MAR 88 me 
 
 
 SPECIAL REPORT 
 
 OF 
 
 MR. JOHN F. WALLACE 
 
 TO THE 
 
 Committee on Railway Terminals 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CITY COUNCIL OF CHICAGO 
 
 BARNAED & MILLER PRINT, CHICAGO. 
 
SPECIAL REPORT 
 
 OF 
 
 MR. JOHN F. WALLACE 
 
 TO THE 
 
 Committee on Railway Terminals 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CITY COUNCIL OF CHICAGO 
 
 ON CONDITIONS RELATIVE TO THE PROPOSED UNION STATION 
 
 COMPANY ORDINANCE PROPOSED BY MR. BION J. ARNOLD 
 
 AND ALSO ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY 
 
 THE OFFICERS OF THE CHICAGO PLAN j 
 
 COMMISSION 
 
 Chicago, December 1st, 1913 
 
#^^ 
 
 ^0^ 
 
GENERAL CONSIDERATION. 
 
 In consideration of the Union Station ordinance, the funda- 
 mental question to be determined is the location of the new sta- 
 tion. It would seem fair and just to consider this question on its 
 merits alone, as comparing it with the several proposed locations : 
 
 A. "What is known as the Adams Street location ; 
 
 B. What is known as the Harrison Street location; 
 
 C. What is known as the 12th Street location. 
 
 The Adams street location is either preferable to the other 
 two locations, or it is not. 
 
 Considering the present situation, there would seem to be no 
 question as to this, the most important controlling element being 
 its relation to the convenience of the public using it and the gen- 
 eral interests of the public as a whole. As no proposition has 
 been advanced or considered looking to the abandonment of the 
 property used for railroad purposes north of Harrison street, 
 and as this development does not interfere in any way with the 
 freedom of movement between the South and West Sides, or inter- 
 fere with the Chicago Plan, there would seem to be no valid rea- 
 son why this site is not preferable. 
 
 While certain future eventualities, which are entirely conjec- 
 tural, might make the Harrison street situation a desirable one, 
 no one is wise enough to predict to a certainty whether this event 
 will happen, or when. 
 
 However, as the natural presumption is that the city will 
 grow and the business district will eventually extend southward, 
 there is a possibility that at some indefinite time in the future 
 this location would not be as objectionable or as inconvenient to 
 the use of the public as it would seem to be at the present time. 
 The uncertainties do not warrant its being selected now. 
 
 The same line of reasoning applies, but to a much larger and 
 greater extent, to the 12th street location. 
 
 It would, therefore, seem that if progress is to be made in the 
 practical settlement of this question, that a decision as to the 
 advisability of the selection of the Adams street site be settled 
 
 3288l»7 
 
without bringing in or considering any other factors than those 
 affecting location. 
 
 After the selection of the site, the next question to be settled 
 is the determination whether the concessions asked for by the 
 Union Station Company are necessary and essential to the proper 
 construction and operation of the Union Station for the satisfac- 
 tory and convenient use of the public. 
 
 The next question for determination is the value to the Union 
 Station Company of the concessions requested from the city, and 
 the compensation which the Union Station Company should render 
 to the city in the way of general street improvements for the 
 concessions granted. 
 
 This is the matter for careful investigation as to values of 
 streets and alleys vacated, or other concessions made, and the 
 character and value of street or other improvements or conces- 
 sions which the city can fairly require of the Union Station Com- 
 pany as compensation ; in other words, a matter of trade. 
 
 There seems to be no reason why these matters of trade should 
 enter into the question of the determination or approval of the 
 site primarily, as their determination will require more or less 
 negotiation and time therefor, and the City Council, in the ap- 
 proving of the site, does not surrender or give away any of the 
 elements which it is necessary to consider in the question of arriv- 
 ing at a fair and just settlement with the Union Station Company 
 on matters relating to concessions, or the conditions under which 
 they are made, or the compensation therefor. 
 
 In the consideration of the second phase of the situation, it 
 is then proper to consider the conditions specified by Mr. Arnold, 
 which conditions should be applied to the granting of priviliges 
 or concessions, and not in the determination of the location of the 
 site. 
 
CONSIDERATION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CONDITIONS SPECIFIED BY MR. BION J. ARNOLD 
 
 PERTAINING TO THE 
 
 PROPOSED UNION STATION COMPANY ORDINANCE 
 
 Taking up and considering the conditions ivhicli Mr. 
 Arnold recommended be imposed upon the Union Station 
 Company before the granting of the ordinance: 
 
 Mr. Arnold's Condition One: 
 
 ''An agreement to co-operate with the other railroads 
 affected, and with the City, in straightening the South Branch 
 of the Chicago River, in some such manner as previously 
 discussed.'* 
 
 Comment: 
 
 Of the several plans that have been advanced for the straight- 
 ening of the river, not any contemplate any changes in the river 
 that would affect the property proposed to be used by the Union 
 Station Company. 
 
 Several of the constituent companies of the Union Station 
 Company have property holdings that would be affected by some 
 of the plans of river straightening proposed, but it is possible that 
 a location for the straightened river might be selected that would 
 not be objectionable to these companies. 
 
 On the other hand, at least two of the constituent companies 
 of the Union Station Company have no property that would be 
 affected by any of the proposed changes in the river. 
 
 It would therefore seem not advisable to make the consent to 
 
the straightening of the river a condition connected with the Union 
 Station ordinance, as it would require some of the constituent 
 railroads of the Union Station Company to assume obligations 
 that would not be required of others. 
 
 As the straightening of the river on some line is desirable, 
 and worthy of careful consideration, it should be referred for re- 
 port and advice to the commission of expert engineers, the forma- 
 tion of which has been suggested in reference to the general con- 
 sideration of the Chicago terminal railroad matters. 
 
 Condition Two. 
 
 **The placing, within a definite time, of all tracks of the 
 steam railroad companies in covered subways beneath the street 
 level, within the district bounded by 12th Street, Halsted Street, 
 Lake Street, and the Lake Front (except the elevated tracks of 
 the new C.&N..W. station and such tracks as are now or may 
 hereafter be located within the present depressed area be- 
 tween Canal Street and the Chicago Eiver; also the tracks 
 of the Illinois Central Railroad along the Lake Front)." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 It is understood that this condition does not apply or is in 
 any way connected with the Union Station ordinance, per se. 
 
Condition Three. 
 
 ''An agreement to co-operate with other railroads and 
 the City in working out a plan which will open from time to 
 time some, and ultimately all, or practically all, of the north 
 and south streets between State Street and Canal Street; 
 and all, or practically all, of the through east and west streets 
 between Randolph Street and Harrison Street ; and also Polk, 
 Taylor, 14th and 16th Streets, which are now blocked by rail- 
 road property." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 As the only through east and west streets which are not now 
 opened across the Union Station Company's property on the west 
 side of the river are Monroe Street, and Congress Street when ex- 
 tended, which Mr. Arnold and myself agree should be opened, it 
 would seem that as far as new east and west streets are concerned, 
 this matter could be left as a matter of negotiation between the 
 City and the Union Station Company, the same as other matters 
 relating to the vacation of streets and the granting of privileges 
 to the Union Station Company by the City, and the proper com- 
 pensation therefor. 
 
 The questions of the opening of east and west through streets 
 between 12th and 16th Streets, and the opening up of north and 
 south streets east of the river, it would seem, are involved, and 
 should be settled in connection with matters connected with the 
 straightening of the river, and are matters which could be con- 
 sidered and reported upon by the board of expert engineers re- 
 ferred to above. Or in connection with the Pennsylvania Freight 
 Ordinance. 
 
i 
 
 Condition Four. 
 
 **The concentration of long distance passenger traffic 
 into the fewest number of terminals practicable, and at such 
 locations as will offer the least obstruction to the extension of 
 the business district, consistent with reasonable accessibility 
 therefrom. * ' 
 
 Gomment: 
 
 Mr. Arnold and myself agree on this proposition. 
 
 Condition Five. 
 
 **An agreement to co-operate with the other steam rail- 
 way companies and the City in the development to its fullest 
 extent, along the most efficient modern lines, of the property 
 now owned by various railroad companies within or contigu- 
 ous to the business district of the City, with the ultimate ob- 
 ject of the complete development of such property, so that 
 the property now occupied by the companies in the business 
 district between State Street and the river can be vacated and 
 devoted exclusively to business purposes; or the surface re- 
 leased from railway purposes by placing the tracks under- 
 ground and developing the property above the surface for 
 business purposes." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 This proposition while desirable is so broad and comprehen- 
 sive, and contains so many complications, and any agreement upon 
 the part of all the railroad companies to co-operate in making it 
 effective would require the investigation into so many facts and 
 the determination of so many matters, that it does not seem that it 
 would be equitable to require the railroad companies to agree to it 
 in connection with the present ordinance. Moreover, a simple 
 agreement to co-operate would be so general and indefinite that it 
 
would seem much better to leave this condition to the future con- 
 sideration and report of the expert commission previously re- 
 f ered to 
 
 Condition Six. 
 
 ''Where streets or alleys are closed, temporarily or for 
 long periods, an equivalent area of value commensurate with 
 the period of occupancy shall be given in return by the rail- 
 road in widening other streets." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 This requirement is self -evidently a proper one. However, 
 it should be considered not in connection with the determination of 
 the site itself, but as one of the elements of the trade between the 
 City and the railroad companies in compensation for the street 
 vacations and general concessions upon the part of the City and 
 the railroads after the site has been determined. 
 
 Condition Seven. 
 
 ''The City to reserve control over all sub-sidewalk and 
 sub-pavement space, not specifically vacated in the ordinance, 
 that may be required for suburban transportation systems 
 or other public utilities." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 This condition is desirable, and should be taken up in con- 
 nection with the second step to be taken in the consideration of 
 the ordinance, relating to the concessions granted by the City to 
 the railroad companies. 
 
1© 
 
 Condition Eight. 
 
 "An agreement to co-operate with the City in the estab- 
 lishment of elevated thoroughfares across the railway prop- 
 erty lying between the South Branch of the river and Canal 
 Street, and westward as may later be deemed necessary. This 
 system to be co-ordinated with the bridge levels established 
 by the City, and with the necessary changes in north and 
 south thoroughfares to equalize the grades, so as to facilitate 
 , vehicle traffic. The ordinance to provide means for ascertain- 
 ing and finally to stipulate the division of cost of such changes 
 proportional to the relative benefits derived by the City and 
 the companies respectively." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 This condition is a reasonable one in the consideration of 
 questions relating to the grants and compensation therefor, which 
 should be provided for in the ordinance. 
 
 Condition Nine. 
 
 "Provision for a marginal way or river road contiguous 
 to the river, extending along the railroad property west of 
 the river between Lake Street and 16th Street, and the devel- 
 opment of suitable docking facilities, municipal or otherwise, 
 along the entire way, and underneath the bridge approaches 
 where practicable." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 If marginal way can be constructed and this facility provided 
 without interfering with new station, there is no objection. 
 
n 
 
 Condition Ten. 
 
 ** Provision in all passenger stations hereafter constructed, 
 for through, connected, or interchange tracks, so as to permit 
 interchangeability of suburban service between the roads op- 
 erating in different parts of the city." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 There seems to be nothing in the plans of the proposed lay- 
 out of the Pennsylvania Company which would prevent the con- 
 sideration of this question at the proper time, which is not objec- 
 tionable but desirable. 
 
 Condition !Eleven. 
 
 *'An agreement to co-operate with other roads to inter- 
 change the use of coach yard facilities with each other, if nec- 
 essary to carry out the through routing or interchange prin- 
 ciple for suburban service." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 This is a matter which can be referred to and considered by 
 the suggested board of engineers. 
 
 Condition Twelve. 
 
 "Commitment to the effect that the company will co- 
 operate with the other roads in the working out of a general 
 plan whereby the roads may be systematically grouped and 
 brought into two or more terminal stations with the least 
 amount of track occupancy.'* 
 
 Comment: 
 
 While this is a desirable end to be sought for, it does not seem 
 necessary to attach it as a condition precedent to the granting 
 of the ordinances now pending. 
 
12 
 
 Condition Thirteen. 
 
 ''An agreement to co-operate with other railroads and 
 the City in establishing universal facilities at Clearing, or 
 some other point, by means of which package freight (less 
 than car-load lots) now interchanged in the down- town dis- 
 trict, will be interchanged at such clearing point, and thus 
 prevent hauling freight into the business center and back 
 again as is done at present, — the effect of which would be to 
 release present down-town freight facilities for the legitimate 
 use of freight destined to and from the business district. ' ' 
 
 Comment; 
 
 This is highly desirable, but the controlling motive that will 
 bring it about upon the part of the various roads will be the 
 economy of time or expense in the handling of the freight in ques- 
 tion. 
 
 Condition Fourteen. 
 
 ''The removal of obstructions due to railroad occupancy 
 which decreases the width of the river channel as now estab- 
 lished, so as to permit the construction of bridges without 
 encroaching upon this river channel." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 As it is not shown that this applies to any of the property 
 proposed to be absorbed by the new Union Station Company, and 
 as it seems to be a matter under the control and powers of the 
 Sanitary District, there would seem to be no reason why it should 
 be considered at this time, as the jurisdiction over the river is 
 either under the absolute control of the United States Govern- 
 ment, for the purposes of navigation, or the Sanitary District, in 
 the performance of its functions. 
 
m 
 
 Condition Fifteen. 
 
 ''The granting of an ordinance to the Pennsylvania Com- 
 pany, for a passenger terminal, need not be conditioned upon 
 the granting of an ordinance to the same company for the use 
 of the proposed freight terminal, for it is not evident that the 
 company will need this additional territory for freight pur- 
 poses for many years to come, if the roads owning the prop^ 
 erty between Canal Street and the river would co-operate in 
 developing it to its fullest extent." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 This condition assumes a statement of fact upon which Mr. 
 Arnold and myself do not agree. However, the advisability of 
 treating the ordinance providing for the Pennsylvania freight fa- 
 cilities on the West Side separately from the Union Station ordi- 
 nance is a matter of policy entirely within the purview of your 
 Conunittee. 
 
 It is understood that the reason of the Pennsylvania apply- 
 ing for the concessions to enable it to provide new freight terminal 
 facilities on the West Side was to relieve the situation in order 
 that the present Union Station site might be extended by the addi- 
 tion of some eighteen acres and new provisions made for the Chi- 
 cago & Alton terminal at a point further south on land now occu- 
 pied by the Pennsylvania Company. It would seem as if the Penn- 
 sylvania Company would not have gone to the expense of several 
 millions of dollars in the acquisition of this property and in its 
 development if any practical plan could have been worked out by 
 it, in the development of the property it now owns between Canal 
 Street and the river. 
 
u 
 
 Condition Sixteen. 
 
 "By means of double decking Canal Street it makes the 
 property west of and contiguous to Canal Street available for 
 terminal purposes, and there is no reason why, if after analy- 
 sis, additional property is ultimately needed for freight pur- 
 poses, it should not be allowed west of and contiguous to Canal 
 Street; provided tracks are kept underground and the prop- 
 erty developed overhead for business or manufacturing pur- 
 poses." 
 
 Comment: 
 
 While Mr. Arnold enumerates this in his recommendations, he 
 
 does not class it as a condition, but simply as a suggestion. 
 
 The matter, however, should be taken up and considered in 
 connection with the second step in the consideration of the Union 
 Station ordinance, in the matter of adjustments of concessions 
 granted and things to be done in compensation therefor by the 
 Union Station Company. 
 
 In regard to the question 
 
 of 
 
 Providing in the Proposed Ordinance 
 
 for the 
 
 BBMOVAL AT SOME FUTUEB TIME 
 
 of the 
 
 PBOPOSBD UNION STATION 
 
 to Harrison Street 
 or to some location further south. 
 
 The principal condition mentioned by Mr. Arnold as a requis- 
 ite to secure his approval of an ordinance providing for a station 
 at the Adams Street site is that the Union Station Company 
 should agree at this time and in connection with the present ordi- 
 nance, to remove its station facilities or provide a new station 
 
w 
 
 either at Harrison or at 12th Streets or at some other location 
 when recommended by the suggested board of expert engineers, 
 and when required by the City Council of Chicago. 
 
 It is apparent that it would be difficult for the Union Station 
 Company to finance its present proposed improvements under a 
 condition of this character. 
 
 It would appear reasonable that if this condition is insisted 
 upon by the City Council Committee, that, first, some definite 
 period should be fixed before it would be applicable ; and, second, 
 that the railroad companies should not be arbitrarily placed in a 
 position which would render them liable to be required to move 
 their terminals to a location less advantageously situated less con- 
 venient to the public, or less favorable from a railroad point of 
 view, as -compared with its principal competitors. The difficulty 
 as to the fixing of a definite period is that a short period would 
 at least increase the difficulties in the way of, if not actually pro- 
 hibit the financing of the project. 
 
 The agreement on a time period long enough to meet the fore- 
 going objections would be so long as to be inefifectual in accom- 
 plishing the purpose intended. 
 
 In regard to the location at some future time of the proposed 
 new Union Station, at a position at least as comparatively prefer- 
 ential as that which the present Union Station occupies: — this 
 would be a very difficult matter to determine ; and in order to make 
 this definite it would be either necessary to arrange for a mutual 
 agreement between the railroad company and City at the time when 
 the change was required, or the reference of this matter to some 
 form of arbitration, for which purpose the proposed board of ex- 
 pert engineers might be selected. 
 
 In this connection, his condition of providing for a specific 
 way to bring about the settlement of a question so uncertain as to 
 time, so indefinite as to its scope, and so long in advance of the 
 time when the issues would probably be raised, seems to me to be 
 unadvisable in connection with the present ordinance. 
 
 In this connection it should be remembered that the probable 
 desirability of moving the station to a point further south would 
 be dependent upon the growth of the business district of Chicago, 
 
16 
 
 the moving south of its ''center of gravity" and the desirability of 
 better serving the public patronizing the railroads using the pro- 
 posed new Union Station. It would therefore seem that the rail- 
 road companies themselves would be the first to propose such a 
 change ; as no interest is more vitally concerned in the establish- 
 ment of a station convenient of access to the public than the rail- 
 roads whose revenues depend upon the business secured thereby. 
 
 It would seem at least fair, in this connection, to request the 
 railroad companies to express their views in regard to it and also 
 suggest the time limit which would be desired by them ; and also 
 to permit them to have a voice in suggesting the manner of the 
 settlement of the question, if it should ever become a question at 
 issue. 
 
 Furthermore, in the consideration of this question, it would 
 seem that the only motive of introducing it at this time was for the 
 reasons stated by the executive officers of the Chicago Plan Com- 
 mission, viz. : in order to influence the Lake Shore Company to 
 move to a point further south ; as it would be difficult to secure the 
 consent of the Lake Shore Company to such removal without re- 
 quiring the Pennsylvania to move likewise, and thus maintain the 
 relatively preferential positions of the two rival corporations. 
 
 It has not been shown, nor claimed in any of the statements 
 made before the Council Committee that the development of the 
 Adorns Street site would be in any way obstructive to the develop- 
 ment of a westward movement of the city, and as stated above, the 
 only motive for requiring the Union Station Company to move 
 southward (except it should find it desirable to do so, from the 
 standpoint of its desire to occupy such a position as would be most 
 convenient and accessible to its patrons,) is on account of the af- 
 fect it would have on its rival corporation, the Lake Shore Eail- 
 road. 
 
 It is therefore apparent that both of these corporations con- 
 sider their present locations desirable, and that either one would 
 expect to lose revenues in case one and not the other should move 
 their station to any point further southward. 
 
 If it is true that either of these companies would lose business 
 by moving southward, it logically follows that it is due to the fact 
 
17 
 
 that the station which is moved further southward would be less 
 convenient and less accessible to the public than where their sta- 
 tions are located at the present time, and to whatever degree new 
 station sites are less preferential, to that extent the public using 
 the new stations would be discommoded. 
 
 It would also logically follow that the one fact that would 
 justify such compulsory removal would be the advantages to other 
 classes of the public than those who use these stations. 
 
 Mr. Arnold's suggestion of the through routing and connect- 
 ing up of the suburban service of roads on the different sides of 
 the city, and his special recommendation in connection with the 
 suburban service that now enters the La Salle Street station, — 
 that it be carried through the station to the North and Northwest ; 
 and the further suggestion that a through passenger station be 
 provided for, below the level of the streets, over which either rail- 
 road or commercial structures could be erected, — would seem to 
 remove any possible necessity of a change in the La Salle Street 
 Station for some years to come; and that until such time, there 
 would be no reason why the Pennsylvania Station should be forced 
 to move to a less preferential location than that which it is pro- 
 posed to occupy by the new Union Station, between Jackson and 
 Adams Streets. 
 
 With the suburban business run through underground and 
 eliminated from the present La Salle Street Station, there is no 
 reason why the capacity of this station would not take care of the 
 through businesfi probably as long as the facilities it is proposed 
 to establish at the new Union Station to take care of the require- 
 ments at that point. 
 
 Eliminating the suburban train service, the number of through 
 trains entering and leaving the La Salle Street station is less than 
 one-half of the through trains entering and leaving the Union Sta- 
 tion. 
 
 The same statement applies to the number of passengers han- 
 dled at each of these stations. 
 
18 
 
 In regard to the Beconiniendation 
 
 of a 
 
 Section in the Proposed Ordinance 
 
 Providing for the organization 
 
 of a 
 
 Standing Commission of Engineers. 
 
 In the matters referred to the engineers for consideration by 
 the Terminal Committee, was first, the drafting of a section for in- 
 sertion in the Union Station ordinance for the organization of a 
 standing expert commission of engineers, to consider continuuous- 
 ly all the problems that have or may arise in regard to steam rail- 
 way terminal facilities inside of the city limits of Chicago. 
 
 This matter was originally referred to Mr. Beckwith, of the 
 Corporation Counsel's office; and the two engineers, Messrs. 
 Arnold and Wallace, were asked to assist him to report a section to 
 be embodied in the Union Station ordinance now under considera- 
 tion. 
 
 As the scope of this commission covers such a broad field for 
 consideration and investigation, and touches on so few matters 
 essential to the consideration of the matters in the present ordi- 
 nance now before the Council Committee, and as the provision for 
 this commission should require the most careful consideration 
 in order that its powers and duties might be so carefully defined 
 as to be made most acceptable to the various parties affected by 
 it, and also the complexed relationships which it might have to 
 both the City Council and the new public Service Commission of 
 the State of Illinois; it would seem advisable that this matter 
 should be provided for in a distinct and separate ordinance than 
 the one now pending. 
 
 It is suggested that if this meets with the views of the Chair- 
 man and the other members of the Committee, that its chairman be 
 requested to draw up a report to the Council Committee recom- 
 mending that a separate ordinance be drafted and considered, pro- 
 viding for the formation of this expert commission. 
 
1» 
 
 CON SI DERATION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Recommendations Submitted by the 
 
 Officers of the Chicago Plan 
 
 Commission 
 
 GENERAL STATEMENT. 
 
 The consideration of the recommendations submitted to the 
 Committee on November 28th by the officers of the Chicago Plan 
 Commission, and which are recapitulated into eighteen ''improve- 
 ments and restrictions which are strongly urged (by them) as nec- 
 essary beforfi any ordinance rights are granted west of the Chi- 
 cago River, north of 16th Street, and south of Kinzie Street," are 
 submitted herewith. 
 
 A majority of the requirements included in these recommenda- 
 tions were either recommended in my report, included in the plans 
 presented by the Union Station Company, or cover questions of 
 detail which would come under the jurisdiction of established de- 
 partments of the city. 
 
 Several of the requirements cover questions subject to the 
 jurisdiction of the city which would not be affected by the Union 
 Station ordinance, and several others, while included in the ' ' Chi- 
 cago Plan," refer to districts of the city not included or affected 
 by the proposed Union Station ordinance. 
 
 Taking up these reconmaended improvements and restrictions 
 separately : 
 
 1. *<The straightening of the River." 
 
 The Plan of Chicago, as originally promulgated, contemplated 
 the straightening of the river between 12th Street and 16th Street, 
 
20 
 
 and so far as I know there has been no change recommended in 
 this Plan, so far as the river is concerned, by the present Plan 
 Commission. 
 
 The straightening of the river between 12th Street and 16th 
 Street wonld not affect any property of the Union Station Com- 
 pany nor of any of the affiliated railroads of the Union Station 
 Company except the Burlington ; and I do not see, so far as the 
 consideration of the Chicago Plan is concerned, why the consent 
 to the straightening of this river, as provided in the Chicago Plan, 
 should be required in the proposed ordinance for the Union Station 
 Company. 
 
 2. **The construction of a connection beti^een Canal St. 
 and Orleans St." 
 
 In my report I recoimnended that ''Canal Street should be 
 extended in a northeasterly direction from near its intersection 
 with Lake Street to a connection with the North Side, providing 
 a direct additional connection between the North and West Side 
 sections of the City." 
 
 I consider this very desirable, and the details as to the definite 
 location and elevation of this proposed connection should be made 
 the subject of further study, and provision for it should be made 
 in the ordinance for the Union Station Company, so far as the 
 opening of this street would affect the Union Station Company or 
 the railroads entering the proposed Union Station from the North. 
 
 3. ''The xcridening of Canal St. from Randolph St. to 
 Archer Ave., to 108 feet." 
 
 In my report I recommended that ''Canal St. should be wid- 
 ened to one hundred feet, from 12th St. to Harrison St., and if pos- 
 sible further north, by extending this street eastwardly twenty feet 
 over railroad property, and supporting it over the tracks below." 
 
 The question as to whether Randolph St. is the proper point 
 at which to end the proposed widening of this street is a detail 
 which should be considered ia the final adjustments under this 
 ordinance. 
 
It is to be questioned whether the prospective traffic on Canal 
 St. demands its widening from 12th St. southward to Archer Ave., 
 and whether or not the widening of this portion of the street should 
 be taken into consideration in the ordinance for the Union Station 
 Company, as it is beyond the territory covered by the proposed 
 ordinance ; and further, if the widening of this street south of 12th 
 St. is a necessity, it should have been at least partially provided 
 for in the improvements nearing completion, which are being made 
 by the Soo Eailroad. 
 
 4. '*The establisliiuent of a uniform grade in Canal St. 
 as far as it is practicable; that is, from Monroe St. 
 sonth to 14tli St.'* 
 
 This is desirable if it is found to be practicable, and would 
 naturally work out if Canal St. were reconstructed on two levels, 
 as recommended in my report, as to that portion south of Harri- 
 son St. to 12th St. 
 
 5. **The opening of a through, east and \irest street of 
 Monroe St." 
 
 This should be provided for, and is recommended in my report. 
 
 6. **The construction of a river road from Fulton St. to 
 12th St." 
 
 The original Chicago Plan, as developed by Mr. Bumham, 
 provided for a river road from Fulton St. to 12th St. ; but in his 
 plan he contemplated the railroads using the property between 
 Clinton St. and Canal St., from 12th St. to Fulton St., for railroad 
 terminal purposes. 
 
 This moving of the property used by the railroads more than 
 three hundred feet westward would have provided a sufficiently 
 larger area of property available for railroad purposes so that 
 the taking from this property of a strip of land for a river road 
 adjacent to the river would not have at all inconvenienced the rail- 
 roads interested. 
 
 The keeping of the west line of railroad terminal property 
 
22 
 
 along the east line of Canal St., as is contemplated in the ordinance 
 under consideration, is without doubt a larger contribution to the 
 Chicago Plan than would be the opening of a river road along the 
 river ; and should be so considered. 
 
 If, however, as is mentioned in the text of the recommendation 
 of the Chicago Plan Commission, it could be found feasible to make 
 this river road an elevated structure, without taking from the rail- 
 roads the use of the area under this structure for railroad pur- 
 poses, the construction of this river road, in so far as it would 
 aifect the poperty of the railroads affiliated with the Union Station 
 Company, might be found desirable, and is a matter that should 
 be considered in the settlement of the concessions and compensa- 
 tions arising out of the passage of the proposed Union Station 
 ordinance. 
 
 7. ^'The -mridening of all east and -west viaducts betiveeu 
 Madison St. and 12th St." 
 
 As the construction of the proposed Union Station will neces- 
 sitate the rebuilding of practically all of the east and west viaducts 
 in the territory named above, it should be required that in the re- 
 building of these viaducts they should be widened to the full width 
 of the street, or wider if found desirable in the detail planning of 
 these improvements. 
 
 8. "Tlie provision around tlie head house on railroad 
 property of room for vehicles to stand \irhile loading 
 or unloading passengers; and the provision by the rail- 
 road company of safety islands in the street, on -ivhich 
 there is a car line, which is used by patrons of the 
 Union Station Company.*' 
 
 In so far as the provision around the head house on railroad 
 property of room for vehicles to stand while loading or unloading 
 passengers, is concerned ; this is already provided for in the plans 
 presented by the Union Station Company. 
 
 The provision for safety islands in the street is one that should 
 receive the consideration of the Committee. The Union Sta- 
 
tion Company's plans contemplate the setting of their building 
 sufSciently inside street lines to accomplish this purpose; but it 
 might be necessary to widen Adams St. on the north. 
 
 9. **Tlie construction of a foot suburay under the river 
 connecting the concourse of the proposed station, 
 wherever located, ivith the east side of the river.*' 
 
 This is very desirable, and should receive the earnest consid- 
 eration of the Committee. 
 
 10. "The provision of a space opposite the station for ve- 
 hicle stands." 
 
 The Union Station Company, in their plans, have provided for 
 a vehicle way within the building which provides for the loading 
 and unloading of cab passengers directly on the concourse level. 
 
 11. "The leaving open across railroad property of a space 
 150 feet Tvide on the line of Congress Street, such space 
 to be dedicated to the city, and when necessary via- 
 ducts to be constructed at the expense of the railroad 
 company." 
 
 The opening of Congress St. 150 feet wide is one of the prin- 
 cipal provisions of the ''Chicago Plan,'* and the ordinance for the 
 proposed Union Station Company should not permit the construc- 
 tion of any structure in connection with this station that would 
 interfere with this plan, nor should it abrogate any rights of the 
 city to cause the opening of this street across the property of the 
 Union Station Company or its constituent railroad companies. 
 
 On account of the length of time that may elapse before the 
 opening of Congress St. is realized, and the changed conditions 
 that may be brought about during that time, the dedication of this 
 strip at this time would seem to me to be neither necessary nor 
 desirable, as it is within the power of the city to negotiate this at 
 any time. 
 
24 
 
 12. "The keeping of the level of the viaduct roadivays 
 doivn to the level of the river bridges." 
 
 This is a detail of grade adjustments for the street department 
 to supervise, and is desirable if found to be practicable. 
 
 13. "The keeping of all portions of the viaduct structures 
 beloiv street level with the exception of girders along 
 the outside edge of the sideivalk. 
 
 This is a structural detail that should come within the juris- 
 diction of the Department of Public Works ; its accomplishment is 
 desirable. 
 
 14. "The opening up and carrying through of 16th St." 
 
 15. "The opening and making of a through east and west 
 street of 14:th St." 
 
 16. "The widening of the viaducts on 18th St. and 22nd 
 St." 
 
 While all of these improvements may be desirable, they are 
 outside the area covered by the proposed Union Station Company 
 ordinance, are not affected by it and therefore should not be con- 
 sidered in connection therewith but in connection with the pro- 
 posed Pennsylvania Freight ordinance. 
 
 17. "No clause shall be put in any ordinance requiring 
 the city of Chicago to agree that it will not permit 
 any construction landw^ard of the west line of the pres- 
 ent 200 feet channel of the south branch of the Chi- 
 cago river." 
 
 This clause evidently refers to the clause in the ordinance sub- 
 mitted by the Union Station Company, which reads : 
 
 (<« * * ^]^g gj^^y ^£ Chicago agrees that it will not 
 permit any construction of any kind landward west of the west 
 
25 
 
 dock line of the present two hundred (200) feet channel of 
 the South Branch of the Chicago Eiver at the streets from 
 West Kandolph St. to West Van Buren St., both inclusive, ex- 
 cepting only the portions of the abutments of the river bridges, 
 the locations of which have already been decided upon.'^ 
 
 The embodiment of this clause in the proposed ordinance is 
 necessary in order to insure to the railroads the occupancy of the 
 space under the viaducts on the streets named and the value of 
 which should be considered by the city in the compensations to the 
 city provided in the ordinance. 
 
 18. "The right of the city to open up as it may see fit 
 streets across railroad property." 
 
 This is a right already vested in the city which need not in any 
 way be abrogated or curtailed in the passage of an ordinance for 
 the proposed Union Station. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
29 
 
 Matters on Wliich Mr. Arnold and Mr. Wallace Agpree as 
 Desirable to Accomplisli. 
 
 <<- 
 
 '1. The desirability of two general station sites, in ad- 
 dition to the present Northwestern Station; one on the Lake 
 Front east of Michigan Ave., and south of 12th St., and the 
 other on the West Side, between Canal St. and the river." 
 
 "2. The desirability of eventually straightening the river 
 along some line far enough west to permit of opening all the 
 South Side streets as far west as Franklin, street. 
 
 "3. Provision for the eventual opening of Congress 
 street. 
 
 ''4. The opening of Monroe Street, to admit of the con- 
 struction of a new bridge across the river. 
 
 ''5. The elevation of Canal Street, as far as possible, 
 commencing at 12th Street. 
 
 "6. The eventual extension of Canal Street to a connec- 
 tion with the North Side, crossing the river. 
 
 *'7. The desirability of gradually removing the encroach- 
 ments of railroad property, between Michigan Ave. and the 
 river. '* 
 
 *'8. Any railroad remaining north of 12th St. to be con- 
 fined within building lines of all principal streets extended or 
 to be opened." 
 
 *'9. The desirability of these tracks north of 12th Street 
 to be placed under ground, and the ultimate covering and plac- 
 ing of these tracks so as to permit the development of the 
 space above for warehouse or other commercial uses." 
 
 '*10. The desirability of the ultimate treatment of the 
 La Salle Street Station and its facilities as per the Arnold re- 
 port." 
 
 **11. The desirability of handling all or as much as pos- 
 sible of non-Chicago freight, now handled through the con- 
 
30 ■ 
 
 gested portion of the city, at some point or points near the 
 outskirts of the city, or outside of the city itself." 
 
 *'12. The desirability of the establishment of a continu- 
 ing technical board or commission, preferably of three men, 
 to take np, consider and investigate and to have jurisdiction 
 over matters pertaining to railway terminal question, but so 
 constituted that its powers will not conflict with the powers 
 of the State Board of Public Utilities. 
 
 **13. In the eventual opening, extending, widening and 
 connecting up of all existing streets which are recommended to 
 be opened, widened, extended or connected, in the recommen- 
 dation submitted to your committee by the officers of the Chi- 
 cago Plan Commission, under date of November 28th, 1913. 
 
 "14. In the principle of routeing through suburban 
 trains, if details of operation can be practically worked out. 
 
 i' c'> offt ^15. That the Union Station Company and railroad com- 
 panies should pay or in some manner compensate the City 
 for all property vacated, or for other concessions granted. 
 
 **16. We agree as to the desirability of providing for an 
 elevated roadway along the west bank of the river, north of 
 12th Street, between such points as may be found practicable, 
 without materially interfering with the use of railroad prop- 
 erty under the structure, provided the rights and obligations 
 of both the city and the railroad can be equitably adjusted." 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 John F. Wallace, 
 BioN J. Arnold, 
 Chicago, Dec. 1, 1913. 
 
 Of which the following Mr. Arnold and Mr. Wallace agree should 
 be provided for in the proposed Union Station Company ordi- 
 nance. 
 
 **1. The desirability of two general station sites, in addi- 
 tion to the present Northwestern Station; one on the Lake 
 Front east of Michigan Ave., and south of 12th St., and the 
 other on the West Side, between Canal St. and the river." 
 
31 
 
 The site proposed in the Union Station Company ordinance 
 is in accordance with this statement. 
 
 *'2. The desirability of eventually straightening the 
 river along some line far enough west to permit of opening 
 all the South Side streets as far west as Franklin Street." 
 
 Agree that an agreement to co-operate in this matter should 
 be incorporated in the ordinance. 
 
 "3. Provision for the eventual opening of Congress 
 Street." 
 
 "4. The opening of Monroe Street, to admit of the con- 
 struction of a new bridge across the river." 
 
 *'5. The elevation of Canal Street, as far as possible, 
 commencing at 12th St.," at least as far north as Harrison 
 Street. 
 
 ''6. The eventual extension of Canal Street to a connec- 
 tion with the North Side, crossing the river," reserving the 
 division of cost for future consideration of the Committee. 
 
 "12. The desirability of the establishment of a continu- 
 ing technical board or commission, preferably of three men, 
 to take up, consider and investigate and to have jurisdiction 
 over matters pertaining to railway terminal questions, but so 
 constituted that its powers will not conflict with the legislative 
 powers of the City Council or of the State Board of Public 
 Utilities." 
 
 *'13. In the eventual opening, extending, widening and 
 connecting up of all existing streets which are recommended 
 to be opened, widened, extended or connected, in the recom- 
 mendation submitted to your committee by the officers of the 
 Chicago Plan Commission, under date of November 28th, 
 
 1913. 
 
 jf 
 
 '*14. In the principle of routing through suburban trains, 
 if details of operation can be practically worked out." 
 
 "15. That the Union Station Company and railroad com- 
 panies should pay or in some manner compensate the city for 
 all property vacated, or for other concessions granted." 
 
32 
 
 Under date of December 4th, 1913, Mr. Arnold submitted 
 ** matters additional to those agreed upon in Wallace- Arnold com- 
 munication," and included items numbered from 17 to 29, inclusive. 
 as follows : 
 
 No. 9. Arnold 
 Beport. 
 
 No. 5. Arnold 
 Beport. 
 
 "17. Dock Facilities Along River Road. 
 
 Provision to be made in all sections of the river road, both 
 on the ground level and underneath the elevated structures, 
 for suitable dock facilities or freight connections between rail 
 and water, except where it is unnecessary to occupy the space 
 by through connecting tracks." 
 
 * * 18. Efficient Development of Freight Facilities. 
 
 Agremeent to develop existing freight properties of the 
 railroads to the fullest extent along the most efficient modern 
 lines." 
 
 **19. Equalization of Levels. 
 
 Provision to be made for the equalization, so far as practi- 
 cable, of the levels of all viaducts across railroad property that 
 now exists or may be herein authorized, with those of the river 
 bridges and connecting streets or viaducts ; costs and benefits 
 to be assigned according to the methods prescribed in this 
 ordinance." 
 
 No. 2. Arnold 
 Beport. 
 
 **20. Depression of Tracks. 
 
 Provision to be made for the depression of tracks now or 
 hereafter located in the depressed area between Canal Street 
 and the Chicago River, to a sufficient extent to enable reason- 
 able equalization of the viaduct levels to be carried out with 
 reasonable approach grades." 
 
 No. 16. Arnold 
 Beport. 
 
 "21. Future Freight Facilities. 
 
 Provision to enable the railroad companies to ultimately 
 expand freight facilities, if necessary, west of Canal Street, 
 stipulating that tracks be kept underground and covered and 
 that proper buildings be erected. ' ' 
 
**22. Sub-sidewalk Space. 
 
 Easement to be provided for by which the city may reserve No. 7. Arnold 
 
 Boport. 
 control over all sub-sidewalk and sub-pavement and also sub- 
 surface space under railroad property not specifically vacated 
 in this ordinance." 
 
 23. Chicago Plan. 
 
 "Agreement that no structure will be erected without con- No. is. Arnold 
 currence with the City authorities and the aforesaid Technical 
 Commission that will interfere with the execution of the Chi- 
 cago Plan in so far as definite plans have at the time been 
 officially adopted by the Chicago Plan Commission. ' ' 
 
 24. Interchange Coach Yaeds. 
 
 "Agreement to be entered for facilitating suburban through No. ii. Arnold 
 routing by means of which coach yard facilities may be inter- ^^° 
 changed on a reasonable basis." 
 
 25. Cab Stand Space. 
 
 "Provision for standing room for idle cabs and other ve- 
 hicles so as not to encroach upon street space, adjacent to 
 either passenger or freight terminals ; this to be provided in 
 addition to space already provided for loading of vehicles." 
 
 26. Bridge Obstructions. 
 
 "Provision to be made by which existing or future obstruc- No. 14. Arnold 
 tions in the river channel or on abutting property will be re- ^^^' 
 moved so as to permit the construction of bridge piers and 
 approaches without incurring damages to the city." 
 
 27. Regrouping of Roads. 
 
 "Understanding or agreement to be made insuring co-ope- no. 12. Arnold 
 ration with other roads and the city in the working out of a Report, 
 general plan whereby improved and simplified regrouping of 
 railroad entrances into the city will be secured in order to 
 
u 
 
 facilitate the consolidation of passenger terminals or the im- 
 provement of freight areas." 
 
 28. Reservation op Air Rights. 
 
 *' Provision for reserving to the city the air rights over all 
 streets and alleys now vacated or heretofore vacated by the 
 city, or for which easements have heretofore been granted or 
 are in this ordinance granted by the city, and for the neces- 
 sary ground rights for the placing of supporting columns 
 within such streets or alleys or upon railroad property." 
 
 29. Recession by Pennsylvania Company. 
 
 Pages 18 and "Provision to be made in the Union Station Company ordi- 
 
 Beport nance, and concurred in by the Pennsylvania Company, 
 
 whereby the Pennsylvania Railroad Company agrees that, 
 
 when the capacity of the new passenger station to be built 
 
 upon the Adams Street site is reached, and in any event within 
 
 years (unless some method of through routing of 
 
 the main line trains shall have been adopted) it will abandon 
 the use of this station for its main line through passenger 
 trains and recede to a new terminal at 12th Street, or some 
 point south of 12th Street but no farther south than its prin- 
 cipal competitors shall be then located or shall have agreed 
 to locate." 
 
 Of these Mr. Arnold and Mr. Wallace agreed that No. 19 
 should be incorporated in the proposed Union Station Company 
 ordinance. 
 
35 
 
 CHICAGO TERMINAL 
 
 PASSENGER TRAIN STATISTICS 
 
 Station 
 
 Trains 
 
 Passengebs 
 
 Baggage 
 
 Mail 
 
 Express 
 
 Num- 
 ber 
 
 Per 
 Cent. 
 
 of 
 Total 
 
 Num- 
 ber 
 
 Per 
 Cent. 
 
 of 
 Total 
 
 Num- 
 ber 
 Pieces 
 
 Per 
 Cent. 
 
 of 
 Total 
 
 Num- 
 ber 
 Sacks 
 
 Per 
 
 Cent. 
 
 of 
 Total 
 
 Weight, 
 Tons 
 
 Per 
 
 Cent. 
 
 of 
 Total 
 
 Northwestern 
 
 310 
 
 29.5 
 
 49448 
 
 32.6 
 
 5876 
 
 25.4 
 
 10287 
 
 9.7 
 
 357 
 
 14.7 
 
 Union 
 
 280 
 
 26.6 
 
 34062 
 
 22.4 
 
 7427 
 
 32.2 
 
 46287 
 
 43.8 
 
 829 
 
 34.2 
 
 La Salle 
 
 193 
 
 18.4 
 
 35256 
 
 23.2 
 
 2795 
 
 12.1 
 
 25624 
 
 24.2 
 
 370 
 
 15.3 
 
 Dearborn 
 
 149 
 
 14.2 
 
 16884 
 
 11.1 
 
 3123 
 
 13.5 
 
 14550 
 
 13.8 
 
 374 
 
 15.5 
 
 Grand Central 
 
 34 
 
 3.2 
 
 3561 
 
 2.3 
 
 1272 
 
 5.5 
 
 1806 
 
 1.7 
 
 120 
 
 5.0 
 
 Central 
 
 85 
 
 8.1 
 
 12729 
 
 8.4 
 
 2611 
 
 11.3 
 
 7177 
 
 6.8 
 
 370 
 
 15.3 
 
 Total 
 
 1051 
 
 100% 
 
 151930 
 
 100% 
 
 23104 
 
 100% 
 
 105731 
 
 100% 
 
 2420 
 
 100% 
 
 
 111 
 
 inois Central Si 
 
 iburbai 
 
 1 not inc 
 
 luded in above. 
 
 
 
 I. C. Sub. 
 
 293 
 
 
 41217 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 465 
 
 
 
^ 
 
 Communication 
 
 from 
 
 MEMBERS OF CHICAGO PI^AN COMMITTEE 
 
 of 
 
 COMMERCIAL CLUB. 
 
 Chicago, 111., 
 
 November 28, 1913. 
 To the Committee on Railway Terminals — 
 
 City Council, Chicago: 
 Deab Sms: — 
 
 In June last Mr. Edward B. Butler, Chairman of the Chicago 
 Plan Committee of the Commercial Club, called together all those 
 who had ever served as members of Chicago Plan Committee 
 of the Commercial Club. Mr. Butler asked them to consider the 
 plans proposed by the Union Station Company as the Penn- 
 sylvania Railroad Company for passenger and freight develop- 
 ment on the West Side. At this conference a sub-committee was 
 appointed to investigate the matter and to report. This sub-com- 
 mittee engaged the services of Mr. L. C. Fritch, who made a 
 careful study of the proposed freight terminal, and submitted his 
 report. Mr. Fritch 's report shows that the freight terminal may 
 be worked out by depressing the railroad tracks from 16th Street 
 north. Subsequently, Mr. Wallace was engaged by your Commit- 
 tee to make an expert report and later the services of Mr. Arnold 
 were secured by a Committee of citizens. The valuable report of 
 these expert engineers together with the plans submitted by the 
 
3f 
 
 executive officers of the Cliicago Plan Commission, and others, 
 afford you material from which a solution of the problem can be 
 reached, satisfactory to all the people of Chicago. 
 
 We congratulate the City on the spirit of co-operation which 
 today is in evidence on the part of your Committee, the various 
 Civic bodies, and the Eailroads. It is not our purpose to submit a 
 definite plan, but we respectfully urge that in all of your delibera- 
 tions, the essential features of the plan of Chicago be ever in your 
 mind. To the end — that nothing shall be done which will make it 
 impossible, in the future, to carry out the salient points of the 
 Plan of Chicago. 
 
 Believing that the report upon the freight terminal as made 
 by Mr. Fritch for us, will be of value to you we take pleasure in 
 sending it herewith for your consideration. We also beg leave to 
 make the following recommendations — 
 
 First — That if your honorable Committee decides to recom- 
 mend that the Pennsylvania Co. be allowed to establish a freight 
 terminal on the west side near the site proposed by it, that no 
 general receiving or distributing freight terminals be allowed 
 north of a line fifty feet south of the south line of Harrison 
 Street — to end that nothing shall be done to interfere with the 
 future widening and development of Harrison Street and all east 
 and west streets north of that street. 
 
 Second — ^That all Railroad tracks north of the south line of 
 Twelfth Street be depressed below the level of the intersecting 
 streets, with the possible exception of an elevation across Polk 
 Street, as suggested by the report of Mr. Wallace ; provided, that 
 this elevation, in the opinion of your committee, is deemed neces- 
 sary for the best intensive development of the section affected by 
 the freight terminal. We especially ask your careful considera- 
 tion of Mr. Fritch 's solution of this particular problem. 
 
 Third — That should your honorable Committee decide to rec- 
 ommend that the Union Station Company be allowed to erect its 
 passenger station on the site proposed, that you consider the avail- 
 ability, for a Post Office site, of the west half, or more, of the 
 area of the two blocks lying between the Northwestern and the 
 proposed Union Station, and bounded by Madison, Canal, Adams 
 
as 
 
 and Clinton Streets. The balance of the said two blocks to be 
 devoted to a public square. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 Emeeson B. Tuttle, 
 Secretary for the Committee. 
 
 Composed of the following named 
 
 Edgar A. Bancroft 
 Clyde M. Caer 
 
 T. E. DONNEMiY 
 
 John V. Farwell 
 Stanley Field 
 John W. Scott 
 John G. Shedd 
 A. A. Sprague 
 Homer A. Sthj^well 
 Emerson B. Tuttle 
 A. C. Bartlett 
 Walter H. Wilson 
 
 gentlemen : 
 
 Fred W. Upham 
 Charles H. Hubbard 
 Charles L. Strobel 
 
 B. E. Sunny 
 
 C. It, Hutchinson 
 Edward B. Butler 
 Edward F. Carry 
 Joy Morton 
 Martin A. Ryerson 
 William L. Brown 
 T. W. Robinson 
 
Gaylord Bros, 
 
 Makers 
 
 Syracuse, N. Y. 
 
 PAT, JAN. 21,1908 
 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY