Height: Unknown
Floor count: 26
Location: West Adams and South Canal
Neighborhood: Loop
Construction end:
Architect: Lucien Lagrange Architects
Developer: Prime Group Realty Trust

http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/4396/unionstation3vv.jpg
http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/229/unioncompbxr4.jpg

INSIDE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
Union Station proposal may be back on track

THOMAS A. CORFMAN
Published March 9, 2005

Lincoln Property Co. is talking to potential tenants about a long-range proposal for a twin-tower office development on top of Union Station, a possible sign that the Dallas real estate firm will be Amtrak's choice as the new developer of the historic structure.

The selection of a developer has renewed urgency for cash-strapped Amtrak, after the Bush administration threatened last month to push the national passenger railroad into bankruptcy in order to force a restructuring.

Amtrak is looking for a new developer after a 2002 deal with Prime Group Realty Trust fell apart. A railroad spokesman declined to comment.

A final decision has not been made, and Amtrak could still turn to one of the Chicago-based finalists: residential firm Draper & Kramer Inc. or Jones Lang LaSalle Inc., which has a mixed-use proposal with about 500,000 square feet of office space, similar to a plan city officials have already approved.

But sources said Lincoln is proposing two towers of roughly 20 stories each on top of the station, which was designed by architect Daniel Burnham with upward expansion in mind. The towers, each with about 600,000 square feet of space, would be located along the north and south sides of the station, which occupies the block bounded by Jackson Boulevard and Canal, Clinton and Adams Streets.

Construction would not start until a tenant agreed to lease about half of a tower, with completion by 2009 at the earliest. The station's existing upper floors would be redeveloped into rental apartments, sources said.

FAT chance of any commercial highrises being built in the current market. But it sounds good to me

If they do that, it had better be damn good architecture.

FAT chance of any commercial highrises being built in the current market. But it sounds good to me

an admittedly weak commercial market, but can you imagine the marketability of buildings that would allow you to leave a Metra train and take an elevator up to your office?

^ I think the "Metra-ites" should be forced to walk to their office... Through the cold and wind and ice.... penance for living outside of the city and having to spend hours a day commuting....

OK, not really...

the building is to architecuraly significant to fuck it up. i say leave it as is

I agree with wicked... there's pleanty of parking lots that need to be built on before they consider possibly mangling Union.

the building is to architecuraly significant to fuck it up. i say leave it as is

unless I'm mistaken, I thought that a high rise portion was actually a part of the original plan. Does anyone know if that's right?

You're correct edsg, that was in the original design. A decade ago there were renderings of the two towers and they integrated beautifully with the classical architecutre of the station. There was also some ingenious engineering involved in canterlevering, if memory serves after so long.

Union Station expansion revisited
January 10, 2006
BY DAVID ROEDER Business Reporter

Amtrak is wrapping up an agreement with Chicago real estate firm Jones Lang LaSalle Inc. that would revive efforts to expand and spruce up Chicago's landmark Union Station.

The proposal calls for an 18-story addition to the eight-story building at 210 S. Canal, which is owned by Amtrak, the federally charged passenger railroad. Jones Lang would pick up a prior development plan that foundered because of another real estate firm's financial trouble.

City landmarks officials approved the plan in 2002, concluding that it fulfilled the intent of Union Station's designers, an architectural firm whose lineage goes back to Chicago visionary Daniel Burnham. If the design works, it could make the Neo-classical station a commercial and residential draw for a fringe area of downtown.

About 1.25 million square feet would be added to the building with no alterations to its Great Hall waiting room, regarded as one of the finest public spaces in the United States.

http://images.suntimes.com/popups/FTR/images/amtrak2_011006_285.jpg
Capable of supporting more floors than are there now, the newest planned expansion of Union Station would add 18 stories (above), but be true to the original design.
Appearing massive from the outside, the latest Union Station plans would feature an atrium and be fairly airy.
http://images.suntimes.com/popups/FTR/images/amtrak_011006_285.jpg

Nothing is planned that should affect passenger concourses or train platforms. But adding that volume of space will be a hard sell in a market where residential condominiums are the only quick sellers, provided they aren't priced too richly.

The proposal would blend condos with a hotel and office space in the addition.

A source said the project is tentatively budgeted at up to $275 million. Backers believe condo prices and lease rates for the offices can be held below market levels because of tax advantages and other cost savings that come from renovating a landmark.

The office floors "will be absolutely the finest and most modern available, with rentals that beat the competition by $4 to $5 a square foot," a source said.

Amtrak and Jones Lang are negotiating a letter of understanding that sources said would give Jones Lang about a year to work on the development. If it appears likely to move ahead, Amtrak would then agree to two successive 99-year deals to lease the station to Jones Lang and a related venture, sources said.

Partners in the venture are Hossein Youssefi, a Jones Lang managing director who will lead the project, and former Jones Lang executive Stuart Scott.

The architect for the expansion would be Chicago's Lucien Lagrange, who directed 1992 improvements at Union Station.

The railroad had conducted prolonged talks with two Union Station suitors. Besides Jones Lang, Lincoln Property Co. was interested in an alliance with architect James Goettsch.

The Lincoln plan could have raised more money for Amtrak, but was far more risky. Sources said it called for two new high-rise additions to the base, and would have required approval by city landmark authorities, which can come only after a hearing process that takes months.

Youssefi carried out successful renovations at Washington, D.C.'s Union Station and Grand Central Station in New York.

In a press release, David Hughes, Amtrak's acting president and chief executive, said, "We hope this project will realize the original architect's vision for the station as a vital center of life and activity in the West Loop."

Lagrange is known for his historic renovations, such as his work on the Carbide & Carbon Building at 230 N. Michigan that became the Hard Rock Chicago hotel, and for new buildings that include Park Tower at 800 N. Michigan.

Chicago's Union Station was built in stages from 1913 to 1925 and finished by the firm Graham, Anderson, Probst & White after Burnham started it. The architects envisioned a high-rise section that was never built, but the structure has a foundation strong enough to support it.

In 2002, Amtrak had an agreement with Prime Group Realty Trust to pursue the Union Station project, but financial hardship forced the then publicly traded company to abandon speculative ventures. Prime Group eventually was sold to a buyer who took it private.

Ok, now that there's a specific thread:

A little more on the Union Station project:

http://globest.com/news/450_450/chicago/141836-1.html

Union Station Topper Plan Rises Again
By Mark Ruda
Last updated: January 10, 2006 05:55am

Jones Lang LaSalle and two former executives of the real estate firm are the latest to attempt to bring Daniel Burnham’s vision for Union Station to its long-awaited fruition. Amtrak subsidiary Chicago Union Station Co. is giving Jones Lang LaSalle and its partner, Youssefi-Scott Development Co., a chance to strike a $250-million redevelopment deal that would add an 18-story tower atop the 80-year-old railroad terminal.


Most recently, Prime Group Realty Trust proposed a $200-million mixed-use project that would have added 180 condominiums, 400 hotel rooms as well as 500,000 sf of office space above the Union Station’s Headhouse Building. Before the REIT’s financial crunch derailed the project, it had hired architect Lucien LaGrange, who ironically had drawn up plans about 20 years earlier for another developer before Tax Reform Act of 1986 torpedoed US real estate markets.

Burnham’s designs included a tower above the station, but he died before the station was completed. Jones Lang LaSalle has been involved in the redevelopment of two other buildings designed by Burnham, Symphony Center in Chicago and Union Station in Washington, DC.

“Our goal is to perpetuate Burnham’s historic vision for Union Station and at the same time create a state-of-the-art, mixed-use facility that includes office space built for the 21st century,” says Hossein Youssefi, whose company also includes Stuart Scott. “Union Station will be an architectural jewel as we extend the Burnham Chicago tradition to the West Loop.”


Bounded by Clinton, Canal, Jackson and Adams streets, Union Station already is Metra’s busiest commuter rail station, serving 120,000 passengers a day in addition to more than 6,000 Amtrak riders. The Jones Lang LaSalle partnership envisions preserving the Great Hall, exterior and rooflines. The redevelopment is not expected to affect Amtrak and Metra operations, but would convert 500,000 sf of vacant railroad offices into new uses.

http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/4348/unionstation1tf.jpg

I really love it. I wonder if there is going to be like a public area in the lower levels the new addition. Also it would be cool if they made the roof of the old station a kind of patio or garden for the public (some place really cool to sit outside and not stray far from the station for those who have to wait for Amtrak trains).

I would love some classical or even maybe some gothic ornimentation on the outside of the new building but some could rightly argue that would be over the top or gaudy. From what I see I love it though.

From the renderings how high would one guess the new addition would be? 250-350 ft?

Here's a thread on the Union Station expansion. I believe that the 2 should be merged. There's no reason to have a double thread.

I don't think we knew there was one :) March....

Union Station expansion revisited
January 10, 2006
BY DAVID ROEDER Business Reporter

Amtrak is wrapping up an agreement with Chicago real estate firm Jones Lang LaSalle Inc. that would revive efforts to expand and spruce up Chicago's landmark Union Station.

The proposal calls for an 18-story addition to the eight-story building at 210 S. Canal, which is owned by Amtrak, the federally charged passenger railroad. Jones Lang would pick up a prior development plan that foundered because of another real estate firm's financial trouble.

City landmarks officials approved the plan in 2002, concluding that it fulfilled the intent of Union Station's designers, an architectural firm whose lineage goes back to Chicago visionary Daniel Burnham. If the design works, it could make the Neo-classical station a commercial and residential draw for a fringe area of downtown.

About 1.25 million square feet would be added to the building with no alterations to its Great Hall waiting room, regarded as one of the finest public spaces in the United States.

http://images.suntimes.com/popups/FTR/images/amtrak2_011006_285.jpg
Capable of supporting more floors than are there now, the newest planned expansion of Union Station would add 18 stories (above), but be true to the original design.
Appearing massive from the outside, the latest Union Station plans would feature an atrium and be fairly airy.
http://images.suntimes.com/popups/FTR/images/amtrak_011006_285.jpg

Nothing is planned that should affect passenger concourses or train platforms. But adding that volume of space will be a hard sell in a market where residential condominiums are the only quick sellers, provided they aren't priced too richly.

The proposal would blend condos with a hotel and office space in the addition.

A source said the project is tentatively budgeted at up to $275 million. Backers believe condo prices and lease rates for the offices can be held below market levels because of tax advantages and other cost savings that come from renovating a landmark.

The office floors "will be absolutely the finest and most modern available, with rentals that beat the competition by $4 to $5 a square foot," a source said.

Amtrak and Jones Lang are negotiating a letter of understanding that sources said would give Jones Lang about a year to work on the development. If it appears likely to move ahead, Amtrak would then agree to two successive 99-year deals to lease the station to Jones Lang and a related venture, sources said.

Partners in the venture are Hossein Youssefi, a Jones Lang managing director who will lead the project, and former Jones Lang executive Stuart Scott.

The architect for the expansion would be Chicago's Lucien Lagrange, who directed 1992 improvements at Union Station.

The railroad had conducted prolonged talks with two Union Station suitors. Besides Jones Lang, Lincoln Property Co. was interested in an alliance with architect James Goettsch.

The Lincoln plan could have raised more money for Amtrak, but was far more risky. Sources said it called for two new high-rise additions to the base, and would have required approval by city landmark authorities, which can come only after a hearing process that takes months.

Youssefi carried out successful renovations at Washington, D.C.'s Union Station and Grand Central Station in New York.

In a press release, David Hughes, Amtrak's acting president and chief executive, said, "We hope this project will realize the original architect's vision for the station as a vital center of life and activity in the West Loop."

Lagrange is known for his historic renovations, such as his work on the Carbide & Carbon Building at 230 N. Michigan that became the Hard Rock Chicago hotel, and for new buildings that include Park Tower at 800 N. Michigan.

Chicago's Union Station was built in stages from 1913 to 1925 and finished by the firm Graham, Anderson, Probst & White after Burnham started it. The architects envisioned a high-rise section that was never built, but the structure has a foundation strong enough to support it.

In 2002, Amtrak had an agreement with Prime Group Realty Trust to pursue the Union Station project, but financial hardship forced the then publicly traded company to abandon speculative ventures. Prime Group eventually was sold to a buyer who took it private.

I like the design. I hope they can actually pull it off... Train stations really need to be very impressive. This is often a person's first impression of a city.

Is it me or does it look like the sides are slightly inclined of the proposed addition? Or is that an opitcal illusion of the rendering? If yes do you like it?

ontact:
Rick Harnish Office: 773-334-6758
Executive Director Cell: 312-339-0116
Midwest High Speed Rail Association www.midwesthsr.org

Statement Regarding Union Station Redevelopment

Earlier today, Amtrak announced an agreement with Jones Lang LaSalle to
redevelop the headhouse building of Chicago’s Union Station. This
presents an excellent opportunity to relieve the crowded conditions
that Amtrak passengers face when boarding trains leaving Chicago.

Steady growth in Amtrak ridership over the last four years has resulted
in overflow crowds in the small trackside waiting rooms. Passengers
are forced to snake through a maze of benches and into the hallway as
they queue up for their trains, some of which leave Chicago with more
passengers than a 747.

The proposed redevelopment creates an opportunity to prepare for the
tremendous growth in passenger volumes expected in the coming decade.
Moving the ticket counters and the customer service areas from the
concourse area and into the headhouse will allow the waiting rooms to
be expanded while improving traffic flows in the planned retail
development.

If the current proposals for fast and dependable trains linking Chicago
to the Midwest are completed, Chicago’s Union Station will become
busier than 85% of the nation’s airports and approach the economic
impact of Midway airport.

The City of Chicago should seize this once in a generation opportunity
and work with Amtrak to create a world-class gateway linking Chicago to
the entire Midwest.

If high speed rail ever did catch on in the U.S. or at least the mid-west (LONG ways off I know) does anyone else think that Union Station could become obsolete?

ontact:
Rick Harnish Office: 773-334-6758
Executive Director Cell: 312-339-0116
Midwest High Speed Rail Association www.midwesthsr.org

Statement Regarding Union Station Redevelopment

Earlier today, Amtrak announced an agreement with Jones Lang LaSalle to
redevelop the headhouse building of Chicago’s Union Station. This
presents an excellent opportunity to relieve the crowded conditions
that Amtrak passengers face when boarding trains leaving Chicago.

Steady growth in Amtrak ridership over the last four years has resulted
in overflow crowds in the small trackside waiting rooms. Passengers
are forced to snake through a maze of benches and into the hallway as
they queue up for their trains, some of which leave Chicago with more
passengers than a 747.

The proposed redevelopment creates an opportunity to prepare for the
tremendous growth in passenger volumes expected in the coming decade.
Moving the ticket counters and the customer service areas from the
concourse area and into the headhouse will allow the waiting rooms to
be expanded while improving traffic flows in the planned retail
development.

If the current proposals for fast and dependable trains linking Chicago
to the Midwest are completed, Chicago’s Union Station will become
busier than 85% of the nation’s airports and approach the economic
impact of Midway airport.

The City of Chicago should seize this once in a generation opportunity
and work with Amtrak to create a world-class gateway linking Chicago to
the entire Midwest.

^ I LOVE reading stuff like that

If high speed rail ever did catch on in the U.S. or at least the mid-west (LONG ways off I know) does anyone else think that Union Station could become obsolete?

how would it become obsolete?

how would it become obsolete?


Well it would have to get to dramatic higher numbers of trains per day I would guess. But Union Station use to share inter-city traffic with three other stations (is that number right?) in its heyday when it was the busiest train hub in the world. It also didn't have near the suberb commuter traffic it does now pre-1960.

With expandad and frequent Metra the hugh numbers that article talked about in terms of passanger (which I am all for) it is just hard to envision that Union has enough track to meet that kind of demand especially at peak times (maybe it does but its just hard for me to envision).

^There would be more than enough track at Union Station if a high speed rail network were to replace some long distance Amtrak lines rather than just as a service to the midwest. Personally I would like to see the Empire Builder and the Southwest Chief go high speed though that is not likely to happen. I think that there would be enough trackage anyway because high speed trains could utilize the Metra lanes if necessary when boarding and departing. Some Metra lanes stay vacant for one or two hours between Metra arrivals.

- edit

According to the Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois, Union Station is in negotiations with a new developer for a twin tower addition; the single-tower LaGrange proposal is in limbo: "...An earlier development proposal, which was approved by LPCI, called for construction of a single-tower addition that would be compatible with Burnham’s original design intent. Recent discussions, however, with another developer, have called for a twin-tower design that could compromise interior spaces and the integrity of exterior of the building..."

You can read the entire entry here: http://www.landmarks.org/chicago_watch_2005_11.htm

Anyone have a clue as to this new twin-tower proposal?

I have no idea about it, but I don't like the sound of it. There are many places they can build this "twin-tower" design, and it probably look fine. If they want to add on to Union Station, they should be required to follow the original design intent.

Can you say Soldier Field part Deux?

First, that single tower design is hideous. Nevermind the fact that sunlight would never reach the hall again with it. I'd prefer them to chuck two of the four sides of the expansion to create a twin tower design, but not if it's like Hearst Tower in NYC. I like that tower but it doesn't mesh with the base at all.

Basically, I'm for two towers, but only if they match the detail of the orginal station.

http://images.suntimes.com/popups/FTR/images/amtrak2_011006_285.jpg

I don't know, it seems like it matches the existing building fine. I guess I shouldn't past judgement until I see the twin towers design.

This part bothers me about the two tower design

Recent discussions, however, with another developer, have called for a twin-tower design that could compromise interior spaces and the integrity of exterior of the building..."

Yes, that version matches the detailing, but the massing sucks. Period. It's a giant ugly block the width of the Sears Tower but without the height to balance it out.

That should give Lucien LaGrange extra free time in improving his design on Ritz-Carlton on Mich Ave.

As much as I like Burnham's designs, this one doesn't look very good. The Beaux-Arts design is done well, but as STR said, the massing is not. Unfortunately, in the revived single-tower design, the massing is the only thing remaining of the old.

To be honest, I think the best possible thing we can see here is a new postmodern design, ala the Harold Washington Library, that is correctly proportional to the existing station. But that's probably not going to happen.

I'll wait until I see a visual of the twin-tower design, and receive more specifics about how it will "compromise" the existing station.

This would be the perfect time for a Norman Foster creation with the weird curvy glass top. I'm sure that would please a few people too (cough*Trib*cough).
http://img290.imageshack.us/img290/1824/0686028sa.jpg
http://img290.imageshack.us/img290/4021/smithson12wp.jpg

Back in the 1990's there was a well-designed two tower addition for the station; it preserved interior spaces and exterior elements by incorporating an ingeniously engineered cantilevered truss system. When that building boom went bust, this proposal went with it. I've searched in vain for the renderings that appeared at that time.

^I dug up the WTC and that Schaumburg tower, I'll see what I can find on Union Station.

It's easy to say "Don't ruin the beautiful classic architecture with such a monstrosity."

But it's hard to look past the fact that such development might have saved Penn Station from the recking ball in the 1960's.

Such development was not possible at the time that Penn Station was demolished. The principles of modernism (the dominant, successful style at that time) strongly advocate starting from a clean slate. Building over Penn Station would mean that the building has to concede some architectural points to the original Beaux-Arts, which would have been seen as a travesty.

I was refering to the fact that the original designer of Penn Station rejected offers for a highrise to be built when the original station was built. That might have changed history a bit.

is this all part of the west loop transportation center consept from the 2020 plan to connect this to the ogilvie transportation center.
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/yosisays/trainstation1.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/yosisays/trainstation2.jpg

^Nope. Independant of the Northwestern/Union Station transfer.

Such development was not possible at the time that Penn Station was demolished. The principles of modernism (the dominant, successful style at that time) strongly advocate starting from a clean slate. Building over Penn Station would mean that the building has to concede some architectural points to the original Beaux-Arts, which would have been seen as a travesty.

Also, the RR wanted to be free of the maintenance costs associated with the older station.

- edit

I hope they do a good job matching the Beaux-Arts, materials-wise. That is, if they don't use limestone, I'm gonna be pissed.

Why is the AMA deserting their awesome Kenzo Tange, River North building?

Here's the 1986 two-tower proposal. This was done by Lucien Lagrange for US Equities Realty.

http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/9744/unionstation1986proposaxw5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

That's nice (if it uses actual stone or terracotta) but what's with the purple corners? Is that just a scanner error or something?

The purple is some kind of weird scanner artifact. Sorry.

Oh, thank god. But I thought Lucien was no longer on this project? The most recent renderings show a large neoclassical cubic tower, with a modern, glassy atrium inside. This is from Jones Lang, I think. It's a shame - I like the 2-tower proposal much better.

Here's the 1986 two-tower proposal. This was done by Lucien Lagrange for US Equities Realty.

http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/9744/unionstation1986proposaxw5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

comparing the photographs, I'd have to say 2>1

Well, the above version couldn't exist exactly as shown - Union Station already has 4 or 5 floors of office space built in the "huge mass" configuration of 1 tower. Hopefully these can be topped with the 2 instead of 1.

- edit

I love developments like this (the other one being the Harold Washington Library and perhaps 65 E Goethe) because, in a sense, it's like adding back to Chicago's dwindling pre-war building stock.

Does that make sense to anybody?

^^

No, but this is a massive and important build up where a build up is needed.

Burnham had visions for this.

This is an important one. I say forget about how much tax, tifs, are given to this project, for this one is important IMO, right after Park Michigan.

http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/4396/unionstation3vv.jpg

INSIDE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
Union Station proposal may be back on track

.

I love developments like this (the other one being the Harold Washington Library and perhaps 65 E Goethe) because, in a sense, it's like adding back to Chicago's dwindling pre-war building stock.

Does that make sense to anybody?

Yeah. I like both those buildings. While I love new designs, I don't think we should be blindly progressive. If pre-war architecture was good, we should try and build in that style in some places. At least it doesn't hurt.

Burnham had visions for this.

He did? Burnham died in 1912. Union Station planning didn't begin until 1915, and they didn't make the final decision about the office block on top until probably 1921. In the Plan of Chicago, Guerin's rendering of the West Loop railroad station scheme shows a two-story headhouse on Union Station, surrounded by six-story buildings.

At any rate, the idea that massive TIF subsidies are needed to encourage development around Union or Ogilvie just doesn't pass the sniff test.

No, but by adding TIF, the city gets a greater degree of control over what happens with this project... right? If left to their own devices, most developers would slap a pre-cast concrete, steel-framed lightweight tower on top of this thing. But since they are basically helping to pay for it, the city can mandate a more sophisticated design with real stone and proper columns, pilasters, and cornice.

I do disagree with the use of TIF to subsidize office towers in the surrounding area, though, when they could be used to fix the horrendous traffic situation on Canal in front of Union Station, or to provide some seed funding on the West Loop Transportation Center.

by adding TIF, the city gets a greater degree of control over what happens with this project... right?

Union Station is a Chicago Landmark, so the city already has tremendous control over the materials and finishes. The size and materials for the office tower expansion were negotiatiated with Amtrak when the landmarking was done in 2002.

This one is worse than the Post Office! I cannot believe the city will just give away TIF money like that. Where does it end? Now the city just subsidizes developments when they see a project that they like. How will this development benefit the neighborhood? And do we really need more foot/car traffic for the hotel/office/condos around this building?

- edit

Panel OKs $59-mil. subsidy for Union Station

Okay, for that kind of money I expect gold-plated faucets in the public restrooms. That kind of tax subsidy could build one heck of a nice train station; are we assuming that the tower pays for itself, since it's mostly leased? (And is it just me, or does condos not sound like the best use for a tower here?)

Its only six floors of condos. I bet there are a contigent of commuters who reverse commute to the burbs enough that it would be an attractive idea.

It would be the third train station project for Mr. Youssefi, a former Jones Lang LaSalle executive who has worked on the redevelopment of Grand Central Terminal in New York and Union Station in Washington, D.C.

Though some have questioned using TIF money to subsidize large private developments, a city official told commissioners that the cost of rehabilitating the existing eight-story structure — estimated at $100 million — was so large that a developer would not undertake the project without city assistance.

Yay for TIF :banana:

[URL]
The developer, a joint venture led by Chicago-based Jones Lang LaSalle Inc., plans to build an 18-story tower atop the train station, a run-down and underused building at 210 S. Canal St.

"I promise that Union Station will have the same impact for the West Loop that Millennium Park has had for the East Loop," Hossein Youssefi, head of the team developing the project, told the commission.


Wow. Run down and underused. Can't they come up with a better solution to getting people into Union Station than this? Maybe adding retail to it? I am assuming they mean the Great Hall.

How will this have the same impact as Millenium Park? MP is a destination that people go to because it is one of a kind. There are offices, condos, and hotels everywhere in the city.

I still don't see how you can justify this as a blighted area and I don't see how you can justify that this is going to give a benefit to the area around it. All you guys who are excitied about this... how do you defend $60M in subsidies for a private deal? It's no wonder our school system is so bad... all the money isn't getting there - it is being diverted into the TIF accounts to help developers.

Well they are planning to include 80k sq ft. of retail space. This is very much a public building and if that money goes to improving the public lower spaces in the building I think its worth it. If eventually Union Station is going to be a state of the art multi-use transit hub for train travel putting 50 million towards that cause doesn't seem all that bad. Especially when considering the tens of millions it cost to do some modest rehab of the subway stations I think it is a relatively cheap.

If any buildings are going to get such funds I think a very heavily used public space such as Union is it in order to maximise its potential and capacity.

As envisioned in 1915
http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/2318/unionstation1915lt2.png


As envisioned in 1921
http://img234.imageshack.us/img234/2218/unionstation1921oe3.png

“The plans under contemplation call for a sixteen story office building over the station proper,” J. D’Esposito, chief engineer for the company, said. “The foundations are being laid to accommodate a skyscraper, though it may not be built at once.”
Chicago Daily Tribune, 18 May 1921

All you guys who are excitied about this... how do you defend $60M in subsidies for a private deal? It's no wonder our school system is so bad... all the money isn't getting there - it is being diverted into the TIF accounts to help developers.
As a middle-school teacher of 46 years, many of those in the Chicago Public Schools, I've witnessed a remarkable turnaround of the schools under Mayor Daley, both physically and academically. The missing piece, which I believe is on the horizon, is the return of the middle class parents. Hopefully the yuppies and buppies moving remaining in or moving back to the city will turn to their local public schools. Money can never compensate for the lack of parental involvement or available resources in the home in support of their childrens' progress. TIFs, by putting the dollars up front, are creating the residential environment that can draw this talent to the problem.

TIFs, by putting the dollars up front, are creating the residential environment that can draw this talent to the problem.

I agree the school system has been much improved. Although I doubt that you will see any families living in Union Station. I think you will see young reverse commuters who have every intention of moving to the burbs closer to work after they start a family.

Hmmm... to be honest, I wish they would demolish Gateway Center 3 and rebuild the Beaux-Arts concourse. The office building is such a horrid building to stand above Chicago's busiest rail station. (I will admit, I do like the cross-bracing on the health club next door)

Hmmm... to be honest, I wish they would demolish Gateway Center 3 and rebuild the Beaux-Arts concourse. The office building is such a horrid building to stand above Chicago's busiest rail station. (I will admit, I do like the cross-bracing on the health club next door)

the irony: Gateway was designed to spearhead office construction and development west of the river at a time when it didn't exist and a time the city had to sell itself to succeed. flash forward to today when Chicago is extensively developed and unquestionably a "hot" commodity and we have the luxury to realize what we lost when the concourse was dismantled.

(I will admit, I do like the cross-bracing on the health club next door)I agree. That structure was originally designed to be a trading floor; the cross-bracing elimated internal columns.

As envisioned in 1915
http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/2318/unionstation1915lt2.png


As envisioned in 1921
http://img234.imageshack.us/img234/2218/unionstation1921oe3.png

“The plans under contemplation call for a sixteen story office building over the station proper,” J. D’Esposito, chief engineer for the company, said. “The foundations are being laid to accommodate a skyscraper, though it may not be built at once.”
Chicago Daily Tribune, 18 May 1921

Excellent find Mr. D - those images are wonderful and it's quite striking how the current proposal mimics the 1921 so closely. Thanks!

Chicago Bearcat and I were musing yesterday about the two blank (with widely spaced windows) areas shown going up the south wall in the 1921 rendering. Were those to be exit stairs? If so, why two on the south wall instead of one north and one south? The elevator lobbies are on the inside of the doughnut, easily visible in modern birdseye views:

http://local.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&cp=qzctb47pwzgm&style=o&lvl=1&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=11385918&encType=1

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/2895/conceptcuselevationsb9.jpg


There are four renderings of the proposed expansion at
http://www.chicagounionstation.com/future_plans.html

As a middle-school teacher of 46 years, many of those in the Chicago Public Schools, I've witnessed a remarkable turnaround of the schools under Mayor Daley, both physically and academically. The missing piece, which I believe is on the horizon, is the return of the middle class parents. Hopefully the yuppies and buppies moving remaining in or moving back to the city will turn to their local public schools. Money can never compensate for the lack of parental involvement or available resources in the home in support of their childrens' progress. TIFs, by putting the dollars up front, are creating the residential environment that can draw this talent to the problem.

Well-put, Frumie.

Chicago Bearcat and I were musing yesterday about the two blank (with widely spaced windows) areas shown going up the south wall in the 1921 rendering. Were those to be exit stairs? If so, why two on the south wall instead of one north and one south? The elevator lobbies are on the inside of the doughnut, easily visible in modern birdseye views:

http://local.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&cp=qzctb47pwzgm&style=o&lvl=1&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=11385918&encType=1

Well, the podium in the 1921 rendering does not quite match what exists today. It's only reasonable to assume that the design went through some revisions before construction, which probably shifted the elevator cores inward.

Also, this building, in 1921, would probably have been the only 'scraper downtown to occupy an entire block. Without any alley elevations, the building would have to bear its downspouts on the outside.

Just found this composite on the Okrent Associates website:

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/229/unioncompbxr4.jpg

That's fairly massive.

^...and ugly.

^...and ugly.


Most certainly. All made possible by a massive diversion of our future tax dollars. This project's a loser....

By all accounts, this project is moving forward. I was sent out today to take photos of the south facade because that is where the main entry will be going. The photos were for AMA, specifically, who will move from their current River North location to the new tower.

South facade... interesting. Do you know if the taxi carriageway will be reopened? I HATE those jersey barriers in the middle of Canal.

By all accounts, this project is moving forward. I was sent out today to take photos of the south facade because that is where the main entry will be going. The photos were for AMA, specifically, who will move from their current River North location to the new tower.


The AMA is moving? Wow nice piece of news Geoff. I hadnt heard that before.

I can only assume they are. I know that what I was doing was for the AMA and I doubt that, if they were going to have a second location in the City, it would be so far from the first.

Arde - those barriers are for buses, not cabs. So, I don't think the carriageway would have an effect on them either way.

No, but by adding TIF, the city gets a greater degree of control over what happens with this project... right? If left to their own devices, most developers would slap a pre-cast concrete, steel-framed lightweight tower on top of this thing. But since they are basically helping to pay for it, the city can mandate a more sophisticated design with real stone and proper columns, pilasters, and cornice.

I do disagree with the use of TIF to subsidize office towers in the surrounding area, though, when they could be used to fix the horrendous traffic situation on Canal in front of Union Station, or to provide some seed funding on the West Loop Transportation Center.

Not really; there are a share of developers who have received TIF money and then stiffed residents and the city with poor work. It's just that many of these have not been called out or investigated like they should have.

Not really; there are a share of developers who have received TIF money and then stiffed residents and the city with poor work. It's just that many of these have not been called out or investigated like they should have.


All this is missing the point (yes ErmDiego we all know you're one of these Ralph Nader consumer advocate types along with the NIMBY PDNA group on this ridiculous crusade to improve the quality of construction in the South Loop (this is a bizarre special interest peculiar to you and a few others). TIFs are for economic development - not to ensure somebody's standards for historic architectural compatability or some nonsence like that are followed...

TIFs are for economic development - not to ensure somebody's standards for historic architectural compatability or some nonsence like that are followed...

But the city would not consider giving TIF funds for this project if there was not historic architecture involved...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/nearwest/chi-union_re_07-15jul15,1,1739788.story

200 condos on track for rehabbed train station

By Jeanette Almada
Special to the Tribune

July 15, 2007

The redevelopment of the eight-story Chicago Union Station headhouse, or main terminal building, into a 26-story mixed-use building will include 300 hotel rooms and 200 condominiums.

Plans for the residential units were disclosed to the Chicago Community Development Commission, which approved $58.8 million in tax increment financing for the project in June.

The Lucien LaGrange-designed building will have a mix of studio and one- and two-bedroom units with 575 to 1,600 square feet of space, Cathy Caisley, a Chicago Department of Planning and Development project manager, told commissioners.

The developers expect to price those units from $260,000 to $760,000.

Union Station comprises operating rail functions below a building at 222 S. Canal St., east of Canal between Adams Street and Jackson Boulevard, and the landmark headhouse, across the street at 210 S. Canal. The headhouse, with the Great Hall at ground level and offices on the upper floors, is considered an integral part of Daniel Burnham's 1909 Plan of Chicago.

Roughly 60 percent of the headhouse has been vacant for more than two decades, according to Caisley. The site is owned by the Chicago Union Station Co., a wholly owned subsidiary of the National Railroad Passenger Corp. (Amtrak), Caisley said.

Union Station Development Co. LLC will rehab the headhouse and enter into a long-term ground lease with CUSCo, according to Caisley.

The project will create a 26-story modernized structure with 600,000 square feet of renewed office space, 85,000 square feet of retail space, 300 hotel rooms and 200 market-rate condos, Caisley said.

This evening I noticed a space called "Union Gallery" in part of the old restaurant area off the southwest corner of the Great Hall. It was locked up at 7.30 pm but there seemed to be a bunch of historic photos on the wall, and it went all the way back to a window overlooking Clinton Street. Anyone know anything about this? Is it something the developer is doing as part of a sales center or something?

Mr Downtown is asking us a question?

Egad! I think I see a pig near my window! ;)

Anyone know anything about this? Is it something the developer is doing as part of a sales center or something?

Possibly. It's either a sales center, or it's an a stopgap use of space so that the first floor doesn't look abandoned.

http://www.nearwestgazette.com/Archive/0907/News0907g.htm

Union Station, other development addressed at WCA luncheon

By Susan Fong

Ambitious plans for developing the old Union Station took center stage at the West Central Association luncheon meeting on Aug. 22, which focused on West Loop development.

Lucien Lagrange posted some updated renderings... not too different from the old ones, but the detailing on the addition has changed a bit. The portion above the last setback now has inset balconies. :cry:

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/4492/unionstation1so9.jpg

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/4746/unionstation2gi8.jpg

Aside from updated renders, is this project moving ahead ?

^I'm guessing yes because AMA is planning to move into the office portion.

^I guessing yes because AMA is planning to move into the office portion.

Sounds like a good sign.

I received two separate emails from two individuals from Jones Lasalle Lang that are working on this development. They both said that they are moving forward with the project, but they also both said that there aren't any condos in the plans anymore.

I'm guessing that the scope of the project has changed a bit? I'll have to drop them a line in a few months to ask about the projected start-date of construction.

I'm guessing that the scope of the project has changed a bit? I'll have to drop them a line in a few months to ask about the projected start-date of construction.

Would this mean they will not get any TIF money anymore? I would be pretty pissed if they still got the TIF money for only office space...

Would this mean they will not get any TIF money anymore? I would be pretty pissed if they still got the TIF money for only office space...

I'm overjoyed. No residential means no balconies.

The purpose of the TIF funding is not to add financial viability to the project, but to fund high-quality design and finishes on the project like real limestone or terra-cotta, as supposed to precast concrete or something glassy.

At least, this is how I understood it.

I'm overjoyed. No residential means no balconies.

The purpose of the TIF funding is not to add financial viability to the project, but to fund high-quality design and finishes on the project like real limestone or terra-cotta, as supposed to precast concrete or something glassy.

At least, this is how I understood it.

Well if that is the truth, that is garbage. I find it hard to believe that the additional property taxes generated by adding quality finishes will offset the rather large TIF dollar amount. Union Station is a historic building and the City could easily tell the developer to beat it if they don't want to pay for the high end finishes the project deserves themselves. This area is not in need of additional office and/or hotel space. It is projects like this that gives TIF a bad name. Do you want to tell the mothers of the kids who are failing at the CPS that they did not get the funding because it was being used to repay a loan for money that the city gave away to make a nicer looking office building downtown? Someone should tell Amtrak that if they want government subsides, they should knock on the fed's door - it is not the children of Chicago that need to suffer to help these guys.

^ Fair argument. And in principle, you're entirely right.

But I really want to see this project happen. It would be nice to see a newly built neoclassical building in Chicago that actually uses high quality materials. Plus, the effect this would have on giving Chicago's premiere train station some major cache bears some mentioning.

Chicago needs something on the order of DC's Union Station or NYC's Grand Central terminal, and while this office building won't change the station itself it should go a huge way towards increasing Union Station's presence.

Chicago needs something on the order of DC's Union Station or NYC's Grand Central terminal, and while this office building won't change the station itself it should go a huge way towards increasing Union Station's presence.

Nice point, but we lost the opportunity to do this by tearing down Union Station's concourse back in 1969.

Both DC Union Station and Grand Central have grand, soaring interior spaces - these are what make the whole experience of these stations into something memorable. True, Union Station in Chicago has a Great Hall that's pretty grand and soaring, but virtually nobody goes through it anymore because it's far easier and more convenient to use the concourse stairs a block east, which are actually closer to the platforms and closer to most offices and tourist destinations across the river to the east (nobody goes west from Union Station). Amtrak has reinforced the emptiness in the Great Hall by cramming everything into the underground concourse - ticket counter, waiting room, passenger queuing for Amtrak trains, retail, restrooms, etc.

The underground concourse used to be topped with a soaring Beaux-Arts structure, but in 1969 it was torn down and replaced with the first of many Gateway Center towers, turning the concourse beneath into a claustrophobic rat's warren not unlike Penn Station in NY. I'm surprised that Chicago, which had such a huge role in forming the preservationist movement, has not really lamented this building like we did for the Chicago Stock Exchange, the Garrick Theater, etc.

^^
Very well put. But I think two things are at work in the lack of reaction you mention: Cynical resignation on the part of many (this IS Chicago after all, largely Richie's Chicago) who would like to care more; and disinterest on the part of many who couldn't care less.

http://chicago2ndward.com/2009/06

2nd Ward Projects
Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009

Union Station: The Union Station Head House, located at 210 N. Canal, is set for rehabilitation and redevelopment. The eight story building will be become a twenty-six story center for office and retail space, hotel lodging, conference rooms, residential condominiums, and over 250 below ground parking spaces. This development not only brings a splendid building but jobs, living space, and businesses to our Ward.

--
Is this project really any closer to starting?

I dunno. Bob Fioretti needs to revise his page... I believe it also notes the original Post Office project.

Nothing about the expansion in this article but Kamin points out so good (though obvious) points about Union Station and any new HSR........


http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel/ct-met-kamin-rail-hub-20100129,0,316129.story

High-speed rail is about more than trains, track
Architects could help America think differently about train travel

By Blair Kamin Architecture critic

January 31, 2010

.........But if a new order is to replace the old one, much more needs to be done than speeding up the trains. The entire passenger experience has to be thought through, from curbside to train shed. If you doubt that, take a look at the mess in Union Station, the likely hub of Midwest high-speed rail.

Envisioned by Daniel Burnham in his 1909 Plan of Chicago and completed in 1925 to the design of his successor firm, Graham, Anderson, Probst & White, Union Station once stirred the soul with spaces of Roman grandeur. Not now. Not by a long shot.

Today, the station, which serves Metra commuter rail trains as well as Amtrak trains, is (or should be) a civic embarrassment. The traveling public must endure a maze of corridors, packed waiting rooms and the stench of train fumes. The grandly scaled waiting room, with its sky-lit, barrel-vaulted ceiling, is empty most of the time — an ironic state of affairs, given the congestion elsewhere in the station. The room's most effective use these days is as a movie set or a camera-ready backdrop for local politicians, who held a news conference on high-speed rail there Friday.

A 1991 renovation by Chicago architect Lucien Lagrange upgraded ticket counters, along with Amtrak waiting areas and baggage-handling systems. But Amtrak, which owns the station through a subsidiary, runs far more short-haul trains now than it did then, so its facilities are overwhelmed. Even Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari says the situation is unacceptable. And well it should be. How do you get people to take the train instead of the plane if you're going to treat them with such disrespect?..............

There are the usual studies to be done, such as the one city transportation officials will conduct of the proposed $2 billion West Loop Transportation Center under Clinton Street, which would connect Union Station and the Ogilvie Transportation Center with CTA buses and rail lines, Pace buses and high-speed rail. But the real task is for Amtrak and Chicago's planners to come to terms with the changes that have made the once-grand Union Station a sad relic — and then come up with a vision to transform it................

I'm always reminded of how utterly craptastic most of Union Station is, especially when I walk down the north entrance stairs. Nothing says "Welcome to Union Station" better than a face full of diesel fumes. Unfortunately, since the platforms are buried beneath buildings, it'll take a small miracle to improve anything.

That seems like an odd objection, as the north entrance stairs go directly to the platforms. It was added about 1995 as a convenience, so you wouldn't have to walk outdoors all the way to Adams. And now you're complaining that when you go down to the train platform, there are trains down there?

And I assume that all of that money that's being thrown around doesn't include electrifying everything.

:no:

Mike

^^ No, and given that Chicago will always be the hub the transcontinental hub there will always need to take account for the diesel-electrics even if they electrified Midwest or Metra rail.


http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2010/02/why-union-station-doesnt-work-.html

February 01, 2010
Why Union Station doesn't work: For starters, the destruction of its concourse building in 1969

In my Friday post on President Obama's $8 billion high-speed rail plan and what it means for Union Station, I didn't have space to delve into one reason the station is such a warren: The 1969 destruction of its classically-inspired, riverfront concourse building, which was replaced by an utterly undistinguished commercial complex built using air rights above the concourse.

It's a long--and sorry--tale that echoes New York's far more infamous (and equally misguided) demolition of the great Pennsylvania Station.

As you can see in this photo of Union Station (above), which was designed by the distinguished Chicago firm of Graham, Anderson, Probst & White, the station once consisted of two parts: A headhouse building west of Canal Street, which contained the main waiting room, and a vaulted concourse building, where passengers boarded and disembarked from trains.

With passenger train traffic spiraling downward in the 1960s, the consortium of railroads that owned Union Station sold the air rights above the tracks and platforms of the concourse building to allow the construction of two office buildings. The concourse building was demolished in 1969--just three years after wreckers finished destroying an even more notable example of "American Renaissance" architecture, New York's Pennsylvania Station (below).

What replaced the concourse building? Not much of architectural or civic value.

Two buildings went up: 222 S. Riverside Plaza, a bland, gridded office tower (below), and the Union Station Multiplex (originally the MidAmerica Commodity Exchange) at 444 W. Jackson Blvd., a low-slung, lower-quality version of the John Hancock Center. Amtrak, now the station's owner, didn't come into existence until 1971.

The replacement buildings are as uninspired as their counterparts at the Pennsylvania Plaza complex in New York, and they offer the same desultory results--bland commercial modernism above, a rat-maze train station below.

What's past is prologue: If you're coming from the Loop to Union Station, you enter the station through the cramped base of 222 S. Riverside, where the grandeur of space still evident in the headhouse's Great Hall is altogether absent. The claustrophic corridors and crowded Amtrak facilities at Union Station sit beneath 222 S. Riverside.

"We're constrained by the footings" of that office building, Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari told me. "We're constrained by the cards we were dealt by the past owners."

When the Chicago Architectural Club ran a design competition for a high-speed rail station in 2008, it fancied that 222 S.Riverside and the Union Station Multiplex would disappear--or that someone would come up with the money to buy them and get rid of them.

The winning scheme, by Michael Cady, Elba Gil, David Lillie and Andres Montana (below), envisioned a flexible, ground-level public space, with openings that would provide views down into the station. The openings would admit natural light into the station--a quality sorely missing in the subterranean grotto of 222 S. Riverside. The spaces would be generous, not cramped, and it would be easy to find your way around.

"I go through [Union Station] all the time, and I still find myself confused every now and then when I'm there," David Lillie, of tvsdesign's Chicago office, told me. "Sometimes I don't really know if I'm going to the right spot."

If getting rid of 222 S. Riverside and the Union Station Multiplex is a pipe dream, where else should a new high-speed rail station go? In a refurbished Union Station where overcrowding is relieved by the proposed West Loop Transportation Center (below)? Or somewhere else downtown?

What are your ideas for getting Union Station back on track?

..

And now you're complaining that when you go down to the train platform, there are trains down there?

Yes, 'there are trains down there', and yes, it's more convenient than walking 2 blocks farther, but my evening train locomotive is parked right next to the stairwell. Hence, some serious fumes during the walk down. Nothing a solid wall along the stairwell wouldn't fix, but I wouldn't expect that to ever happen.

^ Sometimes, in a big, bustling city, you've gotta breathe in occasional fumes... Fumes are SEXY!

Fumes are SEXY!

I bet the ladies go wild when you use that line.

what are they planing to do with this project..? they are planing to build that old building or build on it. ;)

^ Huh? The plan is to build on top of the old station.

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2010/02/amtrak-asks-seven-teams-to-dream-up-plans-for-union-station-.html

Amtrak asks seven firms to dream up plans for Chicago's Union Station

February 22, 2010

Amtrak has asked seven architectural and real estate firms to submit proposals to redevelop a key part of Chicago's Union Station and plans to select a winning proposal by the end of May.

The firms include the Chicago office of architects Skidmore, Owings & Merrill; Chicago developer U.S. Equities Realty and the Chicago office of Jones Lang LaSalle, which currently manages Union Station for Amtrak.

The firms are being asked to come up with plans for Union Station's neo-classical Headhouse building (left), which is bounded by Clinton, Canal, Jackson and Adams streets.

"This is a pretty blank sheet of paper," said Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari. "We will be looking for some creative, imaginative and transportation-oriented uses of the building."

The request for proposals comes amid a sputtering economy and the prospect of more people using the already-overcrowded station, which serves Metra commuter trains as well as Amtrak's long-distance and regional routes. The Obama administration recently awarded $8 billion in funds for the development of high-speed rail networks, including a Midwestern network with a hub in Chicago.

"Certainly everything points to us having more service," Magliari said.

In 2006, a joint venture headed by Jones Lang LaSalle won the bidding to redevelop the Headhouse into a hotel, condominiums, office and retail space. The company planned to redevelop the existing structure and to build an 18-story tower on top of it. Amtrak, which owns Union Station, entered into a redevelopment agreement with Jones Lang LaSalle. But the $250 million project never proceeded.

The other firms invited to participate are Boston architects Goody Clancy, Philadelphia architects Wallace Roberts & Todd: the architectural firm of KlingStubbins, which has offices in Cambridge, Mass. and Philadelphia; and New York architects Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Kuhn.

Amtrak is requesting the proposals at a time when the real estate market has been battered by overbuilding and a credit squeeze. But the railroad concern wants to have plans in place that can be acted upon once the economy improves, Magliari said.

Magliari said the seven invited firms would be free to team up with other companies as they made proposals. Jones Lang LaSalle, for example, had worked with Chicago architect Lucien Lagrange on its previous Union Station plan.

In a separate move, the spokesman said, Amtrak has plans to improve the Headhouse's "Great Hall," the grandly-scaled, vastly-underutilized waiting room that has often served as a movie set.


The hall is not air-conditioned, which limits its ability in the summer to serve as a "customer-friendly" waiting room or as a site for special events, Magliari said. Construction on that portion of the project will likely not start, he said, until October.
..

Plans, plans, plans.

We've been here before..

If they do that, it had better be damn good architecture.

I agree with you.

Not exactley a surprise

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/commute/ct-met-getting-around-0614-20100613,0,6567067.column

Chicago on the low end of high- speed rail

New study predicts $6.1 billion annual boost from faster passenger service

Jon Hilkevitch
5:51 p.m. CDT, June 13, 2010

..........Chicago's share of new tourism and business dollars would be lower than the three other cities studied because Chicago is "already a very well-developed and mature urban center that has good connections with air travel,'' said Steven Fitzroy, director of operations at the Economic Development Research Group, based in Boston.

Still, Midwest high-speed trains operating through a Chicago hub would help the downtown by spurring more mixed-use, high-density development near Chicago Union Station, the report said. It noted that plans to expand Union Station include building an 18-story tower over the station..........

..

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?c=Page&pagename=am%2FLayout&cid=1241267278292


Of particular interest to this thread is the news that a "new Chciago control center" will be built. See last paragraph....

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 16, 2010
ATK-10-081
Contact: Marc Magliari
312 880.5390

AMTRAK IS WORKING ON THE RAILROAD IN CHICAGO
$115 million in projects underway in the nation’s rail hub
to improve reliability and safety

CHICAGO – Amtrak is using $115 million in funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to improve tracks, buildings and control systems in Chicago this construction season, as part of a $1 billion construction program to fund capital projects designed to rebuild the critical infrastructure of America’s Railroad.
“We are investing in our infrastructure in Chicago to improve our operations and support the growing demand to travel by Amtrak,” said President and CEO Joseph Boardman.
He noted America’s intercity passenger railroad posted a ridership increase of more than seven percent nationally in the last nine months, including double-digit increases on the Chicago corridor to and from St. Louis, with strong results also on the Hiawatha Service corridor to and from Milwaukee and the Wolverine Service corridor to and from Detroit/Pontiac.
“These Chicago projects will create jobs and make a significant investment in the future of Amtrak and the Midwest rail system,” said U.S. Senator Dick Durbin, D-Ill. “These improvements are in tandem with the $1.2 billion in Recovery Act funding for work in downstate Illinois that will help bring high speed rail to the Chicago to St. Louis line.”
More than three million Amtrak passengers used Chicago Union Station last year, with more than 50 daily trains, making it the fourth-busiest in the national network. In addition, the nearly 130,000 commuters who pass through the station on an average weekday, with 248 weekday commuter train arrivals or departures, will also benefit from the infrastructure improvements.
These projects in Chicago are underway and expected to be finished by February 2011.

Chicago Terminal & Facilities
Amtrak has awarded a $106.2 million contract to replace or renew approximately five miles of track and to renovate or repair buildings used to inspect and maintain Amtrak trains at Chicago Union Station. Water, air, lighting, natural gas and heated track switching systems will be replaced or upgraded to improve service reliability in Chicago’s harsh winters and to meet the demands of growing ridership. Jacobs Inc. and subcontractors Kiewit Western Co. and Swanson Contracting are performing the work.

Chicago Control Center
A new $9 million control center in Chicago is being built to manage and dispatch Amtrak and other rail traffic in four geographically separate areas, including Chicago Union Station North, Chicago Union Station South, New Orleans Terminal, and the Amtrak Michigan District. Operations at the center involve interconnections with territories owned by Metra (Northeast Illinois Commuter Rail Corp.), Norfolk Southern Railroad and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Canadian National railways.
When finished, the Chicago Control Center will improve the ability of Amtrak to manage daily train operations and extraordinary circumstances, with back-up capabilities elsewhere in the Chicago Terminal and at the Central National Operations Center in Delaware.
Pepper Construction Co. and vendors including Lucien Lagrange Architects, Environmental Systems Design Inc., ARINC Inc. and Jones Lang LaSalle are involved in the project.

too bad the actual building/center probably won't be as cool or as colossal as its name makes it out to be.

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2010/08/amtrak-steams-ahead-with-plans-to-revamp-union-station-picks-jones-lang-lasalle-to-head-effort.html

Amtrak moves ahead with plans to revamp Chicago's historic Union Station; picks Jones Lang LaSalle to head effort
Blair Kamin

...This time, the plans are expected to be more modest. Instead of a high-rise addition, the focus is expected to be on filling the seven floors of vacant office space above the Great Hall. Amtrak plans to occupy a couple of the floors, moving from nearby offices it now leases. Jones Lang Lasalle is charged with determining the best uses for the other floors. Offices, apartments and a hotel are all being considered.

The firm, whose team includes Chicago architect Lucien Lagrange, will also look at bringing shops and services for passengers into the Great Hall. And it will examine the possibility of making the headhouse a more street-friendly structure, with shops along Canal and Clinton Streets, Caprile said.

Hmmm...I thought Lucien was bankrupt (er, retired) now? Kinda strange.

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/10/union-station-upgrade-air-conditioning-more-restrooms.html

Union Station upgrade: Air-conditioning, more restrooms
Jon Hilkevitch October 4, 2010

The elegant but often-sweaty Great Hall of Chicago Union Station will be air-conditioned by next summer,and other improvements including more restrooms at track level are being added as part of a $40 million rehabilitation project announced today.

...Seating in Amtrak's boarding lounges at Union Station will be expanded to 950 seats, which is almost double the existing capacity, officials said.

The work, scheduled for completion in late 2012, will be followed by redevelopment of Union Station's headhouse building to include retail businesses.

So I'm all for improvements, but does anyone (except charity groups) actually use the Great Hall? It would be nice if they actually gave people a reason to go there, besides the 30-second gawk factor. How about more (and more comfortable) seats, and huge flat screens that show pending departure status. I'd much rather wait there than at one of those cramped Amtrak "lounges".

So I'm all for improvements, but does anyone (except charity groups) actually use the Great Hall? It would be nice if they actually gave people a reason to go there, besides the 30-second gawk factor. How about more (and more comfortable) seats, and huge flat screens that show pending departure status. I'd much rather wait there than at one of those cramped Amtrak "lounges".

There's a steady stream of people who go through the Great Hall to & from Adams or Jackson. And I've always seen a decent amount of people using the benches.

They definitely need a better information desk. Something modern and circular with a giant clock and departure info for Amtrak/Metra.

Obviously the thing that will help the most is adding more retail. That will only happen if you make improvements like adding AC.

Flat screen? No, we need a Solari board! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flap_display_board)

Much as I'd like to see more people in the Great Hall, I'm not sure people will wait so far from their gates. They get very nervous. The designers of O'Hare learned this in the early 60s; the big central waiting areas went virtually unused because people went to the "departure lounge" next to the gate and waited there. At Washington Union Station, people wait in the concourse, not the Great Hall. At New York Penn Station, they wait near the proper stairway.

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/229/unioncompbxr4.jpg

I know this design is old, but I like this better than any different designs for the building that other architects may have come up with since then.

I know this design is old, but I like this better than any different designs for the building that other architects may have come up with since then.
There aren't any other designs. That image is the exterior rendering of the only design for renovating union station, the same one that has the cutaway interior section rendering showing the diagrid pattern similar to the Hearst building in NYC.