tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923291.post5011437605962781200..comments2024-03-26T09:42:38.709-05:00Comments on ArchitectureChicago PLUS: Union Station focus of Chicago Architectural Club's 2008 Burnham CompetitionLynn Beckerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03759748613223711212noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923291.post-28466943287429295742008-09-02T14:09:00.000-05:002008-09-02T14:09:00.000-05:00The brief is pretty clear that the high-speed trai...The brief is pretty clear that the high-speed train and transportation program is an excuse, in some ways, to think about the city. This is reinforced by the fact that the program includes more than transportation hub. If you have questions about the program, you can simply ask here, they have been very diligent about answering: <BR/><BR/>http://burnhamprize2008.blogspot.com/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923291.post-69346500460306891912008-08-14T11:32:00.000-05:002008-08-14T11:32:00.000-05:00Amtrak's capital budget is woefully underfunded, a...Amtrak's capital budget is woefully underfunded, and yet some massive influx of routes and ridership will somehow materialize which will necessitate shunting local riders elsewhere? As one of those incovenient suburban commuters, I say no thanks. Yes, the main building of Union Station is underutilized (the concourses are loaded with, yes, all those incovenient suburbanites) but that's mainly due to the building being west of the concourses, while almost all of the commuter traffic moves east into the Loop.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923291.post-81583784715500405642008-08-12T11:03:00.000-05:002008-08-12T11:03:00.000-05:00I guess I'm confused as well. You start off with h...I guess I'm confused as well. You start off with how wasteful the B37 project and Clinton Street subway would be, but then introduce a competition where they magically relocate all the suburban lines? Isn't that going to cost quite a bit more than either of the two projects mentioned above?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923291.post-45993237443239276002008-08-12T10:59:00.000-05:002008-08-12T10:59:00.000-05:00Agreed, that makes no sense. There's two problems ...Agreed, that makes no sense. There's two problems here - one is train service in this country - the other is the current design of Union Station (though one begot the other.) <BR/><BR/>But "wiping" away the majority of actual passenger train traffic, in favor of imaginary future train service ... seems a perfect way to ensure these will remain concepts, only.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923291.post-67170268153689794782008-08-12T09:59:00.000-05:002008-08-12T09:59:00.000-05:00I was very excited to downlod the brief only to be...I was very excited to downlod the brief only to be disapointed to read the "rules".<BR/><BR/>The CAC makes no real mention of what to do with the 20 or so suburban lines coming into the terminal. Just wipe them away?<BR/><BR/>Its confusing to say the least - are they now one level below the High Speed Rails?<BR/><BR/>Is Union Station really the best place for this station anyways? What about the acres and acres of empty land east of the river which could be utilise the St. Charles and B&O rights of ways. <BR/><BR/>Then theres the boundry - I think the program they ask for calls for much more than the boundry given -Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com