[quote user="billio"] [snip] "With an investment of roughly $18 million by the end of this year, Union Pacific will complete the double-track of nine miles...in Imperial County, Calif., and another nine miles in Maricopa County, Ariz." [snip] [/quote]
"You'll have this . . . "
Note the interesting cost factor implied here - $18 Million for 9 + 9 = 18 miles = roughly $1 Million per mile.
- PDN.
billio Hello K.P. Great to have you back. Here's a question: When new track segment is placed in service at the Marsh Road Interchange on I-10, the track on the circuitous segment will have to be taken up -- it's far too valuable for UP to let it stay there -- so where will it be relaid? Logic suggests somewhere on the Sunset Route, but where, if anyplace?
What does it matter to you? Depending on wear, the used rail either will go to mainline or secondary trackage not too far away.
Biases in Transition
Part C (of A-C)
On the EAST side of Sherman Hill, at Cheyenne, WY, is the granddaddy of all logjams, the lengthy 20 M.P.H. CP W511 W. CHEYENNE. Trains often zigzag from one bias to the other.
The west signal bridge thereat spans four tracks.
The east side of CP W511 has a few two-track cantilever signal bridges.
So, there you have it. Unlike publically owned commuter lines that seem to have deep money pockets for grandiose bridges, as a money conscious investor owned entity, UP seems to spare itself the expense of easing transitions by NOT building flyovers and other exotic bridges, and tolerates delays and logjams. At Cheyenne, railfans can sit for hours and watch ONE train after another tread through the crossovers and COMPLETELY tie up a four-track CP. In that respect, UP puts on quite a logjam show! Photographers very seldom get burned by a train visually blocked by another train.
The application of the above to the incomplete Sunset Route two-tracking is that forumists, in this poster's opinion, should not expect any radically significant future track layouts (like flyovers) that would make for free-flowing operations. Free flowing track enhancements may or may not arise. But, Laramie and Cheyenne can be considered an operating philosophy indicator. The operating biases that develop on the Sunset Route's future two-tracking in the Los Angeles Basin, whatever they may be, should make for an interesting show to watch in itself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
Part B (of A-C)
This is a view looking east at the key transition crossovers in Laramie, WY, on the WEST side of Sherman Hill. On this side of the viewed CP, even though the tracks are bi-directional, trains are right biased. On the far, background side of the CP, trains are left biased.
A telephoto of an eastbound train in transition:
Obviously, the above CP can be a bottleneck at times. But, if undue delays would occur, an alternative is available. One railfan that I talked with in Laramie identified the alternative as a "runaround track." As can be seen in the below photo, the alternative is another track that goes to a further west CP a few miles behind the camera. I suppose the hope is that that further west CP would NOT be log jammed as well!
Continued in Part C
Part A (of A-C)
When the entire El Paso, TX to Los Angeles, CA portion of the Sunset Route is completely two-tracked, likely the pivotal Cienega Creek natural crossover in Arizona will be the transition location for biases, i.e., with trains east of Cienega Creek operating with a right hand bias to or from El Paso, whereas west of Cienega Creek trains should operate left hand biased to or from Los Angeles.
(In the above reshown photo, the second-track is below street level (photo left) and is out of view, but that out of view cross-track alignment also goes way under the bridge span that is on the upper right.)
In the Los Angeles basin, logically, the present counterclockwise bias would go contrary to the above, and would need to be reversed, so that it was clockwise. Such may or may not actually happen. As discussed with MikeF90, there is a technical reason to keep the counterclockwise bias along the Los Angeles River.
In my post of February 28, 2010 (page 46 in this thread), the case of Sherman Hill between Laramie and Cheyenne, WY was brought up. On each side of Sherman Hill, trains are RIGHT running biased. But, over Sherman Hill itself, operations are LEFT running biased.
Continued in Part B
cacole and HarveyK400 (both 9-19):
I tend to agree with both of you ... that a utility would object to a danger that trains would pose to their power lines. But, everyone is kind of economically desperate right now, which might even change some power line route management's thinking.
The power line route (and I know of no other feasibility) was presented as a possibility to address reports of doing away with the LA&SL through Riverside. One report indicated that the reroute concept (whatever they had in mind) was concocted after the top Omaha brass requested area higher-ups to make up a "wish list."
It might have some merit if it wasn't for the exorbitant cost of triple-tracking what was recently two-tracked at West Colton Yard ... and any power line utility company's objections.
john_edwards (9-19):
UP's Central Corridor was followed towards the east, and I managed to document a few Sunset Route issues along the way that was previously mentioned in this topic. But, my overall, long term travel "wish list" includes visiting Arizona and New Mexico sometime in the future and seeing what the two-tracking looks like away from I-10.
desertdog (9-19):
I did get a post related automatic email with that Maricopa, AZ platform extension you photographed and attempted unsuccessfully to post, but the email photo was super small.
I've had success in posting photos at the new Kalmbach forums by just using the old IMG address that we previously used instead of the new way, but one unfortunately cannot preview the photo(s) in advance. But, at least they can be posted.
[Because of the present limitations of the Kalmbach website, an example cannot be shown ... But just use the IMG code.]
Hope to see that platform photo posted soon, desertdog ... Sounds most interesting.
Take care all,
K.P.
john_edwards Hi KP, You are going to follow I-10 at least as far as El Paso, right? We all need our "update fix", so don't leave us hanging. LOL John
Hi KP, You are going to follow I-10 at least as far as El Paso, right? We all need our "update fix", so don't leave us hanging. LOL
John
I agree with John. And if you happen to take a slight detour through Maricopa, take a good look at what they have recently done at the Amtrak depot.
From the existing concrete platform eastward for a couple of hundred feet, they have installed a hardened footpath that leads to a small asphalt pad. It appears as though they are trying to eliminate the two-stop procedure to load and discharge passengers. As mentioned several times on this forum, stopping Amtrak over SR 347 causes traffic delays and has raised the ire of cIty officials.
I would have posted a photo by now, but ever since the "new and improved website" made its debut, I have not been able, despite numerous attempts.
Have a safe trip.
John Timm
I'm not that close to the industry anymore; but there is a definite hazard and legitimate concern for derailment. This is more of an issue with higher train speeds too, so a low-speed connection may be more acceptable with adequate mitigation like hardening or shielding tower bases. While examples abound of parallel railroads and power lines adjacent or above one another, that may not be consistent with current best practices.
K.P.: Ref your "Out of this world" series about the power lines --
I don't think the power transmission company/companies would allow a railroad to build for such a long distance adjacent to their towers out of fear of a derailment disrupting their lines.
When we wanted to dig some 2'x2'x2' holes in the ground at our clubhouse, a power transmission company whose lines are 200 or more feet away from us panicked because they thought we were too close to their lines when we applied through the "Blue Stake" project for utility approvals.
Update as of Friday, September 17, 2010:
The Humane Way Signal Bridge
Pomona, CA
The forum may recall the new west side Humane Way signal Bridge was taken down so some type of area corrective construction activity could take place. Whatever that corrective action was, it apparently is finished.
The following is a report on the status of the signal bridge ...
Only the south support has been re-erected.
The north support is still lying on the right-of-way, but the base for it has been reinstalled.
A few replies ...
MikeF90 (9-16):
You were NOT going coo-coo about the Milliken Ave. up and over in Ontario! A rep at SANBAG indicated that the website's lines were in reverse order, and would be corrected soon. Well, it already has! So, your observation started a chain of events that ultimately corrected an official website!
That SANBAG rep also sent the following estimates that speak mounds as to why the UP flyover was chosen over other methods for the Colton Crossing project:
First alternative: BNSF going over the UP: $936 million.
Second alternative: The chosen UP going over the BNSF: $200 million.
Third alternative: A depressing the BNSF tracks to go under the UP: $802 million.
Fourth alternative: A depressing the UP tracks to go under the BNSF: $491 million.
Fifth alternative: A combination: Deemed not buildable.
Sixth alternative: The no build option.
I personally thought the fourth approach might be cheaper, but I guess the facts were otherwise.
mvs (9-17):
What gets me about the Ontario Milliken Ave. up and over is that, as best that I can calculate, the up and over will extend westward just beyond the east switch of the GUASTI siding! Will that siding have to be shortened? Taken out of service? I can see why UP, as you said, was upset that the up and over design was chosen.
A note about K.P.:
I've been conned into delivering stuff to a relative near the east coast, so I will be gone from the forum for two to three weeks.
K.P., great work as always!
How bizarre that the hooded signal is "back" at the intermediate signal between Marne and Walnut.
UP was upset, if I recall correctly, that the grade separation chosen at Milliken Avenue was a train flyover. Unfortunately, because of the road intersection just north of the crossing, a train flyover might have been the least invasive.
K.P., I must have misposted about Milliken Ave or I edited something later. After rereading the SANBAG web site I can't guess what will be built there - they contradict themselves.
I didn't mean to imply that Al sub 3MT was even close, I just think UP won't close off options. Any new bridges are bound to be short, beam types like the common 'desert wash' bridge so they could pour wider piers and just emplace two tracks worth (like Nogales St 2/1). Once the new AZ yard gets built (heh), then it will get interesting ...
Good point about the Metrolink east bank 'bottleneck'. Due to the crossover and short distance (< 3 mi) no other trains can be present for a long UP freight to transit between LATC and the Corridor.
More speculation - the CC flyover could require permanent removal of the (rarely used?) NW connector. In turn, this could cause more congestion on the Mojave and Alhambra subs. OTOH then BNSF could more easily extend 3MT south to CP West Colton.
Discussion on other boards points out that the Alameda Corridors financial difficulties have worsened due to the lower amount of 'marine' containers being shipped to/from areas outside of the southwest US. Apparently goods for closer destinations may be reloaded into domestic boxes which are then moved by truck direct to customers or to local rail yards. More traffic for LATC, COI and the Al sub?
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! ***
rdamon (9-8):
The land you spoke about is a strange situation. When I was by it, the area had much security! Looking at aerials, the idea crossed my mind that it might for the Ontario International Airport parking expansion.
To run a track through there seems a tight proposition. But, who knows. (See below.)
MikeF90 (9-9):
Yes, that UP domed passenger special was a real treat to see ... and I knew better than try to go chase after it ... Before I could get my car started, it would probably be in Los Angeles ...
Mike, I don't know where I got the idea, but I thought Millikan Ave. would have an overpass or underpass built there. When I was on site, I remember wondering how on earth they could possibly ever build an overpass or underpass there. But, your advisement that an up and over would be built like the current project in the City of Industry sure made sense. Thanks.
A wider photo than what was posted previously is shown below for the benefit of the forum. It conveys just how confining the strip of railroad land is that the design theorists had to deal with for the future Milliken Ave. up and over. Note the photo's upper corners.
When it was on the preliminary drawing boards, the designers undoubtedly had no idea UP would ever consider a reroute of the LA&SL, and UP probably didn't either. For UP to THREE-track the line now over new TWO-track bridges (and a planned two-track up and over) would seem to be incredibly expensive, and they would have to foot the whole bill. It might be cheaper to just lay track and build a few bridges in the electric power line right-of-way instead, but admittedly, that idea is starting to sound more and more farfetched the more I delve into it.
While management is supposedly aware of some type of transition concept, that concept was something found desirable to those at UP that came up with the idea. What those that have a broader view of corporate affairs think of the idea is unknown, but I now suspect the idea won't be around for very long. I've reviewed my photo files, and made a few onsite inspects when passing through the area, and I've concluded that laying a third main along the two mains presently at West Colton Yard is not realist, unless the railroad is willing to spend a horrendous amount of money on just the length of the yard.
As far as two-tracking from the City of Industry to Los Angeles (via El Monte and Alhambra), that could make things somewhat more fluid. From the reference material that I possess, it looks like that is only a twelve mile stretch. The problem that I see, though, is the connection between the LA&SL and the SP, the line along the Los Angeles River.
Apparently, that mile or two connecting line is no longer owned by UP, but, I believe commuter interests holds the title. So, it becomes just like the BNSF Colton to Riverside problem of transferring a long train from one accessed track to the other de-access track, but all at slow speeds because of the tight curvatures, with Metrolink commuter runs always clamoring 'on time' performance for their time-sensitive trains. What a mess!
Add to that the apparent future left running bias from Cienega Creek in Arizona to Los Angeles in California, a future clockwise orientation would mean those present snaking descending double-stacks along the Los Angeles River would have to be pulled snakingly upgrade! Of course, if that power line right-of-way by Kaiser Yard (over to the LA&SL) was utilized, a cheap flyover could be built just east of Etiwanda Ave. (where the Duffy special was photographed recently), and the counterclockwise descending along the Los Angeles River could continue ...
The possible Fontana advertising signs issue by Sierra Avenue ... The railroad breaking a long-term lease situation, if that is what the problem is, certainly would be a thorny matter. But, it is hard to believe that the Southern Pacific attorneys would not have included a contingency clause in those original contacts. That may or may not be the case ... or the problem.
Take care, Mike, and all.
Update as of Sunday, September 12, 2010:
City of Industry Area
Part II (of I-II)
Over at the east end of the MARNE siding, the lower head of the future westbound signal had been attached. It is ONLY a TWO-bulb unit, which seems inconsistent with two-tracks westward.
Now you see it, now you don't, now you ...
You remember this photo by Valley Blvd. and Sentous Avenue ...
And, how the new but dead signal was recently uninstalled ...
Well, it has been reinstalled ...
Pomona
At Humane Way, the west side south signal bridge support has been re-erected, but not the north support.
No activity was apparent in the Hamilton Blvd. area.
And the Colton Signal Dept.
At the Colton Signal Dept. in Colton, all that old signal equipment and cement bases photographed September 7, 2010 and posted about are now all gone and cleared away!
---------
Some replies are pending.
Part I (of I-II)
This poster arrived at the 'Up and Over' just as a westbound UP was heading over it. Because driving and photography doesn't mix, unfortunately no photos are available to show the forum.
This poster was hoping to photograph Amtrak #2 on the 'Up and Over,' but it never showed up. It may have gone via the LA&SL, as much work was going on at the 'Up and Over' site, and as soon as the above mentioned freight train passed, machinery and workers re-converged onto the track.
Wood ties in bundles about 15 to 20 feet apart had previously been dropped along much of the 'Up and Over.'
An eastward view from Puente Ave.: Allot was going on and numerous vehicles were park by or on the 'Up and Over.' The office module is no longer at the site. It had been on the photo lower right.
Continued in Part II
K. P. HarrierAs this is posted, the local Los Angeles television stations are from time to time showing live coverage of a train wreck aftermath. The site of the collision is near the Cherry Ave. overpass shown in the middle photo of Part D in the "Out of this World" series, posted above two days ago on September 8, 2010. That overpass is also seen on the top left of the first photo just above.
Regarding an earlier post, I was most puzzled by the BNSF rush to replace those searchlight signals near Colton Crossing when even more changes there are coming. It turns out that they are doing this all over the state (Fullerton, Fresno, Richmond, etc.) so a high maintenance / low parts supply tripping point must have been reached.
In the same area, K.P.'s previous conjecture about moving the CP Rancho crossover east to CP Mt Vernon seems spot on. They will need the room to build the flyover, at least one grade level temp main/lead track, and it would fit into a 'logical' permanent arrangement.
Update as of Tuesday, September 7, 2010:
The Colton Signal Dept.
Colton, CA
A number of old items were brought to the signal department site, like the below electrical boxes and switch machines. The center box had had a fire, and half the plywood inside was charred.
It is unknown where the above items came from, nor what replaced them. There must be some replacement (or upgrade) activity somewhere in the area, possibly the City of Industry.
Mystery Solved
In the recent past there were long lines of 85-foot TOFC flats that were parked for extended stays in West Colton Yard, CA. They had strange brace-like items on them. It was unclear exactly what those cars were for, at least for many of us.
While this forumist was recently up on the north-south Etiwanda Ave. overpass over the east-west Sunset Route just south of I-10, between the cities of Ontario and Fontana, a complex was discovered with those 85-foot flats in it. Those flats were even seen outside of the complex. The below photos are self-explanatory ...
If you didn't know about this place before (like me, and I drive right by it periodically), now you know.
-----
As this is posted, the local Los Angeles television stations are from time to time showing live coverage of a train wreck aftermath. The site of the collision is near the Cherry Ave. overpass shown in the middle photo of Part D in the "Out of this World" series, posted above two days ago on September 8, 2010. That overpass is also seen on the top left of the first photo just above.
K. P. Harriermvs (9-6): Work IS progressing surprisingly fast on the Magnolia Ave. underpass in Riverside, CA. It is unknown, though, what the arrangements are in Orange Country, but the Irvine project you spoke about does seem to have an abnormally long construction time. Does the lead contractor only have a supervisor and two workers? Seriously, the Riverside project, on the other hand, is under SANBAG, and overpass / underpass projects with them have consistently been running 18-24 months.
Work IS progressing surprisingly fast on the Magnolia Ave. underpass in Riverside, CA. It is unknown, though, what the arrangements are in Orange Country, but the Irvine project you spoke about does seem to have an abnormally long construction time. Does the lead contractor only have a supervisor and two workers? Seriously, the Riverside project, on the other hand, is under SANBAG, and overpass / underpass projects with them have consistently been running 18-24 months.
Possibly the delay had come from a mix-up of utilities, as well as a few minor gas leaks. The Riverside Renaissance is moving a lot faster, it seems.
K.P., you sure live right, catching the 'Duffy' officer special by 'accident'.K. P. HarrierThe below photo looking east down the Sunset Route was taken from Milliken Ave., at M.P. 525.40. I-15 is visible in the distance, including much bridgework for freeway interchanging with I-10 just a quarter of a mile to the north, photo left. There are subtle indications at this pictured grade crossing site that the construction of that grade separation is getting close.Indeed, the SANBAG site still says that 'construction is expected to begin in fall 2010'.
K. P. HarrierThe below photo looking east down the Sunset Route was taken from Milliken Ave., at M.P. 525.40. I-15 is visible in the distance, including much bridgework for freeway interchanging with I-10 just a quarter of a mile to the north, photo left. There are subtle indications at this pictured grade crossing site that the construction of that grade separation is getting close.
The construction halt west of CP Sierra may have other reasons. UP may be renegotiating a long term lease that the billboard owners no doubt have. UP has room to track shift, but that might imply a future 'do-over' that they always avoid. They also probably screwed up by not anticipating the Cypress Ave bridge, so more budget is awaited to move the new signal bridge (or not).
EDIT: As far as removing freight traffic from the LA sub between Pomona and Riverside, I think the UP 'source' was just referring to a goal of the Alhambra sub 2MT project. IMO even 3MT is possible between Pomona and West Colton, but a lot of lead/drill tracks would have to be rearranged in that 21 miles. It does make you wonder about spending big taxpayer $$$ on those grade separations in west Riverside for (mostly) Metrolink.
Interesting theory K.P. ... When you posted your teaser I was looking around and thought that this almost vacant area West of ONT on Garfield was what you would be talking about. The campers may be unhappy with that.
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=34.059833,-117.633759&spn=0.007475,0.013937&t=h&z=17
Thank you for keeping us informed!!
Robert
OUT OF THIS WORLD ...
Part D (of A-D)
Back up northeast near where we started this four-part series, but now up on the Etiwanda Ave. overpass, we look eastward at the traditional single-track Sunset Route. This is probably in the vicinity of M.P. 527. It is here that the mainline is surrounded by yard and industrial tracks. If we have identified the possible future connecting line's route correctly, a track(s) likely would come in from the photo's middle to lower right and transition toward the upper left.
It should be noted that a wye could exist here too. If we combine this one with a wye suggested over at Mission Blvd., a Balloon type arrangement could be had. A local eastbound out of the City of Industry could in theory pickup and setout cars on the SP line, go around the big Balloon, and continue its pickup and setout mission back towards Industry on the LA&SL. It is unknown if that is the balloon concept that Omaha is thinking about.
A telephoto looking east from Etiwanda Ave.: The Kaiser Yard is on the left. The overpass in the background is Cherry Ave.
Finally, a recent previously shown view that looked eastward from the very new Cypress Ave. overpass in Fontana:
While the whole West Colton Yard basically was recently revamped, it is wondered if the enhancement of [CP] AL533 SIERRA (in the background in the above photo) was strangely not completed because it would need to be redone again in some way with a Kaiser-area transition track(s) to the LA&SL.
This poster has also mentioned numerous times (most recently in a post discussion with MikeF90) of a conflict situation possibly looming on the horizon between BNSF and UP on the seven mile BNSF section between Colton and Riverside, as Sunset Route trains that are routed that way have to transition between the east and west sides to access the LA&SL, thus often clogging and tying up all the BNSF Transcon mains. But, if a new Ontario area LA&SL-SP transition route was utilized, the brought up BNSF transition problem would simply disappear.
This poster has heard that maybe UP would abandon the LA&SL in Riverside altogether. But, that seems very unlikely because UP is contractually obligated to Metrolink to keep the line active. But, UP could sell the Ontario-Riverside line to Metrolink, but retain trackage rights over the line for overflow traffic and emergencies. That would seem to be the best of both worlds.
Time will tell what will happen, and whether or not the possible bridging track(s) between the SP and LA&SL lines in the Ontario area is ever built.
----------
On Saturday, September 4, 2010, while this poster was up on the Etiwanda Ave. overpass by the old SP Kaiser Yard, a 'shipper' mystery that was previously highlighted in this topic was solved. That will be shared with the forum in a few days ...
Part C (of A-D)
The possible future southwestward line likely then would junction into the present LA&SL line that follows alongside Mission Blvd. Los Angeles is to the west, left. The present CP nearby is C044 MIRA LOMA.
The transition track (from the far background photo left) would have to sharply curve under the I-15 Freeway to the foreground left.
Likely, that would complete the new routing.
A link to a MapQuest aerial view is provided below for those unfamiliar with the area so they can conceptually see an overall perspective of what has been written about in this post series. The scope of the aerial can be expanded or reduced as needed. The diagonal power lines route is pretty obvious in the aerial view, and runs from the upper right to the lower left (the order of this post series so far, Parts A-C).
http://www.mapquest.com/mq/4-4bRAAhat1rbsTZyTVIcm
If you see another alternative route that UP could use, please let the forum know. But, I couldn't find another alternative, and I was actually on site!
As a side note, the above junction would likely have a wye arrangement, as about two miles eastward there is a big auto distribution complex where many new autos are delivered by train, which are in turn delivered to Southern California's auto dealerships by truck.
Continued in Part D
Part B (of A-D)
Further southwestward, the power lines right-of-way diagonally crosses Jurupa Street., where the only thing significant presently in the way of a future rail line is a plant nursery. The view below looks northeastward.
In the highly industrialized area, there are many industrial tracks. One such track crosses the power line right-of-way. The below view that looks southwestward was taken from the same Jurupa Street as above.
Part A (of A-D)
On February 24, 2010, "spbed" posted what I thought was an absolutely farfetched testimony of a UP hogger, to the effect that sometime in the future, LA&SL trains via Riverside would be rerouted over the SP West Colton Yard line instead. Part of my skepticism was based on the very real routing limitations of the present physical plants to do that. But, apparently, the present physical plants are NOT what the FUTURE physical plants could be like!
Word has come to this poster that UP was looking into building a transition track (possibly two-tracks) between the LA&SL and SP lines somewhere in the Ontario area, but it would be in such a way that the transition track could act as a "Balloon" track. That would seemingly only mean the east side of Ontario. But, that area is all wall-to-wall industries.
However, this forumist found a wide strip of land diagonally through the area that is used for many electric power lines (which land is owned by the Southern California Edison Company, some parcels owned jointly with other nearby parcel owners), and theoretically, UP could funnel a new rail line through there. That linking of the two present rail lines is cursorily estimated by this poster to be about 3 miles in length.
The above photo looks southwest from the intersection of Etiwanda and Slover Aves. Note the buildings on both lower corners. The photo was shot on Saturday, September 4, 2010, as most of the other photos were in this series.
Looking northeastward, there is the above noted intersection. The power lines swing northward (photo left) on the other side of the said intersection.
The power lines thereafter cross the SP Sunset Route just a block or two to the north. In the below photo, a Union Pacific passenger train zooms westward (leftward). How "out of this world" is it that a railfan gets to stumble across and photograph such a dazzling event? (By the way, the train was led by specially decaled GE AC45 UP 2010, for those interested in such things.)
mvs (9-6):
The below photo looking east down the Sunset Route was taken from Milliken Ave., at M.P. 525.40. I-15 is visible in the distance, including much bridgework for freeway interchanging with I-10 just a quarter of a mile to the north, photo left. There are subtle indications at this pictured grade crossing site that the construction of that grade separation is getting close.
Take care,
To Everyone: The four-part "Out of this World" series is scheduled for posting early Wednesday morning (Pacific Daylight Time), September 8, 2010. It will highlight a possible new Sunset Route rail line!
To Everyone:
The four-part "Out of this World" series is scheduled for posting early Wednesday morning (Pacific Daylight Time), September 8, 2010. It will highlight a possible new Sunset Route rail line!
K. P. HarrierUpdate as of Tuesday, August 31, 2010: The Magnolia Ave. Underpass Construction Riverside, CA Just a few visual items on the construction progress ... As the underpass is dug out, likely the metal walling will be extended downward to hold up the shoefly track. Note the vertical I-beams.
The Magnolia Ave. Underpass Construction
Riverside, CA
Just a few visual items on the construction progress ...
As the underpass is dug out, likely the metal walling will be extended downward to hold up the shoefly track. Note the vertical I-beams.
K.P., thanks for the picture update.
Work is progressing fast on the Magnolia Avenue underpass. A similar underpass in Irvine began in June 2007 and is not complete yet.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.