CSSHEGEWISCH683 PCC cars may be a lot of streetcars, but CTA operated them on a relative handful of routes: Broadway/State, Clark/Wentworth, Cottage Grove, Halsted, Western, Madison, and 63rd. These also tended to be the last routes that were converted to buses.
True enough. The last non-PCC routes were converted in 1954, PCC routes in 1955-1958. The point is that there were lots of earlier cars, the newest from 1929 though most dated from the teens or even earlier, and lots of track due for renewal. In the choice between replacing streetcar track and replacing L cars the combination of need (500+ L cars) and little available funding - coupled with ridership loss on surface routes - made conversion of the PCC streetcars to L cars a reasonable choice.
Looking back at the PCC routes many of them traverse areas that had significant downturns in the late 1950s and 1960s - often as a result of highway construction through once vibrant neighborhoods. The L lines through the same areas also saw ridership loss during the same period even with new cars.
683 PCC cars may be a lot of streetcars, but CTA operated them on a relative handful of routes: Broadway/State, Clark/Wentworth, Cottage Grove, Halsted, Western, Madison, and 63rd. These also tended to be the last routes that were converted to buses. CTA also picked up a number of heavily used arterial bus routes when Chicago Motor Coach (the "Boulevard Route") was absorbed in 1952.
daveklepper I agree. And I also think that the CTA is one of the better managed public transit systems in North America, after that bad decision to get rid of ALL streetcar lines, when some should have been preserved, in my opinion.
I agree. And I also think that the CTA is one of the better managed public transit systems in North America, after that bad decision to get rid of ALL streetcar lines, when some should have been preserved, in my opinion.
Around Chicago, few would agree. Bloated staff, corrupt, often incompetent.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
CTA's decision about streetcars was not made lightly. There were a lot of factors in play.
1. Downtown Chicago - an area wider than just the Loop, was becoming nearly impassable for streetcars. "Minor" changes like making Dearborn Street one way were very disruptive. Chicago River bridge replacements also threatened fluid operation.
2. Most of the streetcar lines' track was due for renewal - ironically most of the downtown track had actually been replaced during 1943 - showing how important it was to keep the streetcars running. Even the long private ROW stretches on the outskirts were due for renewal.
3. The former CRT was in far worse shape. CSL brought 683 PCCs - 600 of them brand new - and about 1500 other cars - many of them wooden - to the CTA. CRT brought 455 steel cars and 800 wooden cars - the "new" cars dated from 1924.
CTA was able to retire a large number of cars after buying over 400 trolley buses along with lots of gas and propane buses. The last lines running with non-PCCs ended up with pre-CSL 1907 "Big Pullmans" in the 100-700 series, along with a few other similar, mostly wood, cars.
The decision to rebuild the postwar PCCs into rapid transit equipment was a by-product of the successful introduction of PCC technology in the 5001-5004 articulated sets and the 200 "flat door sixes" in the 6001-6200 series. CTA got enough conversions (570 total) to replace all of the wooden L cars after changing service patterns so fewer total cars were required. The last of the wooden L cars and the last streetcars were retired very close together. The remaining prewar PCCs and useful pre-PCC streetcars were by then 25-35 years old, with no money available to replace them. It's worth noting that the first cars CTA bought that were not financed "out of the farebox" didn't come unitl 1969, when the 2200 series cars were bought (by the City of Chicago, out of UMTA funds) for the Dan Ryan and Kennedy extensions.
The product shown in the linked video is not the result of an American company that makes small plans or has limited vision.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZRKm6PG918
Apple, Microsoft, Intel, Cisco System, etc. are not the result of people and teams that made small plans. And there are thousands of other examples of Americans and their enterprises that are world leaders and visionaries.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
Rehab on Fast Track
CSSHEGEWISCH Daniel Burnham may have made no small plans, but the execution often fell far short of his goals.
Daniel Burnham may have made no small plans, but the execution often fell far short of his goals.
Nevertheless, his influence on others and accomplishments were enormous. Very few architects/urban planners come even close.
Meanwhile in the neighborhood, the old post office has a new owner and perhaps a fine future.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-bill-davies-post-office-0514-biz-20160513-story.html
dakotafredIf we resign ourselves that such projects, which even Europe has managed, are beyond our reach, we might as well get comfortable in our Third World graves. Indeed: "Make no small plans!"
Amen!
Thanks to Schlimm for bringing this project to our attention.
I agree with people who think it a large bite for a city and state, and federal government, that are in, ahem, straitened circumstances. HOWEVER:
If we resign ourselves that such projects, which even Europe has managed, are beyond our reach, we might as well get comfortable in our Third World graves.
Indeed: "Make no small plans!"
I guess the author truly believes in the Chicago ideal:
"Make no small plans!" D. Burnham.
Why did they close all those rooms off to the public in the first place? What a waste of space that could otherwise be leased out for revenue to Amtrak. Good news they are going to open them again. Results look great so far.
The first stage of the proposal, turning the "Great Hall" back into the main waiting room, sounds practical and plausible. I think that the author lost me when he proposed to reinstate the concourse similar to what it was prior to 1966 by demolishing Riverside Plaza. His other proposals regarding a connection with North Western Station sound equally implausible and expensive.
Part 3
Part 4
Part 2
Go, Chicago and Amtrak!
I'll admit that, in my excitement, I have not yet read the story closely. I hope that the cost is not all for Amtrak's account. The city has a huge stake in bringing back a proper Union Station, in my opinion. The existing bus depot just doesn't do Chicago justice.
Renovation
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.