I can confirm what Eric S wrote based on a viewing today of the plans for the old Metropolitan Lounge area. Along with the old cattle pens, it will be converted into two new waiting areas: one for Hiawatha passengers, and one for Assisted passengers. Each of these waiting areas will have 350+ seats. From drawings on display, decor will be airport modern, with comfortable swivel seating. Obviously this may change. Bathroom areas will be greatly expanded. No dates were posted for either starting or finishing this project.
Thanks. Do they still have the planned escalator/elevator to the tunnel to the high-level platform, converted from the mail platform?
Because honestly this would be really good for us. We take the LSL to Chicago most of the time and my girlfriend has trouble with stairs.
Yes, plans are still in place to build stairs and/or elevator/escalator to a basement tunnel to provide access to the converted mail platform as part of the Phase I improvements. The design plans are currently being drawn up by Arup; completed plans are expected to be delivered sometime in early 2018. Locating a funding source for the hundreds of millions required to perform the improvements likely means work won't start for several years at least.
I was under the impression that once the mail platform is converted, it is supposed to be used for regional corridor service, not long distance. The converted platform will not have the ability to handle baggage initially.
The platform is to be converted incrementally. Only half of the converted platform will be completed in Phase I - one platform with two through tracks. The second half of the converted platform is supposed to be operational once a fourth north approach track is built, which won't happen until Metra/UP rebuild the bridge that carries the Ogilvie approach tracks over the Union north approach tracks, just south of Kinzie Street. Once completed, the converted mail platform will become two platforms with four through tracks. And I'm not sure that the new platforms will be high-level.
The only way that the converted platforms will have the ability to handle baggage would be if, in the Phase II improvements, Amtrak opts for building the 300 Riverside alternative, as opposed to the 222 Riverside alternative.
At this point, the 300 plan appears easier to accomplish, as they wouldn't have to fork out $300 million or more to buyout the 222 building from Deutsche Bank. But then again, if the investigations into possibly even more money laundering by Deutsche Bank than they recently admitted to pan out, perhaps the presiding judge, as part of the penalty, will tell Deutsche Bank to drop off the keys to the 222 Riverside building. Fantasy, I know, but stranger things have happened.
The Phase I improvements discussed above are not to be confused with a different set of improvements that are planned for Union Station that were announced earlier this year. Apparently Amtrak and Riverside Development are still dotting i's and crossing t's, with the final agreement expected to be hammered out by the end of 2017. Riverside announced that it wanted to get started on Phase I of its project sometime in 2018, which would include converting the burned-out former Harvey lunchroom into a food court, opening additional retail space, converting the upper floors of the headhouse into hotel and office space, as well as erecting two residential towers on top of the headhouse. I'm hoping we'll get a more refined set of renderings once the agreement is finalized.
ETA - I've been taking the Rock Island into town these days, as opposed to the Southwest Service, and haven't been in Union Station for some time. For those who have been there very recently, have they started on the rehab of the skylight in the Great Hall? I had heard it was supposed to start in July.
Secondly, for anyone who might be more intimately acquainted with Union's operations, Amtrak had a line item in their budget for $4.5 million to be used towards building crew quarters in the headhouse. What is the status of that project? Did the Riverside agreement negate that? Just curious.
