The ambitious plan unveiled last month to expand and overhaul Union Station into a glassy, modernized high-speed rail hub is a dream for anyone who has wanted D.C.’s train depot to match in appearance and functionality its standing as the nation’s second-busiest station.
However, Amtrak’s $7 billion proposal is far from being realized, and not just because it still needs to find funding. Besides the money, there is a deeper aesthetic question. Will a Union Station of the future—new high-speed tracks housed in a glass-enclosed concourse —take special care to not upset the historic beauty of the current station?
That’s what a group of historic preservation organizations are concerned about. On the heels of Amtrak’s proposal, a coalition made up of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the D.C. Preservation League, the Capitol Hill Preservation Society and the Committee of 100 on the Federal City, released their own report on how an overhaul of Union Station would be balanced with maintaining its status as an artistic landmark.
Union Station, opened in 1907, is a well-kept relic of the Beaux-Arts era, with sculpting that recalls structures erected by the third-century Roman emperor Diocletian. The station has fallen into disrepair before, but was saved in the 1980s by a public-private partnership that restored its ornate look and turned its concourse into a buzzing retail district.
The high-speed hub called for by the Amtrak plan is anything but a copy of the original station. Instead, the new tracks would be housed in a glass-encased concourse extending from the rear of Union Station. Where today’s passengers currently enter the station through a vast marble hall, Amtrak riders two or three decades from now would pass under wavy glass roofs and sun-drenched corridors.
What the preservation coalition wants to ensure is that modernizing Union Station does not mean the end of its historic reputation. “Union Station is a national architectural icon and an irreplaceable Washington landmark,” the group’s report states. “Several stakeholders
want to make dramatic changes that could improve the station—or undermine an architectural and community icon.”
One of those stakeholders is Ashkenazy Acquisitions, which holds the contract on Union Station’s shopping mall and wants to expand the retail space. It has proposed opening two large holes in the floor of the station’s Great Hall, a change that would dramatically alter the majestic room’s look and experience.
Furthermore, the coalition worries that as rail and retail traffic continue to increase, Union Station would only get even more crowded with the creation of Burnham Place, Akridge’s planned 3 million-square-foot development of commercial and residential towers rising from above Amtrak’s lines. “Mixed-use development would produce jobs and tax revenue, but the new buildings could loom over the station and neighborhood, and flood an already crowded facility with more people,” the report states.
Of course, it might be a while before the coalition has to start truly fretting over Union Station. Nothing on Amtrak’s wish-list is going to happen before contracts are awarded and checks are written. And some of the money is surely expected to come from federal coffers. However, Congress is already chilly to the idea of doling out the funds to spruce up Union Station. Even Democrats, who tend to be far more hospitable toward rail funding than Republicans, are keeping their distance. Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) told Roll Call last week that Congress will authorize a substantial contribution to the $7 billion plan the day she makes the U.S. Olympic team.
“Well, I would say it’s just about as likely as me being in the Olympics,” Mikulski, 76, said.
