Sunset Route Two-Tracking Updates

[K. P. Harrier]

cabcar (9-1):

Great photos!  The first one kind of orients one to the location, the other a heavy telephoto gives the feel of what is going on there!

In the latter photo, it looks like the visible bridges are new.  Are they?  And, looking at aerials of the old Marsh Station Road setup, are those two visible bridges on an alignment a block or two east of the old overpass over I-10?

cacole (9-1):

Between cabcar and you, cacole, you guys are making what is presently going on in Arizona just live!

K.P., way over in California ...

[K. P. Harrier]

MikeF90 (8-27):

It is amazing how more information broadens matters.  That four mile section of BNSF triple-track between [CP] WEST RIVERSIDE and [CP] HIGHGROVE certainly could be used to hold a train waiting to get on the Sunset Route.

It is not known how well known the following is, but holding an eastbound train destined for the Sunset Route on one of those three tracks has its own peculiar quirks.  Holding a train on BNSF Main 1 regulates the three- to two-tracks [CP] WEST RIVERSIDE to, in essence, single-track.  Likewise, holding a train on Main 3 basically single-track's [CP] HIGHGROVE.  The obvious solution is to hold a train on Main 2, the center track.  However, that makes the crew of the stopped train on Main 2 captive, as reportedly BNSF does not permit a center-track train's crew to disembark, not even to roll-by another train.

Thanks for the links in your reply post.  I had no idea of the developments in the Los Angeles area.  The bridge shot at BNSF's DT Junction brought back memories.  Decades ago that old AT&SF line was only single-track.  The slanted bridge abutment is evidence of that.  I always found the name "DT Junction" meaningful, as the CP was where double-track (the DT) began eastward; and the old SP wiggly "T" junction crossing thereat made the place so memorable.

travelingenineer (8-27):

Thanks for the input about your Sunset Route Amtrak travel experiences.  You did quite well under very adverse conditions.

The most eye catching of your observations were:  On Amtrak #1 west of Yuma, AZ, "about 0400," you passed "a well lit UP fenced construction area," and at "about 0404," you noted "two" non-mainline "wood" tied tracks "to the north" of the main track that "merged" into the main.

Sounds like an active staging area way out in the middle of nowhere, possibly in the CACTUS siding area.  The bellow photo is of a staging area just east of Seligman, AZ on the BNSF Transcon.  It has no lights, and no fencing.  It is also right by the highway.

In Pomona, CA, it is believed that because of graffiti the UP was inspired to fence in a future signal box, but without lights ... The area is indirectly lit up by street lights, however.

And, of course, the Colton Signal Dept. is partially fenced, and has floodlights.

But, a fenced area under floodlights in the middle of nowhere sounds strange.  I guess they have to do what they feel they have to do.  That area should not be hard to find if it is as lit up at night as you say it is.

Thanks again for offering and then attempting to check out the Glamis to Yuma area on your recent Amtrak travels. 

desertdog (9-1):

The newspaper story was excellent about the status of the effort to grade separate Highway 347 / UP mains in Maricopa, AZ.

Do you know if anything has ever been resolved concerning Arizona's rather wild demand to get UP to pay for grade separations if the railroad two-tracks over those grade crossings?

Have fun everyone,

K.P.

--------

Coming soon:  More replies ... Seeing that I have halfway figured out how to use the new Kalmbach forum program.

And, coming sometime in the near future (hopefully) ... Might there be an absolutely 'out of this world' reason for UP NOT finishing West Colton Yard's [CP] AL533 SIERRA?  After all, everything else seems finished at the yard.  Why not the west-end?

 

[K. P. Harrier]

Update 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.

 

[K. P. Harrier]

Update as of August 31, 2010:

Tri-Lights-Orama

Part III (of I-III)

Colton Crossing

Colton, CA

The NEW southwest quadrant signal box (right) a few hundred feet WEST of the diamonds.  It is not to be confused with the new signal box at the diamonds.

Another track COULD fit between the present mains and the new signal box.

Overall analysis:

For the most part, the new tri-lights seem to merely replace-duplicate the target signals already at the site, and are in conjunction with the new signals being installed about a mile to the south at BNSF's [CP] WEST COLTON by the B-5 Bridge over the Santa Ana River.

-------------

In the works ... Belated replies that have been held up by the Kalmbach forums conversion ...

[K. P. Harrier]

Update as of August 31, 2010:

Tri-Lights-Orama

Part II (of I-III)

Colton Crossing

Colton, CA

The EAST side of the east-west Sunset Route, as seen from the southeast quadrant, by the Colton Signal Dept.:

The NORTH side, looking south on the BNSF Transcon (westbound, to Los Angeles) from Valley Blvd.:

The west (right) signal of the second photo (above) was tilting badly, as it was not anchored.

The NEW east (left) signal of the second photo above was positioned in the way of the old target signal, and the lower target head (unmoved for decades) had to be swung westward (rightward) slightly so it could be seen by approaching westbound trains.

In the lower left background of the photo just above, the new SOUTH side BNSF Main 2 mast is visible, as well as the still in service, nearly 50-year old signal bridge in the far background.

Continued in Part III

 

[K. P. Harrier]

(NOTE:  The following posts were delayed by the Kalmbach forums conversions.)

Update as of August 31, 2010:

Tri-Lights-Orama

Part I (of III)

Colton Crossing

Colton, CA

This forum contributor received word through the grapevine that new signals were being installed at the Colton Crossing.  Here is what was found ...

The WEST side of the east-west Sunset Route crossing, as viewed from the southwest quadrant:

The SOUTH side of the north-south BNSF line, again as viewed from the southwest quadrant.

The just above signals, this time from the southeast side, looking northward from South 6th St. that follows the north-south BNSF a few blocks.

Continued in Part II

 

[cacole]

When I drove through the construction area between the Marsh Station Road and Emperita Road exits on September 1st, the earth moving equipment seems to have been diverted to preparing the railroad roadbed.  Equipment was busy from one end to the other along the new track alignment.

 

At the current rate of activity, UP track laying crews may be able to start their phase of the project within the next two weeks or so.

[cabcar]

Here's two shots from early August, showing the grading for the ROW North of I-10. The view is looking West from the Empirita Rd. exit off the freeway (MP1019) in Benson,AZ.

 

Related Discussion here.

 

--Robert

 

 

[desertdog]

I wish I could report renewed construction activity on the Gila Sub, but in its absence, here is an article from this week's web edition of the Maricopa Monitor concerning the SR 347 grade separation project in Maricopa. 

In the time I have lived in Arizona I am unaware of any "serious accidents" as referred to in the article.  It may be hyperbole on the part of the mayor, looking to build his case for support from Congress

John Timm

Published: Friday, August 27, 2010 6:11 AM MST:

 
Maricopa received some good news recently when the U.S. House of Representatives appropriated $1 million for the city to help pay for its State Route 347 Grade Separation Project.

The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies appropriations bill has passed the House, but still needs the Senate’s approval.
Maricopa Mayor Anthony Smith said the grade separation, which would reroute traffic either over or under the Union Pacific railroad track, is a high priority for the city because traffic backs up on the tracks, school buses cross the rail lines and there are other safety issues.

“This is a huge problem,” Mayor Smith said. “We feel we’re on a time clock to get a solution in place before we see another serious accident (there).”

He said the entire project is estimated to cost in the $60 million range. The $1 million appropriation would go toward paying for the preliminary steps, which include an environmental impact study and a design concept.

If the city gets the money, it will have to match the funds –something the mayor said Maricopa is prepared to do.

ADOT has committed $500,000 for a Design Concept Report and Environmental Assessment for this project, said

Teresa Welborn, ADOT public involvement director.

Smith said the city has also applied for grant money and will continue to seek additional funding from Congress.

“We are not leaving any stone unturned (in a search for funding),” Smith said.

To that end, the city has hired a lobbyist in Washington, D.C. to communicate to congress its need for funding to pay for both the grade separation and the Santa Cruz Regional Solution, a project that will address flooding issues.

“I’m grateful for Congressman Raul Grijalva’s support and guidance through the House in this effort,” Smith said. “I’m looking forward to the bill being signed by the President.”

For the past two years, the city has been working with its federally-elected officials to advocate for funding for this project, according to a city press release.

Smith said he personally has taken half a dozen trips to Washington, D.C. over the past two years to help get the city the funding.

[mvs]

K.P., here is an update on the "Up-and-Over" for the UP Alhambra Sub in the City of Industry:

Temporary traffic lane closures for 11 weeks (PDF file)

[K. P. Harrier]

The Option Changed

Colton Crossing

Colton, CA

For months and months the official Colton Flyover website has shown diagrams of the various alternatives for grade separating the BNSF and UP lines that cross each other at a 90 degree angle at Colton, CA.

The second alternative was ultimately selected, which was of a UP Sunset Route flyover that alignment shifted NORTH of the present two-track alignment.  It would go through the old SP Colton Depot area, allowing for the present alignment to remain intact during the flyover's construction.

However, MikeF90 very recently made statements in a reply post about the chosen alternative, No 2, to the effect that the flyover would go straight over the BNSF basically on the PRESENT rail line's east-west alignment, and NOT north of it.

Upon investigation, come to find out Alternative 2 had been changed, and the present UPDATED .PDF file shows the flyover actually on the present straight alignment just as MikeF90 had mentioned, instead of on a north side alignment the website had previously shown for months!

A K.P. file photo that was shot on August 28, 2009 (ironically, one year back from this present posting date) shows that a track would indeed fit south (photo lower right, the turnout route) of the present Main 2.

Interestingly, the new CP box (NOT the one in the way in the above photo) between [CP] SP538 RANCHO and the Colton diamonds is positioned so as to also allow for another track south of the present Main 2.  A future photo of that new ‘away from the tracks' CP box is hoped to be taken and posted within the next two or three weeks.

The present SP538 RANCHO CP box and signals are in the way of another track, though.  Perhaps the whole present CP will in a year or two be removed altogether in favor of a new double-crossover in the [CP] SP540 MT VERNON area, to the east of the planned flyover.

 

[travelingengineer]

 Mr. Harrier:  Since I was to travel on the Sunset Limited this past week, and per my offer of August 16th and your reply of the same day, let me report the unfortunately-minimal information that I found on the subject journey.

 I departed Los Angeles aboard that train (Amtrak #2) on Sunday, August 22nd at the scheduled time of 1004 PDT.  But, very quickly we encountered a delay, apparently due to track work, whereby the (distant) dispatcher could do nothing to line the switches properly, that eventually required our Conductor to do the lining.  That lost a terrible amount of time right off the bat.  Then enroute to the Glamis area, we had the usual additional delays due to freight priority.

Result of the delays was that our train reached the Glamis area way after dark, and it gets real dark out there.  That, together with the onboard car aisle lighting prevented me from observing hardly anything externally, and my bedroom accommodation was on facing south.

On the return trip on the Sunset Limited (Amtrak #1), the Glamis area was again passed, but on schedule in the very wee hours after midnight this morning.  Nonetheless, I arranged to be awake from my bed of slumber to see what I could see.  It probably isn't much, and I apologize therefore.  Again it was dark dark (and light light aboard).  We departed Yuma AZ at the scheduled 0244 PDT.  My bedroom (dark and without interior lights on) gave a view to the north.  North of our Sunset Limited track, I observed two additional tracks, both seemingly with wood (not white concrete) ties.  About 0400 PDT, we passed, under a slow order begun earlier, a well lit UP fenced construction area, with no apparent activity observed.  Shortly thereafter, about 0404 PDT, the two tracks to the north merged onto our track.  I could discern no mile markers in the darkness.  (Interior sleeper car aisle lighting prevented me from observing to the south.)  Then, no further (and the usual) very wide grading was immediately noted after that merge.

Am aftraid that that is the best (and only) information that I could gain, and thus provide here.  Perhaps smart guys like you or others could pinpoint the mile marker when the tracks merged by taking the Yuma departure time and guestimate the distance covered, and thus probable mile marker, under slow order speed to get to my 0404 PDT observation.  Hope that you might extract some relevance.

[MikeF90]

K.P., the 1/4 mile 'gap' I mentioned was the possibility of transitioning the 'LA&SL' directly into main 1 and allowing transiting trains to progress and wait in the ~4 mi between Riverside and Highgrove, perhaps helping the flow of traffic.

That new Barton road bridge will allow UP to keep the lead intact north of I-215. However, it doesn't look like Stater Bros gets much traffic these days.

Some more examples of building bridges in tight places:

- The new 'add on' BNSF beam bridge built just west of DT junction on the SB sub was built surprisingly fast and looks very economical to me. In a dry river bed (like the Santa Ana River) multiple piers can be built/lengthed, reducing span lengths and cost.

- Eleven years ago a new RR freight truss bridge was built on the Harbor sub adjacent to the existing bridge *and* a newer light rail bridge - very tight quarters! The whole bridge was winched across the closed road intersection in three days using cranes. The gap seen between the bridges is where the old bridge was. I'm thinking that assembling 'prebuilt' new I-215 bridge(s) on site would be less disruptive.

Re the Fogg St relocation track, I just rechecked that the proposed flyover is ~20 feet above grade at the west end of Old Colton yard. Therefore, the new lead could be connected at grade to the SW connector and yet another diamond would be installed. Curious and curiouser ...

[K. P. Harrier]

MikeF90 (8-23):

Part C (of A-C)

But, get this, Mike:  A block or two away eastward, an old wooden Barton Rd. bridge OVER the presumably soon to be abandoned north part of the UP Riverside Industrial Lead track will come down, and be replaced by a modern bridge!  Wow!  A new bridge over a future abandoned railroad track!  The funding for it is already in place!  The bridge can be seen in the background of the below photo.

The present old bridge, however, reported has hazardous materials in it, so that bridge's removal would be a blessing for the community.

In your post's last paragraph, Mike, you stated:  "What I don't understand is the bizarre 1/4 mile 'gap' between the West Riverside junction and the start of 3MT just RR east."

It is unknown what you understand as a quarter mile gap, but here is what presently is at BNSF's [CP] WEST RIVERSIDE ... Everything appears bunched together without a gap ...

Looking westbound:

Looking eastbound:

What I find to be rather odd is the proliferation of lit dwarf signals in the far background on the last photo.  Those signals are obviously related to Metrolink.

When BNSF, then the Santa Fe Railway (AT&SF), first put in three-tracks eastward at their [CP] WEST RIVERSIDE in the 1990's, as I recall Main 1 on the west went straight through to the present Main 2 on the east.  Main 2 on the west went straight to Main 3 in the east.  The LA&SL track came in from the southwest.  Somewhere east of the center of the CP, Main 1 on the west TURNOUT routed to AT&SF Main 1 in the east.

Then one day years ago I showed up and everything had been alignment shifted and was angled as it is today.  If BNSF ever puts in a flyover at the Santa Ana River by Colton, those alignment-shifted tracks at [CP] WEST RIVERSIDE would likely have to be put back to the way it had been previously!  But, as you have indicated, Mike, such a flyover is questionable conjecturing.

Take care,

K.P.

 

[K. P. Harrier]

MikeF90 (8-23):

Part B (of A-C)

As far as relocating a track in the Fogg Street area of Colton, I am totally lost and confused about that according to the way it is reported by the news media.  Perhaps the press has been confused about that too, because their conveyed news about that matter has never quite made sense to me.  As you mentioned, though, perhaps they are talking about relocating the transition track in the southeast quadrant of the Colton Crossing to along the Santa Ana River instead, which I myself have theorized about just like you have. But, yes, that big lumber yard appears to be in the way!

When I was by the old Colton Yard, nothing new there popped out at me.

I haven't been by the DT Junction area on the BNSF for a while, so don't know what was done there lately.  But, I look forward to seeing what BNSF and transportation authorities have in mind for replacing the old BNSF two-track bridge over the I-215 Freeway in the Highgrove / Grand Terrace area, and what kind of alignments will result.

As far as a flyover south of BNSF's CP WEST COLTON, I see huge benefits to UP and Metrolink, and of course, the ultimate benefit for BNSF by having a free flowing three-track mainline.  But, if BNSF wants to go the logjam route instead, that is their prerogative, but it seems that would be counterproductive.  I have no knowledge of the cost difference between straight bridging over the Santa Ana River (such as what is there now for two-tracks) vs. a single-track flyover that shifted a third-track over to the other side, but maybe someone at the forum has knowledge of such things.

Obviously, bridging is not cheap.  In San Diego, CA the trolley system has much bridging ... and bridging and bridging and bridging ...

San Diego even has the more exotic type bridging.  The long, swooping curved one below (on the photo's background upper left) makes probably a 90 degree turn over the San Diego River near the intersecting of the I-5 and I-8 Freeways.

Of course, the San Diego Trolley is rich pocket taxpayer owned, whereas BNSF is profit minded investor owned.

At [CP] WEST COLTON just north of the B-5 Bridge, as you know two not in service signal masts for eastbound trains have been positioned on the CP's west (south) side.  Exactly what and where the counterparts will be erected for westbound trains should tell us allot about the future.

If BNSF goes westward over the Santa Ana River without a flyover, it will surely have to erect some type of expensive walling alongside Terrace Ave. similar to what it did in Cajon Pass, though not nearly as dramatic of a structure.

Hardly any information has been able to be found reference the Barton Road Bridge over the BNSF in Colton / Grand Terrace.  Maybe that is a cat and mouse situation, with nobody wanting to move first.  And, that has gone on for at least a decade and a half.  But, I perceive that if BNSF is impelled to move first, Colton / Grand Terrace will probably not like what it gets, merely a very narrow two-lane bridge gapping over a BNSF three- or four-track mainline.

Continued in Part C

 

[K. P. Harrier]

MikeF90 (8-23):

Part A (of A-C)

Greetings and salutations, Mike!  Great to hear from you ...

Sorry that the following is so long-winded, but, there is allot of ground to cover in response to your reply post ...

In Colton, CA the two-track Sunset Route from Rancho Ave. to about a block west of the diamonds at the BNSF is right next to either residential housing or an alleyway for such houses.  So, I don't anticipate the tracks being relocated one track southward, but who knows.  I just find it hard to accept that all the NEW signals and boxes would be relocated before the Flyover is finished, or at least almost finished.

An official website shows the flyover route to the north of the present two-tracks, thus, I don't envision ANY track having to be moved.

In the City of Industry, the shoefly was right alongside the Up and Over's construction without any problem. 

So, much can be accomplished in a very tightly spaced area.  And, as with the Up and Over, if something is in the way of the Colton Flyover, the construction contractors could wait till one track is in place, and then remove a ground-level track or whatever was in the way.

Continued in Part B

 

[K. P. Harrier]

Update as of Wednesday, August 25, 2010:

The Cypress Ave. Overpass

Fontana, CA

Part II

Now that the overpass is open, one can see more evidence that the future Main 1 (left) might be too close to the advertising signs, though the Sierra Ave. overpass in the background looks like it has a rather close clearance also.

A view looking west:  The future Main 1 will be on the right.  A second siding-type track will be laid on the left.

Finally, a high-power telephoto looks east.

Construction crews were continuing to finish off minor odds and ends when this posted visited the site.

 

[K. P. Harrier]

Update as of Wednesday, August 25, 2010:

The Cypress Ave. Overpass

Fontana, CA

Part I

As mvs alerted us to on August 21, 2010, the best that I can determine is that the Cypress Ave. overpass opened this past Monday, August 23.  This posted visited the site Wednesday, August 25.

It has a wide roadway with sidewalks on each side for easy access for railfan photography.

Small wire fencing (below photo's upper left) is present, however.  The ground level cul-de-sac leading to the tracks is now paved; and was the location of a number of update photos in this thread over the previous months.

Here is what the Sunset Route looks like from the overpass ... View looks eastbound toward [CP] AL533 SIERRA, and the partially in service west signal bridge.  The West Colton Yard's Receiving Yard is visible on the upper right.

As can be discerned in the above photo, the Cypress Ave overpass sort of blocks the sight path to the signal bridge for approaching eastbound trains, but signals can be seen through the fence's wire meshing.  However, if a green signal dropped unexpectedly to red while a train happened to be in the magical blocked line of site, a train crew would lose response time; but, because of an unhindered straight line of site down the actual tracks, a train crew could respond quickly if something abnormal happened on or around the tracks ahead.

Continued in Part II

 

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

K.P. - It does, thank you very much !    I can well understand how this tragedy affected you.  More importantly, with your several photos and these posts, you've now done a lot to make the information about this memorial and the best 'fix' for the problem - no more grade crossing - more accessible 'on-line'.*  (That's not a 'be-all and end-all' goal in life for me, but it is a worthwhile endeavor to the rest of the public - and just as much of a tribute - to spread the word about both persons and the history of that underpass, for whatever good it may do.) 

* For example, search for just "Colton" and "underpass" and "girl" using Google, and this thread comes back as the top result !  Which of course will lead to your photos of the site and the plaque.      Thanks again, K.P.

- Paul North. 

[K. P. Harrier]

Paul D. North Jr. (8-25):

It is hoped this view will accommodate your request ...

It was a very sad, but memorable tragedy that hit home with me when I saw the plague this past Saturday.  I lived in the Inland Empire at the time of the tragedy, and remember how big the news was.

 

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

Since around 2006, the underpass has been designated as the "Pasqual (or Pascual) S. Oliva Underpass", who is the former mayor referenced in K.P.'s post above.  The little 6-year old girl was Irene Frances Yzaguirre, who was apparently only 1 of 18 people that had been killed by trains in Colton (over an unspecified time period).  This is based on the 2006 application and supporting documents - including annotated copies of newspaper articles from the 1960's - to name the underpass, which can be found on-line at [10 pages, approx. 784 KB in size] - 

  http://www.ci.colton.ca.us/a/MG32727/AS32756/AS32757/AI32808/DO32809/DO_32809.PDF 

Notably, it took then-Councilman Oliva 3 tries to get the $305,000 bond issue approved by the voters for the City of Colton's share of the underpass's costs - apparently it was only after the little girl was killed while walking home for the start Christmas vacation that the bond measure was passed.  The total cost was $747,000, which was shared/ allocated as 40 % by the City, 40 % by the state, and 20 % by the Santa Fe Railway. 

K.P. - do you have or can you get a full-frame, 'head-on' photo of that commemorative plaque, which would show all the wording ?  That doesn't seem to be available on-line, but perhaps should be.  Thanks again.

- Paul North. 

[K. P. Harrier]

A Very Sobering Memorial

Not far from the crossing of the UP Sunset Route and the BNSF Transcon, at the intersection of "N" and 7th Streets in Colton, CA, a memorial silently stands.  It was photographed on Saturday, August 21, 2010.

In the early 1960's, a then City Councilman and later Mayor pushed for construction of the above "N" Street underpass.  The community was stirred to action and passage of a bond measure when a little six-year old girl on her way home from school was struck at the then "N" Street grade crossing by a Santa Fe Railway train.  The little girl subsequently passed away while being rushed by ambulance to the hospital or shortly after arriving thereat.  That was in 1964.  The original "N" Street is visible in the background on the above photo's upper left.

After the underpass was finished in 1968, the Councilman, who was by then the Mayor, dedicated the new underpass in honor of the little girl.  In the past decade, he himself also succumbed.  The memorial was modified to honor him as well as the little girl.

After Union Pacific's merger with the Southern Pacific, the BNSF line over which the tragedy occurred came to be used as a Sunset Route alternate route, in effect making the Sunset Route between Colton and Los Angeles two-tracks.

 

[MikeF90]

Great photos, K.P.! They do prompt more questions than answers.  

I would expect that the UP 2MT near the crossing will be shifted to the ROW south edge in order to make room for the eventual flyover construction, and the new signal boxes there look to be very close to this path. 

More wild speculation, but the upcoming 'Fogg St relocation' track could be engineered to replace the SE connector. However, that pesky lumber yard north of the river would have to be relocated .... BTW anything new happening at Old Colton yard?

K. P. Harrier

Thus, it must be ask:  How can space on the west side south of the Santa Ana River match up with a third track on the east side north of the river?

Given the tight encroachments, I think it is possible to build one or two single track bridges on either side of the existing one (like DT Junction). The same strategy is even more likely for the new I-215 bridge(s). We'll see.

As far as a flyover for UP somewhere along this section, I can't see the economic justification for a very long time if ever. What I don't understand is the bizarre 1/4 mile 'gap' between the West Riverside junction and the start of 3MT just RR east. Historical quirk or purposeful bottleneck?  UP could 'persuade' BNSF to fix this and also add a universal crossover at about CP Highgrove after 3MT is extended - much cheaper than a flyover. BNSF may need to add a new CP nearby if the Metrolink 'Citrus connection' is funded.

[K. P. Harrier]

Pondering the Alternate Sunset Route Southward from Colton, CA

Part VI (of I-VI)

K.P.'s Guess on What BNSF and UP will Do (Continued)

PHOTO "R":

Of course, on the west side of the tracks is La Cadena Drive, but there is quite a bit more room for a third track to be added between the current two-tracks and that west side La Cadena Drive.

It should be remembered that in Highgrove where three-tracks from Riverside end, it is the most westerly track that ends. (See PHOTO "A".)  That most westerly track would correspond with that wider area as in the just above photo.

PHOTO "S":

In the below photo, a double-stack goes between Terrace Ave. (photo lower left) on the east side and La Cadena Drive (photo background middle) on the west side.

Thus, it must be ask:  How can space on the west side south of the Santa Ana River match up with a third track on the east side north of the river?

It is unreasonable to think that BNSF would tear down the whole two-track "B-5 Bridges" and build another, a three-track one, with a new angle-shifted alignment so all the tracks align correctly, including a new track coming north from Highgrove on a WEST side. 

This poster does NOT specifically know how that mismatched alignment problem would be solved.  But, ponder this:

PHOTO "T":

Let us go back to the [CP] WEST COLTON area again ...

If BNSF extended the third-main (rightmost track in the just above photo) southward on a shifted-to-the-east (right) alignment, then flew it OVER the present two-track bridging and came down on the west side and continued southward thereafter, the alignment shift would work perfectly, and solve UP's problem of getting east side Sunset Route transitioned trains on Main 3 (in Colton) over to the west side (Main 1) to go onto the LA&SL in Riverside!  That flyover concept is exactly what this poster thinks BNSF and UP will do.  And, everyone would be forever happy ... Well, UP just ‘grinning and bearing it' would probably be more like it, but that certainly would solve the problem.  Perhaps we should say solve two problems, a logistical one and a track alignment one (remember there was very little room for an additional track adjacent Terrace Avenue in Photo "Q").

PHOTO "U":

As previously noted, BNSF has erected two future south side (eastbound) signals at CP WEST COLTON, but NO north side westbound signals as of yet.

Such masts work well with two-tracks, and would work well here because the theorized future Main 3 would be on a different alignment so as to fly over Mains 1 and 2 (track numbers as viewed FROM the north side, as BNSF ‘s predecessor AT&SF traditionally changed track designations at the point of flying over).

In all the posts in this series, it must be remembered that it is only conjecturing and K.P.'s opinions.  How things actually work out in the future may or may not be as theorized.  But, the physical evidences documented in this series are rather undeniable.

A postscript:

If the southeast quadrant's transition track at Colton Crossing connects to Main 3 immediately south of the Colton Crossing, then that would mean a shortened transition track would exist that would be unable to hold the typical long Intermodal.  That transition track is commonly used for changing engine crews.

PHOTO "V":

On the east side of the SP Sunset Route's own crossing of the Santa Ana River, there is a siding called the Ice Deck Siding.  But, it is only 5740 feet long, and the same problem would result.  The east end of that siding at [CP] SP542 LOMA LINDA is shown below, looking eastward.

However, construction is near for the future Hunts Lane overpass just west of the CP, so, without the grade crossing, the siding eventually could be extended eastward for a, say, 10,000-feet siding.  That extended siding could be used in changing crews that are presently done on the long transition track in Colton.

As stated a number of times previously in this topic, it is believed that the present counterclockwise LA&SL-SP track orientation in the Los Angeles Basin will be changed to a clockwise one in the future.  Such a conjectured future clockwise orientation would work perfectly in conjunction with an extension of the Ice Deck Siding as described above.

----------

For Wednesday, August 25, 2010:  An emotionally moving photo of a memorial monument related to the area of the above post series.

 

[K. P. Harrier]

Pondering the Alternate Sunset Route Southward from Colton, CA

Part V (of I-VI)

K.P.'s Guess on What BNSF and UP will Do (Continued)

PHOTO "N":

The line then goes further south and goes over a three-track, confining old vehicle underpass.

PHOTO "O":

Finally three-tracks (two mains and the southern end of the transition track, photo far background) become two-tracks at BNSF's [CP] WEST COLTON, and continues straight southward over the B-5 bridged Santa Ana River (photo center).

PHOTO "P":

But, here we must stop and backtrack briefly.  The newly installed CP box at the BNSF location presently called [CP] WEST COLTON is at a revealing spot.

As can be seen in the photo just above, the new CP box is on the far, EAST side of the line.  What is NOT seen, however, is that that box is positioned so a third-track can be laid!

To triple-track the line further southward (railroad west), BNSF logically could (note that the word is "could") then build another adjacent bridge (on the east side of the present ones) and go over the Santa Ana River.  Simple enough, but ...

PHOTO "Q":

An important public road for locals (the narrow Terrance Ave.) is somewhat in the way, on the east side of the tracks, as seen on the below photo's lower right. 

Such may require expensive walling like with the "Up and Over" in the City of Industry, CA.

Continued in Part VI

 

[K. P. Harrier]

Pondering the Alternate Sunset Route Southward from Colton, CA

Part IV (of I-VI)

K.P.'s Guess on What BNSF and UP will Do

Thus, UP voluntarily funding anything exotic on the BNSF between Colton and Riverside does not seem in accord with their track record.

PHOTO "J":

Note the southeast quadrant UP transition track (from off the Sunset Route) curving onto the BNSF alignment below (above the railing, left side to center).

The alignment of the track that comes in from the lower left in the photo above looks like it could be a future junction point, with three realigned tracks (including a future one) eventually going under the freeway that the photo was taken from.

PHOTO "K":

Those three tracks immediately go southward over a four-tracks wide bridge at the "N" Street roadway underpass.  View looks east.

PHOTO "L":

But, a block or two more southward ... trouble.  Note the residential fence on the lower right.  The photo was shot on the west side of the tracks.

PHOTO "M":

There is only a three-track width between the old residential housing on each side of the three-track line.  The below photo was taken from the east side of the rail line.

Continued in Part V

 

[K. P. Harrier]

Pondering the Alternate Sunset Route Southward from Colton, CA

Part III (of I-VI)

An Attitude (Continued)

Also, on the LA&SL in 1992-1993, the line between Ontario and Riverside was two-tracked, but UP left two gaps in that two-tracking.

PHOTO "E":

One gap was through the very rocky Pachappa Cut area.

The other was about a three mile section between Pedley (CP C050 LIMONITE) and Riverside (CP 053 ARLINGTON).  What is actually there?

PHOTO "F":

First, eastwardly out of the Pedley Metrolink station stop is landfilling.  View looks westbound.

PHOTO "G":

Next come mild cuts AS IN the Winterhaven area near Arizona.  The following view looks westbound from Clay Street in Riverside.

It should be noted that this is high speed territory, and passenger trains are timetable authorized to go 70 M.P.H. through here.

PHOTO "H":

Eastbound from Clay Street, since the track level is below ground level, adding a second-track here would have required expensive excavations and walling, especially in light of the new housing that has sprung up nearly trackside.

PHOTO "I":

Of course, the eastern end of the about three-mile stretch is where the great single-track viaduct is located.

Thus, from examining the above, it seems to be UP's policy not to spend anything they don't have to on, even if that means foregoing some two-tracking because it goes through expensive to grade or modify areas.

Continued in Part IV

 

[K. P. Harrier]

Pondering the Alternate Sunset Route Southward from Colton, CA

Part II (of I-VI)

An Attitude

The subtitle illustrates a UP perspective that could play into the BNSF triple-tracking.

PHOTO "C":

Just west of the State border between Arizona and California, in the Winterhaven area, grading has taken place for planned two-tracking, but the project stalled when the economy soured.

PHOTO "D":

But, in that effort, UP seems to have left a mile or two gap in the two-tracking effort by NOT grading a small section, one that is mountainous.

Continued in Part III

 

[K. P. Harrier]

Note:  Previously, it was stated that this would be a four-post series.  Developments in this posters life just happened to bring him to the Colton area, so fill-in material was able to be acquired, and a more in depth series was brought together.

Pondering the Alternate Sunset Route Southward from Colton, CA

Part I (of I-VI)

A Key Post

PHOTO "A":

The previously shown photo below looks physically north (railroad east) at the BNSF Transcon TWO-TRACK bridge over the I-215 Freeway in the Highgrove-Grand Terrace, CA area.  The bridge will have to be replaced in a near future freeway widening project. 

In light of the fact that BNSF has triple-tracked Cajon Pass, and as a continuation of that triple-tracking there is triple-track south and a few miles north of the above bridge to be replaced, it stands to reason that the replacement bridge would at least have a three-track width too.

An ‘in the know' source has indicated to K.P. that "the number of tracks the [replacement] bridge will accommodate has not been finalized."  Oh, really?

PHOTO "B":

Remember, the State of California was going to save $10 million if UP abandoned its Riverside Industrial Lead Bridge (the near one in the photo below) over the I-215 Freeway in favor of using BNSF's Transcon Bridge (the distant background one, the same bridge shown above).

We can conclude that the NEW, replacement bridge over the I-215 Freeway in the Highgrove / Grand Terrace area will be at least three-tracks wide.

(In the past, it was noted in this thread that the present archaic 1936-built Barton Road overpass bridge over BNSF's two-tracks in Grand Terrace, about a half a mile north of the I-215 Freeway, will need to be replaced too for the gap in BNSF's triple-tracking to be filled.  Since that will occur sometime in the future, let us put that beyond the scope of this discussion and focus on the triple-tracking as a whole.)

So, assuming the triple-tracking of the BNSF is a given, we are still left with the thorny problem of how Sunset Route trains taking the alternative LA&SL route via Riverside will change sides on the BNSF.  Westbound UP's will enter the BNSF in Colton on the Main 3 side, but exit seven miles later in Riverside on the Main 1 side.

Continued in Part II

 

[john_edwards]

Looks as if they are starting the work right away rather than have the allocated money disappear due to shifting political winds. Thanks for the continued updates KP. John