goat314 wrote: ↑Oct 31, 2022
STLEnginerd wrote: ↑Oct 31, 2022
Firstly. This this is beautiful. I think it would actually win awards.
Secondly. For the sake of discussion I think we should agree to set aside the question of whether/when St. Louis would logically be in the market for a new transit station.
Thirdly. If we were to build a new transit station with no major changes to the services provided I can't imagine a better conceptual rendering.
BUT. I continue to question whether a future multimodal facility should double down on this location.
A reconstruction on the same footprint would be highly disruptive. Easier to build at some other site then shift to that facility when the new one is ready. Also the current space is very tight and constraining, with limited options for expansion. I think a hard look at whether there should be a new location for the facility would be in order.
I also think the near eastside specifically 1/2 way between the East Riverfront stop and 5th& Missouri in East St. Louis has strong potential as part of a larger redevelopment of the eastside. I also think putting a strong institutional anchor like the Amtrak & Greyhound facility is a strong acknowledgement of the importance of a healthy East side to the health of the region.
I really wish trains could still use Union Station. I know somebody mentioned before it was mostly a logistical issue why they stopped using it, but honestly I think the Metro and Amtrak hub should have always been at Union Station. Just another example of St. Louis taking the "cheap" route out in my opinion. Cutting corners on major public investments has always bit St. Louis in the behind.
Amtrak resists using end stub station, but they do it occasionally at major terminals like DC and Chicago. The problem they have, I believe, is that turning trains around takes time, though the historic setup at Union Station made that pretty much a snap. Trains originating at a station require all of that anyway, so the biggest impact is the extra time required on through trains, but the only train that presently passes through town, I believe, is the Texas Eagle. If given proper incentive maybe they could be induced to move back in, but you'd need to rebuild some of the track infrastructure and some of the ancillary facilities and it would be difficult to truly segregate their uses from other uses unless they took back the whole thing, which they couldn't remotely support. (It handled something like a hundred thousand people a day at one time.) The tracks there right now are a bit short, and don't give useful access to their route west via the MoP. And you'd need at least some baggage handling and realistically fuel, water, and maybe septic service. (Otherwise you have to move the train to service it. To be fair, that may not be a huge deal for O&D.) And some crew spaces, probably. The current stuff wouldn't be a terribly long walk, and railroaders are mostly accustomed to some walking, but it'd be nice to get it back into the building. It would, I think, be possible, but it would require investment and it's not one Amtrak would do voluntarily.
In some future where we have Interstate Highway grade investment in high speed rail, and thus a coast to coast network with many nodes, I think it would be possible to get passenger operations back into the station. In fact, I think it would be almost inevitable, as it's the only site in the central city with the space and access that could be acquired without massive disruptions and demolitions. It wouldn't even necessarily require moving the aquarium and entertainment, as their footprint isn't that large. It would mean the demolition of much of the hotel under the train shed and the loss of the parking lot, but either could be rebuilt on an adjacent site with little difficulty. And of course LHM would either have to be on board with it, or you'd have to buy them out. I could easily see an airport style arrangement running a busy passenger terminal, so the buyout seems the best option. (And LHM could perhaps continue to operate whatever hotel and entertainment remains.)
None of this is terribly realistic as things stand right now. But I do think that we, as a nation, require a serious reexamination of our transportation needs. Even the current freight railroad system is increasingly dismal. (Sure, the trains are long, but the schedules, such as they are, are terrible and getting worse as I understand it.) We really need robust options, but we won't get that so long as the lion's share of public funding goes to asphalt and concrete. That said, we built the interstate highway system with public money. We built the railroads in the first place with publicly guaranteed loans. We built the inland waterways with public money. And the airports. No reason we can't do it again apart from the friction currently coming from one side of the aisle to public investment.
