Preservation of the Farley Post Office - Columbia University ...

Penn Station Redux:
Preservation
of the Farley
Post Office
Lisa Calgaro Daniel Fox Carlos Huber Allyson Mehley
Jiewon Song Sara Taylor
April 23, 2007
Columbia University, Historic Preservation Studio II: Planning for Preservation Spring 2007

Penn Station Redux
Preservation of the
Farley Post Office
New York, New York
Revised printing June 15, 2007
Preface 5
Beaux-Arts City & the Ghost of Architecture Past 9
A Landmark Lies Empty 13
Architectural & Material Assesment of the Farley Post
Office Complex
17
Public v. Private Interest 33
Competing Histories:
Madison Square Garden and the Farley Post Office
37
Use Proposals and Design Schemes 43
Conclusion 67
3

4
Image: Google Maps, modified by Daniel Fox
D2
D1
Farley Post Office Complex
P
C
B
E
D.
E
B. C. A
A
F
E. F
L.
H, J
G, K
E
L.
M.
N.
E
Penn Station Complex
H
I
I
O.
G
E
Farley Post Office Complex
A. Eighth Avenue Colonnade
B. Post Office Lobby
C. Mail Sorting Room/Interior Courtyard
D1. Original General Post Office (1913)
D2. Post Office Annex (1934)
Penn Station Complex
E. Grade-Level Entrances to Penn Station
F. Paramount Theatre
G. Penn Station Service Building
H. 2 Penn Plaza
I. Hotel Pennsylvania

Preface
Image taken from early
twentieth-century post card
of the Farley Post Office.
Image: New York Historical
Society, McKim, Mead, &
White Archive
After an extensive lineup of meetings with public officials, developers,
preservationists, and community members, this group truly understood the
profound complexity of our studio problem. We undertook an intensive
studio charrette to better develop an independent preservation perspective,
which culminated in a design guidelines booklet. This document is a
revision and expansion of this original charrette product and is our final
recommendation for the studio problem: Amidst a number of different urban
pressures, what does one do with the near-empty Farley Post Office, a
New York City Historic Landmark designed by McKim, Mead, & White.
We have identified distinct issues that arise from this problem and then out
of those issues, we derive an analysis meant to express a preservation
stance, as opposed to a developer’s or planner’s. The indispensable
emphasis on preservation is diluted unless it is called out and distinguished,
although we do acknowledge the overlap between these different positions.
We begin with the history of the building and its significance, which includes
its own architectural importance, a historical connection to the demolished
Pennsylvania Station, and a larger connection to what we call “The Beaux Arts
City” that emerged around Penn Station. We also address the role that the ghost
of McKim, Mead, & White’s Pennsylvania Station plays in proposals for the future
of the Farley Post Office. We follow with an explanation of the raison d’être
for the current interest in the Farley, which includes zoning changes, facilities
shifts by the U.S. Postal Service, and a strained public transportation system.
Once this important history is illuminated, a detailed analysis of the formal
composition of Farley and an assessment of historic fabric is included.
The next section is on the relationship between public and private interest,
something that we call out as being a particularly important issue to explore
in light of the proposed mixed uses of the complex. Here we explore
use transitions and tenant signage, including appropriate designs. The
next section tackles the issue of Madison Square Garden (MSG), both
its important cultural and architectural history and the institution’s current
interest in occupying the Farley Annex. Following the history we offer design
schemes for the insertion of Madison Square Garden into Farley and uses
for the existing MSG building. Beyond MSG, we offer another possibility
for the Farley complex yet to be considered publicly: a Manhattan location
for the Dia Art Foundation. For all of our design schemes, instead of a final
design, we suggest design possibilities and alternatives that address the
problem through a preservation lens. Our interest is not only in safeguarding
the historic Farley Post Office, but also to provide New York City with an
outstanding work of public architecture, and we hope our renderings reflect this.
5

6
After thoroughly considering the problem’s myriad issues, we have formulated
a set of preservation values indispensable to any design for the Farley Building:
1. A train station in the Farley Building meets a key public transportation
need due to present passenger overflow issues at Penn Station and the
recent Hudson Yards rezoning.
2. There needs to be a clear public purpose for the future of the Farley
Post Office Complex and New York State needs to mandate these
public values.
3. Because Farley is architecturally, historically, and socially significant,
tenants’ occupancy permanence should be carefully evaluated.
4. Given the extended history of use as a post office and rich interior
fabric, the lobby should remain in use by the U.S. Postal Service and its
interior should be designated as a New York City Landmark.
5. All permanent changes to the building should take into account valuable
historic fabric and design integrity.
6. Final design for alternative uses of the Farley Complex should include a
clear delineation of spaces.
7. While the Farley building could accommodate a tenant the size of
Madison Square Garden, other uses that may better preserve historic
integrity should be seriously considered.
8. Certain elements of the current Madison Square Garden Arena
are significant; however we do not call for preservation of the
entire structure. If Madison Square Garden does not relocate, we
recommend reusing particular elements, such as the cable-suspended
roof structure.
9. All signage should respect Farley’s exterior and interior; application of
signage should not damage or detract from historic fabric.
Lisa Calgaro
Daniel Fox
Carlos Huber
Allyson Mehley
Jiewon Song
Sara Taylor
Department of Historic Preservation
Columbia University, GSAPP ‘08

Pennsylvania Terminal Post Office (Farley Post Office), historic view at Eighth Avenue and 33rd Street.
Image: New York Historical Society, McKim, Mead & White Archive
7

8
Rendering of the Pennsylvania Station Complex c. 1904.
Image: Hillary Ballon, New York’s Pennsylvania Stations
Opposite Left: The completed Penn Station Complex.
Image: New York Historical Society, McKim, Mead, & White
Archive
Opposite Right: Post Office Workers on the steps of the Farley
Post Office.
Image: “Letter Carriers in New York,” Unidentified photographer,
Dec. 19, 1952 (on steps of Farley Post Office, Eighth Avenue),
National Postal Museum collection

Beaux-Arts City &
The Ghost of Architecture Past
At the beginning of the twentieth century, the Pennsylvania Railroad
Company had no Manhattan terminal, and had to ferry passengers across
the Hudson from a station in New Jersey. As a result, Pennsy, as the railroad
was called, was losing lucrative long distance business to its rival New York
Central, which had a terminal on 42 nd Street and access to the soon-to-becompleted
Subway. In 1902, Pennsy decided to build a magnificent new
station between 31st and 33rd Streets from Seventh to Eighth Avenues, a
block away from the emerging Herald Square shopping district, a station
which was meant to be “the outward and visible sign of a tunneling triumph
hidden under the waters of the Hudson River.” 1 At the station’s conception,
the West Side, or Tenderloin District, was an unsavory place. Already
condemned in the public’s eye as a den of brothels, bars, and vice, hundreds
of tenements were destroyed and thousands were displaced in what is
perhaps New York’s first urban renewal project of the twentieth century.
In June 1906, in step with the station plan, the United States Postal Service
bought the air rights west of Penn Station for 1.6 million dollars with the intention
of building a new General Post Office for New York. Pennsy carried a little more
than 40% of New York’s outgoing mail and the daily total, including incoming
mail, amounted to 200 tons of letters to be sorted - hence the logic of building a
post office directly over the tracks. Architectural Record noted, “The terminal
1
William D. Middleton. Manhattan Gateway: New York’s Pennsylvania Station. (Waukesha:
Kalmbach Books, 1996) 51.
and the post office together insure the creation of what may fairly be called a
new city on the shore of the North River.” 2 McKim, Mead, & White were to be the
architects of this new city, using Beaux-Arts principles to invoke a “white city”
aesthetic triumphed by the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago.
Pennsy president Alexander Cassatt solicited the work of McKim, Mead, &
White, the great architects of the late-19 th and early-20 th centuries, to build his
new station. Its main waiting room drew inspiration from the Baths of Caracalla,
Titus, and Diocletian, and the Basilica of Constantine, which architects trained
in the Beaux Arts understood to be the “greatest examples in architectural
history of large roofed-in areas adapted to assemblages of people.” 3 Its
most modern expression was the great steel and glass train shed behind the
classical waiting room, a soaring symbol of train travel that so many cite as the
thing they would like to see in the new Moynihan Station. The exterior of the
building was to be of a simple and massive Doric order in pink Milford granite.
Of course, this was only one piece of a larger Beaux Arts plan. The General
Post Office was an early part of plans for the Tenderloin. In 1907, after a
competition held by the supervising architect of the US Treasury, with
participants including Carrere and Hastings, Heins and LaFarge, and Cass
Gilbert, McKim, Mead, & White led by William Kendall were once again chosen
2
Ibid., 52.
3
Ibid., 55.
9

10
Left: “Day and Night” by
Adolph Weinman before
the demolition of Penn
Station.
Image: William D.
Middleton, Manhattan
Gateway: New York’s
Pennsylvania Station
Right: Charles Keck’s
Post Office interpretation
of “Day and Night” on
Ninth Avenue.
Image: Sara Taylor
to guide the path of this white city rising on the banks of the Hudson. After
attending Harvard, MIT, and studying in Italy and France, Kendall became a
draftsman at McKim, Mead, & White and rose to partner by 1906. Besides
the Post Office, some of his important works are Casa Italiana at Columbia,
the Municipal Building at City Hall, and the American Academy in Rome.
Although there were no specific style requirements, architects believed judges
would throw out any design that did not harmonize with Penn Station. A
letter from Pennsy vice president Samuel Rea to William Mead only increased
suspicion, querying rather bluntly if “[the government specified] that the design
of the new Post Office building should be in harmony with … our station?” 4
And so it was. Kendall asserted that tall buildings would inevitably dominate
any low building in New York, so he designed the General Post Office in a
Beaux Arts mode similar to Penn Station. He reinterpreted the station’s long
and low 7th Avenue Doric colonnade with a raised and majestic Corinthian
one, and fills an entire city block with what might be called a “granite waterfall”
of a staircase, expressing its civic meaning. It was sheathed in the same pink
Milford granite as Penn Station, and its multi-leveled plan provided access to
the train platforms below, this time for workers and conveyor belts rather than
commuters and travelers. In an explicit reference to Penn Station, a New York
Post Office design memorandum stated multiple times, “In general, follow
Pennsylvania details unless specified otherwise.” 5 Construction began in 1909
and the building opened in 1913 as the Pennsylvania Terminal Post Office.
4
Samuel Rea to William R. Mead, Jan 25, 1908. McKim, Mead, & White Archive, New-York
Historical Society.
5
Memoranda, N.Y. Post Office, date unknown. McKim, Mead, & White Archive, New-York Historical
Society.
The press noted that the building was too small soon after it was finished,
and a draft deed was drawn to purchase the land west of the post office.
Kendall and Lawrence Grant White, Stanford White’s son, were appointed
architects in 1930 and designed the extension to the Post Office, continuing
street-side pilasters all the way to Ninth Avenue, creating a cohesive Beaux
Arts block. Kendall and White treated the Ninth Avenue façade differently
than Eighth Avenue. Instead of a colonnade, there are three two-story
arched openings with grilled windows in the upper half of the arches,
flanked by six and a half Doric pilasters on either side. The centerpiece of
the this façade is a sculpture by Charles Keck in the entablature over the
central arch that depicts “Day and Night” holding a seal of the United States.
This statue references the sculpture “Day and Night” by Adolph Weinman
that was on the 7 th Avenue façade of Pennsylvania Station, as well as the
nonstop operation of the Post Office. The extension officially opened in 1935.
There are also two other significant parts of the White City. In addition to the
low public buildings, Rea planned a hotel. The Railroad originally conceived
and largely financed the hotel as a means to draw people to the area around
its new Penn Station. With stiff competition uptown from New York Central’s
Grand Central Terminal, replaced in 1913 with today’s structure, Rea believed
the Hotel Pennsylvania “would tend to bring us more traffic, would clean
up the whole situation, [and] would add additional value...” 6 According to
Margaret Foster for the National Trust’s Preservation Online, “One of McKim,
6
Hilary Ballon. New York’s Pennsylvania Stations (New York: W. W. Norton &
Company, 2002) 88.

Left: Hotel Pennsylvania
Image: New York Public
Library. “The Pageant of
America” Collection v.13,
The American spirit in
architecture
Right: Exterior view of
the Penn Station Service
Building.
Image: Historic American
Building Survey
Mead, & White’s later designs, the 22-story Hotel Pennsylvania was “one of
the largest hotels in the world when it opened in 1919 with 2,200 rooms. It
was built across the street from the firm’s Pennsylvania Station…Its ballroom
was a big band hotspot for Duke Ellington, Count Basie, and Glenn Miller,
who made it famous in his 1940 jingle [Pennsylvania 6-5000].” 7 The Hotel
“achieved the goal of architectural unity that Rea steadfastly desired. The
exterior of Indiana Limestone reached a height of 62 feet, corresponding
to the height of Penn Station. A portico of stone columns echoed the
columns of the station as did string courses and other architectural trim.” 8
Finally, the Penn Station Service Building at 242 West 31st Street “held
the key to the railroad’s new operation, providing the electric power for
the engines in and out of New York.” 9 As assessed by Christopher Gray,
“Its Roman Doric façade, marked by an austere row of severe pilasters,
bracketing ventilation windows covered with iron grills, is about as plain as a
building can get and still have an identifiable style.” 10 An integral part of the
white city, it was completed in 1908, two years before Pennsylvania Station.
In these four buildings, Pennsy, the Federal Government, and McKim, Mead,
& White created a Beaux Arts city amidst a dark and dense New York City
backdrop. Their architectural expressions, meant to be a gift to the people
7
Margaret Foster. “Manhattan Hotel to Fall.” Preservation Online (January 8th 2007). http://nthp.
org/magazine/archives/arc_news_2007/010807.htm (accessed 3/07).
8
Ballon 91.
9
Christopher Gray. “The Penn Station Service Building; A 1908 Structure Survives A ‘Monumental
Act of Vandalism.’” The New York Times (August 20, 1989).
10
Ibid.
of New York, impressed upon the city the might of private industry’s civic
benevolence and the public’s trust in government. All except the vanished
Penn Station are still eminently suitable for their original purposes, a fact
that has not changed since the General Post Office’s designation as a New
York City landmark in 1966. In addition, although we do not revisit the Hotel
Pennsylvania or the Mechanical Building beyond this point, each deserves
its own serious look at designation in light of this history. Thus, it is in both
architectural merit and social history that we find these buildings to be significant.
The coda to this significance is the ghost of Penn Station. In 1963, the editors
of Architectural Forum reported with satisfaction on the impending demolition
of Penn Station, writing that it had “haunted New York’s West Side … with
visions of the Baths of Caracalla.” 11 The question to consider now is: Does Penn
Station still haunt New York? We use the metaphor “the ghost of architecture
past” to reflect on the way in which the demolished Penn Station is used by
interested parties to teach us something about mistakes in our past. Consider
this literary analogy from Charles Dickens’s Victorian morality tale A Christmas
Carol. The Ghost of Christmas past haunts Ebenezer Scrooge, an immoral
and corrupt man, to help him comprehend the triumphs and catastrophes of
his life. Unable to bear these painful memories, Scrooge covers the spirit with
a large candlesnuffer. In other words, Scrooge could only access his tragic
history through the coercion of a phantasm -- a force from beyond the grave.
Understanding Penn Station’s ghost in contemporary plans for the post
11
“Pennsylvania Station’s Last Stand.” Architectural Forum (Feb 1963) 11.
11

12
Left: Post Office viewed from
Penn Station.
Image: Hilary Ballon, New
York’s Pennsylvania Stations
Middle: Dismantling Penn
Station.
Image: Hilary Ballon, New
York’s Pennsylvania Stations
Right: Contemporary view
of Post Office from Eighth
Avenue and 33rd Street.
Image: www.
bridgeandtunnelclub.com
office is not insignificant. Penn emerged repeatedly in our meetings,
beckoning us to remember its tragic death. A newspaper ad run early in
the Madison Square Garden controversy by the Committee for a Landmark
Train Station pleads: “Madison Square Garden wants to move again, and
shrink [Moynihan Station]. If we let that happen, once again a landmark
train station and a glorious New York City landmark will be destroyed.” 12
The neglect and destruction of the old Penn Station was a milestone
not only in the history of historic preservation but also for the way in
which it “made clear to even the most casual observer that virtually no
building in New York was sacred.” 13 Only through this immense loss
did the true power of civic architecture in New York come into focus.
Indeed, a deployment and understanding of history is important to make
an argument for preservation. Nevertheless, to use Penn Station’s
demolition as the traumatic moment on which one hangs his or her
preservation hat underestimates the significance of the Post Office.
The ad seems to falsely equivocate Penn Station and The Farley Post
Office. The Post Office is not, nor will it ever be, Pennsylvania Station.
As Ada Louise Huxtable wrote about the Post Office in 1994, “This
competent piece of Beaux-Arts boiler-plate isn’t in the same league as the
12
“Don’t let it happen again.” Advertisement by The Committee for a Landmark Train Station.
13
Robert A.M. Stern et al. New York 1960. (New York: Monacelli, 1997) 1113.
old Penn Station. But today its acres of space and irreplaceable materials
and details are solid gold.” 14 We are not convinced that the old Penn
Station should be the reference point for a new and modern train station,
but there is something compelling -- perhaps it is what Paul Goldberger
called “poetic justice” 15 -- in using old Penn’s companion building as a train
station; to right what went wrong, a moment to acknowledge and then
lay to rest a generations-old wound that has apparently not yet healed.
To conclude, we should not let the memory of Penn acts as a heuristic
for a great train station, blinding us to what a new great train station
could be. We should remember Penn Station and learn from its untimely
death, but we should not let it control or limit the future of the Farley Post
Office; learn from history but do not let it dominate present discourse.
14
Ada Louise Huxtable. “On the Right Track.” The New York Times (Nov 28 1994).
15
Paul Goldberger. “Some Welcome Fiddling With Landmarks.” The New York Times (May 24,
1992).

Left: Empty Post Office
sorting room.
Image: Daniel Fox
A Landmark Lies Empty
Right: Post Office
interior halls.
Image: Sara Taylor
Today, the Farley Post Office Complex (Farley) sits mostly empty because the
United States Postal Service (“USPS”) has significantly reduced its use of the
building -- reasons include the end of train mail approximately two years and
the transition of most operations to the more modern Morgan Station on West
29th Street. 1 Those who advocate using Farley as a train station, including
its earliest supporter Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, envision it as an
opportunity to strengthen the tri-state area’s transportation infrastructure, give
new life to the historic building, and redeem the original Pennsylvania Station.
The movement to transform the former mail-sorting room in Farley has been
alive since 1992. Senator Moynihan was well aware of Penn Station’s poor
condition and upon learning that the Farley Post Office was operating at a
reduced capacity, saw Farley as a prime opportunity to correct two problems:
the loss of Penn Station and alleviate traffic in the current Penn Station.
Several firms worked on designs for the new train station over the
past decade. In early plans, Amtrak was the main station tenant
with the USPS maintaining the post office lobby and auxiliary
spaces throughout the building for their continued use.
The Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Corporation, later renamed the
Moynihan Station Development Corporation (MSDC), was formed in 1996 and
reviewed designs from firms including Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill, whose
1
“Midtown High Point; Post Office’s Flag Day,” The New York Times, December 29, 1991: A-1,
3 Mar. 2007 http://query.nytimes.comgst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE5DE163EF93AA15751C1A9
67958260
design was ultimately chosen in 1999. 2 David M. Childs, the principal architect,
included a 450’ long ticketing hall and glass-covered train hall with connections
vertical to the rail lines. The ticket hall was 150’ high and located in the truck
loading dock between the two sections of the Farley building. The hall’s walls
were curved through the use of a steel skeletal frame. The eastern portion of
the building would house the train hall where the existing roof and floor were
removed to open up the space, while preserving the original steel trusses. 3
In 2002 the USPS allowed the Empire State Development Corporation to
purchase the Farley Post Office building for $230 million with space retained
for use by the USPS. 4 When Senator Moynihan passed away in 2003, the
new station was named Moynihan Station in honor of its biggest supporter.
Amtrak pulled out of the project in 2004 because of budget problems, but
New Jersey Transit and the Long Island Railroad filled the vacant space. The
Related Companies and Vornado Realty Trust first mentioned the possibility
of moving Madison Square Garden into the Western Annex of Farley in 2004. 5
2
David Dunlap, “Plan Gains for Post Office to Be New Penn Station,” The New York Times,
9 Feb. 1998: B-1, ProQuest, Columbia University, New York, 3 Oct. 2006 http://proquest.umi.
com/pqdweb?did=26094535&sid=...
3
“Penn Station Redevelopment Moves Above Ground,” Civil Engineering, Jul. 1999: 18-19, EB-
SCOhost, Roger Williams University, Bristol, RI, 26 Sept. 2006 http://0-search.ebscohost.com.
helin.uri.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db...
4
Stephanie Cash, “A New Penn Station,” Art in America Dec. 2002: 23, EBSCOhost, Roger Williams
University, Bristol, RI, 26 Sept. 2006 http://0-search.ebscohost.com.helin.uri.edu:80/login.
asps?direct...
5
Charles V. Bagli, “State’s Project for a Grand New Penn Station is Moving Again,” The New
York Times 28 Oct. 2004: B-4, ProQuest. Columbia University, New York, 3 Oct. 2006 http://pro-
13

14
Left: Hudson Yards
Rezoning Map.
Image: New York City
Department of City
Planning
Right: Diagram of
potential delineation
of space in the Farley
Building.
Image: Carlos Huber
In 2005, the City of New York’s Department of City Planning rezoned the
Hudson Yards, which includes Madison Square Garden and Farley, and the
new zoning was developed to control development in this district to preserve
neighborhood character while directing dense residential and commercial
development to particular blocks. This Hudson Yards rezoning district
encompasses several blocks that are in the area bounded by Eleventh
Avenue, West 30th Street, West 41st Street and as far over as Eighth Avenue.
Bonuses offered opportunities to increase maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
such as the District Improvement Bonus, Mid-Block Development Rights
Transfers, and the Transit Improvement Bonus for the Penn Station substation
area. 6 The Penn Station Transit Improvement Bonus increases the maximum
FAR from 10 to 19.5 where, “…development or enlargements that significantly
enhance the pedestrian environment and provide improvements to access to
public transit facilities.” 7 The rezoning along with FAR Bonus opportunities
pulled-in the interests of developers like Related Companies and Vornado
Realty Trust, who both owned property in the area. The rezoning along
with FAR bonus pulled in the interests of Related and Vornado, who both
own property in the area. Both developers worked with Madison Square
Garden to develop a scheme to demolish the extant Madison Square Garden;
quest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=724755101&sid=...
6
New York City Department of City Planning, “Special Hudson Yards District Zoning Text
Amendment As Adopted by City Council No40500(A) ZRM,” Jan. 19 2005: 7-11, 21 Apr. 2007
http://home2.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/hyards/zoning_text_011905.pdf
7
Ibid., 38.
because of the new maximum FAR of 19.5, Madison Square Garden and
the developers could build large mixed-use towers over 5 million square feet
on their combined sites. Nevertheless, a new site was needed in order to
demolish the current Madison Square Garden, so the developers proposed
the Annex of the Farley Post Office. 8 This location allowed Madison
Square Garden to maintain a Manhattan venue in close proximity to
public transportation.
In the meantime, several designs had been created for the new Moynihan
Station. In 2005 options were discussed to sell the development rights above
the Farley Post Office complex or to develop the site through the construction
of a tower above the current building. 9 James Carpenter Design Associates
with Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum designed a glass and steel shell to cover
the new ticket hall, but this was eliminated in order to preserve the original
façade and take advantage of Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credits. The
design also featured a 100’ high single level concourse covered with a grid of
skylights supported by six large columns, similar to old Penn Station’s train shed.
In addition to the new train hall there would be spaces for restaurants, a hotel, and other retail. 10
8
Charles V. Bagli, “Madison Square Garden’s Owners Are in Talks to Replace It,” The New York
Times, 12 Sept. 2005: B-1, ProQuest, Columbia University, New York, 3 Oct. 2006 http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=894743681&sid=...
9
Chris Smith, “Train Station Running Late,” New York Magazine, 13 June 2005: 24-25, Pro-
Quest, Columbia University, New York, 3 Oct. 2006 http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=84567
9741&sid=...
10
David Dunlap, “With Many Modifications, Penn Station Project is ‘Go,’” The New York Times,
21 Jul. 2005: B-4, ProQuest, Columbia University, New York, 3 Oct. 2006 http://proquest.umi.

Left to right:
Evolution of designs before the
Madison Square Garden proposal.
Images: Hilary Ballon, New York’s
Pennsylvania Stations;
Moynihan Station Final Environmental
Impact Statement,
Developer C, Phase I development.,
http://gutter.curbed.com/
archives/fosteratrium.jpg;
http://www.amny.com/media/
photo/2006-06/23861467.jpg
In 2006, David M. Childs unveiled the latest design. It incorporated a 137’barrelvaulted
glass skylight above the mail-sorting room space and a parabolic arch
glass skylight between the original Post Office and Annex, removing the original
trusses. This is the most conservative of all designs for the Moynihan Station. 11
On August 17th, 2006, the ESDC approved the State’s acquisition of Farley to
carry out the Moynihan Station Project, which at the time included the creation
of a train concourse and other uses such as “big box” retail in the Annex (Plan A).
In October 2006, the Public Authority Control Board (PACB) failed by a
2 to 1 vote to approve this acquisition based on Plan A. Madison Square
Garden has continued to develop plans for placing its arena within the Annex
of the Farley Post Office (Plan B). In March 2007 the ESDC authorized
the purchase of the Farley Post Office complex. 12 Because the ESDC is
a state entity, it can overrule local zoning ordinances and is not subject
to the New York City Landmarks Preservation law. In addition, if the
ESDC transfers development rights from the Farley Post Office site to an
adjacent site, those rights may not be subject to local land-use regulations.
The ESDC, however, is subject to review under New York State
Parks Recreation Law Section 14.09 as well as Federal review under
com/pqdweb?did=869923511&sid=...
11
David W. Dunlap, “A New Design for an Arched Penn Station,” The New York Times, 28 Apr.
2006: B-5, ProQuest, Columbia University, New York, 3 Oct. 2006 http://proquest.umi.com/pqdw
eb?did=1028263481&sid=...
12
Alex Ulam, “Sheldon Silver Stalls Moynihan Station Proposal,” Architectural Record Oct. 2006:
38, ProQuest, Columbia University, New York, 7 Nov. 2006 http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did
=1148134481&sid. .Empire State Development News, “Farley Post Office Purchase Approved,”
March 23, 2007 http://www.empire.state.ny.us/press/press_display.asp?id=804..
Section 106 of NHPA, Section 4(f) by the Department of Transportation
(DOT), and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 13,14
Since Penn Station is running over passenger capacity, there is a need for
transportation facilities both east and west of Eighth Avenue (proposed as
“Moynihan East” and “Moynihan West”). ”). Redevelopment of the Hudson
Yards area will also increase the flow of passengers to the Far West Side.
Studies show that 20% of Penn Station’s pedestrians will use Moynihan
West. 15 A train station within Farley will alleviate Penn Station’s circulation
issues while at the same time regaining a grand entrance to New York.
13
The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, “Protecting Historic Properties: A Citizen’s
Guide to Section 106 Review,” 2002: 5, 22 Apr. 2007 http://www.achp.gov/citizensguide.pdf
14
Department of the Interior: Office of Environmental Policy & Compliance, “Handbook on
Departmental Review of Section 4 (f) Evaluations,” Feb. 2002: 4, 22 Apr. 2007 http://www.doi.
gov/oepc/Revised4(f)Handbook.pdf
15
Tom Wright of Regional Planning Association, Personal interview, 26 Feb. 2007
15

16
The public deserves Farley’s expressive and monumental Beaux-Arts
architecture as much as the architecture itself craves expressiveness to the
public, but without a new use, one cannot preserve it. As preservationists, we
believe that historic architecture is a vital part of New York’s urban experience
and that it instills dignity and pride in its citizens.
• Because historic user has left, resource must be reused in some
capacity or it will fall into disrepair
• Train tracks underneath the Farley Complex always dictated the basic
use of this facility, and in part, maintaining a train usage preserves an
historic use.
• Project must include train hall and appropriate access points for users.
Top: Platformed train at
current Penn Station.
Image: http://www.
geocities.com/exploring_
citr/trip/index.html
Bottom: Proposed train
concourse for Moynihan
Station.
Image: Regional Plan
Association, Rebirth of
a Gateway Moynihan
Station

Architectural & Material Assessment of
the Farley Post Office
Left: Historic view of
Post Office Annex
construction c.1934.
Image: New-York
Historical Society,
McKim, Mead, & White
Archive.
At first glance, the Farley Post Office Complex may appear to be a simple
Beaux Arts structure with a basic Neoclassical design. This couldn’t be
further from the truth. In order to better understand the design and material
makeup of the structure, a thorough description of the exterior, specific
interior spaces, and a materials conditions assessment were executed.
Station, the design included similar Classical elements and monumental
scale. The steel-frame building’s exterior is clad with smooth-faced granite
ashlar; Pink Milford and Conway granite was used on the early portion of
the building. 3 The entire structure is crowned with an ornamental terra cotta
cornice of stylized anthemion and shells. 4
The Farley Post Office Complex is bounded as follows: northerly by 33 rd
Street, easterly by Eighth Avenue, southerly by 31 st Street, and westerly
by Ninth Avenue. The first portion of the building was proposed by William
Mitchell Kendall of McKim, Mead, & White through a competition solicited
by the U.S. Treasury Department. It was constructed from 1910-1913, and
occupied the Eighth Avenue portion of the block. 1 The Annex, constructed
from 1932 to 1934, was designed by William Kendall and Lawrence White of
McKim, Mead, & White, and extended the building to Ninth Avenue. 2
3
Memoranda, New York Post Office, (June 6, 1912), New York Historical Society, McKim, Mead,
& White Collection, 23 Feb. 2007.
4
United States, Department of the Interior, National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination
Form: U.S. General Post Office 1972: 2, SPHINX, 5 Feb. 2007 http://www.oprhp.state.
ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=4827
The entire building was executed in Beaux Arts style, reflecting the continuing
influence during this period of the 1893 Columbian Exposition’s “White City.”
Because the post office was intended to be a companion to Pennsylvania
1
United States, Department of the Interior, National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination
Form: U.S. General Post Office 1972: 2, SPHINX, 5 Feb. 2007 http://www.oprhp.state.
ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=4827
2
Skidmore Owings & Merrill, et al., Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Project: New York,
New York, (New York: USPS & Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Corporation, 1999) 24.
17

18
Eighth Avenue
The Eighth Avenue is the main pedestrian façade and entrance, indicated by a
grand staircase of thirty-one steps that leads to a Roman-inspired colonnade
of twenty Corinthian columns standing 53 feet high. This colonnade is
framed by two pavilions that are capped with stepped pyramidal roofs along
with first-story niches. Above the elaborate entablature that is supported by
the colonnade is a fourth story with twenty-one windows divided by simple
pilasters. The frieze of the large entablature is inscribed with a phrase
that quotes Herodotus: “Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night
stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.” 1
1
United States, Department of the Interior, National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination
Form: U.S. General Post Office 1972: 3, SPHINX, 5 Feb. 2007 http://www.oprhp.state.
ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=4827
Left: Eighth Avenue facade of Post Office.
Image: http://tools.isovera.com/
organizations/org/newFarley-web-2.jpg
Above right, clockwise from top:
Detail of Eighth Avenue colonnade
Image: http://www.nyc-architecture.com/
MID/MID133-27.jpg
Detail of inscription
Image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Image:NYC-broadway-post-office-detail.
jpg
Detail of niche in pavilion
Image: http://tools.isovera.com/
organizations/org/.newFarley-web-2.jpg

Ninth Avenue
The Ninth Avenue façade was created when the building was extended from
1932-1934. Even though it is considered the “back” of the Post Office, it is a
façade worthy of recognition and serves a means of access into the Western
portion of the complex for delivery trucks.
The façade has the same layout as the Eighth Avenue façade, where two
symmetrical pavilions with stepped pyramidal roofs flank the main portion of
the façade. Instead of a colonnade, there are three, two-story arched openings
with grilled windows in the upper half of the arches flanked by rows of Doric
pilasters on either side. These simplified pilasters have cornices decorated
with acanthus leaf motifs that are replicated in the pilasters located in the
Western portions of the 31 st and 33 rd Street facades.
Like the Eighth Avenue façade, a fourth building story is located over a large
entablature. The windows have the same surrounds as the original structure
and are still divided by simple pilasters.
The centerpiece of the Ninth Avenue façade is a sculpture located on the
entablature over the central arch that depicts “Day and Night” holding a seal of
the United States. This statue was executed by Charles Keck and references
the sculptures of “Day and Night” by Adolph Weinman that used to be located
on the 7 th Avenue façade of Pennsylvania Station. 2
2
Skidmore Owings & Merrill, et al., Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Project: New York,
New York, (New York: USPS & Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Corporation, 1999) 23.
Clockwise from top left:
Detail of “Day and Night” statues,
Three arched openings, Detail of
rosette and pilaster, and Detail of
metal window grill.
mages: Sara Taylor
Bottom: Composite photograph of
present view of Ninth Avenue.
Image: Lisa Calgaro
19

20
West 31 st and 33 rd Streets
The 31 st and 33 rd Street facades are divided into seven sections with two end
pavilions, and a central tripartite feature with flanking pilaster colonnades. 3
The central tripartite section on the 33rd Street side is composed of two large
archways and the 31st Street side features three windows flanked by slightly
projected single bays with street level arched windows.
The eastern end pavilions of the 31st and 33rd Street facades have staircases
leading into arched entrances. These entrances lead into the postal lobby.
The western pavilions have similar arched windows on the second story
without the staircases.
Clockwise from top left:
31st. St. truck-loading dock, and
33rd St. arched entryways.
Images: Sara Taylor
The facades are not identical because of their different functions. The 33 rd
Street façade has a moat that runs the entire length of the street, but the
two centrally-located archways are used for automobile access into the
building. A bridge is located on the eastern portion of the façade for access
to administrative offices. It is marked by three street-level entrances that
support stone entablatures and flanked by two large metal lanterns.
The 31 st Street façade has a truck-loading dock area that is located adjacent
to the western pavilion and extends to the first portion of the tripartite section
of the façade. The street-level docking area is covered with a metal canopy
with Greek fettering in its frieze and is attached to the façade with metal
anchors. The moat extends from the docking area to the eastern end of the
façade. A bridge is located in the eastern portion of the tripartite section for
access into the building. The tripartite section of the 31 st Street façade differs
from the 33 rd Street façade because the central portion has three smaller first
story arched windows.
3 United States, Department of the Interior, National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination
Form: U.S. General Post Office 1972: 3, SPHINX, 5 Feb. 2007 http://www.oprhp.state.
ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=4827

Top: Composite view of 31st Street facade.
Bottom: Composite view of 33rd Street facade.
Images: Lisa Calgaro
21

22
Interior Post Office Lobby
The interior of the Farley post office lobby is an elegant double-height corridor
that runs the entire length of the Eighth Avenue façade. Flanking either end
of the corridor are circular rotundas that are located within the end pavilions.
Secondary lobbies are perpendicular to the main lobby and staircases lead to
the upper floors off of the circular rotundas.
Marble is used extensively within the lobby and rotunda spaces for pilasters,
columns, flooring, trim, and doorways. The ceiling of the lobby has an ornate
molded polychrome plaster finish that features classical elements, such as
geometric bands, urns, egg-and-dart molding, etc (Figure D). Centrallylocated
hexagonal insets contain seals of different European countries and
are surrounded by additional diamond-shaped inset areas. The original,
historic metal light fixtures (Figure G) run along the center of the lobby ceiling
and are used in the rotundas as well.
The east wall of the lobby is lined with clerestory windows that are separated
by marble pilasters. Within each of these bays are alternating windows or
door openings with pedimented (Figure H) or arched metal surrounds.
The west wall of the lobby is a screen with attendant windows that are topped
with glazed clerestory windows with metal screening in front of the second
story windows. 1 Each attendant window (Figure B) is separated by a pilaster
that matches the rhythm of bays on the East wall. These marble pilasters are
similar in style to those located on the exterior of the later portion of the Farley
Complex. The hall’s original postal boxes are present and still in use in the
lobby area.(Figure E).
the marble arches that contain Depression-era murals (Figure F) by Lewis
Lozowick in 1938. “Triboro Bridge” and “Lower Manhattan” were restored in
1998 after years of abuse from their close location to the rotunda entrances. 2
Ornamental plaster-work extends into the stairwells located adjacent to the
rotundas. The staircases are made of carved marble with sculpted balusters
(Figure I). The desks located within the lobby were commissioned by the
Tiffany Studios (Figure A) and are made of bronze with formica tabletops that
replaced the original marble. 3
2
James Vescovi, “Post Office Murals, at 50, Get Face Lift,” The New York Times Mar. 8, 1998:
14.5, ProQuest, Columbia University, New York City 21 Apr. 2007 http://proquest.umi.com/pqdw
eb?did=26991122&sid=1&Fmt=3&clientld=15403&RQT=309&VName=PQD
3
New York Historical Society, Letter by Mr. C. Wenderoth, (New York: June 12, 1914) New York,
New York, 23 Feb 2007.
Right: Main Eighth
Avenue Postal lobby.
Image: Jiewon Song
Opposite page:
Lobby interior details.
Images: Authors
The ornamental molded polychrome plaster finish in the rotunda ceilings (Figure
C) is similar to ceiling of the lobby. A plaster ceiling medallion with acanthus
leaves supports a large light fixture and is surrounded by an octagonal band
of fettering, egg-and-dart molding, etc., which are then surrounded by wedgeshaped
bands of plaster with urn details. A bay-leaf garland encircles the
entire ceiling, which is then surrounded by a thick band of crown molding.
Large marble pilasters flank the arched openings in the rotunda, along with
1
Skidmore Owings & Merrill, et al., Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Project: New York,
New York, (New York: USPS & Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Corporation, 1999) 26.

A. Tiffany desk in main lobby
B. Metal grilles at service windows in lobby C. Ornametal plaster in rotunda
D. Ornamental plaster in main lobby E. Post office boxes F. Louis Lozowick mural in rotunda
G. Light fixtures in postal hall and stairwells H. Ornamental window surround I. Marble staircase off main lobby area
23

24
Mail Sorting Room and Skylight
The mail sorting room located directly west of the Post Office lobby is a room
where great activity once took place. This vast space fills almost all of the
space on the first floor, besides the lobby, of the Western portion of the building.
A system of trusses was employed in order to keep the space free for postal
activity. There are five trusses altogether with three running east-west and
two running north-south. These trusses are supported by large piers that are
located along the outer ring of the room. The trusses also support a hipped
skylight structure that rises a total of 50 feet in the air and a observation gallery
system that runs around the perimeter of the skylight. Some ornamentation
was applied in this work space along the gallery system in the form of cornices,
etc. 1
The interior glazing of the skylight was satin ground wire glass and the exterior
glazing was wire glass. All of the original glazing has been removed and was
replaced with hardboard panels. The original roofing of copper and monel
metal was replaced with a new metal roofing system. Even though there have
been additions to the mail sorting room, such as: a secondary structural system
of rolled steel columns, beams and bar joists; mechanical equipment; electric
lighting systems; extensions of the gallery system, etc. the original structural
materials are all intact and for the most part, in good condition. 2
1
Skidmore Owings & Merrill, et al., Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Project: New York,
New York, (New York: USPS & Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Corporation, 1999) 26.
2
Ibid., 27-28.
Left: Historic view of Mail
Sorting room.
Image: New-York Hisorical
Society, McKim, Mead, & White
Archive
Top Right: Current view of Mail
Sorting room.
Image: Daniel Fox
Bottom Right: Interior skylight.
Image: Historic Building
Survey, Farley/Penn Station
New York Federal Railroad
Administration, Environmental
Assessment, Deleuw Cather &
Company, et al.

Interior Courtyard Walls
The walls of the courtyard located above the mail sorting room skylight are
made of buff-colored bricks with iron spots that are laid in a Common Bond
coursing. Each façade has several evenly spaced bays of windows topped by
an ornamental frieze of projecting brick patterns, brick corbels, inlaid decorative
panels of terra cotta, and capped by a brick cornice.
Decorative terra cotta scrolls are located on the fourth floor of the east-facing
wall. The first, second, and third floor windows are surrounded by patterns
of alternating recessed and projected bricks for ornamentation and the fourth
floor has the same detail in between each window. The windows have splayed
brick lintels with slightly projecting limestone sills.
Besides some light soiling on the brick, the walls have been well preserved
over the years. The fifth floor does have some water infiltration issues which
are indicated by several locations with efflorescence along with a crack on the
southwest wall. In order to prevent further damage to the fifth floor, the source
of the water infiltration needs to be identified. 3
3
Ibid., 34, 49.
Left: Courtyard walls above
skylight.
Image: Daniel Fox
Top right: Detail of brick-work
and ornamentation.
Image: Sara Taylor
Bottom Right: East wall of
interior courtyard.
Image: Sara Taylor
25

26
Original West Facade
The original west façade of the Farley Post Office complex was retained during
the construction of the western addition in the 1930’s. Although some portions
of the original façade have been removed, it is largely intact.
A skylight was inserted between the original west wall and the new wall for
the 1930’s addition. This skylight covers the courtyard created by the space
between the west wall and the newer additional wall, which leaves four stories
exposed. The west wall is made of buff-colored brick with iron spotting and is
laid in Common bond coursing. The fourth floor terra cotta coping and third
floor entablature of the original west wall have been maintained along with
almost all of the original windows. Like the other facades of the building, the
west wall’s windows are separated by simple pilasters, except every story has
this detail instead of just the fourth floor. The fifth floor windows have slightly
projecting limestone sills and all windows have splayed lintels. This façade
has some soiling, but otherwise has been well-preserved. 1
Some argue that because certain interior spaces, such as the interior
courtyard walls of the mail sorting room, were not viewed by the public, they
are not as significant as public and exterior spaces. According to the National
Register of Historic Places criteria, “…contribution to the built environment can
be appreciated even if their [historic buildings] interiors are not accessible.” 2
Interiors are just as significant, even if they were not viewed by the public.
The brick walls of the interior courtyard in the western portion of Farley are a
valuable element of the building. The ornamental windows surrounds and the
terra cotta ornament create a pleasant composition with the well-maintained
brick. Even if they were not meant to be seen by the general public, they are of
an elegant and subtle design made to be appreciated by the building’s users.
The Ninth Avenue façade is clearly different from the Eighth Avenue colonnade,
but by no means less significant. The preservation of exterior materials along
with interior spaces is of great importance to the continued integrity of the
Complex as a historic landmark.
Clockwise from top:
Detail of original West wall,
West wall skylight, and View of
West wall and skylight.
Images: Daniel Fox
1
Ibid., 34.
2
United States, Department of the Interior, National Park Service, “How to Apply the National
Register Criteria for Evaluation Bulletin,” 2002, 27 Apr. 2007 http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/INDEX.htm

Exterior Condition Analysis
The interior and exterior conditions assessment was completed
through observation and documentation by our group - in addition to
an examination of the 1999 Building Conservation Associates (BCA)
report and consultation with a professional architectural conservator in
April of 2007
Granite
The locations of granite elements on the exterior of the Farley Post Office
complex are the ashlar block walls, fluted drum columns, Corinthian capitals,
architrave, and stairs and the stepped pyramidal roofs. None of the granite
elements need to be replaced, but all the mortar joints need to be replaced
between granite units and the stepped roofs. Spalling and erosion has
occurred in a few areas: the granite cornice units on the 3rd floor, the cheek
walls on 31 st and 33 rd Street entrance stairs, and the treads of all exterior
staircases. Some inappropriate terrazzo patches have been installed on
some of the entrance stair treads and cheek walls on 31 st and 33 rd Streets 3 .
Brick
Brick elements are located in the interior courtyard walls, exterior west-facing
wall, fifth floor walls, and areaway perimeter walls. This brick is an iron-spotted
brick which is buff-colored. Within the interior courtyard are decorative brick
corbels with all brickwork laid in Common Bond coursing. Some of the westfacing
exterior wall was removed during the construction of the later extension
of Farley. Even though there has been some soiling on brick surfaces and
some mortar joints need repointing, the brick walls are in good condition.
Some areas of the fifth floor walls have suffered from water damage and
efflorescence, which should be corrected to prevent future damage. 4
From top to bottom
Detail of granite
elements on corner of
Ninth Avenue. & 31st
Street, Brickwork in
interior courtyard, and
Detail of terra cotta
coping.
Images: Sara Taylor
Terra Cotta
Terra cotta elements are located along the decorative parapet coping on the
fourth floor, fifth floor window sills, fifth floor cornice, decorative scrolls on the
east-facing interior courtyard wall’s fifth floor cornice, and decorative inlay
units in the interior courtyard walls. Most of the terra cotta units have been
well preserved, with some minor amounts of glaze spalling and cracking.
Some of the terra cotta coping on the west wall was removed during the
construction of the western Annex construction. Some areas of the coping
are severely damaged and in danger of falling from the building, and some
have already fallen and are missing.
3
Skidmore Owings & Merrill, et al., Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Project: New York,
New York, (New York: USPS & Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Corporation, 1999) 33.
4
Ibid., 34.
27

28
Some of the damage has occurred because of water infiltration at the joints
and from inappropriate pointing. In 1991 the coping was removed from the
east well and some from the north and south parapet walls and were replaced
with buff-colored brick. The terra cotta units are off-white with black specks
to resemble granite. There are a few limestone elements that are located in
the sills of the interior courtyard and the west façade of the building. Some of
the sills have been painted, but all limestone elements are in good condition. 1
Metalwork
The locations of exterior metalwork are on several steel and iron windows,
decorative grillwork and door and window surrounds, copper alloy handrails
on the staircases, copper alloy decorative lettering on the east-facing walls
of the north and south pavilions, and louvered aluminum mechanical vents.
All of the ornamental metalwork is in good condition and doesn’t need to be
replaced. 2
From top to bottom:
Ornamental metal
window grill on 31st
Street facade, Metalframed
windows, and
Detail of metal window
on 31st Street facade.
Images: Sara Taylor
Windows
There are several types of windows that are made of different materials on
Farley. The wood windows are located on the 31 st and 33 rd Street facades up
to the fourth floor, the fourth floor of the Eighth Avenue façade, each pavilion
has three wood windows, and all the windows of the interior courtyard. These
windows are original and have been painted several times. Some of the
windows have deteriorated due to lack of maintenance and weather-stripping.
About 20% of the windows on the north, south, and east facades will require
replacement. Due to a lack of protective finishes, the interior courtyard
windows have deteriorated significantly, resulting in a need to replace all of
the windows. Steel framed windows are located: in the Eighth Avenue façade
from the first to the third floor; behind the decorative grillwork of the arched
entranceways of the 31 st and 33 rd Street facades; and the clerestory windows
located within the West wall of the postal lobby. All exterior steel windows
do show signs of corrosion, with some windows missing hardware, warped,
and damaged stops. The interior steel windows are in better condition, but
some show signs of corrosion as well. Aluminum windows are located on the
fifth floor of the entire building. Due to severe deterioration of the aluminum
windows, they will need to be replaced. 3
1
Ibid., 34.
2
Ibid., 34.
3
Ibid., 34-35.

Interior Condition Analysis - Postal Hall
Marble
The marble elements in the Postal Hall include: Polychrome flooring in
the main postal lobby and the rotundas, wainscoting, archway surrounds
in lobbies and stair halls, pilasters in main lobby and rotundas, stair treads,
risers, handrails, and balustrades in north/south halls, service counters.
The overall condition of the marble is good. Although there are some
areas of cracking and spalling, it is not severe and is present in areas of the
flooring, handrails, and baseboards. Overall marble is in good condition.
Some areas have been poorly patched and general soiling has degraded the
standard polished finish.
Plaster
Plaster elements in the Postal Hall includes: walls, ornamental ceiling in main
hall and rotundas, vaulted ceilings in north/south lobbies, ceilings in stair halls
The plaster is in overall good condition. Plaster walls and ceiling in the main lobby
and rotunda areas have multiple coats of paint from years of continuous use
and maintenance. There is evidence of paint failture on a small (approximately
30 square feet) on the decorative ceiling in the main hall area. It is possible that
this issue was caused by water infiltration. It should also be noted that the paint
scheme on the ceiling plaster work in the Postal Hall, including the rotundas, is
contemporary.
Metalwork
Metal elements that are present include: Interior sides of window frame and
sash, service window grilles, registers and ventilation grilles, bronze plaques,
post office boxes, stair banister. The metalwork is considered to be in good
condition. Small issues such as soiling, loss of original finish, and oxidation
have occurred. Registers and ventilation grilles have layers of corrosion, and
some of the elements are broken and missing pieces. Closer examination
of the metal service window grilles shows that they have been covered with a
gold-colored paint..
Clockwise starting below:
Ornamental plaster on
ceiling of Postal Lobby,
Marble staircase, and
Metal balustrade with wood
railings.
Images: Sara Taylor
29

30
Woodwork
The woodwork in the Postal Hall includes: wood doors in north and south
lobbies. Although some of the original doors have been replaced, all doors are
in good condition and appear to be operable. Doors that are original appear to
have retained their early finish.
Interior lighting
Interior lighting elements include: Suspended light fixtures in main hall and
rotundas, copper alloy sconces and table lights, service window fixtures,
halogen scoops above clerestory windows. The suspended light fixture are
original and have undergone restoration treatment. Copper alloy sconces and
table lamps are not original but should be assessed for historical significance.
The halogen scoops and fluorescent lighting are not original to the Postal
Hall.
Furnishings, Architectural Elements, and Murals
The furnishings, architectural elements, and murals present in the hall
include:Tiffany counters between east wall entrance doors, freestanding fixed
Tiffany tables at the center of lobby, counters below service windows on west
wall of lobby, postal boxes, counters in north and south lobby, murals in north
and south rotundas appear to be in very good to fair condition. The bronze
tables on east wall and freestanding tables in lobby are in good condition but
tops have been replaced with Formica panels. The Louis Lozowick murals
are in very good condition. The murals underwent an extensive restoration in
1998.
After assessing the design and historic fabric of the Farley Post Office complex,
the overall good condition of the building is evident.
Clockwise from top:
Wood door in Rotunda
entrance, Light fixture in
stairwell adjacent to main
lobby, and Tiffany desk in
main lobby.
Images: Sara Taylor,
Jiewon Song
Parties interested in occupying the Farley Building have argued that the postal
lobby is in great disrepair. On the contrary, according to a conservation
professional, the greatest area of concern is the plaster ceiling, although the
suspected area of disrepair (due to water damage) is small. Overall, the type
of restoration and conservation services required was referred to as “primarily
a cleaning and finishes job.” The largest concentrated area of expense for the
preservation of the postal hall is the finishes analysis
for the ornatate plaster ceiling.

It is important to maintain and preserve the historic fabric of the building
because these materials lend to the comprehension of this building as a civic
Beaux-Arts structure. Without the retention of these materials, the purpose
and significance of the building would be lost. The sum of these various
materials together create a powerful and monumental effect-the subtraction
of any material would ruin the overall effect of the materials. Buildings are
not constructed today as they were when the Farley Post Office complex was
constructed. In order to preserve the integrity and significance of the building,
as much as possible of the original building fabric should be preserved.
• New entrances should be avoided. All exterior facades of the Farley Post
Office Complex need to be retained in their original condition (stonework,
terra cotta, windows, metal ornamentation, etc.), except in areas that
need to be altered for new functional uses, such as the truck loading dock
area.
• Annex tenant should take advantage of the Ninth Avenue façade as an
architectural expression with similar merit to the Eighth Avenue façade.
Tenant should restore and reestablish its character as a main access
point, not a back side.
Preservation statement and guidelines
The train hall inside the courtyard over the mail sorting room should make
use of the richness of the walls’ texture; contrary to what developers say, they
are well-maintained and should not be torn down. We believe a richer design
can be accomplished with a combination of old and new materials without
compromising the historic fabric. A wider corridor that controls the flow of
people can still be accomplished. The courtyard’s significance as a courtyard
should be maintained Once glass is introduced, the relationship between the
interior and exterior is distorted.
The Annex is valued for the sensible extension of the original 1913 building,
but its façades’ architectural merit is undervalued. Its composition is less rigid
in its historicism and has rich texture of planar elements and mass and void. Its
conservation is just as important as earlier section of the building, and the new
use should not alter its integrity. If one considers MSG’s involvement a given,
it is important to provide restrictions on its design and any MSG signage
should be independent of the Farley Complex. Guidelines for preservation
and conservation of the Farley Complex are as follows:
• Preserve interior courtyard walls of the Farley Post Office Complex mail
sorting room. The original skylight and trusses above the mail sorting
room should be restored and retained for public use above the train
concourse. If it is not preserved, a skylight based on a truss system may
be considered.
• Preserve all original fabric of the historic Post Office lobby, such as the
Tiffany tables and lamps, window surrounds, ornamental plasterwork on
the ceiling, murals, post office service windows, etc.
• Restore and preserve exterior terra cotta ornamentation, and recreate
missing pieces where absent.
The USPS is planning to retain only the main postal hall behind the Eighth
Avenue colonnade, if it stays at all. MSG, as represented by Vishan Chakrabarti
of The Related Companies/Vornado Realty Trust, has stated that it would like
to use the hall for its own ticket sales. This plan may include the demolition of
some or all of the historic postal windows.
Guidelines for the specific protection of the Postal Lobby area
The building’s connection to United States postal history is significant, and
much of the building’s meaning would be lost without its continued presence. Its
exterior architecture is sturdy and dependable, like a Roman treasury providing
security to mail inside, reflecting the USPS commitment to public service. The
interior hall is where, “…7,000 people a day come through bronze doors under
an arched ceiling decorated with the seals of the countries belonging to the
postal union.” 1 This has always been the public’s main place of interface with
the building and thus the connection of New Yorkers to this main hall should
not be compromised. If the historic uses were abandoned, a similar public use
should be sympathetically inserted into those windows, perhaps train ticketing.
Converting this space into the front door of MSG belies the public’s interest
in the hall and makes it a forecourt rather than a main architectural event. In
order to protect this historic asset, the following guidelines should be followed
for the protection of the lobby and rotunda areas:
• Retention of USPS in the Complex’s original lobby space or a similar
sympathetic use to maintain integrity of hall.
• Designate the Post Office lobby space as a NYC Interior Landmark for
future protection.
• Devise new uses for the hall that will be accessible to the general public.
1
Ada Louise Huxtable, “On the Right Track,” The New York Times November 28, 1994: A-17,
ProQuest, Columbia University, New York, 24 Mar. 2007 http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=37
40412&sid=1&Fmt=2&clientId=15403&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Note: This quote comes from a 1994 article and might not reflect 2007 numbers, although the
Morgan Facility was open in 1994, thus the numbers reflect a time when Farley had drastically
decreased operations.
31

32
Diagram, first floor Material
Significance.
Image: Carlos Huber
This image is one example
of the analysis done to each
floor of the building. All areas
were assigned a level of
“significance” and this was
used to formulate preservation
guidelines for the design and
development ideas that appear
in the following sections.
Opposite page:
Left: Eighth Avenue facade.
Image: http://www.rachelleb.com/
images/post_office_1.jpg
Middle: Interior view of postal hall.
Image: Jiewon Song
Right: Ninth Avenue facade.
Image: Jiewon Song

Public v. Private Interest
Interior/Exterior Civic Spaces
William Kendall designed the Farley Post Office with a certain civic
monumentality in mind. The grand colonnaded Eighth Avenue façade
is meant to draw the public into the postal lobby within. In addition, a
block-long granite staircase meets the colonnade and welcomes the
public into the building. Consider the broad aspirations of the building,
as stated in a letter sent by McKim, Mead, & White, to the USPS in 1907:
“In studying the problem, we have endeavored, while keeping in mind the practical uses of the
building, to give it the monumental character which a government building of such importance
should possess. In general, we may say that as any building of moderate height in New York
is likely to be of inferior height to those eventually surrounding it, the chance to compete with
them will depend upon THE GREAT SCALE AND UNITY OF ITS DESIGN [original emphasis].
For this reason, we have made as few breaks as possible in the façade, and have adopted the
columnar motive running through two stories.” 1
Designed to be identified distinctly with the Governmental class of buildings,
what Farley lacks in height it makes up for in sheer monumentality. If this public
area -- both interior and exterior -- is occupied by MSG for its own ticketing
operations, its meaning will be lost. No longer will it be a public space open
1
Statement of Design Intent Submitted by McKim, Mead, & White to the USPS, (1907) New
York Historical Society, McKim, Mead, & White Archive, 23 Feb. 2007
twenty-four hours a day, but it will slip into the lost realm of privately owned
“public” atriums. Its material richness will also be lost: MSG plans to eliminate
two ticketing windows at either end of the postal hall for circulation during events.
Additionally, if MSG uses the Ninth Avenue entrance to Farley as an access
point to its arena, its architectural importance should not be undermined. Even
though some might consider this the “back” of the Post Office, it is a façade
worthy of recognition and should be treated with the same care as Eighth Avenue.
Thus, the physical appearance and use of the Eighth and Ninth Avenue
sections should be preserved to retain this meaning of civic and monumental
strength. Furthermore, the Postal Lobby retains its original use and accordingly,
we believe that the Postal Service should maintain its retail operations here.
Managing Use Transitions
With multiple new uses occupying Farley, it will be important for public and
private spaces to be clearly delineated. Most importantly, we firmly emphasize
the public aspect of this project, and this public nature should be manifest in
design choices and preservation of historic fabric. The hallmark of this project
must be effective spatial management between ventures to ensure train traffic
33

34
transition
exhibition space
Private sector
development
transition
Train Hall
USPS Lobby
exhibition space
transition
Left: Diagram of spacial use.
Image: Carlos Huber
Right: Madison Square Garden signage.
Image: Daniel Fox
can co-exist. Unless there is a clear and definite transition between
private arena space and public train hall space, travelers will encounter
a train station hidden within a sports arena or semi-public mall.
Transitional spaces between each venue are the key to properly managing
the problem of flow. This may mean distinct entrances or neutral,
undifferentiated sorting spaces to communicate discreet uses. Signage is a
means of aiding circulation, but the signage must be designed in a manner
that is appropriate for a historic building and cannot damage historic fabric.
To be clear, signs are not enough to designate public and private space,
and thus the character of the architecture should define these spaces.
Signage
If MSG relocates into the western extension of Farley, it will require
colossal amounts of informative signs and advertising. After reviewing
the history of MSG’s signage practices at its current location, it is clear
that Farley’s entire interior and exterior will be vulnerable to inhospitable
signage. MSG has proven that it has no qualms when it comes to
advertising: earlier this year, it had a particularly obscene six-story vinyl
banner for the movie “Norbit” stretched across the arena. Its marquee on
Seventh Avenue is a similar detractor -- outsized and obtrusive. While this
approaches the gray area of taste, this mode of signage is out of step with
the old and dignified Farley building. Moreover, signage can physically
damage the historic fabric, the character, and unity of the Farley Complex.
Thus, great care should be exercised in the design of new signage. It needs to
be dignified, separate from the Farley Complex, unobtrusive, and reversible.
In a following section, we offer non-traditional signage alternatives that we
believe to be both affective information tools and sensitive additions to the
Farley Post Office.
Reacting to the Developers Proposals
We found that previous proposals for the Farley Complex did not devise
thorough programs that considered a respectful and realistic use for the entire
structure. The MSG plan to move into the Farley Annex is the most popular
one to date, although it is far from official, thorough, or the best possible use.
The developers and MSG have not provided detailed plans and models for
the public, and the ones we were allowed to see seem rather rushed or leave
out essential details. In light of questions about the feasibility of successfully
locating MSG in the space, alternate uses for the space should be explored.

Left: Model of Moynihan Station/
MSG by Vornado/Related.
Image: Radii Inc. website, http://
www.radiiinc.com/Portfolio.html
Below right (two images):
Computer renderings of potential
exhibition space in Farley Building.
Images: Carlos Huber
We suggest that any tenant’s commitment should be long term, preventing
the historic structure from continuous exposure to alteration work. In addition,
this use should be compatible with the structure and the architecture with
minimum intervention. One alternative might be an arts center. The large,
open, loft-like plan of the Annex lends itself to performance, studios, or a large
exhibition space. This building could serve as an extension of the Chelsea
arts industry, bringing an augmented arts presence to the area. Or, could
many small tenants, not big box stores, be coordinated in such a way that
their use of the Annex is sympathetic with the civic intentions of this building?
Perhaps the developers could organize a number of independent tenants as in
Chelsea Market, the factory turned marketplace, to fill the Annex with an open
market that supports small business and is more in tune with the preferred
method of New York shopping. In other words, a more thorough exploration
of retail options is necessary, rather than a default to corporate tenants.
35

Competing Histories:
Madison Square Garden and
the Farley Post Office
Opposite page: Montage of important MSG events.
Images: http://www.newyorkrangers.com/
http://www.msg50.com/ tickets/images/msg_night_lg.jpg
Top left to right: Madison Square Garden I, II, and III
http://www.answers.com/topic/madison-square1-jpg
“Not a building, but a state of mind”
Madison Square Garden (the “Garden”) is the only sports and entertainment
arena in the city of New York which operates over 400 events a year. Finished in
1968, the current Garden is located on Seventh Avenue between 31 st and 33 rd
Streets, and represents its fourth location in the lifespan of the organization.
Throughout four distinct permutations, the Garden has served as a mecca of
sports and entertainment, as well as a popular civic space in New York City. 1
The first Garden was built at Madison Avenue and 26 th Street in 1871. It was a
time of a great of inventions, such as Bell’s telephone, Edison’s electric light,
Daimler’s high-speed internal-combustion engine, Eastman’s hand camera
and Otis’s electric elevator. In response to rapid modernization, feelings
of nostalgia emerged for the old good days and the show businessman,
Phineas Taylor Barnum, was ready to satisfy these feelings on the live stage.
Accordingly, he made the Garden the most imaginative stage in the city of
the time.
1
Joseph Durso. Madison Square Garden: 100 Years of History (Simon and Schuster: New York,
1979). All historical informaton regarding Madison Square Garden in this section is reconstructed
and rephrased based on the book above.
A passenger depot for the New York & Harlem Railroad originally occupied the
site of the Garden, which later moved to the current Grand Central Terminal
site. One of the reasons behind this relocation was to add grace to the area
which was surrounded by mansions and townhouses. The site was sold to
Barnum, who was already involved in the entertainment business and the first
generation of the Garden debuted in the city known as “the Monster Classical
and Geological Hippodrome.” During this first phase, the Garden went through
two additional names reflecting change of ownership. In 1876, it was renamed
“Gilmore’s Garden” and then William Henry Vanderbilt officially christened it
in 1879 as “Madison Square Garden.” During its first eighteen years, the first
Garden became the center of the city’s social life and sporting life, evolving
into the central point for high society and splendor in then uptown New York.
The second generation of the Garden was built on the old site in 1890. At this
time, the city was the home of the new aristocrats, as well as the target of the
new international celebrities. It was a time of architectural extravagance; the
city was filled with new buildings, monuments, exotic façades, and statues
designed by Stanford White of McKim Mead, & White. This new Garden was
of a lavish Moorish architecture with a minaret-like tower soaring 32 stories,
a colonnade, roof Garden and theater designed by Stanford White. It was the
world’s largest hall with 8,000 seats.
37

38
Left and right: Pennsylvania
Station disassembled and
decked over to make way for
the Madison Square Garden IV.
Images: Hilary Ballon, New
York’s Pennsylvania Stations
After World War I, the Garden’s owners considered demolition due to the
severe financial debt. In addition, show business was considered as a waste
of money and frivolous at that time. But when New York Life Insurance
Company, the Garden’s owner attempted to transform the Garden into more
profitable business, the company was stopped by public pressure. It was
because the Garden always had engaged with the political life, social life as
well as cultural life of New York City. Nevertheless, the second generation
building was torn down in order to make a way for the landmark New York Life
Insurance building in 1924. This “Garden II” served for thirty-five years.
The third version of the Garden moved twenty-five blocks uptown. The new
location at Eighth Avenue and 50 th Street retained the name Madison Square
Garden. This Garden, designed by Thomas W. Lamb, was built in 249 days
on the site of the city’s streetcar barns and opened featuring 18,000 seats in
1925. The building was dedicated to athletics, amusements and the industrial
arts, as inscribed on a plaque imbedded in the wall of the 50 th Street side, for
the next forty-three years. This third venue flourished with visits from political
leaders, popular cultural icons, sport entertainment,social and political
events.
The fourth and current version of the Garden was built on the site of the
demolished and decked-over Pennsylvania Station, located between Seventh
and Eight Avenues, and was designed by Charles Luckman Associates.
In 1960, an obscure announcement was made to the public about the new
construction of the Garden without the information of when and where. Then,
some days later, the Pennsylvania Railroad Company contacted the Garden
owners and suggested they buy the air rights over the Penn Station site,
arguing: “I believe you will agree that from a transportation standpoint, there
isn’t a better location in Manhattan.” 2 Eight months later, the plan to construct
the Garden on the top of Penn Station site was settled. The new Garden
Complex was expected to accommodate sports, entertainment, business
offices, theatres, and expositions. In order to make it happen, the cost was
radical, too, at $123 Million.
The demolition of Penn Station started on October 28, 1963. Construction
of “Garden IV” above street level started in January 1966, while part of the
Penn Station was still being demolished. The main form of the Garden IV was
a circular building alongside a twenty-nine-story skyscraper, 2 Penn Plaza.
Certainly, people involved in this new construction were thinking big: a thirteen
story building with the Bowling Center, Center Cinema, and the Hall of Fame.
2
Ibid., PAGE.

Left and right: The
cable roof was the most
sophisticated of its time.
Left: Sterner, A. J.
“Madison Square Garden:
Fabrication and erection
of cable-supported roof.”
in Civil Engineering.
October, 1967
RIght: Interior view, 2007.
Image:Carlos Huber
The structure of the Garden IV is the 13-story arena in a drum-shaped building,
with 48 columns around the circumference, topped by a cable-suspended
roof. At the time, this was the first permanent cable-supported roof structure
in New York City and the largest cable-supported roof structure in the United
States. 3
The cable-supported roof structure was the most contemporary and
sophisticated technology of the time. The structure used in the Garden IV is
a circular, single-layer cable structure utilizing a compression and a tension
ring with a diameter of 425 ft. The tension ring is supported by the cables
and serves primarily as a connection hub for the radial cables to develop the
clear span across the diameter of the building. The compression ring serves
as the anchorage for the cables to resist horizontal pull and is supported on
the perimeter wall framing. This roof structure was understood as the best
solution for a column free clear span, leaving the arena floor unobstructed.
The cable roof of the Garden IV is an example of an integrated design utilizing
all framing elements to develop a sound cable-suspended structure. 4 We
believe the cable roof to be the most significant aspect of MSG’s arena.
Furthermore, the Garden IV created an innovative solution to the problem
3
A. J. Sterner “Madison Square Garden: Fabrication and erection of cable-supported roof” in
Civil Engineering. October, 1967.
4
Fred Fischer. “Cable Roof for Madison Square Garden” in Civil Engineering. June, 1967.
of constructing an arena over a fully-functioning urban train station. Using
advanced technology, a waterproof floor of structural steel and concrete at
street level was installed inside the station so that the high steel roofs of the
old Penn Station could be demolished without disrupting the activities below
street level. Thus, the 48 perimeter columns for the Sports Arena were brought
to street level where the separate Madison Square Garden contract started. 5
This Garden IV has served 40 years, so far.
Every event at the Garden happens under the same roof: from sports, popular
entertainment to social & political events. The Garden as an institution has
served over one hundred years and has progressed through a number of
buildings and a range of architectural styles. Over time, the institution of
Madison Square Garden has come to repesent more than a building or
buildings, but rather a state of mind.
The Garden is now preparing to create its fifth incarnation for New York City.
With improvements in technology (and careful planning) the Garden could
move into the Farley Complex with minimal intervention to historic structure
and fabric. However, this relocation plan has created a friction between the
Moynihan Station Project and the Farley Post Office building.
5
Ibid.
39

40
If Madison Square
Garden takes over the
postal lobby (left), the
post office windows will
turn into ticket windows
(right).
Images: Jiewon Song
Vornado Realty Trust, one of the major developers in New York City, proposed
the moving of Madison Square Garden into the Post Office Annex (western
portion of building). Because the Garden originally had a renovation plan of
its building, it willingly accepted the developers’ offer. Based on the current
condition of the Garden and the upcoming new Nets Stadium in Brooklyn, it
is not difficult to imagine that the Garden needs to revamp its current facilities
and increase the number of corporate boxes in the arena. New York City
is also in favor of the Garden’s moving into the Farley Complex because it
would help maintain the city’s status as the leading financial center over other
cities and neighboring states. Any information in relation to the relocation
plan has not been open to the public. Based on the information provided
through interviews with key players throughout the studio project, however,
we could gather the potential adverse impacts on the Farley Post Office
building. The Garden’s moving is a threat to the Farley Complex because the
identified potential impacts are physically, visually and functionally irreversible.
Simultaneously, it creates a dynamic of competing histories; a legacy in New
York history threatens another legacy in the history of the United States Post
Office, the Farley Complex.
The Farley building speaks to a historical relationship between the U.S. Postal
Service and the Railroad. In addition, the Farley Complex has meaning in
every way from its scale and material to design in relation to the legacy of the old
Pennsylvania Station.
One of the potential adverse impacts which can be caused by the Garden’s
move into the Farley Complex is destruction of two significant interior spaces.
The Postal lobby is filled with material and ornamental richness. But due to its
undesignated condition, the significance has not been identified. In addition,
this significance was not identified in the Environmental Impact Statement
because the EIS was completed before MSG’s plans for Farley were revealed.
Nevertheless, the lobby is richly decorated expansive space. The doubleheight
space runs the entire length of the eastern side of the building along
Eighth Avenue. Marble is used on the flooring, columns, trim, and archways,
and most interior features are intact. The customer desks created by Tiffany
Studios are also original. Therefore, unless concrete design guidelines are
given to the Garden, all the interior features could be removed or changed
for the Garden’s own purpose. There is another interior space which is of
undervalued significance: the Sorting Room. The developers and the ESDC
claimed that the brick walls of the courts above the Sorting Room are not
visible and they were not supposed to be seen thus they were not significant. In
their design proposals, the walls have disappeared. However, the architectural
elements of the Farley Building include the interior courtyard brick walls. All

Left: Signage on extant Madison
Square Garden.
Image: Jiewon Song
Right: Rendering of imagined
obtrusive signage.
Image: New York Landmarks
Conservancy, http://tools.
isovera.com/organizations/org/
Rendering2.jpg
of the brick is buff colored iron spot brick and the interior courtyard walls have
decorative brick corbels. The brickwork is laid in Common Bond coursing with
joints no larger than one half inch. All of the brick walls are well-preserved.
Moreover, the skylight over the Sorting Room is important to the original
McKim, Mead, & White intent to create a well-lit, pleasant work environment
for postal workers. Its design is quite innovative and its function represents a
significant component of the original design and construction. The design also
intended to keep practical use of the building while giving it the monumental
character. Thus, significance of the Sorting Room as well as its interior walls
should be identified.
The second possible adverse impact on the Farley building can result in the
use of space. The Garden aims to take up not just the western portion but the
entire complex. By doing so, the Farley building could lose its function as a
civic space. Especially, the current lobby space which offers postal service
will convert to the ticket office. Therefore, the grand staircase which used to
belong to the public would belong to fans of the Garden. Without participating
in events at the Garden, the space would no longer be accessible to the public.
Together with the interior change, the Farley space becomes the Garden’s
private space.
the entire Farley complex, the Garden also has a plan to locate poster and
electric signage on the exterior structure. Considering the Garden’s current
signage, one can easily imagine that oversized banners and electric neon signs
may be placed on the Eighth and the Ninth Avenue façade. Consequently, the
visual appearance of the entire façade of the Farley Complex will significantly
change. The developers explains that the signage will be freestanding with
minimal destruction to the exterior fabric. However, even if the signage does
not result in physical destruction of the façade it will obviously lead to visual
adverse impacts on the exterior of the Farley Complex.
Although the developers and the Garden have not provided details on the
actual moving plan, it has been identified as a preservation threat because
the plan will result not only in material and visual destruction but also in a
change of the use of space. Furthermore, those identified adverse impacts
will lead to the destruction of the great scale and unity of design of the Farley
Complex. When the Garden needs to move into the Farley Complex, it will
move. Nevertheless, the Garden should respect the significance of the Postal
lobby, the Sorting Room and its courtyard walls, the Farley Building as a civic
space as well as the exterior of the Farley Building.
The third potential adverse impact is the destruction of the exterior. Taking up
41

Proposals and Design Schemes
Following our established values and in response to the developers’
plans, we propose a revision of concepts and designs for the Farley building.
This revision should grasp the importance of all our conclusions, from
the problem of occupancy, to the importance of the structure as a public
building. We have identified key areas and issues that must be taken
into account to provide a successful design solution to the Farley Complex.
The train hall and USPS lobby are areas that represent the public character
that we value in the building. Also, proposals for the Annex should contemplate
a tenant that understands the significance of the monumental exterior
and the history of the working interiors. While there is a strong possibility
that Madison Square Garden will move into the Annex, we do not treat
this as fact and instead imagine another option: the Dia Art Foundation.
Dia was formed in 1974 and was one of the first institutions to exhibit contemporary
art in Chelsea. In recent years, the Dia left its space in Chelsea
and is looking for a new Manhattan location. Today, it operates a museum
along the Hudson River in Beacon, NY, in a renovated 1929 Nabisco factory,
proving a sensitive tenant of historic buildings. As part of its move into
the Nabisco Building, it pursued a designation for the building on the National
Register of Historic Places. 1 Originally, the foundation planned to build
a new museum near the High Line but in 2006 abandoned this plan due to a
1 DIA Beacon, Home page, 12 June 2007, http://www.diabeacon.org/exhibs/bindex.html.
lack of director and a changing board of directors. Now, with a new director in
place, the Dia is resuming its search for a new location in Manhattan. 2 Based
on publicly available information, Dia currently has $55 million to spend for the
new museum 3 . If the Farley Building was reconfigured with 2 stories of gallery
space and 1-2 stories of office, teaching, and storage space – the 300,000
square feet of space would be comparable to its current presence in Beacon.
We feel that if economically feasible, a tenant such as the
Dia Foundation would preserve critical historic fabric, create
a dynamic space, and reach out to the New York community.
In any case, giving the monumental structure a new use may bring forth problems
with signage.
Thus, our revision focuses on creating guidelines for:
1.
2.
3.
The USPS Lobby and Train Hall.
Two schemes for the Annex.
Farley Exterior: Signage
2 Vogel, Carol,“DIA Appoints A New Director: Next Stop Manhattan” 20 Feb 2007: New York
Times, 12 June 2006, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/20/arts/design/20muse.html?ex=1329627
600&en=b93d2c93c3410588&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
3 Vogel, Carol, “DIA Art Foundation Calls Off Museum Project,” 26 Oct 2006: New York Times, 13
June 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/25/arts/design/25muse.html?ex=1319428800&en=42
49f3b6814fbb06&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
43

44
Top: Northwest view, Eighth
Avenue perspective.
Image: Moynihan Station Final
Environmental Impact Statement,
Developer C, Phase I
development, figure 9-25, 09
Urban Design
Bottom: Interior view of Farley
Post Office lobby.
Image: Jiewon Song
1.
The Post Office Lobby and Train Hall:
A Civic Presence on Eighth Avenue
a) Lobby:
1.
2.
3.
USPS remains in lobby. The Beaux Arts interior reflects the dignity of
a civic building and its service to New York City. This value should be
preserved and exalted.
Designation of lobby interior: clean and restore finishes. Preserve
windows, tables and light fixtures.
Define clear entrances. The access and circulation of users in the
building should not be confusing, highlighting the hierarchy of the Post
Office users and train station passengers. Keep the Eighth Avenue steps
for the Post Office Lobby.

Top: Interior brick wall, watercolor
rendering.
Image: Lisa Calgaro
Bottom: Historic Image of
original sorting room skylight.
Image: Historic Building
Survey, Farley/ Penn Station
New York Federal Railroad
Administration, Environmental
Assessment, Deleuw Cather
& Company, et al.
.
b) Train hall:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Retain “labor” character of courtyard to connect with building’s meaning
as Manhattan’s main post office.
Restore original truss system and skylight.
Incorporate original brick walls into train hall design.
Train hall complete and separate from the other tenant, not merely a
forecourt to the other tenant.
Create ADA compliant entrances at concourse level.
Incorporate Arrivals/Departures screen and appropriate train signage.
45

46
Interior perspective sketches.
Images: Allyson Mehley
Train Hall diagramatic section, looking north.
Image: Carlos Huber

Interior perspective sketch.
Image: Allyson Mehley
47

48
Diagramatic plans of Madison Square Garden scheme.
Images: Carlos Huber
2. Two schemes proposed for the Annex:
Scheme A: Revised MSG proposal:
Key Guidelines
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Define Garden entrances.
Retention of the USPS lobby and offices on eastern part.
MSG presence must not dominate train hall.
Retention of brick wall above train hall lobby.
Make use of windows around façades.
The rooftop addition may rise as a sympathetic dome within the building’s
overall scale. Addition should respect a 10 feet setback, with a
simple design to compliment the Farley envelope.
Arena should provide the most competent design possible for an addition.
Respect historic building with appropriate signage.

Madison Square Garden, Train Hall and Post Office Lobby, diagramatic section, looking north.
Image: Carlos Huber
49

50
All images this page: The Sazka
Area in Prague has a steel tie-rod
roof, which is significantly lighter
than a cable roof system. The
sloping effect first developed by
Madison Square Garden’s cable
roof is echoed in arenas elsewhere
because of its intimacy.
Images: Sazka Arena Website,
http://www.sazkaarena.com
9. The new ceiling structure should be an engineering
advancement, an echo of MSG IV’s innovation in roof
design.Current roof structure designs still reflect the
influence of MSG IV’s cable roof system.The 2003
Sazka Arena in Prague, is currently the world’s most
modern.

Below: Bird’s-eye view of Farley building and Madison Square Garden addition, with preserved
and refaced drum structure.
Image: Carlos Huber
10. Preserve MSG IV’s structure and cable roof for Moynihan East:
The Paramount Theater inside the Arena may be removed since it is no
longer a part of MSG’s future. This will bring light into Penn Station and
provide an above grade presence. To redeem the structure in the public’s
eye, the arena floor may be removed and a garden can terrace down
into the concourse giving commuters an urban oasis. We also envision a
refacing of the MSG drum, playing with transparent and opaque glass.
With transportation improvements such as these, developers may build the
coveted five million plus square feet of development on top.
51

52
1 Madison Square Gardena.
Improved 21,000 seat arena:
Scattered corporate boxes, better sight lines,
innovative roof structure.
b. Lobbies and ticket windows
c. Restaurants and hall of fame
d. Convention space
e. Offices on north and south sides of train hall
2 Moynihan Westf.
Train Hall LIRR/NJT
g. Vertical exits for 10 tracks Penn
h. Police and machine rooms
i. Widened corridor
3 USPSj.
Postal Lobby
k. USPS Offices and
storage
4 Moynihan Eastl.
Intermodal Garden
(main concourse)
m.Amtrak/LIRR/NJT platforms
n. Retail/restaurants
a
b
d
b
c
e
f
g
k
h
j
i
n
m
L
n

1 2
5 Mixed Use Development-
Four new towers combine
over five million sf of development.
3
4
2
Diagramatic footprint of the four new towers.
Image: Carlos Huber
.
4
1
Four new landmark towers pierce the Manhattan sky.
3
The developers’ main incentive for moving Madison Square
Garden is getting five million sq. ft. of new development on
the Penn Station block. In combination with the existing
infrastructure, this will create the new business district New
York needs to remain competitive at a global scale. We think
the developers should adaptively use the arena structure,
incorporating it into the new development.
Images (at right and opposite page): Carlos Huber
53

54
Scheme B: Dia:Hudson Yards:
If the Farley Building is reconfigured with 2 stories of gallery space and 1-2
stories of office, teaching, and storage space – the 300,000 square feet of
space would be comparable to Dia’s current Beacon facilities. We believe that
if economically feasible, a tenant such as the Dia foundation would preserve
critical historic fabric, create a dynamic space, and reach out to the New York
community.
Dia’s 300,000 square feet layout in Beacon, NY, houses gallery space, workshops,
lecture rooms, and a basement for temporary exhibitions.
Image: Architectural Record, Dia: Beacon Project Portfolio

Making use of a a former warehouse space, Dia:Beacon.
Images: Urban 75 Website http://www.urban75.org/photos/newyork/dia-beacon-ny.html
55

56
Right: Skylight in Farley
Annex - loading dock.
Image: Daniel Fox
Dia: Hudson Yards, diagramatic section. Image: Allyson Mehley
Key Guidelines
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Remain sensitive to the building’s architectural value and integrity.
Create dynamic space while taking advantage of the existing fabric.
Make use of all space available.
Work with “warehouse” character in Annex interiors
Retain windows around façades.
Bring needed light in through roof (in center).
Connect with Chelsea art community.
Developers must still analyze solutions to improve Penn Station and
promote development while remodeling MSG on site.

Diagramatic section. Image: Allyson Mehley
The Annex’s raw interior has great potential for the exhibition
of contemporary and large scale art.
Image: Sara Taylor
East Lobby and Sculpture Hall
Hallways/ Stairs/ Escalators
Upper Galleries
Lower Galleries/ Classrooms/ Workshops
Museum Shop
Offices
57

58
Image: Carlos Huber
The developers must still analyze solutions to improve Penn Station and
promote development, a major incentive, while remodeling MSG on site. A
proven analysis will corroborate their claims for development.
We believe the maintenance of Madison Square Garden on its current site
does not prohibit the possibility for transportation improvements. Removing
the theater permits light to reach the train station. The same might be done
on 7th Avenue, removing the extant entrance structure and opening up the
station to the surface.

The dense development might still be possible...
Image: Carlos Huber
59

60
3. Farley Exterior: Signage
There is no denying the strong presence of advertising in cities like New York.
However, over-saturation of traditionally-placed advertisements is rendering
most outdoor advertising ineffective. The intended audience automatically filters
out the high-gloss billboards and the industry is changing to recapture
their attention. Today, even contemporary architecture has absorbed signage
to enhance its power as a tool of communication. In the case of an historic
building like Farley, the addition of signage becomes a serious issue. This is
especially relevant in Madison Square Garden’s case, since advertisement
and sponsorship is a big part of its business. Signage should be regulated
so as not to minimize the monumental character of the exterior envelope. We
have done research to study ways in which advertisement, promotion and
decoration might be done without damaging the building or covering up the
facades.
Above: New mixed use development on 7th Avenue and
34th Street.
Image: Vornado Website, New Projects
A monumental building is itself promoting, and it should not be clouded by an
over-saturation of messages. As advertisers increasingly harness the talents
of famous artists to freshen the delivery of messages, video and light projections
turn buildings into new media skin, literally without touching them.
Above: A rendering by the New York Lanmarks Conservancy of
what we don’t want to happen.
Image: New York Landmarks Conservancy, Public Policy, Presarvation
Alerts. http://www.nylandmarks.org/index.php

The controversial signage in the Atlantic Yards project is comparable to a Las Vegas style “New York-New York”
Images: “Develop, don’t destroy Brooklyn” website, http://dddb.net
61

62
At right, examples of illumination and video projections on historic architecture.
Top: Mitchell Library, Sidney, by The Electric Canvas, a Sidney-based large
scale projection specialist.
Image: www.theelectriccanvas.com.au
Middle: The work of artist Krzysztof Wodiczko uses historic buildings as
canvases for his videos on cities, community, and identity. Projection at the
Parthenon at Carlton Hill in Edinburgh, August, 1988.
Image: http://www.artangel.org.uk/pages/past/88/
Bottom: Christmas time projections in Grand Central Station - a classical interior
can include advertising in its program and remain dignified.
Image: Flickr, photo sharing website
We have encountered work by artists, innovative advertisement and design
companies that promote a revaluation of experimental media and prove the
economic, and even artistic, advantages. 1
Key Guidelines
1.
2.
3.
Every tenant should respect the landmark with appropriate signage.
Explore non-traditional and creative methods of advertisement.
Exterior illumination and projections are encouraged since they don’t
cover up parts of the building. This is particularly relevant in MSG’s case,
since advertisement functions more in the evening, when events occur.
1 Kumra, Raina, “Hijacking the urban screen: Trends in outdoor advertising and predictions for
the use of video art and urban screens”, First Monday, Special Issue #4: Urban Screens: Discovering
the potential of outdoor screens for urban society, Chicago, February 2006

Ninth Avenue Facade, Madison Square Garden scheme.
Projections for nightime events, sponsors, promotional media and exterior decoration. Projectors
can be hung from structures directly opposite.
Images: Carlos Huber
63

64
4. The civic character of the Eight Avenue façade must be respected.
5. Free standing kiosks may make use of LED video screens but must remain
within scale.
6. The Annex tenant’s signage should not dominate train hall, or be confused
with necessary train signage.
7. Sponsor’s advertisement should be limited to the Annex’s interior.
On Eight Avenue, signage is more discreet. The civic character of the
Train Hall and Post Office must not be emasculated. The free standing
kiosks, consisting of a LED video screen and a base, are set back
from the facade, directing to Ninth Avenue. Image also shows proposed
ADA compliant entrances, created at the base of the building to access
the concourse level. If the space in the moats is required for retail use,
a less invasive suggestion is covering them in glass, maintaining the
distance that enhances the monumntality of the building.
Image: Moynihan Station Final Environmental Impact Statement,
Developer C, Phase I development, modified by Carlos Huber

66
31st Street elevation.
Image: Historic Building Survey, Farley/Penn Station, New York Federal Railroad Administration, Environmental Assessment, Deleuw Cather & Company, et al.
.

Conclusion
With this document, we ask that responsible leadership from the Moynihan
Station Development Corporation and strong pressure from the groups that
believe in the building’s significance assure the public that this historic resource
is respected and maintained. We place a high value on civic spaces
within New York City and because of this, the preservation of the Farley Post
Office lobby and its designation as a New York City Landmark is critical. We
assert that this space should remain in the public trust.
Through the identification of core preservation issues and proposed guidelines
for development, our hope is to ensure the protection of a rich historic
asset, while delivering a new great train station and inspiring public space to
the city of New York.
We also understand that the project must satisfy improvements to transportation
and urban and economic development, but we believe a successful solution
can be born out of preservation values. We ask that changes to the
building take into account valuable historic fabric because it enhances the
possibilities for a new work of great architecture. New tenants are important
for the building to survive but their presence and intervention should honor the
multiple meanings of the building. Additionally, a new private or semi-public
presence should not take over the building through an unfair distribution of
space or an excess of signage.The entrances and surfaces should be clear
and separate.
67