Industrial layout dilemma

I guess the first question I would ask is how high is the layout off the floor? If you're looking down on it from above, I can see how the industries may not be that pleasing to the eye. But if the industries are at close to eye level so that you're looking through and around them, then that can make a big difference in how it looks and feels to you. At eye level you feel more like you're in the scene rather than in a plane looking down and an eye level view can help to eliminate that 'row of buildings' look.

Bob

Bob, this area is 52" above the ground, so I'm not looking down a lot. The roofs of the one stories ar maybe 8 to 10" below eye level.  Part of the brewery roof is at eye level.  And yeah, if I bend down a little more it looks better, but still I have that row-by-row feeling to this.

I'd like to avoid jacking up the layout if possible.

I tried laying in more curves, but I don't have a lot of width at 5.5' and the curves just eat up the real estate and make it difficult for road laying as well.

Oh well, then again maybe it will look better with some shrubs, weeds, grass, trees, cars, trucks, people etc. than it does now on a basically flat homosote top.

 

 

k:

The best thing to do is look at the prototype. Some industrial areas really are a row of buildings, usually with some roads, parking lots, scrap yards, and maybe other structures - corner bars, rowhouses, gas stations, etc.
Here are some pictures of street tractors switching in Baltimore that you might find useful:

http://prr.railfan.net/RubberTiredSwitchers.html

West 12th Street in Erie is, mostly, a row of buildings, and in earlier years there were more buildings there. However, the distance between it and the tracks is wide enough that in places there are buildings behind those on 12th, reached by cross streets which dead-end at the tracks. Some industries are a complex of several buildings, often with parking in the middle. Some have interesting ventilators, outside storage yards, or other unusual details.

Here and there are gaps where rail spurs, many from a B&LE line that used to run along 12th St., cross between buildings to get to others. There is also a lot more vegetation and scenery than you might expect, growing up in the lots that nobody is mowing. Even well-kept plants might have grass, and perhaps even some ornamental landscaping. Talon, in Meadville, once had elaborate formal gardens with floral clocks across from their Arch St. plant.

Try angling the buildings against the back walls, instead of aligning them parallel to it.  That way, when you're looking into the layout, the square lines of the street grid are broken up by the buildings.

Think about street-running, that is, embedding the tracks in your "asphalt," "concrete" or "cobblestone" roadways.  That way, the trains are moving through the "concrete canyons" created by the buildings, and the whole city structure is more integrated with the layout.  Also, consider trolleys to put some more action downtown.

I've added interior detail and lighting to many of my structures.  Industry gives you the opportunity to populate loading docks with crates, barrels and workers.  Trucks also bring life to the scene.

Hi kenkal: Here's a few thoughts you may want to consider: Could you divide the area approx. in half with a divider roughly down the center. You could then have industrial backdrops, backround buildings, etc. A side benefit is all your track would then be easily accessable.  Also, 5.5' would allow for generous curves. And, you could have some of your industrys at a higher level toward the back, (maybe an inch or two higher than the front).  You could also angle some of the sidings instead of having them all lined up. Would you have any room for some small penisulas jutting a short distance at an angle from the main area? Just some ideas you may want to consider.  I'm sure you'll get some great ideas from other members of the forum.  Good luck!

Industrial buildings can be used as scenery.  I once had a 2x4 N scale layout that was all urban and it worked very well.  Sadly, most industrial areas ARE row by row buildings- they are functional, not pretty, but there are some things you can do to create interest.  You can elevate some buildings on raised foundations, angle the streets, T off some other streets and make a few dead ends.  A couple of tore up asphalt parking areas, perhaps a vacant lot or two and there is your industrial section.  This is a great place to use mirror tricks at the end of roads, inside of buildings, etc.

kenkal wrote:

I tried laying in more curves, but I don't have a lot of width at 5.5' and the curves just eat up the real estate and make it difficult for road laying as well.

Since all I have on my layout is 18" for benchwork depth I am having a hard time feeling your pain.  At 5.5 ft wide you could even make a U shaped lead  and have a branch that's almost 20 ft long.  You have room for 30" radius although you don't need that much, 22-24" would do.

In any case I would make the lines curved or at an angle to create visual interest.

One option would be a river or stream wandering down the middle of the area and the line breaks off the main on one side of the river wanders down the peninsula, makes a hard left (or right), crosses the stream/valley and then serves the industries on the other side of the river.  At the location of hard turn, scenic it like there was a railroad crossing the industrial line and was abandoned.  Your railroad now operates the section across the river using the bridge and sort piece of the abandoned road's main line.  That creates visual interest, it divides the layout operationally and logically in half  (since you can only reach halfway into a 5.5 ft wide peninsula anyway) and creates a reason for the engine to travel the full length (about 20 ft) to service the whole area.

Dave H.

This is part of my layout.  I really don't have a lot of "natural" scenery.  Mostly, I model a more urban area.  The buildings in the foreground are mostly DPM's, with a couple of Model Power structures in there, too.  I intentionally put the buildings up front, so the trains would run behind them.  There's a small amount of street running behind the buildings, and the subway line comes up from below to the surface in a channel parallel to the main street.

I curved the roads a bit, and my streets are relatively short.  By breaking things up with streets and urban scenes, I think there's a lot of interest in this square grid pattern.

If in doubt, look at the prototype.

Specifically, bring up MapQuest and enter East Craig Road and North Pecos Road, North Las Vegas, NV.  Then scan east and a little north for an industrial spur that parallels two streets that run at an angle to the main east-west thoroughfare, ending in a switchback (honest!) parallel to Craig Road.

After you've looked that over, follow it back to the UP mainline, then scan north to check out a newer industrial area (tracks laid with rail dated 2000.)

Two things become obvious.  The buildings parallel the adjacent streets, and there is LOTS of parking, for everything from sedans to 18 wheelers.

If you want to model something in a different part of the country, pick a city with a history of rail-served industry and zero in on it with any of the satellite-image services.  Since I haven't looked, I can't give you any specific spots to check.

(My own railroad is semi-rural to totally rural, and most freight traffic is just passing through.)

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

Folks:

Another thing to keep in mind is that the industrial buildings themselves can be very interesting, even modern ones. A lot of the articles I've seen in magazines on building modern industries make the claim that they're perfectly orderly and barren of detail now, but that simply doesn't withstand a quick look at the real thing.

For one thing, a lot of places do store stuff outside. There's a fairly new rail-served plastic pipe shop near here with a yard full of very interesting rolls of brightly colored pipe. Often the stored stuff is kept in the back yard, away from the road, which might lead people to believe that it's never there. Some places do indeed have a considerable "junk" collection back there. Sometimes this is actually a supply of parts for obsolete machinery that is too old to find parts for, but which is still making enough money to be worth keeping, but not enough to be worth upgrading.


Even the neatest plant has a lot of detail: fire hydrants, weeds, transformer boxes, signs, and rat bait stations are a few you see almost everywhere. Most places have a picnic table or two near some of the man doors.

I really need to snap some photos of stuff like this so I can illustrate it better.

If the industry generates dust, there will be dust separators either on the roof or mounted to the side of the building.

If paint is sprayed, there will be exhaust blowers, possibly ducted to a dust collector or bag house.

Not all rooftop air handlers are featureless boxes.

How about a natural gas fueled emergency generator in a little fenced enclosure?

Maybe the place has gone really green, and roofed the entire building with solar cells...

Once again, satellite and birds-eye views will tell you a lot.

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

Buildings tend to be parallel or perpendicular to one another in industrial areas to some degree, especially in more modern eras. Here's a modern industrial park served by the Modesto and Empire Traction.

You may view a larger .jpg here

Trevor Marshall wrote two interesting articles about the M&ET in the October and November 2007 issues of Railroad Model Craftsman. One focused on the real-life railroad and the other on one approach to modeling some parts of it.

There have been many layouts published that are primarily industrial areas with little or no natural scenery. My own modest plans for a section of my layout include a number of areas like this, including Webster Street.

I need to re-work this for a new space, but the general ideas will stay the same. (you can read more about Webster Street here)
link corrected, thanks for catching my error, Stein!

You seem to have enough space to build an interesting layout of the kind of industrial area you desire, especially if you chose to make some of the industries "flats" along the wall or the aisles ("fascia flats").

Byron
Model RR Blog

One other thought, if the issue is to get away from so many right angles. A road or creek/drainage channel cutting at an angle across the area will naturally cause some buildings to be oriented parallel to it. The railroad will want to minimize crossings, so it might justify orienting parts of the area in a grid and others at an angle to that grid.

This can be seen in the M&ET map referenced above where a few tracks and buildings are oriented along Mitchell Road and the Airport at the lower left. This places them at an angle to the mostly-right-angles of the other buildings in the area.

cuyama wrote:

There have been many layouts published that are primarily industrial areas with little or no natural scenery. My own modest plans for a section of my layout include a number of areas like this, including Webster Street. I need to re-work this for a new space, but the general ideas will stay the same. (you can read more about Webster Street here)

 Corrected link to Webster Street design: http://home.earthlink.net/~hendoweb/ohb/id12.html

 Looks cool, Byron!

 Grin,
 Stein

 

Thank you all for the many quite helpful responses.  I guess I lost site of the trees and just saw the forest and it was overwhelming!

The tips on layout (angles, curves, examples), scenery (details) and that many real industrial areas are indeed arranged in rows should do the trick for me.  I tried "rough" incorporating some of the thoughts and things do look much better.

I especially appreciate the detailed pics and maps some of you provided.

Again, thanks to all for your help, you're a great bunch!  Ken

Some other places where you potensially can get some ideas & inspiration:

http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=2703: Some images from regular forum poster Jon Grant's layout

http://www.westportterminal.de/room.html : some image (and track plan) from regular forum poster Wolfgang Dudler's layout - have a look at his "Third street industrial district".

http://www.freewebs.com/newponcayard/index.htm: New Ponca Yard from the American Railroad Association of Ghent, Belgium.

http://www.trainsarefun.com/urbanmodeling/urban.htm: Nick Kallis' web page on Urban model railroading. 

http://andrews-trains.fotopic.net/p14832720.html : Andrew Martin's interpretation of a corner on John Pryke's "Union Freight RR" from Model Railroader. See also John's book "Building City Scenery for Your Model Railroad" - can be bought from our hosts here.

 Linda Sand also had a couple of excellent articles on tight industrial/urban layouts in Model Railroad Planner (e.g on page 52 in MRP 1998: "Industrial Switching in N and H0" - a layout plan based on the Nicolet Avenue area in Minneapolis and on page 38 in MRP 1999: "Big City Railroads don' require big spaces").

 MRP 1998 also contain Jim Senese's excellent Kansas City Terminal.

 Churck Hitchcock's excellent and awe inspiring AIDRY (Argentine Industrial District Railway) based on a terminal RR in Kansas City can be found in the February 2007 issue of Model Railroader Magazine.

 Bernie Kempinski has an excellent design for the New York Cross Harbor's Bush Terminal RR in the article "On the Waterfront" in MRP 2003. 

 MRP 2005 has Byron Henderson's excellent Alameda Belt Line layout - that is the same Byron who posted a part of his Oakland Harbor Belt layout plan above.

 Back issues of MRP and Model Railroader can be ordered here:

 Model Railroader: http://kalmbachcatalog.stores.yahoo.net/model-railroading-model-railroader-magazine-back-issues.html 

 Model Railroad Planning:
http://kalmbachcatalog.stores.yahoo.net/model-railroading-model-railroad-planning.html

 

And finally (and not in the same class as the guys and gals above) - here is the plan I am building now:

 

 If you look at the top shelf - that area has about 10 industries in a space 2 feet deep and about 11 feet long.

 Compared that with your available 5x10 feet. If you e.g can have your area on a peninsula jutting out from your layout, with a scenic divider down the peninsula, and looping around at the end of the peninsula, it ought to be possible to fit in 10-15 industries in your space without overloading it too bad.

 Anyways - have fun designing your industrial area!

 Grin,
 Stein

 

 

 

Old industrial areas had the buildings set out along the rail line[s] so every factory had a rail served loading dock.  New industrial areas have the buildings set out along the roads, (and don't ship by rail).  I'd start the arrangement by locating the rail spurs and the the roads.  An old area will have the buildings loading docks facing the track and the road access will go where evey it needs.  I'd make sure the straight lines of the rail spurs and / or roads don't run parallel to the table edges, run them catty corner. 

   YOu mentioned a 5 and a bit by 10 foot area.  Can you run a view block down the center?  This would give you two industrial scenes, each 10 by two and a bit.  Put a photo diorama on the view block suggesting a heavily industrialized area stretching into the distance.  Run the rail spur[s] near the foreground with the loading dock side of the industries behind the spur.  

Stein, on quick looks, those are some pretty nice web addreses you listed and have tons of ideas there.  Gonna take me some enjoyable time getting through them.

Thank you.  Ken

Dave, my changing area is pretty much following the old industrial design you indicated and that fits with my transition period.  The docks face the tracks.  I was worried about the roads, but I like your suggestion of the roads go where they need to be. I've also tried to keep my whole layout away from table edge, and it is for the most part.

While your and a couple others suggestion for a view block is a good idea, I think it might be difficult (for my untalented abilities anyway) to incorporate in my layout as adjacent to that 10' span is a roundhouse at one end of a 6x12' engine facilty. I don't think I could make the transition all that appealing.

Thanks for your input.  Much appreciated.  Ken

 

kenkal wrote:

Dave, my changing area is pretty much following the old industrial design you indicated and that fits with my transition period.  The docks face the tracks.  I was worried about the roads, but I like your suggestion of the roads go where they need to be. I've also tried to keep my whole layout away from table edge, and it is for the most part. While your and a couple others suggestion for a view block is a good idea, I think it might be difficult (for my untalented abilities anyway) to incorporate in my layout as adjacent to that 10' span is a roundhouse at one end of a 6x12' engine facilty. I don't think I could make the transition all that appealing. Thanks for your input.  Much appreciated.  Ken

   I was thinking of Malden, MA.  The rail line went in first, and there is a miles long row of industrial buildings from the 19th century stretching to the east of Malden center going along the tracks.  Pretty clearly the track went in first and the industries followed.  The old buildings all have loading docks,  now un used.  The B&M abandond the rail line in the 1970's, and all the buildings now have truck loading docks facing Arlington St (RT60) running down the other side of the industrial row.  The buildings are not spaced all that tight, there are vacant lots between many of them, untended and overgrown.  

Try this out for ideas: http://chicagoswitching.com/v5/   Lots of varied industries in the Chicago area.  Some might be close enough to take a field trip to.

Could use this plan for a brewery.

Lots of curves, 4-axle power only, track in the street.  If you get real creative, could have trucks zipping around the lot as the train is trying to switch.