Portland Union Station for sale

One of my favorite Amtrak stations is for sale. Needs $250m in upgrades. Amtrak isn't interested. That doesn't sound good.

Hope this can be read. I was able to without a subscription.

https://www.oregonlive.com/business...oric-depot-needs-250-million-in-upgrades.html

Uhlman, the Prosper spokesperson, said the station needs a transportation-focused owner who can spearhead a large-scale renovation.“Prosper Portland,” he said, “is not positioned to lead this work.”

Click to expand...

Ok first thing first “Prosper Portland” needs a name change or update it’s mission statement.

The link story stated 250 million for both buildings and platforms work. I understand Amtrak wants to control the platforms. (monopoly issue) however the building need upgrades for earthquake stability, and that I am sure Amtrak would not be interested in.

Just-Thinking-51 said:

Ok first thing first “Prosper Portland” needs a name change or update it’s mission statement.

The link story stated 250 million for both buildings and platforms work. I understand Amtrak wants to control the platforms. (monopoly issue) however the building need upgrades for earthquake stability, and that I am sure Amtrak would not be interested in.

Click to expand...

I mean, if Amtrak really wants to control the platforms, then maybe they should start checking the couch cushions?

...unreinforced masonry in its buildings that could fail in an earthquake.

Click to expand...

Uh oh. I wondered how renovating the station could possibly cost $250 million. That answered it. Unreinforced masonry in a seismic risk zone - not good. No easy or cheap way to deal with that. One good shake and you have a pile of bricks and block.

Absent the historic significance, it would almost certainly be cheaper and faster to tear it down and rebuild from scratch. But, if the building needs to be preserved with an appearance more or less as is, it will be a very expensive project. A lot of new structural elements will have to be embedded or hidden within the building to meet modern standards. It would look the same but would be a new structure within the old. Who pays for it? Round up the usual suspects - city, state DOT, Fed DOT, etc.

Take it down, brick by brick, carefully labeling and keeping separate the exterior, windows and doors, etc. Remove the remaining structure. Excavate and build a new foundation that meets earthquake standards. Build an earthquake-proof steel frame (or other best practice) on top of the new foundation. Apply the saved bricks, etc. to form a non-structural exterior that looks identical to the existing building because everything you can see IS the existing building. (To make it lighter, they could slice off the exterior surface of all the bricks to about 1/2" thickness and mortar or epoxy them to the hidden steel building inside.) Re-install any interior elements, benches, etc. that they decided to save.

The result would look exactly like the current building, meet all modern building codes, and would be horrendously expensive, but maybe cheaper than re-enforcing the existing building. An Amshack would be much cheaper.

A couple of thoughts.

The first is that King Street Station was restored and brought up to modern seismic standards. It would have been cheaper to demolish and start over, too, but the City of Seattle went ahead and restored it at a cost in the hundreds of millions. King Street was a steel frame building to start with, though.

Second is that Amtrak's general approach is not to own or construct stations, so Amtrak backing away is in no way surprising. They generally want local governments/entities to provide station buildings. There are exceptions, notably CUS and Penn Station. Do not know how CUS got into Amtrak's hands, but Penn was acquired as part of the Northeast Corridor in the Penn Central government takeover that brought us Conrail. Perhaps CUS was similar, Pennsy had the largest ownership stake in CUS, but I don't know. Both CUS and Penn offer real estate income opportunities in leasing that Portland probably wouldn't, though.

Separate ownership of the station building and rail infrastructure is not unusual. It's pretty common. For example, my understanding is LAUS was under that model, at least for awhile, with the platforms/rail owned by SCRRA and the headhouse by Catellus. Since the acquisition of the headhouse by LA Metro, that may have changed. In smaller cities it is extremely common with cities owning stations, railroads the rail and platform.

Bottom line, I think the City of Portland is trying to dump something that customarily would be their responsibility under current models. Seattle stepped up, Portland appears to be stepping down. Perhaps they should be shopping for grants, not a buyer.

Finally, I vehemently disagree with the description of Portland as "cave". The interior is beautiful, original and well maintained. It is a lovely station. It never needed to "restored" as King Street was, it was maintained in its original design. King Street had been "modernized" into a Mid-century Bus Station motif and was a pit. It was truly a cave. Seattle undid that and put it back to its original look. At Portland there's nothing to undo.

One time in SEA after a mild shake remember how all the brick buildings around King Street station and the station had rods running thru the buildings with large round holders attached to the outsides of the buildings. There were holding the brick to the walls.

Condensed history:

In the early years of Amtrak, the Portland Terminal Co. considered tearing down the building and replacing it with a piggyback yard. Amtrak looked into a location near the Willbridge interlocking, on the Linnton bus line. Tri-Met tied up the process by getting a federal grant to study an intermodal terminal project, and then didn't use the grant. The Port of Portland (operator of the region's airports) looked into buying it and decided there was no way to make money. The Portland Development Commission (urban renewal) took it on, gaining revenue from the property by removing tracks for housing. They tried to remove more tracks but were stymied by rail advocates. Most memorable was a photo that showed that all the station tracks were used by existing service levels when trains were off schedule.

In the meantime, the downtown Greyhound and Trailways stations were replaced by an award-winning architect's work across Hoyt Street from Union Station. The design was integrated with Union Station. Light rail reached the station with the Yellow and Green Lines. [They should have rerouted the Red Line from the international airport past Union Station, instead of the Green Line, but it would have caused political problems.]

Even before the current owners took over Greyhound, the bus station property was put up for sale and then the buses were moved to the curb north of the Broadway Bridge, parallel to Track One. As far as I know from a distance, both the bus and rail stations are now for sale.


2011 - some safety measures were undertaken.

The station is far too busy to be replaced by an Amshack, 23 daily departures and that could easily rise to 30. Well worth saving and rebuilding the neighborhood around it.

There are obviously Serious Issues with the building, the neighborhood, and the City of Portland (and the Multnomah County government too). But it can all be dealt with and better outcomes are possible with work, imagination, and a lot of money.

Is this a solution in search of a problem. It does say “The city economic development agency, which has owned the station since 1987, has made improvements in the past decade or so including seismic upgrades and a roof replacement”. No doubt the platform and tracks need updating but at a fraction of the $250m.

So apparently the unreinforced masonry is the major problem. And the building has lasted 128 years without falling down?! My memory is the station interior is vey attractive and ‘updating’ is not necessary other than perhaps electrical/plumbing. If the work is necessary perhaps they should consider the approach of the residents of the Cincinnati area who passed a sales tax increase that funded the majority of the $228m cost to update the magnificent Cincinnati Union Terminal aka Cincinnati Museum Center.

Palmland said:

Is this a solution in search of a problem. It does say “The city economic development agency, which has owned the station since 1987, has made improvements in the past decade or so including seismic upgrades and a roof replacement”. No doubt the platform and tracks need updating but at a fraction of the $250m.

So apparently the unreinforced masonry is the major problem. And the building has lasted 128 years without falling down?! My memory is the station interior is vey attractive and ‘updating’ is not necessary other than perhaps electrical/plumbing. If the work is necessary perhaps they should consider the approach of the residents of the Cincinnati area who passed a sales tax increase that funded the majority of the $228m cost to update the magnificent Cincinnati Union Terminal aka Cincinnati Museum Center.

Click to expand...

No sales tax in Oregon for starters. And the City would be happy to unload this and get a temporary cash infusion to spend on the serious issues they face. But the building is not too bad in the publicly accessible parts and has withstood any number of minor earthquakes over the years. I can't imagine a private development firm being interested though, there is leasable space in the building and some tenants in it now but surely not enough demand in a city full of unused commercial space and the surrounding blocks have gotten quite rough. It would take a major transformation to transform it into viable commercial space. It's going to take some truly visionary work from both the public and private sectors.

Palmland said:

So apparently the unreinforced masonry is the major problem. And the building has lasted 128 years without falling down?!

Click to expand...

Portland hasn't had a significant earthquake in the last 128 years. Not even one the size of the Nisqually quake, which was only moderately large, a 6.8, and caused significant damage to unreinforced masonry structures 60 miles away in Seattle. That does not mean there will never be a major quake affecting Portland. A major quake there is inevitable eventually, Portland is in the Cascade Subduction Zone. The Cascade Subduction Zone is capable of producing huge quakes, quakes larger than California's famed San Andreas Fault is capable of producing, quakes than can approach or exceed 9.0, like the 1964 Alaska quake. And one can happen tomorrow, next week, next year or not for 100 years. There is no way to know, other than it will happen.

If you want to see what happens to unreinforced masonry in an earthquake, Google the 1933 Long Beach earthquake. And that was only a 6.4. Or a picture of San Francisco City Hall after the famed 1906 quake (7.9).

Expecting an unreinforced masonry structure in an active seismic zone to survive a major quake without major damage or collapse is like expecting a tar paper shack to withstand a hurricane.

As a lifelong resident of West Coast earthquake country, California and Washington, yeah, an unreinforced masonry busy public building is a problem. A big one.

zephyr17 said:

an unreinforced masonry busy public building is a problem. A big one.

Click to expand...

Good info, but I do wonder why this is a major problem now and not long ago. The problem should have been obvious 100 (or even 20) years ago, as you point out. Is it because we are more risk adverse now? I would hope the civic leaders of Portland could take this as an opportunity to revitalize this whole area and not just the station. We were last there maybe 10-12 years ago and getting to Powell’s books wasn’t pleasant.

Palmland said:

Good info, but I do wonder why this is a major problem now and not long ago. The problem should have been obvious 100 (or even 20) years ago, as you point out. Is it because we are more risk adverse now? I would hope the civic leaders of Portland could take this as an opportunity to revitalize this whole area and not just the station. We were last there maybe 10-12 years ago and getting to Powell’s books wasn’t pleasant.

Click to expand...

It has probably been flagged as an issue for a long time. Earthquake awareness jumped with a lot more damage than anticipated in the 1989 Loma Prieta quake, like a section of the Bay Bridge collapsing and the complete failure of the Cypress Viaduct, and the 1994 Northridge quake. As @Willbridge pointed out, there was at least some remediation done in 2011.

100 years ago there was very little earthquake awareness and traditional building techniques dominant then did not take them into account.

The Pacific Northwest is generally somewhat lackadaisical in earthquake prepardedness compared to California. Quakes here are less frequent but have the potential to be larger. California gets small to moderate quakes pretty frequently that serve as reminders. It is also a very expensive problem that can be pretty painlessly kicked down the road without immediate consequence. Even California didn't seriously get off the dime in some ways until after the 1989 and 1994 quakes showed that relatively moderate quakes could do more damage than they thought, though unreinforced masonry construction had already been outlawed for years there. The Portland Redevelopment Agency that owns the station obviously knew it needed more/better earthquake remediation, but kicked it down the road maybe until they felt they couldn't any longer (or seized on it as a rationale for something they already wanted to do). Then they started looking to try and toss the hot potato away rather than looking for ways to address it.

The fact that politicians often want to kick an expensive can down the road doesn't mean it isn't a serious problem. Not wanting to have a building that is essentially just a big pile of loose bricks fall on top of you in the inevitable quake is really not being unduly risk averse, unless you consider significant, avoidable fatalities acceptable.

BTW, both Seattle and Portland will be in big trouble in general when we get a Big One. We are much less ready for it than California is now. And a Cascade Subduction Big One is apt to be significantly worse than a San Andreas Big One.

Palmland said:

Good info, but I do wonder why this is a major problem now and not long ago. The problem should have been obvious 100 (or even 20) years ago, as you point out. Is it because we are more risk adverse now? I would hope the civic leaders of Portland could take this as an opportunity to revitalize this whole area and not just the station. We were last there maybe 10-12 years ago and getting to Powell’s books wasn’t pleasant.

Click to expand...

I still walk in NW Portland but getting to Powells from Union Station would've been easy 10-12 years ago compared to now. things have not gotten better.

danasgoodstuff said:

I still walk in NW Portland but getting to Powells from Union Station would've been easy 10-12 years ago compared to now. things have not gotten better.

Click to expand...

Just did that in August. It wasn't particularly bad

zephyr17 said:

Just did that in August. It wasn't particularly bad

Click to expand...

It's not as bad as some make it out to be, but it's not good.

danasgoodstuff said:

It's not as bad as some make it out to be, but it's not good.

Click to expand...

Can't really disagree with that. "Not particularly bad" isn't a high bar.

Beats Third and Pike in Seattle, though.

What time of the day the big one happens in Portland will determine where the major injuries will happen. That includes the station.

Surely Prosper Portland could get a federal grant for at least some of the seismic upgrade?

Palmland said:

Good info, but I do wonder why this is a major problem now and not long ago. The problem should have been obvious 100 (or even 20) years ago, as you point out. Is it because we are more risk adverse now?

Click to expand...

I don't think people 100 years ago even knew Portland was susceptible to earthquakes. My understanding from some PBS documentaries (and fresh googling) is the last major earthquake in Cascadia was a huge one in 1700 but nobody, other than the natives who passed on stories, even knew it had happened until the 1980s.

danasgoodstuff said:

Surely Prosper Portland could get a federal grant for at least some of the seismic upgrade?

Click to expand...

Assuming they want to try, which it kind of looks like they don't.

John Bredin said:

I don't think people 100 years ago even knew Portland was susceptible to earthquakes. My understanding from some PBS documentaries (and fresh googling) is the last major earthquake in Cascadia was a huge one in 1700 but nobody, other than the natives who passed on stories, even knew it had happened until the 1980s.

Click to expand...

I grew up in Portland and can remember only two earthquakes that caused visible damage in the city. In the 1950's I remember watching the sidewalk in front of our house crack, just like in the movies (except smaller). In the 1960's I was walking up the stairs at home and lost my footing when the stairs lurched. When pictures fell off the walls seconds later, I realized it was an earthquake. My dad was on the road both times and only learned of them from the radio stations being knocked off the air momentarily.

Awareness of the risks has increased greatly.

zephyr17 said:

Assuming they want to try, which it kind of looks like they don't.

Click to expand...

From this distance, it's possible to visualize this as a set-up for a big real estate deal involving the former Greyhound block and adjacent Union Station property.

Portland is switching to a new city government system, so it's hard to say how things will work out. My grandfather was on the committee that set up the old system (before WWI), so there were a lot of years since for people to learn how to work the levers.

AORTA, the Oregon rail advocates, just completed a survey of the candidates for the reshaped Portland city council, so the Union Station issue had not come up. One candidate specifically discussed the intercity bus station issue, and here is the statement.

Prosper Portland Purchase of Greyhound Station: It’s unacceptable that intercity riders are forced to wait in the cold and rain along NW Station Way. We should purchase the former Greyhound station currently being used as a homeless shelter. Once we’ve ended unsheltered homelessness and can begin reducing the size of our shelter system we should convert the facility back to transit use. The expansion of the POINT system and other intercity buses means we need to offer a place for intercity bus riders to wait and transfer. Providing a centralized intercity bus station available to be used by future regional express buses and private coaches is essential to becoming a world-class transit city.

(POINT is the marketing name for state-sponsored routes. They load curbside at Union Station by the baggage room.)