FOR years, Washington, DC’s leaders have dreamed of renovating, expanding and generally revolutionising Union Station, the city's main rail hub. Last month, the Union Station Redevelopment Corporation (USRC), which manages the 107-year-old terminus, announced that it had selected Beyer Blinder Belle, the architecture firm behind the late-1990s overhaul of Grand Central station in New York, to dream up what its Washington, DC cousin will look like a decade or so from now. USRC and its partners, Amtrak (America's government-funded passenger rail corporation) and Akridge (a large developer), are counting on “major investments from the federal government” to fund the effort, according to the Washington Post. The project’s backers have long claimed that it will triple capacity at the station. But as Gulliver has noted before, there might be better places to spend federal rail dollars than renovating a station. (Here's one suggestion.)

Yet these are exactly the sorts of infrastructure projects that America seems to be able to complete. It is easy to see why. Train stations are big and visible: something that a politician can put his name to, or a developer can point to and boast “I built that.” Other infrastructure is a lot more boring. Maybe people have a harder time noticing and appreciating overhauls of rail tunnels because they are literally underground. Track-straightening and bridge maintenance are similar investments: crucial but, for too many people, boring. I expect the federal government will end up dishing out a good deal of money to pay for the Union Station overhaul. But will it pay to replace the Cos Cob Bridge, which would improve journey times in the north east corridor? Don't count on it anytime soon.