The modern historic preservation movement in the United States is often traced to one galvanizing loss: the demolition of New York City’s original Pennsylvania Station in 1963. Completed in 1910, the original Pennsylvania Station was an architectural marvel and grand transportation hub, featuring soaring columns, huge waiting rooms, and natural light streaming through its glass ceilings. The dismantling of this architectural masterpiece shocked the public and galvanized activists, architects, and policymakers to fight for the protection of historic landmarks. Its destruction inspired legislative action at the city, state, and federal levels, and fundamentally shifted historic preservation from a niche concern to a mainstream political and cultural force.
For over half a century, Pennsylvania Station stood as a majestic gateway to the city and embodied a simple civic ideal: that everyday movement through a city could feel grand. However, by the late 1950s, the station’s owner, the Pennsylvania Railroad, faced financial hardship and sought to capitalize on the valuable Manhattan real estate. In 1963, the Railroad sold the air rights and crews began dismantling the building to make way for a sports arena (Madison Square Garden) and an office complex. New Yorkers watched, dismayed, as the marble and granite came down and a landmark was carted off in pieces. From that wound, preservation as we know it—local, state, and federal—took shape.
No place felt the shock more directly than New York City, and no city did more to ensure it wouldn’t happen again. In 1965, New York City enacted the Landmarks Law and created the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC). The law empowered the LPC to designate individual landmarks and historic districts. Almost immediately, the law began to shape development. The SoHo–Cast Iron Historic District preserved hundreds of 19th-century iron-fronted buildings that, only a few years earlier, were slated to be torn down. Brooklyn Heights, Greenwich Village, and other districts across the city were created, anchoring neighborhood identity and reinvestment.
The most significant legal test came with Grand Central Terminal. After the LPC denied a plan to top Grand Central with a large office tower, the owner sued. In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the city’s right to protect historic landmarks against redevelopment, thus validating landmark regulation as a legitimate exercise of government power that cities nationwide would adopt.
If Penn Station was the spark, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) supplied the national framework. Passed just a year after New York City’s Landmarks Law, the NHPA created the National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and a nationwide network of State Historic Preservation Offices. Crucially, the NHPA required federal agencies to consider the impact of projects on historic sites, a process known as the Section 106 Review.
Later, Congress passed the Tax Reform Act of 1976, which, for the first time, introduced tax incentives for rehabilitating historic buildings, further encouraging preservation. Over the next two decades, Congress further refined federal historic rehabilitation tax incentives, which turned preservation from a regulatory hurdle into a pro-investment opportunity. Across the country, mills, depots, warehouses, schools, and theaters found new life as housing, offices, and cultural venues because the numbers finally worked out.
In 1980, the New York State Historic Preservation Act established the State Register of Historic Places and codified the role of the State Historic Preservation Office. Small cities and rural counties in New York State—far from Midtown Manhattan—could now designate main streets, industrial sites, and farmsteads as historic landmarks, and leverage that status in planning, grants, and tax incentives.
What began as a fight to save monumental buildings has evolved into a broader understanding of what deserves care. Cultural landscapes and traditional neighborhoods, sacred sites and civil-rights landmarks, architectural marvels and charming main streets—all fit under the preservation umbrella. However, the modern preservation movement is not without its critics. Detractors argue that preservation efforts can lead to gentrification, where property values in designated historic districts rise, often displacing original residents. Others point to bureaucratic delays that frustrate developers and homeowners who face restrictions on making improvements to buildings, or how strict preservation laws have been blamed for limiting new housing construction and worsening the affordability crisis.
While there were scattered efforts to save historic buildings before the 1960s, the dismantling of the original Pennsylvania Station served as a powerful wake-up call for a public that had taken its architectural heritage for granted. If the original terminal had survived, it would surely still awe. But its destruction did something remarkable: it created a historical preservation movement that is no longer about nostalgia versus growth, but about channeling growth through the lens of the places people cherish. In that sense, Penn Station’s absence continues to shape the city, the state, and the country—by ensuring the next treasured place has a fighting chance to endu
This material has been prepared for informational purposes only, and is not intended to provide or be relied upon for legal or tax advice. If you have any specific legal or tax questions regarding this content or related issues, please consult with your professional legal or tax advisor.