BY EUGENE SINIGALLIANO | I write this piece to express my views to the Federal Rail Administration (FRA) which announced on April 17 that it will now be taking a more “hands on” approach to the Penn Station project and has appointed Amtrak to lead the project and relegated the MTA and NJ Transit (all three herein referred to as the “Railroads”) to support roles. For over 45 years, I’ve lived with my family in a building on Block 780–West 30th Street between 7th and 8th Avenues. This piece supplements a statement I submitted to the FRA earlier this year (see below Appendix), which asked for their intervention at Penn Station.

I lead a neighborhood block association and have sat on the Penn Station Community Advisory Committee Working Group (CACWG) and now the oddly named Penn Station Working Advisory Group (SWAG). New York State Assemblymember Tony Simone, thankfully, made them put me on SWAG, as I was originally omitted.

My block association is a co-founder of the Empire Station Coalition–a 15-member assembly of think tanks, neighborhood associations, preservation groups, and block associations that Sam Turvey coordinates. There are many agendas at Penn Station playing out with developers, large property owners, the Empire State Development Corporation (ESD), the Railroads, proponents of plans for Penn Station, and large civic organizations. Sometimes it is difficult to determine who’s on first. Some of these groups flip-flop or worse, and so I have plenty of concerns always about the fate of my block.

I start from the premise—and there are other issues in all this—that the best way to make sure there is affordable housing in the neighborhood is not to tear it down in the first place. I believe there are no sound reasons to tear down my block, as the Railroads propose, or even flirt with tearing down my block as a number of station and through-running proponents have done (e.g. the Grand Penn Community Alliance [GPCA] and the Tri-State Transportation Campaign). It is premature and just plain wrong to discuss demolishing my neighborhood for “terminal” track expansion or transit-oriented development reasons until a bona fide, truly independent review to properly evaluate through-running in Penn Station’s footprint is commissioned and completed. After and only after such a review is completed can we deliberate from a complete and unbiased set of facts regarding transit needs and so-called transit-oriented development. Groups like the GPCA and Tri-State Transportation Campaign should follow Governor Hochul’s lead and withdraw aspects of their plans that in any way suggests the need to demolish my neighborhood.

The Railroads’ attempt to foist terminal track expansion on the neighborhood to the south of Penn Station is deeply flawed, especially given that it is expressly disfavored in FRA guidelines. To date, the Railroads have not even used the simulation modeling software known as Rail Traffic Controller, that they and their consultants all have access to. The FRA has to know that  this needs to be done before any further planning at Penn Station happens or taxpayer money is wasted.

Beyond the Railroads themselves (who I cover in my Appendix below), the FRA should know my take on many of the current players at Penn Station, which is as follows:

1.) Vornado Realty Trust obviously only cares about their shareholders and has shown little regard for the neighborhood beyond their own desires for a Vornado-branded campus. To us, that may be o.k. for a suburban office park but has no place in discussions about a vibrant and historic neighborhood in Manhattan. Property owner Arnold Gumowitz is a businessman but has funded efforts to protect his buildings and the neighborhood from eminent domain and paid the lion’s share of the litigation fees. Gumowitz has been a net positive–but the issues presented are broader than his efforts.

2.) Our local electeds, particularly Assemblymember Simone, have been consistently opposed to demolishing Block 780. Sen. Leroy Comrie from Queens has been great at pushing through-running, which should eliminate the need to demolish Block 780. Other elected officials, including our City Council Member, Erik Bottcher, have also opposed demolishing Block 780. The Governor re-upped on Cuomo’s plan originally but now looks to protect Block 780–but she has left the Penn Station General Project Plan alive, so who knows how this will play out. As elected officials, these folks have to manage competing interests. Some have steadfastly been on our side, others less so. Manhattan  Community Boards 4 and 5 have done yeoman’s work on behalf of protecting my block and the neighborhood. 

3.) Architect Alexandros Washburn and the GPCA have for years been sympathetic to through-running and developing to the North and leaving Block 780 alone. I am beyond disappointed to see their recent renderings, which show the neighborhood and residential buildings to the south of Penn Station demolished. I don’t know what is motivating that. To the contrary: ASTM (a competitor Penn Station plan), has never looked to demolish the neighborhood and has been very open to and supportive of through-running. They had me and a group of ESC members in for a briefing and I found ASTM rep Peter Cipriano to be a straight shooter then and since.

4.)  Two groups have been consistently in our corner and consistent with their positions: ReThinkNYC under Sam Turvey and The New York Landmarks Conservancy under Peg Breen. Sam also coordinates the Empire Station Coalition, and the litigation effort through the Penn Community Defense Fund. These groups have also been unyielding in their support for us. Sam Turvey  is unpaid and tireless. He has never even flirted with compromise and has made clear that Block 780 is a redline. Peg Breen has been to similar effect due to the presence of numerous landmark-eligible buildings in the neighborhood and her overall civic sensibilities. These two efforts stand in stark contrast to the Regional Plan Association (RPA) and Municipal Art Society (MAS), whose”civic” positions are all over the map and show little, if any, genuine regard for the neighborhood. I do not say this lightly–I have attended meetings with them for years. I questioned them at a forum they held last August, as to whether any civic groups other than the RPA and MAS in New York were advocating for the displacement of my neighborhood. Their answers were non-existent or garbled–but their written record on these matters is clear: We don’t matter. Since I asked that question, another civic organization, the National Civic Art Society, via its sponsorship of GPCA, is now also flirting with the displacement of my neighborhood as part of their path forward and the GPCA now shows a Hudson Yards East in its renderings.

5.) As to the Federal, State, and City Governments, I am going to give the new FRA effort a chance. My modest interactions with them have been constructive and their own guidelines favor through-running. I was able to submit the  statement that is in the appendix to their offices and have found them to be responsive. I am optimistic that the FRA understands how important it is to fully explore whether through-running via  an adaptive reuse at Penn Station is the “faster, better and cheaper” alternative that would leave my neighborhood intact. New York’s Empire State Development Corporation (ESD) is out of touch and has a vision of commercial supertalls from “river to river” which will destroy New York City as it has been known for hundreds of years and convert us to Shanghai or Dubai. It is unfortunate that the ESD route, which sidesteps ULURP (Uniform Land Use Review Process), was chosen and it is part of why this whole project is on life support. New Jersey needs to embrace through-running as opposed to the stub end terminal which would eliminate my block. The benefits to their economy and cities like Paterson, Newark, and New Brunswick, among others, needs to become part of their calculus. The New York City government has largely stood idly by as the ESD designated them for the sidelines. This does not excuse their silence on many City issues of relevance being determined at Penn Station.

I am going to keep fighting to find people in the federal, state, and even city governments to make the through-running solution a reality. Both political parties claim “faster, better, cheaper” is the mantra and I say let’s go.

My “at risk” neighborhood, residents, businesses, their employees, our church, and the friars who live on block 780 and portions of the other “at risk” blocks are very worried and live in constant fear and stress that we will lose everything for a fatally flawed, outdated, wasteful, inefficient stub-end terminal expansion station built for NJ Transit. None of this expense or destruction needs to happen when there is a transit operating model in use in most of our competitor cities, internationally and increasingly domestically, called “through-running.” Implementing through-running would obviate the need to demolish our community and provide a cost-effective, superior, and transformative operating model to the region. We believe a bona fide independent review supervised by the FRA will bear this out and we can get on to creating a worthy transit plan below street level and worthy Penn Station above ground that unlocks a once-in-a-century opportunity and move away from the plainly destructive plans the Railroads have been pursuing for my neighborhood.

Appendix

February 29, 2025 Statement by Eugene Sinigalliano 

Submitted to FRA

My name is Eugene Sinigalliano. I represent my at-risk-of-destruction community to the south of Penn Station.I am not a transit expert, but I am the only “at-risk” individual who was allowed to be a member of Empire State Development Corporation’s Penn Station Community Advisory Committee Working Group and a member of the Railroads’ recently formed New York Penn Station Working. Advisory Group. After attending all these meetings and spending a lot of time studying the data presented, a few things became very clear even to a lay person:

—The Railroads’ Penn Station reconstruction and expansion plans are wasteful and ineffectual.

—The Railroads’ data has been rife with inconsistencies and their answers change when confronted on those inconsistencies or inaccurate answers to questions.

—Their capacity numbers keep changing.

—Their studies done by WSP/FX Collaborative, the firm granted the contract to design Penn Reconstruction, are incomplete, suspect, and self-serving.

My community is extremely upset that we may lose our homes, employees will lose their jobs, and historic buildings–including the beautiful St. John the Baptist Catholic Church–will be destroyed because of the Railroads’ misguided, outdated, and mismanaged plans as well as mercenary studies by conflicted consulting firms. None of this unwarranted expense or destruction needs to happen when there is a transit operating model in use in most of our competitor cities, internationally and increasingly domestically, called “through-running.”

Implementing through-running would obviate the need to demolish our community and provide a cost effective, superior, and transformative operating model to the region. Through-running is an obvious win-win. The Railroads’ plan to build an outrageously expensive and outdated, stub end, southern expansion station is a lose-lose.

We are outraged that the railroads refuse to properly evaluate through running in Penn Station especially when it is favored in FRA guidelines. They have not even used simulation modelling software, RTC, that they and their consultants all have access to. This is as unprofessional as it is just plain wrong. As a result, we respectfully request that a bona fide independent study should be done and this will expose the folly of their ways. Finally, my community knows of another multibillion-dollar project in New York, the Port Authority Bus Terminal. Here, independent reviewers were brought in from the outset and worked with the community and not against it. They not only have foregone demolishing any of the neighborhood but are actually adding needed parkland. We are hopeful–and even confident–that if the FRA insists or sponsors a bona fide independent review of through-running options at today’s Penn Station, similar results will occur.

NOTE: The views expressed by our Guest Opinion writers are not necessarily those of Chelsea Community News.

—END—

ChelseaCommunityNews.com (CCNews) is an independent, single-owner online newspaper providing news, arts, events, and opinion content to Manhattan’s Chelsea community and its adjacent areas (Flatiron/NoMad and Meatpacking Districts, Hudson Yards, Hell’s Kitchen, Broadway/Times Square, and the Penn Station area).  Our editorial content is made possible by advertising revenue, grants, quarterly pledges of support, and voluntary reader donations (click here for our GoFundMe campaign). To join our subscriber list, click here to receive ENewsletters containing links to recently published content–as well as an occasional “Sponsored Content” email featuring an advertiser’s exclusive message. 

ChelseaCommunityNews.com is a member of the New York Press Association (NYPA) and the Empire State Local News Coalition. Our content is collected for placement in the United States Library of Congress’ LGBTQ+ Studies Web Archive. (“We consider your website to be an important part of  the historical record,” read a July 26, 2019 email.) Our freelance reporters have been recognized by NYPA’s annual Better Newspaper Contest, with Honorable Mention wins for Best News or Feature Series  (2021, 2023). CCNews is a three-time winner in the Coverage of the Arts category (First Place and Honorable Mention, 2022 and Third Place, 2023).

PLEASE SUPPORT LOCAL JOURNALISM: HELP CHELSEA COMMUNITY NEWS THRIVE BY FREQUENTLY  VISITING THIS WEBSITE TO READ OUR ARTICLES AND CLICK ON THE ADVERTISEMENTS.

Questions? Comments? Want to Place an Advertisement or Make a Donation? Email Founder/Editor Scott Stiffler at scott@chelseacommunitynews.com