For decades, Chicago's hulking railroad bridges carried rumbling freight and passenger trains through the city, serving as a link that bolstered industrial and economic growth.
Twelve of these movable structures, which evolved in design as shipping needs and technology changed, were recommended for landmark status recently by the Chicago Commission on Landmarks.
"They are pretty standout structures," said Terry Tatum, director of research for the Chicago Department of Planning and Development's landmarks division.
"The city was such an important center of railroad commerce from the 1850s on that identifying structures of importance to that history was something that we wanted to do."
The most modern is the Chicago & Western Indiana structure on the Far South Side. It was completed in the late 1960s.
Another bridge the commission seeks to preserve is the asymmetrical 19th century Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway's Bridge No. Z-2, which played a crucial role in the development of Goose Island because it was the only rail line to service industries and the freight yard there.
One of the more impressive bridges, Tatum said, is the Pennsylvania Railroad Bridge, located south of 19th and east of Lumber [see bottom photo below].
When the bridge was completed in 1914, it was considered the most innovative style of the "vertical lift" model designed by engineers John Alexander Low Waddell and John Lyle Harrington. The bridge essentially operates like an elevator as its 1,500-ton span, which is suspended between two towers, is vertically raised and lowered by cables and pulleys.
Most of the bridges, which could get landmark status as soon as spring, are still operable.
They are interesting, and Chicago probably has a bigger concentration of such bridges than any other region. I wish I could see a listing of exactly which bridges are being preserved, bacause I think that a few of them are pretty distinctive. I may be one of the few people who can say that I've been on and/or under most of them.
That Milwaukee Road bridge mentioned in the article is an unusual swing bridge, with the pier quite a distance from the center of the span.
The "eight-track" PRR bridge apparently refers to the four double-track bascule bridges near Western Avenue (actually PRR B&O, and CJ), two of which open from each bank of the canal. As I've said in other threads, I'd love to see those operate (but they are no longer movable).
The CNW bridge mentioned in the article could be one of two bascule bridges over the North Branch--I suspect that it's the one right near the Loop, at one time part of the line out to Navy Pier. That one should be preserved, possibly to be used as part of some sort of connector line (trolley?) to serve the Near North area--that's been talked about off and on for decades.
The "Lake Shore & Michigan" bridges must be the lift bridges over the Calumet River. There were four bridges there once; only one (former PRR, I think) is still in use--and that one is apparently not being considered a landmark!
I can't figure out which IC bridge they're talking about, unless it's the swing bridge over the canal. That's a real antique. I'd guess that the "Chicago & Alton" bridge is that hulking thing over Bubbly Creek.
I'm a little surprised that they've included the "new" C&WI lift bridge. It's not in use any more, and might be threatened if they do anything to enlarge Torrance Avenue. Or maybe it could be incorporated into such an enlargement without jeopardizing its status.
The only two bridges I'd heard about previously being considered for landmark status are the St. Charles Air Line bridge (permanently down, currently in use) and the B&O bridge right next to it--abandoned, permanently up. If the plans to abandon the St. Charles Air Line go through, both bridges will serve no purpose--but they've been on the southern horizon of the Loop, like, forever, and would probably be missed if they were to disappear.
Landmark status isn't forever--Soldier Field was a landmark; it was altered to make it more suitable for modern-day entertainment needs of the game-attending public (can you tell I don't do that?), and has lost its landmark status as a result. These bridges are unlikely to be changed. Landmark status may prevent the railroads from destroying them if they really wanted to, but they are pretty sturdy, and should last all right if the railroads involved want them to, and they aren't likely to fall apart for a while if they're not being used.
I would hope that preservation as landmarks would include appropriate signage explaining their significance, and perhaps suitable places nearby for viewing them safely (especially the ones that still carry trains! ).
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
MP173 wrote:I would like to see the complete list and also the locations.
So would I.
I would like to see them added to this ASME site-
http://www.asme.org/Communities/History/Landmarks/
CShaveRR wrote:As I've said in other threads, I'd love to see those operate (but they are no longer movable).
As I've said in other threads, I'd love to see those operate (but they are no longer movable).
The article is unclear but one could infer they would be designated landmarks under city, county, or state law, not national law. The national law doesn't restrict the property owner but city, county, or state law may. Here's the national law:
http://www.cr.nps.gov/nhl/QA.htm
Movable bridges even though machines in a sense are civil engineering landmarks, not mechanical engineering landmarks.
S. Hadid
TheAntiGates wrote: CShaveRR wrote: As I've said in other threads, I'd love to see those operate (but they are no longer movable). Hey man, give ome of us non-chicagoans a bit of background here. You say that some of these bridges no longer operate, and are left down? Why is this? Do they no longer use the sanitary/ship canals for shipping?
CShaveRR wrote: As I've said in other threads, I'd love to see those operate (but they are no longer movable).
Masted vessels no longer use the Sanitary & Ship Canal west of Ashland Ave. and there is enough vertical clearance for tug/barge combos when the bridges are in the lowered position. I'm not sure about the five movable vehicular bridges on the Calumet River but none of the movable vehicular bridges on the Chicago River and its branches are manned full-time. When the bridges need to be raised, at scheduled times for pleasure boats or as requested for the now-rare commercial freighter, three crews are assigned to operate the bridges and leap-frog up or down the river with the vessels.
CSSHEGEWISCH wrote:Masted vessels no longer use the Sanitary & Ship Canal west of Ashland Ave. and there is enough vertical clearance for tug/barge combos when the bridges are in the lowered position. I'm not sure about the five movable vehicular bridges on the Calumet River but none of the movable vehicular bridges on the Chicago River and its branches are manned full-time. When the bridges need to be raised, at scheduled times for pleasure boats or as requested for the now-rare commercial freighter, three crews are assigned to operate the bridges and leap-frog up or down the river with the vessels.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.