Quote:
|
SORD originally advocated for maintenance of the original rail orientation and station position, but the city decided that the "Sacramento Northern" plan, one of four proposed plans, was the best one, and SORD signed on--it wasn't their idea.
|
Are you saying that the CITY is forcing the station's move?
Quote:
|
About keeping the depot building where it is and building a new station, call me cynical but if the past is any indication of the future the station would sit vacant, a "homeless person" would start a fire inside "to keep warm" in the middle of August, and we'd have a parking lot for a couple of decades anyhow.
|
Well, there is some cause for that cynicism, but many of us love the old station including city leaders and local developers/planners and it would have made an ideal venue for a variety of retail or cultural uses. Tax credits and other funding sources and public demand would have made the right deal not just possible, but likely.
My point is that a concerted effort to preserve that station in its present location with a complimentary use is a better solution than to spend millions moving and renovating an obsolete facility. I know the word "obsolete" is a hot-button issue for preservationists, but force-feeding a smaller, early 20th Century station onto a 21st Century market/infrastructure is problematic at best and will most likely lead to a confusing and cumbersome solution. At the very least it will be far expensive then it had to be.