Denver to Como

[John Droste]

I was hoping to find out what was under the cover strap attached to the ceiling of the baggage room. No doubt the cover strip is there for a purpose, covering a join in the ceiling. Two sections of ceiling joined together. Same as directly below where two floor joists join together side by side. And the joins in the wall on the East side also. Don`t need to go over that again but I was hoping to find out if the cover strap covers a gap where there was a wall, and not just two sections of ceiling cut for transportation and then butted back together again.



So I hope that you can identify the rows of nails that hold the ceiling boards to the ceiling joists. We are going somewhere here! Looking at the rows of nails indicates that there will be a ceiling joist, maybe even two, under the cover strip.

Anyway, I have been looking at the drawings of the roof with the spacing between the floor joists. Drawing below. To move the ceiling in sections to Como, the movers would cut through the ceiling along the side of a floor joist. The boards hanging loose then cut off along the neighbouring ceiling joist, effectively reducing the width of the ceiling the distance between the ceiling joists. See drawing.



Don`t know if you can see it in the plan but the spacing between the ceiling joists varies from 18 to 22 inches apart. So the original ceiling would have been that much bigger originally.
Before moving on, I will just point out that there are a number of ceiling joists missing and the architect is instructing that they be inserted. Ceiling joists just don`t go 'missing'! But when a building has been transported and reassembled then there is plausible reason that they could be missing.

Okay I will bring up the plan again and I know that the ceiling on the south side of the oil room wall at least runs the full width of the room. So the ceiling is from the original depot. The floor as discussed before was to short and had to be extended. So it did not come from the original depot. In the freight room however, the floor joists do span the full width of the building. So looking at the plan, if we were to expand the baggage room ceiling that extra ceiling joist, we would have the length of the freight room. Room dimensions are in the previous post but they are only in quarters of a foot. But you can check, its there to see if you want.



Now I have been previously busy discussing how many/most of the wall sections of the office were part of the original depot. And I have also very thoroughly explained that the walls of the freight room with its altered doorways was not part of the original depot. So where did they come from then? And of coarse, they were the original walls to run the length of the office floor.

There are some interesting points to make here. With battens on the roof rafters to hold the timber tiles as they were, there is no reason why each side of the roof could not be cut down in sections and moved, just like the floor, just like the walls, just like the ceiling sections.

And also then, it seems that we have a surplus of roof trusses to span the original depot if the floor from the baggage room came from the building that is the width of the office. But to be honest, I can not be certain which way the floor under what was called the "First Office extension" runs. It could be an extension of the depot. That would balance things up there.
 And despite the interests of 2,496 views here now, we are not going to be advised on this.

But to continue, to keep everything in a reasonable proportion quantities wise, I will bring up a photo showing the ceiling of the office. And if you did not know, you can see in the drawing of the roof, the ceiling joists run in the same direction of the roof rafters. Purpose of the ceiling joists not just to hold the ceiling lining boards which naturally run perpendicular to the joists for nailing purposes, the primary function is to stop the walls from splitting apart from the downwards pressure of the A frame of the rafters.

But the ceiling in the office is running the wrong way when compared with the outside roof.



As you can see, the ceiling cladding runs the same way through the entire office, despite the roof ridge lines above running in different directions. That is why you see a new roof over the office in the 1883 photo. Because it was built over the former roof.
I would say some of that former roof was still there, not needing to be removed.

One other thing. I was asked and I discussed how the walls of the freight room were moved up from Denver and I explained how the bracing was attached on the inside walls to hold the sections square during transport. That would mean fore planning before the building was taken down knowing that sections of the south wall "as it is now" would need to be cut to a correct size beforehand, for assembly in the reestablished building. Not to hard to do, when the buildings are next door to each other.
Will look at all that again later, more properly than before.

Properly confused? I bet you are! I did not get this far that easily.

I need to talk about the wall between the office and ticket room further also sometime. That photo above also shows the hidden horizontal cladding as well.

If I knew that the cover strap that covers the ceiling in the baggage room actually covered a void where there was formerly a wall, that would make a significant difference in explaining where the buildings came from. I won`t say why however. No need to go into those variations without the knowledge.

"Photos used by permission Copyright Ken Smith Photography All Rights Reserved.”
www.steamandmorephotography.com

[John Droste]

I wish to discuss the baggage room further because it is full of quandaries. But tonight I wish to make an amendment regarding one of the outer wall sections that I discussed previously. Readers may recall that I said I had counted an odd number of half wall sections and I needed to work out why. Disregarding the odd section of wall in the north wall, obviously.

But first, I would just like to remind you of words Bob Schoppe wrote in the October 2013 edition of the B&L in the "Greeting from the President" section. "The building does seem to be cobbled together from parts of other (earlier) buildings, as society member John Droste has suggested. Windows were "cut in" in odd places and many other abnormalities are becoming evident."

I wonder if I have missed Bob`s acknowledgement when he wrote this. I can`t remember now but thank you Bob for acknowledging me then. I am still a member of the society and I think that everybody would benefit if you and David would reengage with discussions on the Depot. At the moment I am doing the best I can with my only friend, the spirit of the depot, against everybody. Its not easy, I am doing okay but just think what headway we could make if we cooperated together. Setting aside my faults in the interests of everybody, who has an interest in working out what is going on with the depot.

Will just bring up the plan again for reference for starters.



And now a photo showing the corner of the north wall. I have said before that this section of wall was a half wall, half the internal width of the depot. But it is not.



In the right hand corner of the photo I marked a join in the wall sections with arrows and an "A". That join is only inches away from the slat counter and I do not think it reaches a full half width of the of the depot. Furthermore, the window in this wall is not as large in hight as the other depot windows. Meaning of course, the feature windows in the west wall. Cast your eyes along the top of the window and it is easy to see that it is shorter.
 So this section of wall seems to match the section of wall on the east side of the baggage room with the shorter window.

Here is a photo of the smaller window in the rear of the depot from outside.



Here is a photo again showing the join in the wall from inside the baggage room. The wall join is just at the end of the wall with the exposed framework.


So using the plan measuring by approximation the joins in the wall, the wall section of the east wall in question joining in the intersection of the baggage/freight room wall, the measurements seem to match. As does the width of the window by measurement of the plans. So finding pairing lengths of wall may make sense but also maybe not too.
 The windows are installed at different heights. That`s an issue for me. But then again, the cladding above the freight room door and the small window have a paint history that is dissimilar to the walls each side. That is evident in the outside photo. Obviously the cladding above the freight room doors needed to be extended as discussed previously and you can`t cut timber longer!

Some close ups.





If these sections of walls and windows are matching and they do come from what was not the original depot then it is an indicator to me that this was not the D&RG depot in Denver. I seem to be gathering more information on this leaning in both directions, confusing as that may sound. But it is not easy without help.

"Photos used by permission Copyright Ken Smith Photography All Rights Reserved.”
www.steamandmorephotography.com

[John Droste]

Last post, I think, before I discuss where I think the depot came from. I don't think anybody anymore is still going to believe the depot was first constructed in Como.
 Last time I discussed Denver, I made mistakes and wish to sort those out as well as describe the situation there more clearly.
 But first,...
 Will just bring up the plan again for reference.



I have discussed before how the wall between the office and ticket room or waiting room was double clad on the office side. This was evident due to mud washing through the outer boards joins revealing the horizontal boards underneath, "probably clap board"due to the distinctive lines created. Just a quick photo pointing out the dirt lines which stop half way across the wall. As per the plan above. Notice on this side of the counter the wall has been patched in, suggesting that there may have been a window in this wall before.



 Here is the other side of the same wall and clearly the wall has been opened up to build in support for the chimney. The closer half wall has two patched in areas and the whole centre has been patched in under the chimney. I don't quite see the necessity to do that to support the chimney if it is centred on the wall. However, having the cladding off all the way up the middle would enable a way to join the two sections of wall together. A similar procedure could be used to attach the internal walls to the outer walls then covering the damaged wall cladding with a second layer.
 Not saying that the walls were assembled this way but it would be one way of assembling the building. One peculiarity has struck me for I have not found joins in the outside wall cladding where wall sections were joined together. That suggests to me that the depot was re-clad in Como. Getting off track a bit, the south wall of the depot was assembled in two halves and then it looks as if the apex above the wall line was added later. That would mean that the cladding would Have to go on later. The north wall of course, the roof ran the other way so the apex was added later and some of the upper internal cladding was removed to allow all this to take place, according to the photos shown elsewhere.



The opposite wall of the ticket room or waiting room is below. And as you can see the cladding extends full width. There is a patch in the wall up high suggesting a chimney flue passed through here from a pot belly. On the other side is a square patch in the ceiling. I don't know if the two patches directly line up!
 David suggests that the lower patch was where the ticket window was formerly. But why the patch above then?



Here is the other side of the above wall. The join in the wall sections is evident. Hard to identify but there, is the patch in the ceiling in the corner of the Oil room also. (I will just say here that I have not had a great deal of education and so I can not find adjectives to describe what this does to the head, but I love to swear as a form of compensation. But I cannot do that here.)  I think the ceiling has been turned around and was against an outside wall previously. One must consider every section of floor, ceiling and wall, how they may have stood together before Como.



 Just to give you an example of 'mind numbing', although I would choose a word starting with F, instead of numbing. Still seven letters though.

The wall with entrance to the oil room is a half wall, half the internal width of the depot. At the southern end of that wall are two floor joists side by side suggesting that the half wall above ended where the two floor sections join, joist against joist. It does. But the floor sections seem to be made from floor joists that come from what seems to be the office building width.

 And then there is this photo of the baggage room ceiling that has the cover strap part way across the ceiling and part way down the wall. Same material that was used in part to cover the hole in the north wall. No mystery there, I have explained that, but the cover straps are there for a reason. They are covering where a wall was, I am sure. But the wall did not it seems, extend to the floor, for the cover strap stops short.
 Now it seems to me also, looking at the plan above, that the distance of the Oil room wall where the cover strap stops alongside of, to the west wall, is a very similar distance as the internal width of the office!



And so to continue with the mind F, if we look at the west wall of the office we see that there have been some panels replaced. One where the doorway was. And another one just to the south side adjoining where the doorway was. You can see the latter panel marked in on the above plan too for some reason. The panel infills have different sized cladding so they are easy to identify. I have also circled the top corners of the doorway. So if you were to take this section of wall from the office, without the infill panels, It looks like it would take up the space of where the cover straps in the baggage room are quite neatly. I am not saying it did. Just pointing out the possibility of what could have been. And without ever being there, I don't think I will ever be able to confirm or discount much further. Not without cooperation.



 Staggeringly complex!

Where the cover strap ends on the ceiling.


Perhaps a small comforter. In my last post I mentioned how the President of the DSP&P HS acknowledged that windows had been moved around as I had been suggesting. I have argued for many years that the window in the west wall of the office was not originally there and had been inserted at a time after the wall was constructed. This was one of the very first things that I took up with Bob. And David.
 But anyway, just thought that I would mention the window in case anyone gets the insane idea of trying to piece together how these buildings once were.
 I have a rough idea now, to take to Denver. And lets face it. These buildings would not have come from short of Denver.
 So what went on?

"Photos used by permission Copyright Ken Smith Photography All Rights Reserved.”
www.steamandmorephotography.com

The photo of the replaced cover strap came from Bob Schoppe.

David Tomkins provided me the plans.

Thanks to each. I believe we all have a much greater understanding now as a result. Except for the Mind F...

[John Droste]

I am confident that I finally have it sorted. All the way. Everything that raised questions about the early years of the Depot. And the Hotel/s.
And there are a few novel surprises in store too. Please take the time and follow up where I can and can not provide links.

I will start in Denver. I had realised that the Train Order Board had run the length of the building before Como and Kemton`s book "Denvers Railroads" suggested that the DRG station fitted that description. So in a discussion I started in the Narrow Gauge Discussion Forum I searched further with the subject heading, "Denver DRG Station 1871-1879." Jeff Ramsey replied and I will cut and paste some of his reply here with his photos. Jeff only made the one post and I had more questions. However, I had struck gold and somebody told Jeff, so it seems, to "S.T.F.Up."

In reply to my subject Jeff replied,
"Interesting subject. I think the D&RGRy had 4 different Denver stations before the completion of Denver Union Depot in 1881. I need to review some research material which I have in storage, perhaps I can post next week in detail. A big game changer was the washout and destruction of the bridge over Cherry Creek in 1878. Bo a Google search on D&RG annual reports 1871-1883 there are some building reports and valuation.

The second D&RG station is left of the telegraph pole, beyond the Kansas Pacific passenger train, 1873."

The photo then that Jeff had posted regarding above quote;


The photo above places the Station/Depot on the SouthWest corner of Wynkoop & Nineteenth Street, as per the City Directories too. However prior to the Cherry Creek floods of 1878, it seems that this building was no longer in that location and after the floods until the bridges were rebuilt, a station depot was erected on the Northern corner of Wynkoop & Nineteenth, just to the South side of the building on the far right of the image.

Here is a quote from Jeff regarding that location and a map he provided showing DRG depot in same location;
"Map, 1878-79 showing layout Of Kansas/Denver Pacific passenger and freight, Denver & Rio Grande and Colorado Central depots. In 1879 the Denver, South Park & Pacific was also interchanging with the Colorado Central thus the second bridge over cherry creek (Wewatta St), the D&RG being the first being rebuilt after the flood of 1878 (Wynkoop St)."


Here is a track plan of the area around that time. Not sure of the exact date but the building on the far right of the top photo has gone. And no sign of the DRG depot that popped up there as a temporary measure either.


The DPL has a drawing of Denver, 1884. It has the building on the right hand side of the top photo drawn in. I will attach a link below. It shows that the building was a small way away from the building on the very corner of Nineteenth & Wynkoop. I am told that that building was the Ben Delaney Whiskey Bar.
1884 map of denver

                             Reference URL                                
http://cdm16079.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p16079coll39/id/8

This photo taken from atop the Grande Union Station shows the DRG station located between the Ben Delaney Bar and the building in the drawing and the top photo. As I expected or hoped to find, the Train Order Board was visible along Wynkoop Street in front of the station/depot as it would relate to the revealing row of holes for the TOB cog bracket as I have discussed numerous times before, in the Como depot.
Probably worth noting that there is a standard gauge line running down Wynkoop Street which seems to extend to the DRG yards near Cherry Creek.
http://cdm16079.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15330coll22/id/88627

The above Jackson photo is one of four taken on the same day. It is dated 1882 but that is wrong and it is actually 1881, just when the Grande Union Station was completed. And I will explain why I know that with the following three photograph links:

The above DPL photo and another DPL photo below both show the same cars and people in the Kansas Pacific yards.
The latter image shows part of the grounds of the Union Station in a construction site status. So do the other two images for that matter.
One photo is taken from ground level of the depot. Note that the tower is finished. That is important. Also note the cleaning equipment leaning against the walls. Brooms, buckets on a rough timber boardwalk along the edge of the construction site. No signage as yet on the station as yet.
http://cdm16079.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15330coll22/id/84036


http://cdm16079.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15330coll22/id/84035


http://cdm16079.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15330coll22/id/88640

So my whole point is that this is 1881. The DRG station building and the one next door are about to be moved to Como. On flatcars with an A frame like the one that can be seen in the train exiting Wynkoop St, entering the Union Station grounds "Wewatta Street"and probably on its way to pick up parts of the Colorado Central Depot which was pulled down within weeks of the completion of the tower on Grande Union Station. And I will talk about the Colorado Central after I explain what developed in Como up to this time and slightly beyond.
-------------------------------------------
The Como end.

Folks, for reference unless you have access to better images than I, you will need to have the July 2013 Bogie & Loop, page 16, for starters. You will find that the plan drawing of the hotel complex [page 18] is not compatible with the photo of the rear of the hotel.

What actually began there, and I will explain is that there were two hotels of a comparable size 30 feet apart. The Gilman, and the other hotel that is marked in between the marked points "North and South Wall of 20 x 30 extension." Actually, that is not so. That is the rear wall of the second hotel.
 The actual 20 x 30 extension is that long flat windowless wall between the two hotels. Making when all joined together, a 100 foot long hotel. So you know what you are looking at, compare the shadow coming off the rear of the depot, and off the building thought to be the Ice House, and also the wall mistakenly marked "North Wall of 20 x 30 extension". Same shadows to each, but no shadow in the area as suggested in the plan drawing on page 18.
 Another important thing to recognise is the distance the rear of the Gilman extends behind the area marked "Indentation of Foyer". There is very little distance from it to the back of the Gilman. If that "Foyer" was only 10 to 12 feet wide as suggested in the article, there would be a lot more sidewall of the Gilman showing, not to mention the missing shadow line.
 But look at the wall marked "South Wall of 20 x 30 extension". It can easily be defined as extending up above the roof line. It can easily be identified against the building beyond the hotel. Such construction was repeated on the end walls of the roundhouse. And it was again when the hotel was extended once more and the kitchen was added to the South end. I will add another photo showing how that end wall of the kitchen extended above the roof of the hotel when the Depot was joined alongside. You can see how the top of the wall steps down twice towards the rear of the building.


 Now readers, you will know that I have discussed before that the depot was moved before the 1883 photo. I showed that there were patches in the floor below the replaced roof tiles over the freight room, as per my photo above. Holes to lift and adjust the building to slightly different place. And we know that that happened again later too.

So it seems that in 1881, the DRG building was moved from Denver to Como, along with the building alongside it. Both buildings to become the Como Depot. We have discussed all the sections of floor, walls, ceilings at length of each building and how they were joined together. We have discussed anomalies that indicate that the move from Denver to Como was not the first move for the DRG depot. I have just explained why.

 And it seems that the depot was assembled perhaps against or close to the hotel before the kitchen extension was added to the hotel. Reason to shift the depot and reason for the north wall cladding to be different to the rest of the building.

 In the past I explained that the hole in the north wall for the telegraph wires was patched over with three pieces of wood that seem to have come from the surrounds of a cut out window frame.
 I have shown that the windows of the yardmasters hut matched that of the Gilman`s windows.
 And I have suggested that it looked like it could be that windows taken from the Gilman when the hotels were joined together were used to do these things. And you can see that the timeline will fit for that to happen.

 You can see that looking at the photo of the Pacific hotel, page 14 & 15 in the October 2013 edition of the B&L that the window symmetry matches that of the back of the Hotel as I have described it from the rear.
 And then there but barely perceptible, you will identify slight differences in the brickwork where the foyer was added between the two hotels and where the kitchen was added onto the hotel. Above the fifth veranda post from the right end and slightly left above the sixth veranda post from the left end.

-----------------------------------------------
The Union Pacific was in control of both the D&RG and the DSP&P at this time. Instructions to Jay Gould from the New York financiers was to reach Leadville as soon as possible. The UP was big. Taking over the DRG and DSP&P would be minor steps in attaining the objectives of the UP`s bankers.
 The Union Pacific also almost fully financed the Colorado Central. They all but supplied everything except the land supplied by the various counties and the Right of Way. They were not actually interested so much in the railroad as such but the coal that Denver could supply. You can read it in MC Poor`s book!

 So the UP owned the DSP&P, DRG and the CC RR`s. And they would have supplied the CC depot to Denver. And they would not have destroyed it. They would have reused it.
 The CC depot in Denver was torn taken down within weeks of the Union Station`s tower being completed, according to Kenton Forrest. And so the "A" frame on the flatcar is revealing, approaching the grounds of the Union station, empty.

 And I say that that part of the BV depot that has a similar construction to the odd section of wall in the North wall of the Como Depot would be very rare indeed.
The DRG always had there ticket sales in the city centre. It changed year by year, whereas it almost seemed the same case that their passenger station operated from a different place too. Therefore, no necessity for a ticket window from station buildings.

I have expressed doubt that there was a ticket window in the patch between the waiting room and baggage room walls in the Como depot. In fact there is a small ticket window nearby in the same wall. The missing ticket window from the BV depot, modelled off the Como depot ticket window is far to tall to fit the patch in the waiting room/baggage room wall. Furthermore, There is a half wall directly adjoining one side. That means that if there was a ticket window there, it would have to be removed when the building was reassembled and not possibly afterwards.
 So why not have just used that piece of wall with the ticket window, where it was wanted straight away?

 I think the answer to that lays with Jay Gould, controller of the UP. Buyer upper of railroads through Texas like the T&HC. The railroad that bared a flag that resembles the carving in the corbels of the ticket window. The ticket window that has a character about it that matches the age of the odd section of north wall more than the rest of the depot.

I can not prove it but I suspect that Gould delivered that Colorado Central depot to Denver, formerly a Houston & Texas Central depot. Having ownership of the building, he could use it however he instructed, "Move the CC depot to Buena Vista, we need one there. Then move the DRG depot and the adjoining building to Como." "We are making Como a division point and the current depot is not adequate for what is now planned there." "And if we are joining two buildings together in BV, what we don't need there can go back to the Como build."

 Of course, I can not prove that is what happened with the CC depot. However, as I have described the construction of the Hotels in Como, the time frames fit. The buildings had to come from somewhere, not thin air.
 Also, those that have read my research over the years know that I have always said that the back room of the office was a sleeping quarters when the depot was first built. Later, I understood that would have been the Dispatcher but I could not remember why the sleeping quarters were first required. Now it becomes obvious. The hotels would have been closed for the connection or foyer works between the two to take place. And of course, no Dispatcher`s building as yet.
 It all makes sense to me now. I hope you readers can make sense of what I am saying. I ramble when I get tired. But there you have it.
 Could make some minor amendments to past postings but not now, thanks.

John

[Fred52]

John:
Ok. I'll bite. When did the UP control the D&RG in the period you mention? General Palmer did not retire as President of the Grande until 1901. And in an item on the current UP site concerning the history of the D&RG and UP connection no mention is made concerning the 1880's period.
Can you give me a reference about the control of the Grande during this period?
Fred Cotterell

[John Droste]

Hi Fred,
Thank you for your question. Maybe you are right. If I read it anywhere it will be in the DRG section in M C Poor`s book. Give me a week to look it up just where. Could also be in the chapter on Buena Vista where it said that Gould forced the DSP&P and the DRG to work together. Forced the railroads to share each others roads in order to reach Leadville as soon as possible. Yes. The railroads had to pay each other for the use of each others trackage.
 If I wrote that the Union had complete ownership of the DRG then maybe I am wrong on that point. They did have powerful influence, or so I believe at present.
 I am in business so can't drop everything to look up the matter on short notice, but I will do it to answer your question.

 On the other hand, others will have a far more exact picture on how the relationship between the DSP & RG and the UP took place than I do. Perhaps somebody can step in to clarify matters for the benefit of us both.

Will try to get back to you shortly. Thanks again for your question and maybe you are correct and I got something wrong, again.

John

[John Droste]

Hi Fred,
I looked up what I meant to be referring to and apologies if I was misleading.

This is what I was talking about, a Joint Operating Agreement that took affect Oct 1, 1879.

Jay Gould had obtained a half interest in the Rio Grande in 1879.
He had also gained control of the DSP in 1879.
Because the Rio Grande had not fulfilled an agreement made with Jay Gould, Gould was able to force an agreement between the Rio Grande and the DSP&P.
The idea being that the Rio Grande push through to Leadville and the DSP&P build through towards the Gunnison Country. Each were able to use each others trackage and rates for paying each other for such were all in the Joint Operating Agreement. There is a small chapter on it in the revised edition of Mac Poor`s book.

 The railroads reached Buena Vista in believed to be Jan 8 1880, where there tracks crossed over. Eventually, I suppose.

 Was talking about the possibility of the CC depot being part of the BV depot. This photo shows an extension to the BV waiting room, indicating that the original depot was added onto. The addition architecture matches that of the odd section of wall in the Como Depot North wall. If you are joining two buildings together, you only need one wall where they join, if any. Possibly the reason for the appearance of one odd piece of wall in the Como depot. The image and quote below are from the DSP&P website.


"8 – As the restoration progressed it was discovered that what we thought was a large waiting room was actually two smaller rooms.  As the old plaster was stripped off, it became apparent that the waiting room was about half as large as we thought, and another room was added to the living space.  We’re not sure of its original use."

The Colorado Central station was taken down on June 6 1881 to make way for extra tracks at the Union Station.
Having studied those four William H Jackson photos in detail, I noticed a severe lack of people in sight. No workers around the station, only what appeared to be a scavenger perhaps. Three people in the Kansas Pacific yard. A woman holding a child talking to another person near the south end. I wondered if it could have been a public holiday. An opportunity for Jackson to get in there with his camera. July 4, maybe?

[John Droste]

I am going to have a go at drawing the insides of the Hotel, using some common sense, the room dimensions, and available photos.

A few interesting points just for now that provide a good start but also provide some insight.

One upstairs hallway measures 98.5 feet x 6 feet, the full length of the addition. So that would be at the back of the 20&1/3ft 30' addition that ran between the two hotels, if there ever were two. Obviously you would have the bedrooms at the front with the windows and hall to the rear.
Other hallways would run down the centre of each hotel basically, with bedrooms to each side. The stairs would need to be near the centre of the Gilman as each flight would be over the top of the other and they would have to finish in the loft where there was headroom. I can work that out. Bedroom walls between windows. Won`t get much more accurate than that.

This is the really fascinating thing. The dining room which is obviously near the kitchen, 28 x 42 feet. That is the entire space of the hotel 1st floor South end. Let me tell you this. They did not knock the back of the hotel off, double story, to enlarge the dining room on the first floor.
These facts, the length of the hall and that full size dining room confirm that the supposed addition to the rear of the building was a mistake.

And don't make the mistake of thinking the dining room was in the Gilman. 28 feet wide is to small for a 35ft wide building outside. And it is to large to consider that there was a passage down one side. Furthermore, it would be nonsensical to have the kitchen and dining room at opposite ends of the building, for starters.

Give me some time. I will come up up with an interior plan that will be close to what was original.

Fascinating thing about the dining room for me, the stairs must have been set back behind the 1st floor hallway. Rather inconvenient for lodgers to have to walk through the dining room to reach the stairs. Makes me wonder if there were stairs in that section at all. At the moment anyway.

[John Droste]

I can't believe it really!
I have had Mike Blazek`s Como workbook for a number of years now but I never bothered to take a look properly before. I was wanting to discover where the Oil loading dock was located with platform that was barely smaller than that of the Como Depot, thinking that that may be the platform for the depot before the current depot was established. The oil building is mentioned, item 44, but is not to be found. It is not marked in.

 When I first looked at the drawings, it looked like the Right of Way had been drawn in over an already existing town, looking at the encroached upon building lots. Then I realised that tracks one and two must have been later additions as they encroached over a number of building lots.

What really threw me was the layout of the entire town and the mainline track passing the water tank. Nothing but flat empty ground on each side of the track. Nothing there except the water tank in the middle of nowhere. And I had to ask, "Why?"

What an absolute first choice to locate the depot. Directly below the town and Seventh Street. In between the leads to the Roundhouse from each end, north & south, as would be ideal. And the water tank, perfectly positioned to service trains passing through.

And then there is the location of the current depot, on the outside corner of town. And I cannot really believe that nobody has questioned this. They probably have!
 David Tomkins, I believe was close to the matter I think when he expressed the opinion that the roundhouse was in an unusual place. Actually, it seems to me that the roundhouse was perfectly positioned, right behind the depot. It is the depot that is out of place!

Obviously, there would have been another depot before the positioning of the current depot 1881. So if anybody can give cause for this location beside the water tank, below the town, as not being the ideal place, I would like to know why.

Thanks.

[John Droste]

Was looking at my screensaved image of the Pacific Hotel this morning. I realised that the location of the chimneys will align between the walls between bedrooms. And other rooms on the first floor two.
Then it dawned on me that the large chimney that David was talking about would be the one at the back of the dining room, 28 x 42 feet. A very large room to warm up. Wow, what a fireplace that must have been!
And of course the extra large chimney on the north side of the Gilman would have serviced a large room also.

I am going to enjoy doing this and I am considering building an interior when I make my model.

The spirit and I, we only got our own railroad operating this month after many years of preparation. A rewarding feeling. A lot of work to do in that so maybe a fully detailed Pacific hotel would best be avoided. But then again, my railroad will never be finished anyway so whats the difference?
 Oh dear, what a terrible conundrum!

John

[ComoDepot]

In June of 1879 when the first train arrived in the area then called Lechner there was nothing here, the Italian encampment was about a mile away, somewhere near was the McLaughlin ranch/stage stop.

The Depot location makes perfect sense as it was next to the cut off road from Fairplay to Kenosha and near the switch to the spur that led to the coal mines.

Probably where I would have it, right in the middle.

There is mention of an early Town Plat and then a later Plat that apparently removed all the civic amenities, Parks etc and is the one we have now, I have yet to track down the early Plat.

The Roundhouse location is odd in my mind in that it faces north east not south east and did not allow for easy expansion.

The first good photo of the town I have is early 1883, just before the Dispatchers Office was built, not a lot here and not a lot that could not have been moved if they wanted to put the Roundhouse somewhere else.

I can only assume nobody that mattered thought there was likely to be significant expansion.

[John Droste]

David,
Thanks for explaining further your quandary regarding the roundhouse. I now understand what you mean, I think.
Is not the prevailing winds coming from the north/west? And as such would not the positioning of the roundhouse be exacting so as to avoid the prevailing weather blowing in through the doors?

 And as I would understand it, I somehow had the idea that it was Italians that built the roundhouse, having finished stoneworks for provisional DSP buildings in Denver? I must have read this somewhere to get this idea. Were the Denver facilities made from stone? Are there any Italians amongst those that died in King accidents?
 Anyway, I had the idea that it was Italian stonemasons, homesick for Como Italy, looked over the lake and named it Lake Como.
 I don't need to just make this up but am unable to explain where I got this idea from.
 Maybe you yourself said this. I do remember you saying that you had been to Lake Como in Italy. Were the buildings in the Como area Italy of a stone construction like the roundhouse? I bet they were!

 Regarding the roundhouse again. At the time that it was built, it would not have been anticipated that the facility would have become as busy as it became. Other old roundhouses would have been moved in as the facility expanded, otherwise it would have made sense to just build a larger stone roundhouse straight off.
Indeed, as I understand it and from what I have seen in photos, every door on the roundhouse looks different from the other. Quirky design features for the day if they have not been refitted from other former roundhouses. If you think about it, there would have been lots of roundhouses from standard gauge roads that would have just become to small as the engines grew larger and larger over time. Reusing those old roundhouses on narrow gauge lines would make a lot of sense. That is how Gould would have thought. That is how Gould would have supplied equipment to buy his entry in the DSP&P.

And last, the depot. You seem to be suggesting that all of my research over the years is just a fabrication? That the depot was there when the railroad arrived? I think you said that in a video clip.
 To use an ozzy term, Mate, I don't think that they would need bother building a depot next to the road on the way to Fairplay when they were building a railroad in that direction!

 And, I am no railroad aficionado, let me be the first to say so. Today at least! But are not railroad stations normally located close to the heart of town and not outside town? Would`nt that big empty unused space near the water tank, between the leads to the roundhouse from each end, directly below the street map as per town plan and directly just north of the road that leaves town towards the south, turning into seventh street. Would you not think that this desolate piece of flat ground would be ideal to place a town depot? And if not, then do you think it would have been better suited to have placed the roundhouse? Well no, of course. Because the main line passed straight through the middle.
 Friend, have another think, about everything. Including your opinion of me.

 I, I have been wrong lots of times. I have to be. I have to. I have to in order to explore all possibilities in order to find truth when what was believed, did not make sense. Numerous folk told me that things did not click with them regarding the depot. They knew as I did that things were amiss. Did not make sense. And they helped me at first, not wanting to speak out publicly. And I never revealed who they are.

 When I work out the plan for the hotel, I will know if there was a stairs descending from the kitchen of the hotel. A stairs that would have ended up close to where you said there was a filled in door to the sleeping quarters. The door to the kitchen was closed over on the trackside. If there was not a stairs at the rear, all supply to the kitchen would have had to be brought in through the dining room. And that is unlikely.
 Another thing is evident to me too regarding the hotel. One of the hallways is 42 feet long, same length as the dining room. And that hallway would have run down the middle of the building. You can see that both windows above the doorways have a different hue about them in the Pacific Hotel photo. One or both windows were partially open. Look again and you will see that the bedroom windows appear to be cleaner looking. There would have been a second chimney too, at the end of the hall, where your big chimney is.
 The large 12 x 12 or so rooms would have been above the big basement room along the north wall of the Gilman? Stairs would have been to the side of those two rooms. The wall between, extending through the basement to the footings,
 I will cut out the room sizes to scale, draw out the periphery of the building, and then its an easy jigsaw. Almost finished before I start.

 The Alpine engine house is of a Spanish style architecture. I have seen Spanish buildings like that, that had multiple round arches like that along the long walls, as does the Alpine Engine House having one, in the centre. I would imagine that such craftsmen who built the lasting Como roundhouse moved on to do other significant works, like the Alpine engine house or maybe the Palisades. Not ordinary craftsmen!

[John Droste]

Hello David, again.
I have another question too, on top of the last ones.
Would you mind just explaining the actual locations of the basement rooms of the hotel as they are today or as they were when the Pacific existed?
It would help me a lot in rediscovering the full internal layout of the original hotels.
This is not just for me. A lot of people will be interested in this.
I am even thinking of writing the plan into a program that somebody could use to laser cut kits. In America, if anybody shows interest or here, where I have friends that can provide that service. They also have 3D printers that could make those special parts like chimneys and irregular windows.
I believe I understand how the roof looked from the east, between the two former hotels.
Your help with the basement rooms please, for the great many that would like to know. Not just me.

John

[ComoDepot]

The original Gilman has a walk out Basement, basically where the north Tower is now and a bit further back. You can see it in the pacific Hotel photo.

There was also a 'basement' at the back in the middle which contained a well., I call this the 4th extension but it may be the third.

When the Eating House was rebuilt they decked it over, c 54 a concrete slab was poured on top.

[John Droste]

David,
just clarify, please.



I am speaking of the three Cellar rooms in the buildings and structures book. For me to accurately work out the internal walls of the floor above, and the location of the stairwell, it would help me a great deal to have help with the positioning of the rooms in the basement.
Because of the chimneys locations, I am thinking that the north wall of the Gilman, at cellar level, had two rooms behind it? The two smaller cellar rooms, as listed. And the 42.5 foot long room was therefore on the southern side of the Gilman?

I am not sure what you mean by the term "walk out basement". I can see that the north wall had a row of windows in the basement. Were some or one of those windows a doorway/s?

Interesting that you mention the extension behind the Gilman. Yes, I have noticed it. I believe listed as a "conservatory on back end" in the BB&S book. I take it that that is where the well was? And not behind the 20 x 30 extension between the two hotels?

I also had envisaged that the washroom 12.5 x 21.25 feet would be outside the actual hotel buildings, 1st floor. Would that have been the room over the well? Do those dimensions fit around the well? Would make sense to have the washroom in close proximity to the water source.
I suspect the later hotel had water tanks at the rear. Would that be right?

I love working out this kind of stuff. Good for the brain, like playing chess and that!

David, thank you. I am appreciative of your help. If I can get those walls positioned, it will give me the positioning of the stair room/well.

John

[ComoDepot]

Original Gilman had 3 windows and a door on the north face, ground sloped significantly to the east, much less so now. windows got deeper as you went east and the door on the end. Bricked up windows can be seen in the big photo of the Eating House when new. They had planned to reuse the basement but for some reason changed their mind.

Gilman was c 30ft wide 40ft deep seems at least one dividing wall down the middle east to west.

Do not know much about the wooden extension at the back, supposedly it was there after the RR era and was taken down c 1954, but can not be certain.

The well room is behind what is now the South tower, well wraps slightly around to the south, there was something else going on out the back, mentioned the chimney, found water lines heading south, just can not make it out.

Como mystery.

[John Droste]

Will think about this David but off the cuff, it would make sense then that the washroom be behind the dining room. Well, underneath or near.
I have starred at the back of the hotel, thinking there may be water tanks there. It would make a heck of a lot of sense if there was.
In the old days it was practise to have the wash facilities as an intermediary building. Plumbing not being what it is today and half way between dining table and the crapper.
Behind the Gilman, the conservatory.

I thought the Gilman was 45 feet deep? x 35 wide?. That would account for 42 foot deep cellar. 34 x 45 in the BB&S book.

The wall up the middle makes heaps of sense. That would have supported a wall directly above it, for two stories, the side of the stairs too. For as I said before, there must have been head clearance at the very top.

Is there any possibility at all that the Hotel, thought to be the Gilman, was already there before the railroad arrived?

A number of features make me ponder that question!

Thanks heaps. This is a great help. If anything else comes to mind, please mention it.

Like, could the pipes leading from the back have come from the washrooms?
Could the big chimney have been to heat water for showers in the washroom too?

[ComoDepot]

Gilman was built in 1880, opened New Years Eve, the extensions were built with flat roofs, heavily remodelled in 1885. Seems the kitchen was moved from the north west corner to the south wall next to the Depot.

I think the first extension may have been basically 2 big rooms, eating downstairs sleeping up, do not know for certain.

Comment was made how long the remodel took, seems like it was much more than was expected.

Plumbing was probably limited internally, kitchen plus a few wash basins. There is a 12 inch ish vitreous pipe going from the south end down the gulch, presume it served the kitchen/laundry, seems similar to the drain at the Roundhouse.

[John Droste]

I am not sure where to find links to the 1883 - 85 photos. I would expect to find almost no changes to Como in that time. In fact because of the discolouration of the replaced depot roof having an unnoticeable difference due to fading, I would not be surprised if the photos were actually taken the same year but only weeks or months apart. And that the Dispatcher`s was a kit building brought up from Denver.
 There is actually a bit of a track going around the Dispatcher`s but would not want to guess how busy that path would be so hard to guess too just how old that path is.

The earlier photo had a hanging banner outside the eating house/kitchen door, hanging from a horizontal pole beneath the upstairs hall window. The banner is blowing gently towards the north indicating a southerly breeze.
If I am correct in that, the smoke from the loco north of the depot will have its smoke blowing in that general direction as well. I have not checked that!

Anyway, it seems that the kitchen was open for business at that time 1883, if I am thinking of the right pic.

[ComoDepot]

The earliest one I have seen is pre Dispatchers showing the extended Gilman with a Mason Bogie heading out solo just to the left. You can see the new extension of the Depot with its new roof yet to weather.

I do not think a hi res version was in the public domain?

Dispatch was a standard plan, I do not know who built it, or what happened to it. Bob/Jeff found the plans down in Denver.