MikeF90 A very disturbing/confusing newspaper article ... ... Perhaps KPH or some other local can shed some light.
A very disturbing/confusing newspaper article ...
... Perhaps KPH or some other local can shed some light.
OK, here is what K.P. senses ...
As composed in the news articled that was referred to, the last paragraph's relocating the north-south branch line tracks in Colton a bit EASTWARD would have NO effect whatsoever on the ex-SP bridge over the I-215 Freeway a mile or two to the south that Caltrans would rather do away with than have to replace. Thus, the news story may be a case of a reporter miserably trying to make sense of a situation that even civic leaders perhaps don't comprehend and understand. It must be remembered that many interested parties' nerves must be all frayed right now with millions and millions of dollars at stake, and they apparently are groping to grab onto some lifeline somewhere that they seem to be having much difficulty finding. It may or may not exist!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
A very disturbing/confusing newspaper article covering the Colton City Council meeting states that relocating the little used UP Riverside lead north of the I-215 freeway somehow eliminates the need for replacing the UP RR bridge. HOW?
I can see where maybe this relocation is necessary if the Colton Crossing flyover is built, maybe. Or is SANBAG just padding their list of 'public benefits'? Or perhaps it is just Good Old Porkbarrel spending for some local contractor ....
Perhaps KPH or some other local can shed some light.
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! ***
For those of us who don't have access to Newswire, several relevant articles have been recently published in the Riverside Press-Enterprise.
The California Transportation Commission initially rejected the plans due to lack of "public benefit". IMO this decision was badly timed due to the ongoing work on the C/C Environmental Impact Report.
The above articles report that the local gov't association (SANBAG) has negotiated further related concessions from the RRs:
- running more commuter trains on the BNSF between Riverside and San Bernardino
- permitting commuter trains on the UP to the Palm Springs area
Also, reportedly the UP has agreed to abandon the ex-PE bridge over the I-215 freeway, thereby not requiring its replacement. No details were given, but presumably this is using trackage rights and a connection via the BNSF main or the ex-BNSF San Jacinto branch. See map for key locations.
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
According to Trains Magazine in there most recent issue the under/over proposed for C/crossing will not be built since according to the California officals involved it will only benefit the RRs & have no impact on the citizens of California
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.