Los Angeles Union Station caused a sensation when it opened in 1939. For first-time visitors to the City of Angels who alight from an Amtrak train there, it still does. The station is monumental, built in a mix of Streamline Moderne, Art Deco and Spanish-influenced Mission Revival styles. It hosted trains on the Santa Fe, Southern Pacific and Union Pacific and replaced separate stations, none of which still stand. The station was built on the rubble of the city’s historic Chinatown, which was demolished to make way for it. Across the street from the station, one building from it survives as a museum. Today’s relocated Chinatown starts a few blocks away. The city’s Mexican heritage is celebrated in the Plaza, located directly across from the station, and on nearby Olvera Street.
When the station opened, it was called the Los Angeles Union Passenger Terminal, and it hosted 33 trains from the three above-named railroads, an operation commemorated on a historic sign preserved inside. All were intercity trains. That number dwindled over the ensuring three decades, until hitting its nadir in 1971. At that time, there were only 17 weekly arrivals and departures of Amtrak long-distance trains: the daily Southwest Chief to and from Chicago, the daily Coast Daylight to and from San Francisco (the Coast Starlight to Seattle operated tri-weekly at the time and was later upgraded to daily operation), and the tri-weekly Sunset Limited to and from New Orleans. That schedule remains the same today, although the Desert Wind through Salt Lake City and Las Vegas served the station from 1979 until 1997. The only corridor trains at the time were a few San Diegans on the Santa Fe’s Surf Line, two daily and one tri-weekly train in 1971, which increased to three daily trains the next year.
Today’s operations at Union Station are vastly different and much busier, except for the few long-distance trains that still originate and terminate there. Metrolink, the area’s regional railroad that started in 1992, runs several lines to and from the facility, and service has gradually been expanding over the years. Local service on Metro Rail serves the station, too. The Blue Line (now officially the A Line), a light rail line that goes to Long Beach on one end and to Azusa through Pasadena on the other (originally the Gold Line), uses Tracks 1 and 2, two station tracks and the platform in between. The Red (B Line) and Purple (D Line) Lines are subway lines located at the other end of the long passageway under the elevated tracks away from the waiting room and other station facilities. There is also a bus terminal nearby, the Patsaouras Transit Center on Vignes Street beyond the subway entrance. It serves about ten local bus providers, including Metro, but Amtrak California’s Thruway buses stop elsewhere. So, after decades of relatively little activity, Union Station is a very busy place once more.
Original 2004 Through-Running Proposal
Against this backdrop, there is serious talk of rebuilding the railroad infrastructure to accommodate through-running. The project is massive and expensive. It has been under discussion for more than 20 years, and a document from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) described it this way: “An Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) has been prepared for the LA Union Station Run-through Tracks Project proposed by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Caltrans supports Amtrak’s San Diego-Los Angels-San Luis Obispo Surfliner rail services, which rely upon LA Union Station and would use the run-through tracks. For this project, Caltrans is both the project sponsor and the lead agency for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, and the FRA is the lead federal lead agency for the National Environmental Policy Act compliance. Caltrans is also preparing a Program EIR/EIS with FRA for a 20-year improvement program along the existing Angeles to San Diego rail corridor.” The 47-page executive summary (ES, including photos) from the FRA document is downloadable below.
The FRA included this Background for the project (at ES-1): “The Los Angeles Union Station Passenger Terminal was constructed in 1939 to serve as the Los Angeles terminus for transcontinental passenger trains before the establishment of interstate highways and international airports. Access to Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) is not provided directly via main line tracks, but rather via a set of lead tracks. The current operation of the station requires trains to pull into the terminal and then reverse their direction of travel after unloading or loading passengers. Many passengers transfer to other trains or other local transportation modes, leaving the station to reach their final destinations. Since all trains, whether starting/ending their trips or continuing beyond the station, must enter and exit through the same set of lead tracks to connect to the main line, they are subject to delays either at the station platforms or on the connecting tracks while awaiting a slot at the platforms or access back onto the main lines.” The report also noted 126 weekday Metrolink trains and 25 Surfliner trains.
The report said that through-tunning tracks would improve service at the station (“LAUS”) in three ways. The first was “Improve near-term operational efficiencies and scheduling reliability for trains using LAUS by reducing the constraint on train movements that results from stub-end operation” and said that trains “are subject to delays either at the station platforms or on the connecting lead tracks while awaiting a slot at the platforms or access onto the main lines.” The second was “Improve pedestrian access and functionality of the passenger platforms, while also improving connectivity with other transit services at LAUS (LRT, subway, and buses).” The reported noted about 40,000 daily pedestrian movements at the station, as well as an LACMTA (Los Angeles County MTA, better-known as Metro) prediction of about 60,000 over the next decade and suggested that previously decommissioned Tracks 7 and 8 and their platform be returned to service. The third was “Increase the capacity of LAUS to accommodate planned growth of Amtrak and SCRRA (Southern California Regional Rail Authority, the official name for the agency that operates Metrolink) train services. The number of trains using the station is forecasted to grow from 159 today to 222 by 2010 and 278 by 2025. Initial analysis indicated that acceptable levels of service reliability could be provided by the current facilities only through 2010” (at ES-4-5).
The document (at ES-14) summarized the changes proposed at the time (illustrations at ES-13). They included modifications to switches and tracks in the “throat” area where trains enter and exit the station, eliminating the station’s mail facility and constructing new platforms where it had been, and raising other platforms, along with building a new lead track north of the station to accommodate the proposed through-running operation. Platforms 7 and 8, where the mail facility was, would be rebuilt, and they would serve Tracks 13 through 16, which would be reinstalled. Platforms 3 and 4, which serve Tracks 4-6, would be raised.
Current Proposal
We’ll now fast-forward 20 years, but we’ll do it in stages. The proposal is now known as “Link Union Station” or “Link US.” There is more information about it on the Metro website. Metro now describes the project this way: “As envisioned, Metro’s plan for better transit includes improvements at Union Station to address existing capacity constraints and improve connections between rail and bus services and future high-speed rail service. The Link US Project proposes new run-through tracks on an elevated rail yard to improve operational flexibility, expand LAUS capacity, and accommodate future high-speed rail service. It also proposes an expanded passageway.” Under “forecasted opening,” Metro said: “To be determined.” That means we can’t be sure that it won’t be completed anytime soon.
On June 6, 2014, Noel T. Braymer, President of the Rail Passengers Association of California and Nevada (RAILPAC) posted an editorial headlined “What’s So Great about Run-Through Tracks at LA Union Station?” He started with some background: “When the City of Los Angeles originally proposed building a Union Station on the current site, the railroads opposed it. One of their reasons was that site would have station tracks that would dead end as stub tracks. This would require departing trains to back into the station and terminating trains to be backed out to go to the yards. These excessive moves would easily create congestion with trains needing to back in and out of the new station’s throat. It also would create extra costs often requiring switching moves.” He also noted that the City had different goals: “The railroads preferred to upgrade an existing station as the Union Station by using the existing tracks that ran along the banks of the Los Angeles River. But the city wanted a Union Station that would redevelop the area around Olvera Street and create a new Chinatown while using the rundown existing Chinatown as the site of the new Union Station. The result was in 1939 the city got a beautiful new station with stub tracks that branched off from the river and dead ended at the station … Finally, hopefully by 2019, Los Angeles will get it all: a beautiful station with run-through tracks.”
Of course, that has not happened yet, and it won’t happen anytime soon. The Metro Board approved the project on June 27, 2019, an action that be considered a start, but not more. That day, Joe Linton reported in Streetblog LA: “At its Meeting today, the Metro board approved environmental studies for the Link US Union Station run-through tracks project. Link US will improve the overall efficiency of Union Station, especially for Metrolink, Amtrak and planned California High-Speed Rail. The final design, as detailed … includes an expanded central concourse hallway and eliminated loop tracks. These modifications reduced project costs while prioritizing rider convenience while transferring between trains … The overall Link US project is estimated to cost roughly $2.3 billion. Metro already has $950 million to fund the initial Link US phase, essentially just building a new elevated track structure over the 101 Freeway. An unfunded second phase costing nearly $2 billion would make extensive changes to Union Station itself, including widening the concourse hallway, raising the platforms, expanding the northern ‘throat tracks,’ etc.”
According to Linton, a loop track and an elevated concourse, among other things, were eliminated to save money. Linton’s report included renderings that showed “before and after” comparisons. He reported: “All in all, without big concourse re-works and the loop track, the overall Link US project budget would go from an estimated $2.7-$3.3 billion down to an estimated $2.3 billion. This cost savings may be just enough for the project to get funded and built in the near term.”
Braymer argued in defense of through-running, comparing capacity at New York Penn Station (which serves Amtrak, New Jersey Transit and the Long Island Rail Road with through-running Amtrak trains on the Northeast Corridor but trains from New Jersey and Long Island that run stub-end operations) with Gare de Châtelet-Les Halles in Paris. He said that Penn Station can handle three trains per hour per track, while the Paris station can handle 17. His “progress report” on L.A. at the time: “There are now 12 tracks available at Los Angeles Union Station with 10 now usually in use. There are problems now running up to 110 round trip trains a day or 220 movements with Metrolink and Amtrak. Rail passenger ridership runs about 50,000 passengers a day now.”
This is how Braymer described the project at the time: “The new run-through tracks for Union Station will serve 4 platforms (platforms 2, 3, 4 and 5) for a total of 8 station tracks. This will require a 4-track bridge south of the station over the 101 freeway. These four tracks will split into two sets of double tracks as the new trackage bends to the east as one set goes north and the other south to connect with the railroad tracks to the east along the Los Angeles River. New railroad bridges will also be built across the river so trains can connect with tracks on the east bank of the river. This will allow trains to enter or leave from any track near Union Station from both the north and south ends of the station.”
Nearly three years later, on May 26, 2022, the Metro Board approved what Linton had reported two days earlier as the Board being set to approve just over “$423 million CHSRA [California High Speed Rail Authority] funding [through June 30, 2028], as well as approve a $298 million ‘Partial Preconstruction Phase’ project budget.” According to Linton, the agenda also included canceling a highway project to widen the 710 freeway.
On June 29, 2023, Metro Executive Officer Scott McConnell gave an update on the Link US Project and a companion project, the Rosecrans-Marquardt Project that concerns a new grade-separation on a BNSF line in Santa Fe Springs (download below). We will concentrate on the Link US Project here. It was slated at that time to include seven platforms, up to six through-running tracks for regional and intercity rail (Metrolink and Amtrak), and four tracks for eventual high-speed rail, new common rail infrastructure to First Street, and lead tracks for Amtrak and BNSF beyond there. The benefits listed for the project were expanded rail capacity (from 178 trains now to more than 500, including future high-speed trains), reduced dwell times, more one-seat rides, an expanded passageway with amenities, wider platforms and ADA improvements.
According to the presentation, all target dates had been set back. The “new” forecast dates were summer 2026 for 100% of plans, specifications and estimates, construction to start “as early as 2025” and completion by summer 2033, which included a two-year contingency. The Current Cost Estimate was $1.93 billion, with total funding of $950 million with a project delivery date of 2033, as of that time. It was also noted that costs had risen by almost $982 million since the former 2019 estimate. Also, if Metro could not afford to pay for its share of the plan, “In response to a potential funding shortfall, cost overrun, schedule delay or specification noncompliance, LACMTA will provide CSHRA with a plan (‘Remediation Plan’) that LACMTA proposes” and that could include “to identify and quantify realistic potential cost savings measures from Project scope reductions,” among other measures. The next steps for a Remediation Plan were: New Cost and Schedule with Value Engineering, Work with Stakeholders to Reduce Risk, and Develop a Funding Strategy with the FRA, FTA, State and Amtrak, and Get it on the Funding Calendar.
On Jan. 10, 2024, Steven Sharp reported in Urbanize L.A. that the plan would be scaled back. Sharp described the original vision for the project and then said: “That vision, as with so many other ambitious infrastructure projects across the country, has faced the challenge of a growing budget that exceeds available funding: In June 2023, the price tag of Link Union Station had ballooned to an estimated $1.93 billion, more than double the $950 million Metro had secured for construction.” He described the newly reduced project: “After value engineering, plans how call for a reduction in the number of new-build platforms that would have access to the run-through tracks from seven to four. Those platforms would serve eight different tracks that would converge onto just two tracks crossing the freeway—also a reduction from the original plan, which had called for at least four.” Sharp reported on the three phases of the scaled-down project and said that it was still expected that heavy construction would begin in summer 2026, but, “a completion date for the project is not specified.”
Is the Project Worthwhile?
I examined the current Metrolink schedule, which became effective on Octob. 21, 2024. The current weekday schedule calls for 76 Metrolink trains and 15 Amtrak Pacific Surfliner trains in each direction calling at Union Station, for a total of 182 trains. Adding Amtrak’s long-distance trains, the total swells to 186 trains on Monday, Tuesday and Thursday, and 188 trains on Wednesday and Friday. Those numbers are far below the original 2004 FRA forecasts for 222 train moves by 2010 (85%) and 278 by this year (68%). These differences tend to render such forecasts at least somewhat questionable.
How much capacity, if any, must be added? That depends on how much service could be added, especially during peak commuting periods, when demand for seats is highest. Even with a stub-end terminal, the existing infrastructure can handle today’s traffic, including all the region’s commuters. Capacity is not constrained on weekends or during midday and evening hours on weekdays, so it will not be necessary to add more infrastructure for new service outside peak commuting times, at least not for new capacity. Most of the recent service additions have come on weekends and during midday on weekdays. Even if Metrolink expands to hourly service on every line, the added service would not add to the commuter crunch, at least not significantly. Metrolink is at its weakest in the evening, when more service would not require more infrastructure. With traditional five-day commuting in decline to some extent, we don’t know how many peak-hour trains will be needed in the future.
On the Amtrak side, the only long-distance train that arrives and leaves during peak commuting hours is the Southwest Chief to and from Chicago. One Amtrak train from Santa Barbara on the Ventura County Line arrives at Union Station during the late afternoon peak, and one leaves for Santa Barbara during the morning commute (with another leaving after 9:00). Of the ten Amtrak round trips to and from San Diego on the Orange County Line, two arrive at the beginning and end of the morning peak, and one arrives in the late afternoon. One leaves for San Diego during the morning peak, and two leave during the evening peak. Amtrak corridor trains are run as through trains, even with the current operation. Times from arrival to departure vary, with the best performance being for northbound trains (13 minutes’ dwell time, which rivals performance at Penn Station in New York, where through-running has been in place since 1917). There is no talk of expanding Amtrak service on the Surf Line and, even if there were, much of the expanded service would run outside commuting hours, when station capacity is not an issue. As variations in dwell time can demonstrate, there is also the separate benefit of a faster equipment turnaround with through-running, which is a different issue from capacity.
The question then becomes how much capacity would be needed if two potential high-speed-rail (HSR) lines come to fruition. One is Brightline West, which is slated to run between Las Vegas and two potential connection points with Metrolink. One would be Rancho Cucamonga on the San Bernardino Line, and the other would be at Palmdale on the Antelope Valley Line. Current plans call for transfers between Metrolink and Brightline West, but the proposed hourly service on Brightline West could bring more trains into Union Station if there is room for a through-running operation to and from Las Vegas on the San Bernardino Line, the Antelope Valley Line, or both. Again, though, most of the new service would run outside peak commuting hours.
The other potential new service is the California High-Speed Rail (CHSR) line, currently under construction in the Central Valley. While project sponsors at the California High Speed Rail Authority remain enthusiastic about prospects for completing the line between San Francisco and Los Angeles, with extensions to Sacramento and San Diego someday, completion remains decades off, and funding is becoming increasingly problematic as costs rise dramatically. Through-running, even for such an operation, would probably not become essential until a route to San Diego is established. The most expensive part of the line to build is north of L.A. to Bakersfield, through the mountains. Time will tell if the proposed line even gets built south of Bakersfield, given California’s financial condition and the fact that the current proposal has already been cut back due to funding difficulties.
So, time will tell about through-running for trains in the City of Angels. Scott Spencer, Operations Director of AmeriStarRail, is one of the nation’s most enthusiastic proponents of through-running, and has proposed running NEC trains south to Alexandria, Va., to implement through-running at Washington, D.C. Union Station. He also lists the benefits of through-running for Los Angeles. It is difficult to dispute that it can speed up an operation anywhere, because there is no need to wait for slots out of the station once a train is in. If money were no object, it would be easy to sell the concept, but transit generally is falling on hard times, due to the fiscal cliff that is hitting transit providers hard, now that the one-shot relief that Congress gave those providers during the COVID-19 pandemic is running out. There remains the issue of opportunity cost: Is it better to spend scarce dollars on the through-running project, or could the money be better-spent on other projects that could be built instead? Despite all these obstacles, will L.A. Union Station be rebuilt for through-running? As usual, time will tell.
There is one city where many people had high hopes that a new rail line would link separate services running on the North Side and the South Side of the City. That’s Boston, where the long-awaited “North-South Rail Link” was never built, and as things stand now, probably never will. We will examine the “Link that Failed” in the next article in this series.
