K.P., thanks for the update. Here are a few links of interest.
The Magnolia Avenue grade separation has a webpage on the Riverside city website.
In addition, the City of Riverside has a website for its Riverside Renaissance project, which is basically construction of things around the city. Included on the Riverside Renaissance website are webpages for the Magnolia Avenue grade separation and another grade separation at Streeter Avenue. Finally, there is a proposed grade separation at Riverside Avenue, which is east of Magnolia Avenue.
mvs (6-1):
Your success in finding and awareness of the Riverside, CA grade separation websites is certainly better than mine. Thanks for the links.
I was wondering exactly how the Magnolia Ave. roadway would end up. But, the appropriate website showed that it will swing westward slightly, go under, and then return to the present alignment as it comes up on the other side of the tracks. Magnolia Ave. is a very busy street, so an underpass will be a boon to locals. One sad thing I noted, however, is that Merrill Ave. will no longer through-cross Magnolia Ave. Railfans will have to take a circuitous route if they are attempting to pace a train, or just follow the tracks.
An even sadder matter for old timers will be the loss of rather historic, big, overhead grade crossing warning signs.
It is unknown if the very severely corroded signs still light up, but years and years ago they use to light and warn motorists of an approaching train. Back then the Magnolia Ave. grade crossing only had flashers, NOT crossing gates. So, I guess the neon signs back then were a glaring supplement to the flashers. Oh, how times have changed ... even to the point of a coming underpass!
K.P.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.
Wonderfully eclectic as well as electric signs! These were probably a California enhancement; but no longer (if ever) relevant to current Federal highway warning standards (Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices as amended).
One more quick update from travels today:
For the Sunset Avenue railroad overpass between Bassett and New Siding, one track with concrete ties has been laid on the west and east slopes of the massive overpass. I would assume the track is laid up above on the massive embankment, but I'm not sure.
Valley Boulevard bridge over the railroad tracks and the City of Industry railroad yard, is partially shut down. Traffic will be slow there, and picture taking difficult.
There is a new signal mast, but without the hooded signals, for the westbound signal at Marne.
cacole Followup to Marsh Station Road construction: I drove through the area again on Wednesday, March 31st. Photography is impossible because the shoulders on both sides of I-10 are blocked off and parking is not allowed anywhere near the construction zone. In addition to the rerouting of Marsh Station Road and a new interchange, grading is also taking place for the construction of new Union Pacific trackage between Interstate mileposts 189 and 292 (Marsh Station Road and Empirita Road), the two locations where the railroad crosses over and then under I-10. The relocated track will run parallel to I-10 between these two locations only a few hundred feet north of the interstate. This will eliminate the long horseshoe loop south of I-10 and will shorten the traditionally east-bound UP line by approximately 5 miles. The low clearance railroad bridge near Cienega Creek will be removed and the west-bound lanes of I-10 will be moved 50 or so feet north to allow for a median between the lanes where they are now constricted and separated only by a barrier. The one mile stretch where the east and west bound I-10 lanes cross under the railroad bridge at Cienega Creek is actually not recognized as part of the federal Interstate Highway system, but is still regarded as Arizona State Highway 80 because of the lack of an adequate median. At the current rate of grading and bridge construction activity, the UP may be able to begin laying track in two months or less.
Followup to Marsh Station Road construction:
I drove through the area again on Wednesday, March 31st. Photography is impossible because the shoulders on both sides of I-10 are blocked off and parking is not allowed anywhere near the construction zone.
In addition to the rerouting of Marsh Station Road and a new interchange, grading is also taking place for the construction of new Union Pacific trackage between Interstate mileposts 189 and 292 (Marsh Station Road and Empirita Road), the two locations where the railroad crosses over and then under I-10.
The relocated track will run parallel to I-10 between these two locations only a few hundred feet north of the interstate. This will eliminate the long horseshoe loop south of I-10 and will shorten the traditionally east-bound UP line by approximately 5 miles.
The low clearance railroad bridge near Cienega Creek will be removed and the west-bound lanes of I-10 will be moved 50 or so feet north to allow for a median between the lanes where they are now constricted and separated only by a barrier.
The one mile stretch where the east and west bound I-10 lanes cross under the railroad bridge at Cienega Creek is actually not recognized as part of the federal Interstate Highway system, but is still regarded as Arizona State Highway 80 because of the lack of an adequate median.
At the current rate of grading and bridge construction activity, the UP may be able to begin laying track in two months or less.
Any more recent info re: ROW grading (Is it completed? Has it even been started?) and track laying (Has that started?). Also, assuming the ties and rail on the circuitous segment that is slated to be replaced by this project will be reclaimed, does anyone know where UP plans to relay it?
Thanks in advance.
billio Any more recent info re: ROW grading (Is it completed? Has it even been started?) and track laying (Has that started?). Also, assuming the ties and rail on the circuitous segment that is slated to be replaced by this project will be reclaimed, does anyone know where UP plans to relay it? Thanks in advance.
The construction project started off like a ball of fire but seems to have slowed down considerably. Construction of the new Marsh Station Road highway bridges over I-10 seems to be taking forever.
Sand and gravel for the concrete was mined locally and formed into huge piles near the old Marsh Station Road exit, and water wells were drilled. Concrete is being mixed on site for the bridge piers. It appears that the construction contractor is working only 4 days per week, Monday through Thursday.
No railroad grading has taken place since the very early stages of the project. At the current rate of activity, it may be late this year or the first half of 2011 before any track is laid. I think the UP will have to wait until the Marsh Station Road overpass bridges are in place before their roadbed can be completed.
The Marsh Station Road portion of the project is using economic stimulus funding.
Things Are Not Like They Use To Be
The below photo looks at the present west eastbound signal at CP C055 STREETER on the LA&SL in Riverside, CA. The street sign by it bodes bad news for railfans.
More and more suchlike signs are being seen on the Sunset Route, and associated tracks. Things are so bad at times, this poster has had to park his vehicle at a legal place and hike a mile to the tracks! And, at times, the hike is right alongside the tracks!
Industrial areas are particularly troublesome. But, some rural scenes by the tracks are becoming nearly impossible to photograph, like in the famous San Timoteo Canyon on Beaumont Hill in California.
There are now new roadway bike paths and sidewalks too, but NO place to park a vehicle. (In the above re-shown photo, a train is in the distant background.)
It is understandable that communities and manufacturers would work together, and hinder access to areas where thieves and the unscrupulous could easily prey on businesses. It is understandable, too, that railroads that have had a theft of cargo problem would desire motorists not to park on roads adjacent to the railroad's tracks.
This poster is convinced municipalities have listened to the outcries of railroads. Those municipalities MAY have even accepted funding payments for "No Parking" signs from the railroads. That would explain why more and more trackside roadways have such signs now.
And then we (with good intentions) come along ... and see signs that even say, "No Stopping" in addition to simply "No Parking." It seems increasingly like we are in a losing battle and can't win.
So, if you see a train photo, whether in a magazine or on the Internet, more unpaid effort than you ever may know might have been taken to shoot that photo!
And, if you are of the hiker / rail photographer type, when you do take a rail related 'hike,' make sure you carry ALLOT of drinking water with you ... because you WILL need it!
Continued in the "Second Section."
Second Section
The post above highlighted an access problem; but this "Second Section" will feature a related prudence matter, i.e., safety. When BNSF was triple-tracking Cajon Pass a few years ago, this forumist made efforts to photo document that too. That area had nowhere near the access problems that are being encountered on the Sunset Route.
One access roadway was deemed so dangerous, however, it was elected to walk for a couple of blocks completely off the highway rather than park on it at the track laying news site. But a news van showed up, and parked ... with people illegally zooming by at 70 M.P.H.!
I guess the news van was so bright in color, the news people felt everybody surely would see it and not hit it ...
Getting back to more access hindrances ... One area this poster hasn't had to deal with since starting to document the Sunset Route two-tracking is in Arizona WEST of Gila Bend to the Mohawk area. I-8 is the only road there, a freeway, and generally follows the tracks. And, as you know, stopping on a freeway to take pictures is a big no-no. The only thing I've come up with to photo document that stretch (when it is finally being two-tracked in the future) is an expensive helicopter, which I don't have ... Hmm ... I wonder if so and so (a licensed pilot) would ...
-------------
A tidbit coming tomorrow ... Would you believe a two-tracks to one-track CP right OVER an underpass?
Time to get a bike and rack for the car if you don't have them already.
The Promised Tidbit Photo
On the LA&SL in Pedley, CA, two-tracks become one right OVER the Limonite Ave. underpass! The CP is C050 LIMONITE.
This two-tracking came around 1992-1993, before UP ever thought about merging with SP. At the particular time, UP had powerful ex-Missouri Pacific (MP) men in charge of it.
Beyond the signals in the photo above is one continuous single-track block for about two and a half miles, and two-tracks resume eastward thereafter at [CP] C053 ARLINGTON.
For those unfamiliar with the area, toward the far eastern end of that two and a half mile section is the viaduct bridge posted about a number of months ago.
It is unknown if that gap in two-tracks will eventually be filled, but over the single-track viaduct crossing of the Santa Ana River it is doubtful the line will ever be two-tracked. That would follow the MP philosophy of leaving the expensive to two-track places as single-track.
Anyway, we are left with the mystery of WHY Union Pacific ended two-tracking right over the Limonite underpass, especially when there is a single-crossover just over a mile to the west. (Single-crossovers were also another MP characteristic.)
PERHAPS it has something to do with the Metrolink commuter station stop right before the end of those two-tracks at Limonite Ave.
The just above view looks WESTBOUND from the same general location as the first photo in this post, which looked EASTBOUND. The signals for the single-crossover mentioned earlier are visible in the photo background.
Maybe someone better informed can confirm or expand on the issue; but I've heard that there is a cost associated with each track at a crossing, perhaps more than the equipment, materials, and maintenance, that behooves a railroad to reduce tracks despite the loss of capacity to move multiple trains through simultaneously.
HarveyK400 Time to get a bike and rack for the car if you don't have them already.
I had the same thought - but K.P. posted that the only road there was I-8, and at least around here both pedestrians and bicycles are explicitly prohibited from using the Interstates by signs at most of the entrance ramps. So it's hard for me to see any safely legal way to travel along the I-8 R-O-W to get photos of the parallel railroad, that won't attract the attention of the police force that patrols the highway or area.
- Paul North.
K. P. HarrierAnyway, we are left with the mystery of WHY Union Pacific ended two-tracking right over the Limonite underpass, especially when there is a single-crossover just over a mile to the west.
Perhaps cacole can follow up on another I-8/Cienega Creek mystery. Reconstructing the March Station road interchange looks like a boondoggle when they could extend the road east three miles to the existing Empirita road interchange alongside the new RR ROW. Is there a terrain related issue?
Links to my Google Maps ---> Sunset Route overview, SoCal metro, Yuma sub, Gila sub, SR east of Tucson, BNSF Northern Transcon and Southern Transcon *** Why you should support Ukraine! ***
MikeF90 Reconstructing the Marsh Station Road interchange looks like a boondoggle when they could extend the road east three miles to the existing Empirita Road interchange alongside the new RR ROW. Is there a terrain related issue?
Reconstructing the Marsh Station Road interchange looks like a boondoggle when they could extend the road east three miles to the existing Empirita Road interchange alongside the new RR ROW. Is there a terrain related issue?
That's a good point -- building new bridges over 4 lanes of I-10 and the new UP rail line has to be an extremely expensive proposition.
As far as terrain is concerned, I don't see that as any significant restriction because there are no deep ravines or high hills between the two exits, and all of the land is unsettled, State-owned. I-10 crosses under the railroad at Cienega Creek and over the railroad at Emperita, so the Empirita exit could be rebuilt and brought down to grade level, and only the new Marsh Station Road exit would need to be elevated to cross over the rail line.
Building a bridge for Marsh Station Road to cross over the rail line at Empirita should certainly be cheaper than having to cross over 4 lanes of I-10 and then the railroad.
But when the State and Federal governments get involved in a project of this type, common sense and saving taxpayer money don't seem to enter the equation.
Paul_D_North_Jr HarveyK400 Time to get a bike and rack for the car if you don't have them already. I had the same thought - but K.P. posted that the only road there was I-8, and at least around here both pedestrians and bicycles are explicitly prohibited from using the Interstates by signs at most of the entrance ramps. So it's hard for me to see any safely legal way to travel along the I-8 R-O-W to get photos of the parallel railroad, that won't attract the attention of the police force that patrols the highway or area. - Paul North.
It will require a second person to drive while you photograph. I've used that technique a couple times to get shots of places where it's not desirable/legal to stop.
Dan
Update as of Friday, June 4, 2010:
The Up and Over
City of Industry, CA
Part A (of A-B)
This past Wednesday "mvs" alerted us to the fact that track had been laid on the up and over.
On Friday this forumist got a totally unexpected dispatch to the City of Industry area, so while by the new, under construction up and over, some time was taken to photo document what mvs so kindly reported.
From the WEST side, looking east from Puente Ave.
It is difficult to see in the above photo, but at the bottom of the newly laid track, behind the orange temporary fencing, the track laying seems to end on an alignment shift that will eventually align with track on the center bottom.
On the EAST side, from California Ave, the following view looks westward.
A view of the shoe-fly (lower left) that presently blocks completion of the up and over in relation to the new track being laid.
Continued in Part B
Part B (of A-B)
On the east side also, the newly laid track comes right down to the California Ave. grade crossing.
Looking eastward from California Ave., the new track becomes the old track and goes straight over the grade crossing, and in the previously posted photo below, becomes the end of an industrial track that turns into the present single-track Main.
It is unknown at this time how what appears to be the future Main 1 will align with the present Main in the far distance.
Mvs also reported a new mast signal having been erected at the east end of the Marnes siding. While this forumist did not have time this time to 'hike in' to take pictures of such, it was noted that all three headless masts have now been put in, with the two west side eastbound future signals positioned on the outsides, i.e., one to the left and the other to the right, and the single-track east side westbound signal was positioned, strangely, on the left side of the Main.
HarveyK400 While service to Williams may be desirable, the only way that might be remotely possible would be in an expressway median. As had been noted in the reader comments, the existing BNSF line is both slow and circuitous.
While service to Williams may be desirable, the only way that might be remotely possible would be in an expressway median. As had been noted in the reader comments, the existing BNSF line is both slow and circuitous.
An "expressway median" is not a viable option either. I-17 north of Phoenix to Flagstaff has several sections with 6% grades. Not very conducive for a railroad!
Mike
MJChittick HarveyK400 While service to Williams may be desirable, the only way that might be remotely possible would be in an expressway median. As had been noted in the reader comments, the existing BNSF line is both slow and circuitous. An "expressway median" is not a viable option either. I-17 north of Phoenix to Flagstaff has several sections with 6% grades. Not very conducive for a railroad!
Not to mention that in the Bradshaw area, the N/B and S/B lanes are often separated by level, grade and cliffs!
silicon212MJChittick HarveyK400 While service to Williams may be desirable, the only way that might be remotely possible would be in an expressway median. As had been noted in the reader comments, the existing BNSF line is both slow and circuitous. An "expressway median" is not a viable option either. I-17 north of Phoenix to Flagstaff has several sections with 6% grades. Not very conducive for a railroad! Not to mention that in the Bradshaw area, the N/B and S/B lanes are often separated by level, grade and cliffs!
I had a few minutes to take a look at the aerials; and the I-17 corridor would be challenging, not only for the grades you quote, but for the curves as well.
Regarding the City of Industry up and over: shades of the South Shore .
HarveyK400 silicon212 MJChittick HarveyK400 While service to Williams may be desirable, the only way that might be remotely possible would be in an expressway median. As had been noted in the reader comments, the existing BNSF line is both slow and circuitous. An "expressway median" is not a viable option either. I-17 north of Phoenix to Flagstaff has several sections with 6% grades. Not very conducive for a railroad! Not to mention that in the Bradshaw area, the N/B and S/B lanes are often separated by level, grade and cliffs! I had a few minutes to take a look at the aerials; and the I-17 corridor would be challenging, not only for the grades you quote, but for the curves as well. Just median construction would be costly for a low-density corridor, even if shared with a commuter service in the Phoenix area. However, I-17 HOV lanes would need to be converted to rail; and the lack of a median beyond the HOV lanes and land-locked ROW would require reconstruction and reduction of lanes. Would ridership justify the extremely costly, mostly elevated, high-speed line on a new easement, or at least by-passes, between Phoenix and Flagstaff? Would there be better cost-effectiveness with tilting equipment on the BNSF by way of Williams Jct; but would they even be competitive with driving if limited to only 50-55 mph in many places and over a more circuitous route? Neither I-17 or the rail route go through Prescott - just sayin'.
silicon212 MJChittick HarveyK400 While service to Williams may be desirable, the only way that might be remotely possible would be in an expressway median. As had been noted in the reader comments, the existing BNSF line is both slow and circuitous. An "expressway median" is not a viable option either. I-17 north of Phoenix to Flagstaff has several sections with 6% grades. Not very conducive for a railroad! Not to mention that in the Bradshaw area, the N/B and S/B lanes are often separated by level, grade and cliffs!
I cannot see any cost / benefit justification whatsoever for Phoenix-Flagstaff or Phoenix-Williams HSR. I am willing to wager that the majority of those who drive to either place are either sightseeing and like the convenience of having their own vehicles, or are on business and want a one-day turnaround.
John Timm
desertdog I cannot see any cost / benefit justification whatsoever for Phoenix-Flagstaff or Phoenix-Williams HSR. I am willing to wager that the majority of those who drive to either place are either sightseeing and like the convenience of having their own vehicles, or are on business and want a one-day turnaround. John Timm
As I read the I-17 proposal it was in conjunction of the more extensive front range HSR proposals that would have a line Cheyene (maybe) - Denver - Colorado Springs - Pueblo - Santa Fe (maybe) - Albuquerque - Flagstaff - Phoenix line. Will it happen soon? Not likely Albuquerque - Phoenix a long distance.
Update as of Monday, June 7, 2010:
A West to East Overview, From Industry, CA to Colton
The bottom of the east end of the up and over in the City of Industry had a number of track workers and machinery on it. Because the crossing gates at California Ave. seemed to be going crazy, the whole area was a complete traffic jam, and this poster decided to get out of there as quickly as he could.
A previously shown May 16, 2010 view looking east from the Azusa Ave. overpass shows the far east end of the MARNE siding in the distance. The MARNE siding itself is the far east end of the City of Industry Yard, which yard is behind the camera.
The below newly shown photo taken less than a month ago also (on May 16) shows the westbound signal at that east end of [CP] AL504 MARNE. This view looks eastbound from the Fullerton Rd. grade crossing, M.P. 503.91.
Now ... A photo of the new left-side positioned mast (photo center). The tracks here follow the six-lane, highly traveled Valley Blvd.
From Fullerton Rd., looking westbound at the new eastbound signal pole for the Main. The Azusa Ave. overpass is in the distance.
The siding view. The new CP box already has some graffiti on it.
Note the new protective concrete blocks. The new CP box is kind of on a track embankment.
NO new CP box has yet arrived west of Temple Ave. in Pomona, nor have the assembled switches laying there been installed.
No activity seems to have been done either in downtown Pomona, at the future [CP] AL514 HAMILTON. No new masts nor a signal bridge was found to be present yet for the west end of the new CP.
Everything was quiet as a mouse at the Colton Signal Dept. (in the M.P. 539 area). The two signal boxes in Colton that are destined for [CP] AL514 HAMILTON in downtown Pomona again had their doors open, but nobody seemed to have been around.
--------------
On Thursday, June 10, 2010, a very brief look at the east side of [CP] AL503 MARNE X-OVER will be posted. Something there is now brewing.
Update as of Wednesday, June 9, 2010:
Report on the Colton Signal Dept. Yard
Colton, CA
This date the signal facility was found to be quiet, gate locked, and nobody seemed to be around, though a number of parked autos were present.
Two regular, empty, small flat trailers that are used to bring signals and CP boxes to sites were parked at the yard. A number of signals in various stages of assembly were present. And, a UP Sunset Route westbound happening by with CSX run-through power in the lead.
The yard seems to have been cleaned up considerably, or perhaps just emptied.
The stacks and stacks and stacks of rolled signal cable, out of view on the second photo's right, was still collecting dust in that locked fenced area.
Above the [CP] MARNE X-OVER AL503
Part A
Previously, a post featured the views from the WEST side of Azusa Ave. overpass in the City of Industry, CA. This post will highlight the EAST side ...
and something new thereat!
From left to right on the first photo above, likely the tracks will be Main 1 and Main 2. The third track pertains to the yard itself.
Visible in the first photo above is a bunch of power on the upper right.
Part B
To remind the forum about the west side, the following view is re-posted.
(A trivial thing: Exactly why the old CP box is label MARNE X-OVER (singular) when there are TWO crossovers (plural) within the interlocking is beyond this contributor.)
Because of space limitations, this poster wonders if something other than new mast signals will be put in on both the east and west ends of AL503. A new set of the increasingly rare for UP cantilevered signals seems most likely. The previously posted photo below shows such a rare structure recently installed at Mobile, AZ.
The only reason a poled signal wasn't used at [CP] MOBILE is because of insufficient mast clearance between the siding and Main 1
While We Are Up On the East Side of the Azusa Ave. Overpass ...
A bunch of stacked concrete ties in the Industry Yard were also observed. Out of view on the lower left are even more concrete ties stacked up.
You may recall a previous post about a truck and flatbed trailer that was backing in a small load of concrete ties for the future [CP] AL514 HAMILTON in Pomona.
Perhaps those trucked in ties came from the above Industry facility, only about 11 miles away from Pomona ... But, wherever they came from, one would think they would be transported from a relatively nearby location.
K.P., great pictures and updates as always. Sad to see the SP cantilever at Marne X-Over to go, but it's progress.
Help Wanted
The following re-shown photo illustrates a kind of mystery situation (at least for this poster) presently taking place at the Colton, CA Signal Department yard.
Suchlike boxes suddenly show up, and then depart equally as quickly. This poster thus has concluded there MIGHT be some kind of signal box manufacturer nearby. Does anyone at the forum know of such a manufacturer? Of course, there is the possibility that UP builds the boxes themselves somewhere in the greater Los Angeles area. Another possibility is that there is a big CP box storage yard somewhere, and a steady stream of CP boxes a few at a time are run through the Colton Signal Dept. yard.
Whatever the case, these very quick turnaround boxes are unlike the experience UP is continuing to have with the two re-shown big AL514 HAMILTON boxes in Colton that have been there for quite a number of months now. Sometimes those boxes have their doors open, sometimes closed.
BNSF Railway seems to use a different style box, as illustrated in the below July 11, 2008 photo taken at their [CP] CAJON in Cajon Pass, about 30 minutes away from the Sunset Route and UP's Colton Signal Dept. The then newly placed, shiny BNSF box is on the photo right.
That just above photo was originally posted in the "Cajon Pass Triple-Tracking Updates" thread.
The new UP boxes may or may not be peculiar to UP, as this poster has no knowledge of what type of CP boxes other railroads are currently using, other than the BNSF CP box pictured above.
Any leads on this matter from the forum would be welcomed.
K. P. HarrierPerhaps those trucked in ties came from the above Industry facility, only about 11 miles away from Pomona ... But, wherever they came from, one would think they would be transported from a relatively nearby location.
K.P., great photos of the COI yard area upgrades. I would have predicted double tracking west from the diversion, but apparently there are other priority bottlenecks to overcome. It seems strange that the relatively new Nogales street undercrossing only has a single track (?) RR bridge.
Also, too bad no one with a camera caught the crew in progress laying that mass of ties over the Sunset flyover, we would like to know what equipment was used. mvs needs to budget for a camera
Regarding the signal equipment hut shuffles, I noticed that some (old IIRC) are being staged/stored at the NW corner of the LA sub Campus Ave crossing. Just to the west the ex-SP Ontario branch had derails installed a block south, perhaps due to the Sunkist plant closure.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.