From: ahk@chinet.com
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>On 18-May-14 13:32, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>>>>Metra's not doing shit. There's no money. Chicago Union Station
>>>>Company is 100% Amtrak subsidiary, although transit grants have
>>>>been used for certain improvements.
>>>Fine, it's not Metra's money that is changing the platforms.
>>Try to pay attention to what I've actually written, rather than
>>continuing with your assumptions. No one's changing the platforms.
>>It's being discussed. There's no plan. There's no money.
>There's no plan? You might want to tell the folks who wrote the
>"Chicago Union Station Master Plan", specifically the section in the
>"First Stage Final Report" called "Widen Selected Metra Platforms":
>http://www.unionstationmp.com/
Those folks would be consultants to city of Chicago. There's no agreement
among Metra and Amtrak.
>I don't see any mention of funding for their plan, but that's typical
>for US public projects: spend money on study after study rather than on
>actually getting something done that will benefit the people footing the
>bill.
This one's not a study that leads to future engineering. It's more of a
wish list. There have been prior "plans" suggesting removal of platforms,
removing the concourse, etc. Amtrak's had several redevelopment plans for
what they consider the non-rail side. Nothing's come of any of it, except
for removing a few of Pennsy's 1970 "improvements" in the early '90's
that opened things up a little and created a mezzanine with a tiny
food court.
You're not listening: This thing is hot air. There's no final decision.
There's no money. When there's agreement among all parties and funding,
that's something that can be called a plan.
--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
* Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)
|
