Why isn't there a high speed Chicago to Washington D.C. line?
bencharif wrote:How much more before even Conservatives say, "Enough!--Please raise my taxes"?
To fund a train "service" so inept that it ran its operations from a metal shack for 30 years?
How about instead, the government sells the rails to the highest bidders so that someone motivated by profit can give us a train service actually worth using?! Also, we should do the same with highways as well, make people pay the true cost of driving on each trip rather than have the cost dispersed to everyone through taxes. This is especially true for businesses, which rely on trucking, and trucks are responsible for about 90% of damage to roads (guess how they pass that cost on...).
I would imagine that more businesses would rely on rail and that would require that they locate closer to the freight depot due to cost of transport from the depot. This means businesses are more densely located within the core (not on connector highways) and workers will follow to live closer.
Federal cutting of mass transit spending began during Nixon and was completed during Reagan.
I loved hearing Jim Talent talking about funding transportation when he means highways and not mass transit.
Both parties really do not push for mass transit on the national level.
Maybe we were too busy spending the 4 trillion on the Cold War plus billions now on Iraq?
I loved hearing Jim Talent talking about funding transportation when he means highways and not mass transit.
Both parties really do not push for mass transit on the national level.
Maybe we were too busy spending the 4 trillion on the Cold War plus billions now on Iraq?
Bastiat wrote:I would imagine that more businesses would rely on rail and that would require that they locate closer to the freight depot due to cost of transport from the depot. This means businesses are more densely located within the core (not on connector highways) and workers will follow to live closer.
This is off topic, but the idea of a freight depot is so outdated. Besides bulk commodities, which are already still on rail lines, everything is intermodal with containers. There are central intermodal yards, but once off the train, the containers and trailers can be trucked anywhere in the Metro area. It will still be more convienent to do this than move your whole business and still have to at least shuttle your container over to the yard at best. Boxcars, while still in use, just isn't the way things are done anymore.
MattnSTL wrote:Bastiat wrote:I would imagine that more businesses would rely on rail and that would require that they locate closer to the freight depot due to cost of transport from the depot. This means businesses are more densely located within the core (not on connector highways) and workers will follow to live closer.
This is off topic, but the idea of a freight depot is so outdated. Besides bulk commodities, which are already still on rail lines, everything is intermodal with containers. There are central intermodal yards, but once off the train, the containers and trailers can be trucked anywhere in the Metro area. It will still be more convienent to do this than move your whole business and still have to at least shuttle your container over to the yard at best. Boxcars, while still in use, just isn't the way things are done anymore.
I don't know much about the transportation industry.I was just making the point that if companies were forced to pay for the use of the roads that these trucks use (and the damage they incur) instead of externalizing it by dividing the costs up between all taxpayers, they might try to cut those transportation costs by locating closer to the railroad yard/freight depot/intermodal yard/whatever-you-want to-call-it.
The cost of relocating the entire firm from the boonies to core might outweigh any savings incurred by cutting transport costs. But that is only for existing firms. New startups would take advantage of the ability to cut transport costs and force the older firms to follow suit or lose business.
I know we're off topic so spank me now....
Quick points:
Amtrak leases the use of tracks from private railroads (Union Pacific/BNSF) So Amtrak (government) cannot 'sell the rails' to private companies. As a 'renter,' Amtrak is subject to the railroads' schedule and Amtrak trains are low on the priority list.
The railroad industry is the only mode of transportation that pays for the construction and maintenance of its own infrastructure (compared to DOT, FAA and the Corps. of Engineers.) The only tracks Amtrak actually owns are in the NE corridor.
Railroads were once required by law to provide passenger service (in exchange for land grants) but that was repealed in the 1960s and they all dropped service. Passenger rail service is not really profitable but incredibly efficient. If the FAA was not propping up the airlines (through infrastructure support/maintenance) I doubt you'd ever see a ticket below $1000.
again, apologies for straying away...
Quick points:
Amtrak leases the use of tracks from private railroads (Union Pacific/BNSF) So Amtrak (government) cannot 'sell the rails' to private companies. As a 'renter,' Amtrak is subject to the railroads' schedule and Amtrak trains are low on the priority list.
The railroad industry is the only mode of transportation that pays for the construction and maintenance of its own infrastructure (compared to DOT, FAA and the Corps. of Engineers.) The only tracks Amtrak actually owns are in the NE corridor.
Railroads were once required by law to provide passenger service (in exchange for land grants) but that was repealed in the 1960s and they all dropped service. Passenger rail service is not really profitable but incredibly efficient. If the FAA was not propping up the airlines (through infrastructure support/maintenance) I doubt you'd ever see a ticket below $1000.
again, apologies for straying away...
- 86
Does anyone have pictures of what the new Amtrack station will look like when completed?
- 10K
Move over, 'Amshack': New train-bus terminal takes shape downtown
By Tim O'Neil
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
10/16/2006
Almost 28 years after the last passenger train pulled out of St. Louis Union Station, a new train-and-bus terminal is finally taking form beneath a busy elevated highway exchange.
It has been a long, long time in coming - progress in concrete after so many shelved plans and stalled intentions.
The new, $26 million, steel-and-glass building will serve Greyhound buses and Amtrak passenger trains from a front door on 15th Street, just south of the Scottrade Center and next to a MetroLink station. Grand opening is expected by fall 2007.
Link
From Post-Dispatch article:
("When completed, the St. Louis Gateway Transportation Center will have 10 bays for Greyhound buses, doubling the company's current capacity in its converted bank building at 1450 North 13th Street. The Amtrak section will have four tracks reached by an overhead enclosed walkway and two sets of stairways, escalators and elevators to the train platforms below.
Ticket windows, a common lobby and a restaurant will be in the middle. The station's contemporary exterior is similar to the spacious glass of the Scottrade Center nearby.
The station's foundation runs 700 feet north and south as its curls around the highway piers. The building will be narrow - no wider than 35 feet in its interior public areas.")
So, I guess it will be a long skinny building. I wish there were visuals to see how this would look.
("When completed, the St. Louis Gateway Transportation Center will have 10 bays for Greyhound buses, doubling the company's current capacity in its converted bank building at 1450 North 13th Street. The Amtrak section will have four tracks reached by an overhead enclosed walkway and two sets of stairways, escalators and elevators to the train platforms below.
Ticket windows, a common lobby and a restaurant will be in the middle. The station's contemporary exterior is similar to the spacious glass of the Scottrade Center nearby.
The station's foundation runs 700 feet north and south as its curls around the highway piers. The building will be narrow - no wider than 35 feet in its interior public areas.")
So, I guess it will be a long skinny building. I wish there were visuals to see how this would look.
- 179
what a terrible design and why does kennedy associates seem to be the architectural firm of choice for city project? There are other, more qualified, firms that can do a better job than what is shown on kai's website.
I'm afraid this building will be outdated before it's even built. It still looks like an amshack.
RH
- 46
It's probably too late to say this...but what would that $26 million have gotten us if it was spent on revamping Union Station's facilities so the western part of it could have been used for trains and buses? It seems to me that this would have been a real opportunity to pump new dollars into a faded urban mall concept (good as it was) and bring new life to it.
There are still three or four tracks on the west side of Union Station. Some retrofitting would have to be done, in the form of new signaling, track and platform work, etc, but so what? We could have a full-fledged direct transfer to Metrolink trains via escalators. There is room in the tunnel (it's 100' wide) below for a long platform and an intermodal transfer.
If train service increases, more tracks could easily be added, since a lot of what is there now is either parking or a fountain and a pond. Most of the retail is on the east and north side of the former train shed. Maybe a way could be found to tie the original grand waiting room to the trains and have it used for its original purpose.
Oh well....as I said...too late. One way to look at this is to consider the new station a temporary solution. If train travel booms and we add more service, the station will be inadequate. THEN we can talk about either an expanded station on today's site or a move back to Union Station. The traditionalist in me favors the latter.
One question: I'm not really up on all this, so can anyone tell me what the decision process was for this? Who made these plans? Was Union Station brought up? If it was, what happened?
There are still three or four tracks on the west side of Union Station. Some retrofitting would have to be done, in the form of new signaling, track and platform work, etc, but so what? We could have a full-fledged direct transfer to Metrolink trains via escalators. There is room in the tunnel (it's 100' wide) below for a long platform and an intermodal transfer.
If train service increases, more tracks could easily be added, since a lot of what is there now is either parking or a fountain and a pond. Most of the retail is on the east and north side of the former train shed. Maybe a way could be found to tie the original grand waiting room to the trains and have it used for its original purpose.
Oh well....as I said...too late. One way to look at this is to consider the new station a temporary solution. If train travel booms and we add more service, the station will be inadequate. THEN we can talk about either an expanded station on today's site or a move back to Union Station. The traditionalist in me favors the latter.
One question: I'm not really up on all this, so can anyone tell me what the decision process was for this? Who made these plans? Was Union Station brought up? If it was, what happened?
Nice article on the new Station/hub.
This is an exciting new complex for St. Louis, residents, tourists, and businesses. Will be wonderful to see!
This is an exciting new complex for St. Louis, residents, tourists, and businesses. Will be wonderful to see!
- 156
Kind of looks like a boat instead of a train. I'm disappointed that it cannot be seen from the highway.
- 11K
^? Isn't that the highway in the background of the rendering? Seems to me that this will be easily seen from the highway. I'm starting to like the modern design on this and some of the CORTEX buildings. I was in Columbus OH this past weekend and their downtown had some nice modern buildings.
On a lighter note - I think it's great that the multi-modal things has been designed as a barge - the first tenet of Chouteau's Pond!!!
On a lighter note - I think it's great that the multi-modal things has been designed as a barge - the first tenet of Chouteau's Pond!!!
- 3,428
Well, this was clearly an awkward site. The resulting building is also awkward, although the glass end facing Scottrade may turn out well. I don't think anyone except people using the new facility or the MetroLink/MetroBus transfer station next door will even know this building is even there. It's kind of down in a hole.
I knew I wasn't looking at that rendering right... the ones before the one Citylover posted. They were only renderings of the Bus Terminal, not including the main building or the Amtrak area.
- 11K
Thanks Citylover - looks good to me - it's great that they were able to use this space.
- 1,026
you know - uo laugh about the lake - but that buiding would look cool jutting out into the water
- 1,610
If you notice the notches or holes in the middle terminal -- the concession/lobby area shared by the intercity bus (north end) and passenger train (south end) wings -- you'll notice that the terminal is actually being built around the present-day piers for the US 40/I-64 14th/Clark on-ramp.
The intercity bus (Greyhound et al) wing will be just up from the present-day walkway from the west side of the Civic Center MetroLink station. However, the wing building will shield MetroLink from the buses pulling in from the west. Intercity buses will reach the new multi-modal center via a newly built Spruce Street (although more in line with virtually extinct Poplar Street) from South 18th Street at Union Station heading east to the terminal. As such, intercity buses to/from the south/southwest can take Truman Parkway to/from I-44/55, accessing 18th from the south. Buses to/from the north and east can exit Market Street at 20th from US 40/I-64, and buses to/from the west can exit 22nd to Chestnut, accessing 18th from Chestnut (to/from west) or Market (to/from north/east).
The train (Amtrak) wing will be at the south edge of US 40/I-64. The shared terminal will be under the highway and its ramps. Trains will reach the station via the tracks along Mill Creek Valley as they do today. Trains from Kansas City, Texas, and maybe someday Springfield, MO will arrive from the west, while more frequent trains to Chicago will arrive from the east.
The intercity bus (Greyhound et al) wing will be just up from the present-day walkway from the west side of the Civic Center MetroLink station. However, the wing building will shield MetroLink from the buses pulling in from the west. Intercity buses will reach the new multi-modal center via a newly built Spruce Street (although more in line with virtually extinct Poplar Street) from South 18th Street at Union Station heading east to the terminal. As such, intercity buses to/from the south/southwest can take Truman Parkway to/from I-44/55, accessing 18th from the south. Buses to/from the north and east can exit Market Street at 20th from US 40/I-64, and buses to/from the west can exit 22nd to Chestnut, accessing 18th from Chestnut (to/from west) or Market (to/from north/east).
The train (Amtrak) wing will be at the south edge of US 40/I-64. The shared terminal will be under the highway and its ramps. Trains will reach the station via the tracks along Mill Creek Valley as they do today. Trains from Kansas City, Texas, and maybe someday Springfield, MO will arrive from the west, while more frequent trains to Chicago will arrive from the east.