Add Kansas City to the list of major urban terminal renovations/adaptive reuse projects which have fallen on fiscal hard times. The Kansas City Star reports that the current mix of tenants (a science museum and several other cultural attractions along with a modest number of commerical tenants) do not generate enough rent to cover ongoing maintenance and capital reinvestment.

For details see this article:

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 838743.htm



Kans City Union Station article

That's too bad. I was there in June and marveled at how well the restoration had been done. Of particular note to folks on this board would be the twice-daily constumed interpreters giving guided tours and the "heritage section" of a corner of the depot which goes nicely into detail-- without tossing in too much railroad jargon--about the history of the depot and its restoration.

KCS is helpful in parking its business car train out back where people can see it, but that too needs more interpretation for folks who only see these black, red and yellow office cars and don't know what they were used for or why.

It's a beautiful station, a great attraction and something that Kansas City should be quite proud of.

http://nctrans.org
Wrinnbo@aol.com

What is the status of Indianapolis Union Station?


tmanz@afo.net

> What is the status of Indianapolis Union
> Station?

See the RyPN Editorial page; if you are accessing the Interchange directly go to www.rypn.org for the full links.


eledbetter@rypn.org

Project Silver Streak? More attractions needed? As seen in Erik's Indianapolis editorial, a rail museum would fit in nicely with the science museum. To my knowledge however(correct me if wrong), no one ever advanced such a proposal, though there has been a preservation group in the area for some years. The nearby KCT roundhouse, now being renovated into office space, could have been part of that. It is up to us, collectively, to have a vision for these projects and integrate ourselves into them in the initial planning stages. Developers and other planners do not think in the same ways we do, and without our input early on in the process, the trains will always be an afterthought.

http://www.rypn.org/
ryarger@rypn.org

I visited Indianapolis twice between 1986 and 1990 and was delighted with the general atmosphere at the Union Depot. A trip in November of 1999 was a real shock - the lively maketplace was padlocked, dirty and dark.

Could the trainshed and headhouse of the depot have been physically liked to the new mall? I'm sure it could have happened, if there had been the will to do so.

Washington Union Station is the poster child for the successful blending of transportation and retail functions. This depot is different in one important respect - along with thousands of daily rail and Metro passengers, DC is uniquely blessed with out-of-town visitors during all seasons of the year.

tmanz@afo.net

Sadly no real surprise here. The station has been under at least 3 and maybe 4 managements by now. Infighting seems to be the order of the day. Keep in mind that downtown Kansas City has been dead economically for over 20 years and there is little that goes on downtown at night. Few restaurants, no movie theaters, long gone retail community, etc. Even the much ballyhooed Crown Center shops all close around 5 PM. The only real night life is south at Westport and The Plaza; and sadly these two areas are far enough away where people stay there.

First and foremost, there is little at Kansas City Union Station to let people know about the heritage. That is unless, you consider displays of Lionel trains as an exhibit. What little information is on display looks to have been placed almost as an afterthought.

Sometimes I really wonder if the humane thing would have been to demolish the building and go forward.

jimhollis@ev1.net

> Could the trainshed and headhouse of the
> depot have been physically liked to the new
> mall? I'm sure it could have happened, if
> there had been the will to do so.

Well, it would have required blasting the mall through one to two additional city blocks, or else installing a two-block skywalk, but in principle, sure. The mall does have a skywalk link to a half-old/half new hotel (the Omni I think), which in turn has a front door 40 feet from the front door of the station headhouse.

eledbetter@rypn.org

The only real night life is
> south at Westport and The Plaza; and sadly
> these two areas are far enough away where
> people stay there.

Getting off topic, but anyone with an interest in AMerican urban history, public planning, landscape history and so on should visit Country Club Plaza when in Kansas City. It's America's first mall, and still a fascinating landscape and experience.

Here's a link to a quick history of the place.

http://www.countryclubplaza.com/pr_art01.html

eledbetter@rypn.org

It is difficult to revitalize an old facility to accommodate new functions, especially if the structure is of the size of KCUPT. The science museum is the largest tenant at the facility, and according to the Kansas City Star, that museum doesn't produce nearly enough visitors to provide a steady flow of revenue to support the station. The most ideal function for an old railroad station to be is a railroad station (or at least a transit center of some kind). Kansas City is only beginning to flirt with the idea of commuter rail, so providing enough trains to justify using it as a train station won't happen today.
I agree that the failure of KCUPT's revitalization is the location and the exhibits in it. But ultimately, financial success or not, the restoration was a good thing. Notwithstanding the appreciation that younger and future generations should have of being able to experience walking through a large, beaux-arts railroad terminal, the facility will be available when Kansas City follows the trends of similar cities and requires a transit hub for commuter trains, light rail, and bus systems.
> Sometimes I really wonder if the humane
> thing would have been to demolish the
> building and go forward.
And replace it with what, another office building like the ones adjacent to it? I am curious as what 'going forward' in this context would be. If a historic building is not financially successful after it's renovation, the restoration is not a failure. Historical, civic investments may take years to mature, and investments such as the restoration of KCUPT may not return in the form of direct, monetary returns. City parks don't directly produce much revenue either, but they are built and maintained.
The quality of life for Kansas Citians will improve because there is still a sufficient facility that will act as a transportation hub for commuters, plus an irreplaceable monument to Kansas City's past still stands.

agm2006@ksu.edu

I agree wholeheartedly that: "The most ideal function for an old railroad station to be is a railroad station (or at least a transit center of some kind)."

I grew up in KC in the 50's (even rode the Super Chief to Chicago once) and just visited the renovated Union Station two weeks ago. I hadn't been there in many years. I was just amazed at what they had done. Unfortunately the interior is so bright and clean that it wasn't like I remembered it at all.

There were lots of people there on a Saturday, but I couldn't figure out how even they would pay for the upkeep of what is the second largest train station in America. Most of the attractions, like Science City, are for kids. That's great, I suppose, but doesn't interest me that much. I do think that the Science City metal and glass structure where the west train sheds used to be ruins the historical nature of the building.

And because of the street and new buildings to the east in addition to Science City, the through platforms can never be used again. They said that there were plans to move the Amtrak terminal to inside the station. That would help a lot, I think. Bus service is there, but KC's transit sytem isn't very good.

This is an absolutely magnificent building and an important part of Kansas City's heritage. I just hope they didn't spend all that money for nothing.

Science City
spmarch@attbi.com

According to the Indianapolis Star at the time, the reason no sky walk was built was that the historic preservation commission nixed it as it would harm (in their opinion) IUS.

One of the options proposed at the time would have had a walkway that was wide enough to accomodate stores on at least one side of it, so that the shopper would have a continuous shopping experience between Union Station and Circle Centre Mall.

Today the food court at IUS is now a go cart racing venue and the Crown Plaza uses the headhouse for catered events.

In the trainshed, two tracks are in use by the Cardinal and Kentucky Cardinal, with another platform (two tracks currently removed) that could be used for future rail use.

The CSX main on the outside of the station, contrary to the editorial, has always been there...but has been covered over by the shed so as to hide the freight trains from public view.

Les Jarrett
Indianapolis, IN

> Well, it would have required blasting the
> mall through one to two additional city
> blocks, or else installing a two-block
> skywalk, but in principle, sure. The mall
> does have a skywalk link to a half-old/half
> new hotel (the Omni I think), which in turn
> has a front door 40 feet from the front door
> of the station headhouse.


Les@A-Trains.com

Kansas City didn't spend the money for nothing. Take hope. If nothing else, the renovation buys time. It reversed years of deterioration. It's absolutely not the facility that it was when I was there in 1983. Even if the powers that be close the doors tomorrow, the building has a new roof, and wil survive dormant in much better condition than it has been since it opened.

It's unfortunate that no rail passenger use can be made at present, but Amtrak rejected offers that it had to move in, saying it would have been to expensive. (And it probably would have been. Keep in mind, this is the same entity that just took out another mortgage on their terminal in NY.) Interestingly, the developers in both St. Louis and K.C. tried to lure Amtrak into their structures, but couldn't do it at an economicaly feasible price.

The one problem with any restoration and reuse is really money. We have to make these structures justifiable economicaly or as a cultural asset. And much as we'd like to see rail museums in old stations, there isn't a rail museum in the world that could have filled then train sheds in K.C. or St.L., let alone pay the enormous upkeep on such extravagent structures. A science museum comes a litle closer, as they get more people in the gate. I doubt K.C. could really justify a comercial developement, what with Crown Centre across the street. A musem seemed like a good fit to the voters. If one took a nod from Science and Industry in Chicago, then a rail component would be a good fit. This is definitely something to consider.

Union Station in St. Louis presented different problems. The train shed, (which thankfully has been preserved, but only with a lot of good fortune,) is so large, (the largest ever built in the U.S.) that no museum could ever have used that much space. Additionaly, St. Louis had mature museums of almost every conceivable type by that time, and none would have likely wished to move. A retail space seems like a much likelier option. And though the space has struggled with vastly increased competition from the suburbs, it has remained viable.

It is also interesting to note that both the Kansas City and the St. Louis developers actually incorporated a rail element into their plans, in spite of the fact that this was undoubtedly not going to generate any significant revenue in the imediate future.
K.C. has a viable two track platform, which could serve all of the metro areas rail needs at present. Likewise for St. Louis. (Neither generates significant intercity rail traffic.)

Let's hope that these, and other significant structures like them, can remain viable so that perhaps someday, when the climate changes, and intercity passenger rail service becomes viable agian, the're still there to be re-used yet again.

Sincerely,
David Ackerman

david_ackerman@yahoo.com

> The CSX main on the outside of the station,
> contrary to the editorial, has always been
> there...but has been covered over by the
> shed so as to hide the freight trains from
> public view.

Thanks, Les. I'll correct the Editorial.

Dallas Morning News
eledbetter@rypn.org

Amtrak is going to move in. Construction is taking place with a planned start up in October and December. A ticket room for Amtrak has existed for some time now. I'm not sure how they are going to link the ticket room to the platforms.

God Bless,
Gerald W. Kopiasz
Heartland Railroad Historical Society

> Kansas City didn't spend the money for
> nothing. Take hope. If nothing else, the
> renovation buys time. It reversed years of
> deterioration. It's absolutely not the
> facility that it was when I was there in
> 1983. Even if the powers that be close the
> doors tomorrow, the building has a new roof,
> and wil survive dormant in much better
> condition than it has been since it opened.

> It's unfortunate that no rail passenger use
> can be made at present, but Amtrak rejected
> offers that it had to move in, saying it
> would have been to expensive. (And it
> probably would have been. Keep in mind, this
> is the same entity that just took out
> another mortgage on their terminal in NY.)
> Interestingly, the developers in both St.
> Louis and K.C. tried to lure Amtrak into
> their structures, but couldn't do it at an
> economicaly feasible price.

> The one problem with any restoration and
> reuse is really money. We have to make these
> structures justifiable economicaly or as a
> cultural asset. And much as we'd like to see
> rail museums in old stations, there isn't a
> rail museum in the world that could have
> filled then train sheds in K.C. or St.L.,
> let alone pay the enormous upkeep on such
> extravagent structures. A science museum
> comes a litle closer, as they get more
> people in the gate. I doubt K.C. could
> really justify a comercial developement,
> what with Crown Centre across the street. A
> musem seemed like a good fit to the voters.
> If one took a nod from Science and Industry
> in Chicago, then a rail component would be a
> good fit. This is definitely something to
> consider.

> Union Station in St. Louis presented
> different problems. The train shed, (which
> thankfully has been preserved, but only with
> a lot of good fortune,) is so large, (the
> largest ever built in the U.S.) that no
> museum could ever have used that much space.
> Additionaly, St. Louis had mature museums of
> almost every conceivable type by that time,
> and none would have likely wished to move. A
> retail space seems like a much likelier
> option. And though the space has struggled
> with vastly increased competition from the
> suburbs, it has remained viable.

> It is also interesting to note that both the
> Kansas City and the St. Louis developers
> actually incorporated a rail element into
> their plans, in spite of the fact that this
> was undoubtedly not going to generate any
> significant revenue in the imediate future.
> K.C. has a viable two track platform, which
> could serve all of the metro areas rail
> needs at present. Likewise for St. Louis.
> (Neither generates significant intercity
> rail traffic.)

> Let's hope that these, and other significant
> structures like them, can remain viable so
> that perhaps someday, when the climate
> changes, and intercity passenger rail
> service becomes viable agian, the're still
> there to be re-used yet again.

> Sincerely,
> David Ackerman


hrrhs@aol.com