Station Developments

Station Aficionado wrote:And work continues at Springfield: Union Station

All I can say is Wow... Great article and video. I'm glad to see the work inside the station is actually happening. I have been waiting for this to materialize since about 1975. I hope they can save the old terrazzo floor. It does not appear that they are saving very much i.e. wood work around the arched doorways, column capitals and bases, panel doors, etc. But at last, at long, long last the real work is under way.

Raleigh is looking at either additional costs or scaled back features for the new Union Station:

The city of Raleigh may spend an additional $16 million on the first phase of Union Station, bringing the cost of the Amtrak station and transit hub to $84 million.

Increasing property values and unanticipated utility costs have driven up the price of the station, which was scheduled to begin construction this March on the west side of downtown Raleigh.

If the Raleigh City Council decides not to allocate extra money, the city could be forced to eliminate elements now in the project's master plan. The changes could include postponing plans for a public plaza, cutting most of the space planned for private leasing, and stopping efforts to pursue a "green" building certification, according to city staff.

I would be interested in any updated information on the proposed plans to construct a secure customs and immigration facility at track 22 ( a track currently used by AMT commuter trains) within Montreal Central Station, for use in processing Amtrak Adirondack passengers. The latest information I have seen on this is a briefing titled "Cross Border Rail Passenger Service Progress Report" from the Transportation Border Working Group, dated April 23, 2013.

News from Elyria, OH:

Lorain County commissioners are moving forward with engineering on a proposed $9 million passenger platform at the county’s Transportation Center in downtown Elyria.

The project, which has the backing of Elyria Mayor Holly Brinda, would see the construction of an enclosed bridge spanning the two tracks running by the refurbished train depot. It would include three elevators and three staircases to provide access to two partially enclosed platforms for passengers boarding the night trains running through the city.

************
County Administrator Jim Cordes said the county has cobbled together federal money, toll credits from the state of Ohio as well a $2.9 million pledge of support from Amtrak to cover all but about $500,000 of the project.

*************
So far, the commissioners have only approved negotiating a contract with Richard L. Bowen & Associates, the architecture firm that did the preliminary drawings and cost estimates on the project. Cordes said that deal has yet to be finalized.

Bowen actually provided a second, cheaper proposal that would see passengers access the platforms using old tunnels running underneath the tracks. The county now uses those tunnels for storage, but Cordes said Norfolk Southern has always opposed that plan.

He also said that using the cheaper option, which would cost around $8.6 million, would only reduce the amount of local match by about $50,000, so it wouldn’t present a significant cost savings for the county. He also said there are security concerns because it would mean the Transportation Center would have to be open in the middle of the night to allow access to passengers.
******************

The Transportation Center referred to in the story is the rehabbed ex-NYC station.

Chicago Tribute reports Chicago Union Station to get $12m for better HVAC and concourse capacity, as well as safety and facade work:

Something is going on at Waterloo, IN, but it's a little hard to figure out what (are they picking up the depot and moving it?):

Note that the story is illustrated not with a photograph of the Waterloo station (or of the LSL or CL), but with a generic shot of an "Amtrack" train somewhere on the NEC.

EDIT: I have removed the original link and quote, as WANE has put up a revised story (illustrated by a photo of the exNYC depot in Waterloo). The story now explains:

Starting next year, people who board an Amtrak train at the Waterloo station will have more than a “bus stop” shelter to wait in before boarding. It’s part of a ten-year community effort to replace the existing shelter and return the historic Waterloo Depot to passenger use.

In 2010, Waterloo received a $1,820,100 grant from the US Department of Transportation. Changes to the project nearly caused the town to lose funding. However, the project is moving forward and expected to be complete early next year.

The money will be used to replace the existing bus stop shelter and renovate the Waterloo Depot. There will also be a new long-term parking lot added.

The project will physically move the historic depot to the southeast corner to Center Street and Van Vleek Street, closer to the existing Amtrak boarding area. These changes should improve the waiting and parking area so passengers have a better experience and residents enjoy the benefits of a more attractive parking lot. Currently, the Amtrak stop at Waterloo consists of a set of enclosed metal and plexiglass shelters beside the boarding platform.

****************

The story ends with a plug from a group pushing for the restoration of service in Ft. Wayne. I'm guessing that group provided much of the corrected story to WANE (possibly the photo, too) and were then able to put in their plug for Ft. Wayne (which is otherwise a non-sequitur from the rest of the story.

As Ann Arbor contemplates a replacement for the current (1983) Amshack, a blast from the past has appeared on their radar scope:

Could the castle-like building that houses the Gandy Dancer restaurant in Ann Arbor return to its former glory as a rail depot?
That's an idea the city and its consultants are now exploring at the request of the federal government.
Eli Cooper, the city's transportation program manager, said the Federal Railroad Administration has asked the city's project team to give further consideration to the historic Michigan Central Railroad Depot as a future train station option.
******************
The Romanesque-style depot, built in 1886 and opened in 1887, was converted into the upscale seafood restaurant known as the Gandy Dancer around 1970.
The city has been exploring options for building a new train station for several years, citing concerns about the ability of the existing Amtrak station on Depot Street, immediately to the west of the Gandy Dancer, to handle growing passenger volumes. A new Amtrak station would replace the Amtrak station that was built in 1983.
The city moved forward on a study of potential sites for a new station in 2014, narrowing the list to two: the existing Amtrak site, and a piece of Fuller Park in front of the University of Michigan Hospital along Fuller Road.
*******************
But as the city and its consultants continue evaluating the existing Amtrak site and the Fuller Road site, the FRA is now requesting additional details in the evaluation of the potential use of the historic Michigan Central Railroad Depot building.
**************

I don't know what the restaurant did to the inside, but exterior-wise, it would be a huge asesthetic step forward from the current facility.

I'm amazed. Quite audacious on the part of the FRA really.

If I were the city I think I would maintain that it would be easier to build a new facility from scratch than it would be to adapt the historic station as needed. I would also look at the site limitations for multi-modal options and the economic loss to the City by having the old station come off the tax rolls (assuming it is privately owned right now).

I think there's a pretty solid case to be made for building a new station at the current site (assuming it has enough space for multi-modal transfers, which I could not ascertain).

Having been in Ann Arbor two weekends ago, and having "a room with a view" (even though I drove), the Michigan Central "fortress" is intact. The restaurant has added "terrace seating" on what was the platform affording diners (if any of 'em care) a "table with a view" (photo montage).

Speaking of returning "MC fortresses" to their rightful use, how about Battle Creek?

Looks like it will now be 2016 before Amtrak moves to the new intermodal station in Miami:

The arrival time for the next phase of mass transit in Miami-Dade County has been delayed.

Miami Central Station, part of a $2 billion transit center east of Miami International Airport, will now open in two phases: the Tri-Rail station this spring and the Amtrak station in summer 2016, said Ric Katz, a spokesman for the Miami Intermodal Center, known as MIC.
*****************
Several factors played a role in the delay of the Miami Central Station opening, including unfinished work and a dispute between public agencies.
*********************

While the story discusses various reasons that have delayed completion of the station, it's not clear to me why it will be another year before Amtrak moves in, while Tri-Rail is moving this spring. As I read this story and others, the platforms have been lengthened and the situation with streets that would be blocked by Amtrak trains is being dealt with. So why another year? Some have suggested that Amtrak really doesn't want to move from Hialeah, because their yard for servicing the equipment is right at the station. Anyone with knowledge of the facts on the ground care to comment?

gokeefe wrote:I would also look at the site limitations for multi-modal options and the economic loss to the City by having the old station come off the tax rolls (assuming it is privately owned right now).

I think there's a pretty solid case to be made for building a new station at the current site (assuming it has enough space for multi-modal transfers, which I could not ascertain).

Just looking at the satellite view on Bing, there might be room for a bus terminal where the current Amtrak station and lot are, with station being housed in the old MC Depot. Also, it looks like there's plenty of room for more parking across the tracks (which could be accessed by a pedestrian bridge like the one they have in Dearborn). I'm not an engineer, so I don't know if it's technically possible. I'm just eyeballing the satellite photos. Of course, I'm biased toward reusing heritage stations.

A quote taken from the Miami Herald article immediately linked by Mr. Aficionado:

Several factors played a role in the delay of the Miami Central Station opening, including unfinished work and a dispute between public agencies

Elsewhere, I learned that this dispute regards liability between Tri Rail's and the Center's public agencies, or otherwise, a Tri Rail passenger, not necessarily transferring to a flight, gets hurt somewhere within the facility. It sure appears to be a case of "government suing government", but then as anyone around here who has spent any time in the labyrinth known as "Disneyland on the Potomac" will simply say "what else is new?".

This is simply one more reason that I believe Amtrak, if the decision ultimately is theirs to make, will just as soon stay put.

Since later this month, I expect to make a transfer there between United Airlines, the Airport, the People Mover, Metro Rail, and v.v. (also Metrorail to Metro mover at Gov Ctr, but that's all the same agency), I have to be astounded over this apparent "much ado about nothing". Lest we forget, even if this land is underserved with "plane to the train" transfers, there are enough of such to set legal precedent.

Hath our barristers around here such as Mr. Dunville, a comment to make?

Miami Central Station is a poor choice of names for this facility at the airport. Like the airport, it's not at all central. It would be better to be known by one of its alternate names: Miami Intermodal Center [MIC] or Miami Airport. I say "poor choice of names" because whether you believe it's going to happen or not, All Aboard Florida calls its Miami station "Miami Central", and central it will be: right downtown, and the last I saw a few months ago, the land has already been cleared for it.

Looks like Oklahoma City is moving forward with renovating the exATSF station used by the Heartland Flyer:

A railroading term with a history to fit the mission figures in the renovation — and future — of downtown Oklahoma City’s Santa Fe Station.
The elevated railroad tracks in downtown Oklahoma City were built adjacent to the original 1904 Santa Fe railroad station.

Plans include laying track for a bypass — a “shoefly” or “shoofly,” depending on your source — so trains can move while construction workers tunnel beneath the elevated tracks to create a walkway between downtown and Bricktown.

The tunnel is “a huge part” of the $28.4 million transformation of the historic Art Deco depot into a transportation hub for options as varied as bicycles, streetcars and commuter trains, Eric Wenger, Oklahoma City’s public works director, told the city council Tuesday.

Architects’ designs should be complete by April and construction could begin this summer, Wenger said. Plans are to open the renovated station, with its tunnel leading from inside to a terrace above the Bricktown Canal, in two years.
*********************
Wenger said the renovated station would include Amtrak office space and a waiting area for passengers riding the Heartland Flyer.
**********************
In response to questions from Ward 2 Councilman Ed Shadid and Ward 8 Councilman Pat Ryan, Wenger said city officials also would be in contact with Greyhound about restoring intercity bus service downtown with a stop at the station.
**********************

Progress, or lack thereof, in Ft. Madison, IA:

A firm has been hired to redesign the platform for the Santa Fe Depot that will ideally lead to relocating the Amtrak station to Riverview Park.
The Fort Madison City Council approved paying almost $30,000 to Klingner & Associates P.C. for the design.

The multi-million dollar depot project began in 2007 with renovations, but has slowed in recent years because of negotiations between BNSF Railway and the city. For example, this will be the second design for the platform. In 2011, Amtrak wanted the 500-foot platform expanded to 1,000 feet. Earlier this year, after reviewing the plans, BNSF objected to the original 1,000-foot platform.

“We had the train stopping in a curve, and they said that can’t happen,”City Manager David Varley told the council.
Instead, BNSF informed the Iowa Department of Transportation that the platform must be moved east about 250 feet so that will not be partially located on a curve.

************************************