Final approval of the EIS for LAUS aproved. Appears that first step will be the new connections to the south end with new bridging over the freeway. That will change LAUS from a stub end station to a through station. For METRA and Coast line thru Amtrak trains that will cut at least 5 minutes and probably 10 minutes on thru scheduling as no back up or changing controlling ends of trains will be necessary.
https://la.streetsblog.org/2019/06/27/metro-board-approves-link-us-union-station-cut-through-tracks/
Looks great, they need to proceed to construction. Though I think if I were the designer I would go with a dual level platform for more capacity. Just seems to me that less than 10 tracks might not be enough for just one rail station in LA.
CMStPnP Just seems to me that less than 10 tracks might not be enough for just one rail station in LA.
Who would have thought the time would come to say that?
(Now if we can just get the Judge to bring back the Red Cars! Seems like he was here in this puddle of butyl cellosolve just a few moments ago...)
Overmod (Now if we can just get the Judge to bring back the Red Cars! Seems like he was here in this puddle of butyl cellosolve just a few moments ago...)
Ain't you a stinker!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKjUtTC3e0Y
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Maybe CUS should consider dual level and multiple through tracks to allow for expansion.
CMStPnP Looks great, they need to proceed to construction. Though I think if I were the designer I would go with a dual level platform for more capacity. Just seems to me that less than 10 tracks might not be enough for just one rail station in LA.
charlie hebdo Maybe CUS should consider dual level and multiple through tracks to allow for expansion.
CSSHEGEWISCH charlie hebdo Maybe CUS should consider dual level and multiple through tracks to allow for expansion. And just where would you put them? Dual level is out of the question since the additional tracks would be lower than the level of the South Branch or at or above street level. The only place for additional through tracks would be through the concourse or the main waiting room.
The through tracks would be on the current level. The upper level would be slightly higher than tracks at LaSalle or OTC. Yes, it would be a major project but it was done in the early 20th century, it can be done again. If nothing is done, how to achieve more capacity for Metra and Midwest Corridors?
Consider that the existing CUS approaches have major structures above the tracks from Polk St on the south to Lake St on the north.
Bet they pick the $50M option :)
CSSHEGEWISCH Consider that the existing CUS approaches have major structures above the tracks from Polk St on the south to Lake St on the north.
What's your option for expanding capacity?
Two questions:
1. Anyone know when construction will begin on this whole thing? The article gives no start date.
I remember reading about this project around 2009/2010 and wondered if it would even happen.
2. Where would money come from to complete the second phase???
One way to expand capacity after it becomes a through station is to run most trains through. That is what allows four-track Market Street East to replace Reading Terminal. Very few trains (if any?) terminate at Market Street East. This should be possible with nearly all the commuter trains, but even some Amtrak, with San Diego to Santa Barabara, Sf, Oakland-Emoriville and Sacramento service. The Star Light might run through to San Diego!
charlie hebdo CSSHEGEWISCH Consider that the existing CUS approaches have major structures above the tracks from Polk St on the south to Lake St on the north. What's your option for expanding capacity?
OvermodWho would have thought the time would come to say that?
Well they want to ad LA to Las Vegas service at some point. Add in all the Commuter train traffic (which is slowly expanding) and Amtrak San Diegans, etc. 7 tracks probably means some train pairs will double up on the same track.
charlie hebdoMaybe CUS should consider dual level and multiple through tracks to allow for expansion.
They are shifting some of the trains over to LaSalle Street Station from CUS (former N&W I think). That should free up some capacity from the South Concourse.
I think they could also switch some of the Milwaukee North departures over to the former Northwestern Station but that would add a new and probably very expensive track connection and it would probably create confusion as well.
CMStPnP charlie hebdo Maybe CUS should consider dual level and multiple through tracks to allow for expansion. They are shifting some of the trains over to LaSalle Street Station from CUS (former N&W I think). That should free up some capacity from the South Concourse. I think they could also switch some of the Milwaukee North departures over to the former Northwestern Station but that would add a new and probably very expensive track connection and it would probably create confusion as well.
I think both Milwaukee Metra lines cross over the UP West line at Western Avenue (double slip swiches?) so that would not be so hard. But the North concourse isn't the crowded one at CUS.
My memory says there is one through track that platforms at Chicago Union. For a short time, Amdtrak ran a train between Milwaukee and a point south of Chicago (St. Louis? Indianapolis? Champaign?).
Has METRA ever considered doing this? Why not?
Dave, there are two through tracks at the Chicago Union Station; one is next to the station, and the other, with a platform, is east of it, and is reached by crossing over the first one. This spring, when I took the Cardinal to Washington, it left from the outer track.
Yes, Amtrak ran through service between Milwaukee and St. Louis, using the GM&O south of Chicago. I rode it, Milwaukee to Joliet, in Fenruary of 1972.
Johnny
so, why doesn'r METRA run any through service?
daveklepper so, why doesn'r METRA run any through service?
I'm not sure there are that many people who transfer from the BNSF to Milw or UP Metra lines to warrant a through train.
Deggesty Dave, there are two through tracks at the Chicago Union Station; one is next to the station, and the other, with a platform, is east of it, and is reached by crossing over the first one. This spring, when I took the Cardinal to Washington, it left from the outer track. Yes, Amtrak ran through service between Milwaukee and St. Louis, using the GM&O south of Chicago. I rode it, Milwaukee to Joliet, in Fenruary of 1972.
For a brief period, in the Fall-Winter 1975-6 schedule, there was also a Turboliner run-through between Milwaukee and Detroit.
From the article: "At its Meeting today, the Metro board approved environmental studies for the Link US Union Station run-through tracks project."
What exactly does that mean?
These environmental studies -- are they just the first round?
I'm always leery when something like this is announced. How long will environmental lawsuits delay things? The way things go today, one lawsuit and one judge can seemingly stall a project for years.
Hopefully that doesn't happen.
York1 John
York1From the article: "At its Meeting today, the Metro board approved environmental studies for the Link US Union Station run-through tracks project." What exactly does that mean? These environmental studies -- are they just the first round? I'm always leery when something like this is announced. How long will environmental lawsuits delay things? The way things go today, one lawsuit and one judge can seemingly stall a project for years. Hopefully that doesn't happen.
Based on what I have read elsewhere and I am by no means an expert. However, they have to complete an EIS before any major rail project it seems. I suspect the EIS hearings on Milwaukee to Chicago is what held up the 3 additional trains that Amtrak wants to add. EIS usually take 18 months on average (no opposition), some can take 2-3 years (if contested). They are a major slow down on most rail improvement projects but are required when your adding something new that wasn't there before. I think the EIS is a waste of time in most cases as it is duplicative of processes already in place.
Basically you complete an EIS report, then schedule and hold hearings on it. There are rules on the advertising the announcement of the hearing location date and time that it has to be in a place so a good chunk of the population can see the announcement as well. Like posted on station windows, in a local newspaper, via press release, etc.
Hopefully, whatever is planned for Los Angeles Union Station will not destroy its beauty. It is my favorite station.
I have spent many hours in the main waiting room's comfy chairs reading while waiting for my train. Equally pleasurable has been the outdoor areas on either side of the main waiting room.
The station was completed in 1939, the year that I was born. I hope that it will be around long after I am gone.
Maybe so, Charlie, but it would improve capacity.
And some traffic would develop. Especially if marketed.
There are employment locations outside the Chicago CBT.
Re-negotiation of labor agreements may be required before through runs could be established through CUS, especially since BNSF operates the Aurora line on a purchase-of-service agreement.
CMStPnP York1 From the article: "At its Meeting today, the Metro board approved environmental studies for the Link US Union Station run-through tracks project." What exactly does that mean? These environmental studies -- are they just the first round? I'm always leery when something like this is announced. How long will environmental lawsuits delay things? The way things go today, one lawsuit and one judge can seemingly stall a project for years. Hopefully that doesn't happen. Based on what I have read elsewhere and I am by no means an expert. However, they have to complete an EIS before any major rail project it seems. I suspect the EIS hearings on Milwaukee to Chicago is what held up the 3 additional trains that Amtrak wants to add. EIS usually take 18 months on average (no opposition), some can take 2-3 years (if contested). They are a major slow down on most rail improvement projects but are required when your adding something new that wasn't there before. I think the EIS is a waste of time in most cases as it is duplicative of processes already in place. Basically you complete an EIS report, then schedule and hold hearings on it. There are rules on the advertising the announcement of the hearing location date and time that it has to be in a place so a good chunk of the population can see the announcement as well. Like posted on station windows, in a local newspaper, via press release, etc.
York1 From the article: "At its Meeting today, the Metro board approved environmental studies for the Link US Union Station run-through tracks project." What exactly does that mean? These environmental studies -- are they just the first round? I'm always leery when something like this is announced. How long will environmental lawsuits delay things? The way things go today, one lawsuit and one judge can seemingly stall a project for years. Hopefully that doesn't happen.
lidgerwoodplowIn some magazine article I read the author was quite vehement that the correct name was Los Angles Union Passenger Terminal.
It was never that. Although I have seen clips from a television broadcast that said it originated from "Los Angles", I suspect it was the work product of someone either academically or grammatically challenged. Might as well call it after Our Lady of the Postage-Stamp Plot (in homage perhaps to all the zero-lot-line construction since) as that's more accurate... but I doubt that will catch on too well. (Note how I avoid video reference to 'queen of the double-wide trailer')
The term "LAUPT" ceased to be used when Catellus did the rebuild in the '90s. It's officially been LAUS for a long time now.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.