General Discussion Forgotten Chicago Forum
Feel free to discuss anything related to the website here.
L' trains
Posted by:
jjcairo
(---.proxy.aol.com)
Date: July 11, 2008 11:46PM
when i was a kid in the 50's i used to go down chicago ave to go to globlatt's department store and the woolworth's five and dime next door to it on the trolley bus, that was just a few doors west before ashland ave on chicago ave on the south side of the street. there was 'L' tracks that ran north and south about a block west of the store. they ran right above a women's dress shop and across chicago ave but i don't remember seeing any trains on the tracks above? then one day they tore them down. anyone remember this?
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
jjcairo
(---.proxy.aol.com)
Date: July 16, 2008 09:47PM
i got my answer from one of the other pages chicago sightings. it was part of the logan square bridge. thanks!
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
SuperCFL
(---.dsl.chcgil.sbcglobal.net)
Date: January 26, 2009 09:17PM
It was the old alignment for the Logan Square "L". They hadn't been used in passenger service since December 1951 (when the Dearborn Subway opened) and were used only for periodic training and shop moves after that. I think they were finally razed around 1964.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
SuperCFL
(---.dsl.chcgil.ameritech.net)
Date: May 14, 2009 01:28AM
The latest issue of First & Fastest magazine has some fantastic restored photos of that old line to Logan Square, taken when it was virtually brand new in the 1890s. A friend found the (very faded) photo book on eBay and spent a lot of time digitally restoring the pictures.
Lots of empty space next to the "L" then...but back then it was because the area was virtually undeveloped!
Lots of empty space next to the "L" then...but back then it was because the area was virtually undeveloped!
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
shekaago
(---.tmodns.net)
Date: October 20, 2009 02:53AM
Those overhead tracks had lead to a now-demolished, above ground Logan Square station. The present track alignment heads underground from just north of the California Blue Line station and now the Logan Square station is underground. The history of the electric "L" lines in Chicago is quite fasciniating! A great site to check out is www.Chicago-L.org. And the Chicago History Museum hosts a few "L" tours each year. One of the few nearly-original brick station houses along the Blue Line is the California station. Most of the other stations have been modernized. I understand the need to upgrade as parts of the line date from the 1890's but it is a shame that so much of the old station houses and architectural features and ornamental work from that era has been destroyed.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
shekaago
(---.tmodns.net)
Date: October 20, 2009 03:00AM
Oops! After re-reading your post, the tracks I think you are referring to ran down Paulina. This track was used by the L trains that ran from Logan Square to the Loop before the Dearborn Subway was built. A section of the old track now known as the "Paulina Connector" is being used again on the Pink Line.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
the_mogra
(---.hfc.comcastbusiness.net)
Date: August 26, 2015 04:55PM
boy do I remember those 'L' tracks first mentioned, from a kid in the '50s-'60s shopping at that Chicago Ave Goldblatts's store w/ my mom and sisters
but the thing you must grasp is those particular tracks could drive a young boy (like me anyway) crazy, in that we saw them and drove under them year after year after year AND NOT ONCE DID WE SEE A TRAIN ON THEM. I recall there used to be stations along those tracks at Grand, at Chicago, and other places but they were the first to completely vanish. Where could I go, who could I talk to back then who could tell me what was really happening. After all I wanted to ride on those tracks, and that yearning just increased with time. But the CTA took their time during the '60s, and gradually and with no public explanation (that I knew of) those 'L' tracks just disappeared, first from the south (at Lake St) and demolition progressing north. My thinking was how could the CTA just drop an 'L' route, certainly the trackage/right-of-way was irreplaceable. But by about 1969 the very last vestiges--the switched connections where it joined into the descending Milwaukee subway @ Evergreen, were gotten rid of.
Of course this little boy was fundamentally right back then. Now the CTA wants a so-called 'Circle Connector' line and I'd bet they wish they'd retained the elevated structure, so blueline riders could bypass heading (unnecessarily) into the Loop and instead go south/north along Paulina St and connect with the pink line tracks. One can only imagine if the CTA didn't need those pinkline tracks for traincar re-distribution between the blue & green lines in years past they would've torn those down long ago too
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/26/2015 04:58PM by the_mogra.
but the thing you must grasp is those particular tracks could drive a young boy (like me anyway) crazy, in that we saw them and drove under them year after year after year AND NOT ONCE DID WE SEE A TRAIN ON THEM. I recall there used to be stations along those tracks at Grand, at Chicago, and other places but they were the first to completely vanish. Where could I go, who could I talk to back then who could tell me what was really happening. After all I wanted to ride on those tracks, and that yearning just increased with time. But the CTA took their time during the '60s, and gradually and with no public explanation (that I knew of) those 'L' tracks just disappeared, first from the south (at Lake St) and demolition progressing north. My thinking was how could the CTA just drop an 'L' route, certainly the trackage/right-of-way was irreplaceable. But by about 1969 the very last vestiges--the switched connections where it joined into the descending Milwaukee subway @ Evergreen, were gotten rid of.
Of course this little boy was fundamentally right back then. Now the CTA wants a so-called 'Circle Connector' line and I'd bet they wish they'd retained the elevated structure, so blueline riders could bypass heading (unnecessarily) into the Loop and instead go south/north along Paulina St and connect with the pink line tracks. One can only imagine if the CTA didn't need those pinkline tracks for traincar re-distribution between the blue & green lines in years past they would've torn those down long ago too
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/26/2015 04:58PM by the_mogra.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
Jeff_Weiner
(---.sub-70-194-68.myvzw.com)
Date: August 26, 2015 10:39PM
I think that the biggest problem for preserving these structures is money. They can't just sit there, but need a certain level of maintenance. The CTA would be responsible if anything rusted through and fell on someone, and they are still underfunded even now.
My question on the Circle Connector would be exactly where it would go, north of Logan Square. Would the CTA have had to acquire more property for a right-of-way? Would they have tried running it over Kedzie? And how would this have impacted the connection to the Kennedy median portion of the Blue Line?
The CTA might have saved those structures if the City had offered to pay something towards extending the Humboldt Park line, to allow for some connection downtown, although what might have been more likely would be the Douglas/Pink line having always come downtown on the Lake Street tracks, and the Humboldt trains would run through the Dearborn Street subway.
Who knows?
My question on the Circle Connector would be exactly where it would go, north of Logan Square. Would the CTA have had to acquire more property for a right-of-way? Would they have tried running it over Kedzie? And how would this have impacted the connection to the Kennedy median portion of the Blue Line?
The CTA might have saved those structures if the City had offered to pay something towards extending the Humboldt Park line, to allow for some connection downtown, although what might have been more likely would be the Douglas/Pink line having always come downtown on the Lake Street tracks, and the Humboldt trains would run through the Dearborn Street subway.
Who knows?
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
Dunning1
(---.dhs.gov)
Date: August 27, 2015 12:53PM
Living out in the Dunning area for most of my life, I have always felt that when it comes to public transportation, the neighborhood is equally inconvenient to everywhere. With all of the money that was recently spent rebuilding two rapid transit lines that run within blocks of each other, I have always felt that the far south side and the west/northwest area of the city have been particularly underserved with public transportation. The old Addison Street bus used to be a Chicago Motor Coach Line that ran all of the way downtown, but with the opening of the Kennedy Median Trains in 1969, it was cut back to Lake Shore Drive. This all looks fine on paper, but with the elimination of the old express buses you are forced to share the bus with high school kids from about five high schools, as well as Cubs fans, and getting downtown takes a lot longer that it did in the past. From my area, there is no bus that runs down to either the Lake Street or Congress trains, and nothing going up to the O'Hare Line. Back in the 1920's, there was a plan afoot to run a subway out from downtown on the route of Avondale Avenue, currently the right of way of the Kennedy, and then turn west on Belmont, and terminate at Belmont and Oak Park Avenues. Nothing ever came of this. I also can't see why a subway or overhead train was never built along Grand Avenue out to the city limits. This would really help serve these areas. While the CTA extended the Harlem Avenue bus down to Lake Street from Grand Avenue, technically encroaching on PACE territory a few years ago, the current PACE CTA bus pretty much goes from nowhere to nowhere else. An extension up through the city on Oak Park Avenue, through Harwood Heights, maybe going west on Gunnison and terminating at the Harlem O'Hare Line station would help a lot of people. Yet nothing is done. Just goes to illustrate that there are really two Chicagos, east and west of the river. And those west of the river just get to pay the tax bills for the improvements east of the river. All of the money spent on cosmetics on public transportation, yet nothing spent on actually improving or extending the services.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
the_mogra
(---.hfc.comcastbusiness.net)
Date: August 27, 2015 01:24PM
I view the old Humboldt Park line (which I remember only from seeing partial trackage east of Western Ave up to about 1963) and the Paulina St tracks as totally separate matters, at least as far as making my point in this discussion. Extending the old Humboldt Park line is an ancient issue completely pre-dating the CTA; once the CTA got ahold of it in 1947 they wanted nothing more to do with it than to close/eliminate/tear it down which they succeeded 5 years from that. By contrast, the Paulina St tracks were merely surplus to the purpose (of getting people downtown) in CTA's view once the Dearborn subway opened 1951-52
Now the CTA says a Circle Connector is necessary because so many blueline riders travel downtown into the Dearborn subway when their ultimate destination is cross-town (like a person boarding at the Western Ave station at one end of the blueline and getting-off at the Western Ave station at the other end of the blueline, or similar scenarios). So they're clogging the downtown Dearborn subway portion unnecessarily, and it isn't just about getting riders downtown anymore. The CTA says a kind of circle connector line that travels cross-town will correct this, but where's the best place to locate it--along Ashland Ave or along Western Ave? Well anybody can see the old Paulina St tracks would've gone mightily towards this purpose, but the CTA threw them and the right-of-way out years ago. Yes hindsight's 20/20 but a smart rail-roader has an intuition their rights-of-way are to be preserved insofar as possible even if temporarily unused.
The 'money issue' you mention is the battle; the CTA's liability insurers no doubt said "even if you don't regularly use the tracks you must keep them in repair as if they were, or we won't cover claims resulting from anything on that old track length". But a portion was kept, south of Lake St (the CTA's own need then, as opposed to the public directly) that is now the pinkline. As I used to read about it, when the CTA got the federal gov'ts financial help to rebuild the old Douglas Park line over a doz. years ago they also said they wanted the Paulina St 'connector' elevated rebuilt, but the feds replied at first no, funds were to be used only on tracks that the public travels on directly. So thinking outside the box as it were the CTA adapted by making the paulina st connector the new Pinkline the public could ride themselves, and only then the feds agreed to fund rebuilding it (you might say we have the federal government entirely to thank for the pinkline's existence). So compromises are not only possible but necessary IMO in all cases, because a destructive alternative is unacceptable to anybody.
Getting off my high horse, you know nowadays when I go into those old neighborhoods--now gentrified--and try to envision the paulina st elevated structure I saw so much of in my childhood I can have a bit of trouble pinpointing where it stood exactly, at least in places (like around Grand Ave). The trestle over the commuter tracks establishes something, and north of division st certain homes are set back from the front of their properties curiously, because the 'L' used to stand immediately in front of their 2nd flr windows.
Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/2015 02:03PM by the_mogra.
Now the CTA says a Circle Connector is necessary because so many blueline riders travel downtown into the Dearborn subway when their ultimate destination is cross-town (like a person boarding at the Western Ave station at one end of the blueline and getting-off at the Western Ave station at the other end of the blueline, or similar scenarios). So they're clogging the downtown Dearborn subway portion unnecessarily, and it isn't just about getting riders downtown anymore. The CTA says a kind of circle connector line that travels cross-town will correct this, but where's the best place to locate it--along Ashland Ave or along Western Ave? Well anybody can see the old Paulina St tracks would've gone mightily towards this purpose, but the CTA threw them and the right-of-way out years ago. Yes hindsight's 20/20 but a smart rail-roader has an intuition their rights-of-way are to be preserved insofar as possible even if temporarily unused.
The 'money issue' you mention is the battle; the CTA's liability insurers no doubt said "even if you don't regularly use the tracks you must keep them in repair as if they were, or we won't cover claims resulting from anything on that old track length". But a portion was kept, south of Lake St (the CTA's own need then, as opposed to the public directly) that is now the pinkline. As I used to read about it, when the CTA got the federal gov'ts financial help to rebuild the old Douglas Park line over a doz. years ago they also said they wanted the Paulina St 'connector' elevated rebuilt, but the feds replied at first no, funds were to be used only on tracks that the public travels on directly. So thinking outside the box as it were the CTA adapted by making the paulina st connector the new Pinkline the public could ride themselves, and only then the feds agreed to fund rebuilding it (you might say we have the federal government entirely to thank for the pinkline's existence). So compromises are not only possible but necessary IMO in all cases, because a destructive alternative is unacceptable to anybody.
Getting off my high horse, you know nowadays when I go into those old neighborhoods--now gentrified--and try to envision the paulina st elevated structure I saw so much of in my childhood I can have a bit of trouble pinpointing where it stood exactly, at least in places (like around Grand Ave). The trestle over the commuter tracks establishes something, and north of division st certain homes are set back from the front of their properties curiously, because the 'L' used to stand immediately in front of their 2nd flr windows.
Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/2015 02:03PM by the_mogra.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
WayOutWardell
(---.dsl.chcgil.sbcglobal.net)
Date: August 27, 2015 10:47PM
The irony of the claim that no business would want to exist under the tracks along East 63rd is that the only businesses which exist along East 63rd are all under the tracks that remain.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/2015 11:02PM by WayOutWardell.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/2015 11:02PM by WayOutWardell.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
Vern H
(---.hsd1.il.comcast.net)
Date: August 29, 2015 03:40AM
Nice article about the old Humboldt Park line here. [url=http://forgottenchicago.com/features/remnants-of-the-l/]link[/url]
I also find it ironic how they talk about extending the Eisenhower branch of the blue line west, maybe to Mannheim? [url=http://www.transitchicago.com/blueweststudy/]link[/url] They really should have found a way to keep at least the Cook county part of the CA&E. Maybe the old Westchester branch too?
I also find it ironic how they talk about extending the Eisenhower branch of the blue line west, maybe to Mannheim? [url=http://www.transitchicago.com/blueweststudy/]link[/url] They really should have found a way to keep at least the Cook county part of the CA&E. Maybe the old Westchester branch too?
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
the_mogra
(---.hfc.comcastbusiness.net)
Date: August 29, 2015 04:11PM
yes it is certainly ironic. I don't know that I'd begrudge it much, though. This current extension discussion's a by-product you might say of IDOT widening the Ike from 3 lanes to 4 each direction west of Austin all the way to Mannheim. IDOT must also allow enough potential track right-of-way west of the Forest Park terminal so the blue-line maybe extended in the future too (at least that far). I'm not sure but Maywood may constitute a substantial 'pinch-point' on that count. Public meetings held over the past year or two on the expressway widening matter have heard considerable voices that the blue-line extension really needs to be and intergral part of the deal to reduce overall congestion, and they're certainly right to insist on this foresight.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
Jeff_Weiner
(---.sub-70-194-72.myvzw.com)
Date: August 31, 2015 07:02PM
the_mogra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I view the old Humboldt Park line (which I
> remember only from seeing partial trackage east of
> Western Ave up to about 1963) and the Paulina St
> tracks as totally separate matters, at least as
> far as making my point in this discussion.
> Extending the old Humboldt Park line is an ancient
> issue completely pre-dating the CTA; once the CTA
> got ahold of it in 1947 they wanted nothing more
> to do with it than to close/eliminate/tear it down
> which they succeeded 5 years from that. By
> contrast, the Paulina St tracks were merely
> surplus to the purpose (of getting people
> downtown) in CTA's view once the Dearborn subway
> opened 1951-52
>
Well, had the residents who used the Humboldt Park line insisted on keeping it running, and even convince the City to extend it west, the old structure and tracks between Evergreen Junction (at the portal) and Washington Junction (where the tracks diverged towards Paulina Junction) may have remained, allowing Pauline Junction to become a wye. The Humboldt trains would then proceed to and from the Loop over Lake Street.
> Now the CTA says a Circle Connector is necessary
> because so many blueline riders travel downtown
> into the Dearborn subway when their ultimate
> destination is cross-town (like a person boarding
> at the Western Ave station at one end of the
> blueline and getting-off at the Western Ave
> station at the other end of the blueline, or
> similar scenarios). So they're clogging the
> downtown Dearborn subway portion unnecessarily,
> and it isn't just about getting riders downtown
> anymore. The CTA says a kind of circle connector
> line that travels cross-town will correct this,
> but where's the best place to locate it--along
> Ashland Ave or along Western Ave? Well anybody
> can see the old Paulina St tracks would've gone
> mightily towards this purpose, but the CTA threw
> them and the right-of-way out years ago. Yes
> hindsight's 20/20 but a smart rail-roader has an
> intuition their rights-of-way are to be preserved
> insofar as possible even if temporarily unused.
>
The Circle Line keeps heading west. Back when, it would have been using the Douglas (Blue/Pink) tracks as well as everything north of Loomis Junction to Logan Square. I just don't see where the tracks would have gone, north of Logan.
Now, it seems like they want to follow the route of the Crosstown Expressway, running over, or at least parallel to the Belt Railway tracks.
> The 'money issue' you mention is the battle; the
> CTA's liability insurers no doubt said "even if
> you don't regularly use the tracks you must keep
> them in repair as if they were, or we won't cover
> claims resulting from anything on that old track
> length". But a portion was kept, south of Lake St
> (the CTA's own need then, as opposed to the public
> directly) that is now the pinkline. As I used to
> read about it, when the CTA got the federal gov'ts
> financial help to rebuild the old Douglas Park
> line over a doz. years ago they also said they
> wanted the Paulina St 'connector' elevated
> rebuilt, but the feds replied at first no, funds
> were to be used only on tracks that the public
> travels on directly. So thinking outside the box
> as it were the CTA adapted by making the paulina
> st connector the new Pinkline the public could
> ride themselves, and only then the feds agreed to
> fund rebuilding it (you might say we have the
> federal government entirely to thank for the
> pinkline's existence). So compromises are not
> only possible but necessary IMO in all cases,
> because a destructive alternative is unacceptable
> to anybody.
>
Money is always the problem. And insurance is a real consideration of cost.
> Getting off my high horse, you know nowadays when
> I go into those old neighborhoods--now
> gentrified--and try to envision the paulina st
> elevated structure I saw so much of in my
> childhood I can have a bit of trouble pinpointing
> where it stood exactly, at least in places (like
> around Grand Ave). The trestle over the commuter
> tracks establishes something, and north of
> division st certain homes are set back from the
> front of their properties curiously, because the
> 'L' used to stand immediately in front of their
> 2nd flr windows.
I've tried this using Google Maps on satellite view, scrolling from Loomis Juncion at the Eisenhower Expressway to the old Met bridge over the UP-Metra/BN-SF tracks west of Ashland. Lotsa new houses built where the tracks used to be.
-------------------------------------------------------
> I view the old Humboldt Park line (which I
> remember only from seeing partial trackage east of
> Western Ave up to about 1963) and the Paulina St
> tracks as totally separate matters, at least as
> far as making my point in this discussion.
> Extending the old Humboldt Park line is an ancient
> issue completely pre-dating the CTA; once the CTA
> got ahold of it in 1947 they wanted nothing more
> to do with it than to close/eliminate/tear it down
> which they succeeded 5 years from that. By
> contrast, the Paulina St tracks were merely
> surplus to the purpose (of getting people
> downtown) in CTA's view once the Dearborn subway
> opened 1951-52
>
Well, had the residents who used the Humboldt Park line insisted on keeping it running, and even convince the City to extend it west, the old structure and tracks between Evergreen Junction (at the portal) and Washington Junction (where the tracks diverged towards Paulina Junction) may have remained, allowing Pauline Junction to become a wye. The Humboldt trains would then proceed to and from the Loop over Lake Street.
> Now the CTA says a Circle Connector is necessary
> because so many blueline riders travel downtown
> into the Dearborn subway when their ultimate
> destination is cross-town (like a person boarding
> at the Western Ave station at one end of the
> blueline and getting-off at the Western Ave
> station at the other end of the blueline, or
> similar scenarios). So they're clogging the
> downtown Dearborn subway portion unnecessarily,
> and it isn't just about getting riders downtown
> anymore. The CTA says a kind of circle connector
> line that travels cross-town will correct this,
> but where's the best place to locate it--along
> Ashland Ave or along Western Ave? Well anybody
> can see the old Paulina St tracks would've gone
> mightily towards this purpose, but the CTA threw
> them and the right-of-way out years ago. Yes
> hindsight's 20/20 but a smart rail-roader has an
> intuition their rights-of-way are to be preserved
> insofar as possible even if temporarily unused.
>
The Circle Line keeps heading west. Back when, it would have been using the Douglas (Blue/Pink) tracks as well as everything north of Loomis Junction to Logan Square. I just don't see where the tracks would have gone, north of Logan.
Now, it seems like they want to follow the route of the Crosstown Expressway, running over, or at least parallel to the Belt Railway tracks.
> The 'money issue' you mention is the battle; the
> CTA's liability insurers no doubt said "even if
> you don't regularly use the tracks you must keep
> them in repair as if they were, or we won't cover
> claims resulting from anything on that old track
> length". But a portion was kept, south of Lake St
> (the CTA's own need then, as opposed to the public
> directly) that is now the pinkline. As I used to
> read about it, when the CTA got the federal gov'ts
> financial help to rebuild the old Douglas Park
> line over a doz. years ago they also said they
> wanted the Paulina St 'connector' elevated
> rebuilt, but the feds replied at first no, funds
> were to be used only on tracks that the public
> travels on directly. So thinking outside the box
> as it were the CTA adapted by making the paulina
> st connector the new Pinkline the public could
> ride themselves, and only then the feds agreed to
> fund rebuilding it (you might say we have the
> federal government entirely to thank for the
> pinkline's existence). So compromises are not
> only possible but necessary IMO in all cases,
> because a destructive alternative is unacceptable
> to anybody.
>
Money is always the problem. And insurance is a real consideration of cost.
> Getting off my high horse, you know nowadays when
> I go into those old neighborhoods--now
> gentrified--and try to envision the paulina st
> elevated structure I saw so much of in my
> childhood I can have a bit of trouble pinpointing
> where it stood exactly, at least in places (like
> around Grand Ave). The trestle over the commuter
> tracks establishes something, and north of
> division st certain homes are set back from the
> front of their properties curiously, because the
> 'L' used to stand immediately in front of their
> 2nd flr windows.
I've tried this using Google Maps on satellite view, scrolling from Loomis Juncion at the Eisenhower Expressway to the old Met bridge over the UP-Metra/BN-SF tracks west of Ashland. Lotsa new houses built where the tracks used to be.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
the_mogra
(---.hfc.comcastbusiness.net)
Date: August 31, 2015 07:29PM
excuse me but (unless I'm misunderstanding your satellite search) its NOT the track portion from Loomis/Mansfield junction north to the old Met bridge that's at issue because, after all, that essentially is today's pinkline. although it got rebuilt it's right of way there is where its always had been. but north of the creaky old 'Met' trestle over the UP-Metra/BN-SF tracks is where I can get tripped up a little. I think the old torn-down 'paulina st' elevated used to weave a little as it traveled through alleyways and over property fronts. Comparitively I don't think it enjoyed a generous right-of-way
to repeat my earlier mutterings as a little boy I endlessly wondered why there never where any trains running up there, in the early '60s primarily. the closest I ever came to seeing something was immediately prior to the CTA destroying the 'Evergreen junction', a few old L cars had been switched onto it for God knows whatever reason, which was probably 1969 (nothing south of Division remained by then)
to repeat my earlier mutterings as a little boy I endlessly wondered why there never where any trains running up there, in the early '60s primarily. the closest I ever came to seeing something was immediately prior to the CTA destroying the 'Evergreen junction', a few old L cars had been switched onto it for God knows whatever reason, which was probably 1969 (nothing south of Division remained by then)
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
Jeff_Weiner
(---.sub-70-194-73.myvzw.com)
Date: September 04, 2015 12:08AM
I'm betting a few old timers at the CTA probably were secretly kicking themselves that the agency hadn't saved those lines, back when the freight tunnel flood occurred. They could have had access to the Loop via some new trackage at Paulina Junction, and been able to move equipment to the Forest Park line via the Lake Transfer main to Harrison and Loomis Junctions. If the alderman had prevailed, and the Humboldt Park line had been kept running, they might have wanted that line to route those trains to the Loop. And if it was kept running, the CTA might have extended it west.
All speculation now, of course.
All speculation now, of course.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
the_mogra
(---.hfc.comcastbusiness.net)
Date: September 04, 2015 06:25PM
that the old Humboldt park branch line may possibly have been extended, eventually, had it even been kept (past 1953) is interesting speculation. certainly it would take years for the CTA to realize the need for it (but today anyway I'd say the need is obvious, but we can't extend a line we don't have anymore). Furthermore the CTA can't extend existing lines--they formulate grandiose plans about extending the red line east (to 130th) plus the orange line (to ford city) and the yellow line (to old orchard/westgate) but this talk has been going on for years and the most concrete answer the CTA might give the public is "well, we're just waiting for the money". not much different than me continuing to wait for a bigtime lottery win, IMO. sarcasm, but the residents in those neighborhoods probably feel like what they've been led to believe amounts to fairytales
the Humboldt branch line was torn down as if the CTA had a vendetta against it back then, plus the others that went with it. a lot if not most of that forsaken trackage had great utilitarian value, and I agree during the freight tunnel flooding it certainly could've played a valuable role. When the official agencies want to slash costs, the execution is quick and ruthless
the Humboldt branch line was torn down as if the CTA had a vendetta against it back then, plus the others that went with it. a lot if not most of that forsaken trackage had great utilitarian value, and I agree during the freight tunnel flooding it certainly could've played a valuable role. When the official agencies want to slash costs, the execution is quick and ruthless
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
PKDickman
(---.lightspeed.cicril.sbcglobal.net)
Date: September 04, 2015 08:44PM
the_mogra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> that the old Humboldt park branch line may
> possibly have been extended, eventually, had it
> even been kept (past 1953) is interesting
> speculation. certainly it would take years for
> the CTA to realize the need for it (but today
> anyway I'd say the need is obvious, but we can't
> extend a line we don't have anymore). Furthermore
> the CTA can't extend existing lines--they
> formulate grandiose plans about extending the red
> line east (to 130th) plus the orange line (to ford
> city) and the yellow line (to old
> orchard/westgate) but this talk has been going on
> for years and the most concrete answer the CTA
> might give the public is "well, we're just waiting
> for the money". not much different than me
> continuing to wait for a bigtime lottery win, IMO.
> sarcasm, but the residents in those neighborhoods
> probably feel like what they've been led to
> believe amounts to fairytales
>
> the Humboldt branch line was torn down as if the
> CTA had a vendetta against it back then, plus the
> others that went with it. a lot if not most of
> that forsaken trackage had great utilitarian
> value, and I agree during the freight tunnel
> flooding it certainly could've played a valuable
> role. When the official agencies want to slash
> costs, the execution is quick and ruthless
Hind sight is 20/20. The humboldt line ridership was down to 1500 a day when they closed it. That probably didn't even pay the electric bill.
They dismantled the North ave leg within a couple of years.
I think they did it to keep anyone from forcing them to reopen a money pit
They didn't pull down the rest til a decade later, when the lower half was in the way of the Washington-Hermitage redevelopment project.
The upper part was in the middle of the East Humboldt renewal area and since it was no longer connected they took it down as well.
-------------------------------------------------------
> that the old Humboldt park branch line may
> possibly have been extended, eventually, had it
> even been kept (past 1953) is interesting
> speculation. certainly it would take years for
> the CTA to realize the need for it (but today
> anyway I'd say the need is obvious, but we can't
> extend a line we don't have anymore). Furthermore
> the CTA can't extend existing lines--they
> formulate grandiose plans about extending the red
> line east (to 130th) plus the orange line (to ford
> city) and the yellow line (to old
> orchard/westgate) but this talk has been going on
> for years and the most concrete answer the CTA
> might give the public is "well, we're just waiting
> for the money". not much different than me
> continuing to wait for a bigtime lottery win, IMO.
> sarcasm, but the residents in those neighborhoods
> probably feel like what they've been led to
> believe amounts to fairytales
>
> the Humboldt branch line was torn down as if the
> CTA had a vendetta against it back then, plus the
> others that went with it. a lot if not most of
> that forsaken trackage had great utilitarian
> value, and I agree during the freight tunnel
> flooding it certainly could've played a valuable
> role. When the official agencies want to slash
> costs, the execution is quick and ruthless
Hind sight is 20/20. The humboldt line ridership was down to 1500 a day when they closed it. That probably didn't even pay the electric bill.
They dismantled the North ave leg within a couple of years.
I think they did it to keep anyone from forcing them to reopen a money pit
They didn't pull down the rest til a decade later, when the lower half was in the way of the Washington-Hermitage redevelopment project.
The upper part was in the middle of the East Humboldt renewal area and since it was no longer connected they took it down as well.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
Jeff_Weiner
(---.sub-70-194-74.myvzw.com)
Date: September 04, 2015 10:57PM
It's always about money.
The Englewood line was supposed to be extended to Cicero, as one route to serve Midway Airport. It never went past Ashland.
When first built, the Ravenswood (Brown) line ended at Kimball and Lawrence. There was practically nothing there. That's as far as they wanted to spend money.
The Jackson Park line was cut back to University. They didn't want to spend the money to rebuild a century-old structure.
Sad, isn't it.
The Englewood line was supposed to be extended to Cicero, as one route to serve Midway Airport. It never went past Ashland.
When first built, the Ravenswood (Brown) line ended at Kimball and Lawrence. There was practically nothing there. That's as far as they wanted to spend money.
The Jackson Park line was cut back to University. They didn't want to spend the money to rebuild a century-old structure.
Sad, isn't it.
Re: L' trains
Posted by:
the_mogra
(---.hfc.comcastbusiness.net)
Date: September 10, 2015 07:21PM
CTA in the '70s closes old Cermak 'L' stop on the greenline, citing 'low useage'. right.
almost 40 years later they rebuild that Cermak stop and reopen - now things are different. right.
I recall the Grand Ave stop on the blueline subway went through the same metamorphosis in the early '90s. right.
If one wants to point out an extreme example the new Oakton stop on the yellow line had a previous life too.
Understanding all this by you/me takes an acute perception of bureaucratic agency nonsense. It's not all about the money, it's just what people want to do and will foist on you at various points in time.
almost 40 years later they rebuild that Cermak stop and reopen - now things are different. right.
I recall the Grand Ave stop on the blueline subway went through the same metamorphosis in the early '90s. right.
If one wants to point out an extreme example the new Oakton stop on the yellow line had a previous life too.
Understanding all this by you/me takes an acute perception of bureaucratic agency nonsense. It's not all about the money, it's just what people want to do and will foist on you at various points in time.
