel across the street from the station is very attractive. I understand the original interior has been completely ruined over the years and the exterior is nothing special. That said, I do think this lesser work of McKim, Mead & White will be much better than the replacement glass slab or glass shard. But I would save this preservation battle for a better building, such as making sure the relocated Madison Square Garden doesn't ruin the Farley Post Office, afterall MSG already destroyed one MMW masterpiece.

reply

Not Necessary

Submitted by a.mcconnell on Thu, 2007-11-01 16:24.

I do not believe that this building should be added to the list of New York Landmark buildings. There are two reasons, first the building isn’t a flagship building for Mckim, Mead, and White, secondly, the location of the hotel does not work well as a hotel. The argument has been made that Mckim, Mead, and White are some of the best American architects, I believe this is a true statement, however, this does not mean that every building they designed (or in this case helped design) is a masterpiece. This building is good, but it isn’t necessarily unique or their best work. The other side of the argument is more practical. If the building is put onto the landmark list it will be limited to what uses it could have in the future. The location does not call for a hotel. It would be, for example, a better location for an office building. The building is not so spectacular that we should force it to remain a hotel.

reply

Hmmm...

Submitted by GFS on Thu, 2007-11-01 16:17.

Didn't the facade relate to a building that's been demolished? The old Madison Square Garden, maybe? Regardless, it's the last indicator that a nicer landmark used to reflect the loggia on the front of the Hotel Pennsylvania. That's kinda backwards, but I think you get my drift. Also, the question remains about the demolition of buildings of lesser renown from top firms. I say that it should be about the architecture, not about the relics of fame of particular people. If the building is good, keep it. If the building is bad, tear it down. It seems like the Hotel Pennsylvania still serves its purpose well- I'm sure it's booked for months in advance, being located among the mid-30's steets in Manhattan. It also looks pretty decent, granted not great, and it is a real landmark, and it's across from another landmark. Maybe they should tear down the current Madison Square Garden instead! Ha!

n/a