doulasc From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 635 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4519 times:
Is the TWA terminal 5 at JFK open for anything. There were several rumors of what it would be used for. At first I heard
JetBlue wanted to use it for ground transportation like taxi's and limos. The I heard it might be a museum of some kind?
Any latest updates?
richierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4366 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4404 times:
It is currently closed and sadly off-limits to all but a few people, although it has been open briefly to the public a few times since it closed in 2001.
I believe the problem is that nobody knows what to do with the building. There are no good solutions. I've heard everything from a museum to a restaurant to a nightclub (!). Personally I lean toward a permanent JFK-airport museum, which would keep with the theme of the building being from the "golden age" of air travel, etc., but I know that is not a revenue-generating proposition and isn't exactly a great location for such an exhibit. Most people who go to the airport do so to catch a flight or pick somebody up... only a few people (mainly most of us a.netters) would be interested in an airline-related museum. Additionally, I believe much of the original Port Authority's photographs surrounding IDL's building and first few years were stored in the twin towers and sadly lost in 2001. Most photography and paraphernalia would have to come from private sources and collections.
There was talk of putting a hotel between the Saarinen building and Jetblue's T5. I don't know if anything further is coming of this but I really don't see how there is room for anything resembling a hotel. I hope this is not a final solution as a building of this type would totally ruin what is left of the dignity surrounding the Saarinen building and its "tubes". What was the point of keeping all of it if all the PA wants to do is build all around it and hem it in?
Terminal 3 should be a historic landmark, too, and I think it is a huge mistake to tear it down.
It is inadequate now, but if all the ugly, crowded additions to the original (elliptical) building were torn down, the PanAm Terminal itself would be perfect for transcontinental flights (JFK-LAX, -SFO, -SAN, and -SEA). DL is missing a bet that would create a unique flying experience and would set it apart from the others.
You don't - or shouldn't - demolish historic buildings just to make "more space". This nation has saved far too little of its important landmarks, and, unfortunately, the airline industry has been just as guilty of this as anyone else.
It is only after we demolish out heritage that we start to regret what we have lost.
PITingres From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1196 posts, RR: 13
Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3614 times:
Quoting bohica (Reply 5): Terminal 5 can't be torn down. It is a historic landmark and is protected from the wrecking ball.
That is too bad. It was mildly interesting, I suppose, when new; it was ugly, dirty, and depressing the first time I went through it, which I think might have been in the 1970's; and ugly, filthy, and depressing each time I encountered it afterwards. If someone thinks that it was interesting once, take a few pictures, and then knock the bloody thing down.
tymnbalewne From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 970 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3500 times:
At the Open House NY opening of the TWA Flight Center the PONYNJA (Port Authority) said they were close to signing a deal for a hotel to be built between the B6 and TW terminals on either side of the iconic tubes, (so as not to block the view from the waiting area of the TW terminal.
Here are a few pics I took during the terminal's one day opening.
Opened in 1962, the TWA Flight Center still has a futuristic feel.
The archictecurally intriguing TWA Flight Center - JFK