The land for Eola yard started being purchased in 1908. The first six tracks
laid would today be west yard 1-6.
By the way there was scuttlebutt floating around the Aurora Division in the mid
to late 1970s that studies were underway to build a new classification yard out
around the area between Montgomery/Bristol and Sugar Grove/Big Rock to replace
both Cicero and Eola with shuttles trains into the city from there to
interchanges. Much like it was in the late 1800’s when Aurora made up trains
for Chicago and I guess much like today with the shuttles from Eola to Clearing.
LeoPhillipp
> On Jun 8, 2023, at 11:39 AM, trains@davidstreeter.net wrote:
>
> I hadn't even considered the C&I. It could have swung south almost anywhere
> between Sugar Grove and the current west end of Aurora Siding.
>
> Would that be the West Yard at Eola? I had thought Eola Yard was older than
> that. I should have known better; I'm pretty sure I read the Bulletin about
> the elevation.
>
> --
> David Streeter
>
>> On 6/8/2023 11:23 AM, Leo Phillipp via groups.io wrote:
>> David,
>>
>> I like your idea about paralleling bypass 30 which was developed in the
>> early 60s at the insistence of Aurora mayor Paul Egan. (Most folks look at
>> me with a blank stare when I say bypass 30). As that would allow the C&I to
>> swing south from around Sugar Grove.
>>
>> By the way the first 6 tracks at Eola date to about 1910/1911 as a prepatory
>> move as to compensate for Aurora yard tracks lost to the upcoming elevation.
>>
>> Leo Phillipp
>>
>>>> On Jun 8, 2023, at 11:11 AM, trains@davidstreeter.net wrote:
>>>
>>> I could see such a line roughly paralleling the present-day US 30 (which
>>> itself is a relatively new bypass; I had a friend who was born in 1968 and
>>> called it Bypass 30) from where it crosses the Q south of Montgomery to its
>>> junction with US 34, then that to the parcel of land the Q owned on the
>>> west side of Naperville ("Nabisco"). I could also see that line turning
>>> north to parallel the EJ&E to Eola. An awful lot of things would be
>>> different today if either of these had happened.
>>>
>>> I don't see how a line starting 25+ miles southwest of Montgomery and going
>>> west could have had anything to do with it.
>>>
>>> --
>>> David Streeter
>>>
>>>> On 6/8/2023 10:00 AM, Leo Phillipp via groups.io wrote:
>>>> Last night I spent a very enjoyable and educational hour reading
>>>> articles on the new BRHS Digital library. Rupert and Jack are to be
>>>> commended. It’s easy to use and a literal gold mine for research on the Q.
>>>>
>>>> I focused on the section about “Depots,Stations and Freight Stores” (would
>>>> suggest changing this to Depots,Stations,Freight houses and Storehouses).
>>>> As an example of what’s now at our fingertips, I learned so much I didn’t
>>>> know about the construction of the Aurora elevation despite previously
>>>> reading everything I could find on the subject.
>>>>
>>>> One line in one of the articles stated the Q studied an Aurora,IL bypass
>>>> that would have been 16 miles long around Aurora to avoid all the street
>>>> crossings. It was eventually decided against it. Then the city of Aurora
>>>> made the decision to elevate mandatory with an ordinance. Despite looking
>>>> through Q annual reports from 1907-1915 I could learn nothing more about
>>>> the potential bypass. From my operational experiences my guess is would
>>>> have swung east a bit before Montgomery and run NE to around Naperville.
>>>> Charlie Vlk once mentioned that based on his research, he believed the
>>>> Joliet,Rockford and Northern, commonly known as the Burgess Jct. To Paw
>>>> Paw line was part of the bypass. Based on what I read last night that the
>>>> Q researched the bypass in 1908 while the J.R.&N. was built in 1881(I
>>>> believe to move Streator coal north via Paw Paw and Shabbona or
>>>> Rockfalls/Sterling/Denrock) that likely was not the case.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone have additional info. On the potential Aurora bypass ?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Leo Phillipp
>
>
>
>
>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#65444): https://groups.io/g/CBQ/message/65444
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/99408662/703214
Group Owner: CBQ+owner@groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/CBQ/leave/1544929/703214/691670059/xyzzy
[archives@nauer.org]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
|