It has been about 2 months since any mention of the Iris to Mesquite (and presumably the Mesquite to Glamis siding?) construction. This would be a pretty good chunk of the 50 or so miles of double track that UP said was slated for 2014. Any recent rumbles, whispers in the wind or clues in the tea leaves?
Fully agree.
Announcing an Update Series
On Friday, December 19, 2014 during a long dispatch down in Riverside County (CA) with much free time, the following areas were pursued or come upon, and investigated:
(1) The Riverside Ave. underpass, Riverside
(2) A second railroad bridge over the 91 Freeway
(3) Night lights on the Mt. Vernon Connector by the Colton Flyer and Colton Crossing, Colton
(4) Valley Blvd. Quiet Zone-work as a result of the Colton Flyover Agreement (also with nighttime views)
Concerning night lights (Item #3 above), the forum may remember these May 19, 2012 poled lights in the Picacho area of Arizona, where the Phoenix Line meets the Sunset Route.
K.P. came across a similar situation in Colton, CA, on the Mt. Vernon Connector, but at night, with the floodlights all lit and a train under those lights!
Reference Item 2, the duplicated NEW bridge (on the original old alignment, left) …
… appears the same as the first new one (on the temporary alignment, right). Interestingly, the scene looks very, very different now when driving underneath those bridges on the 91 Freeway. K.P. has concluded it is an illusion, but what an illusion it is! More details on the illusion, but NO ‘behind the wheel’ photos, with the planned report … which should be ready for presentation in a few days.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
Thanks!!
Looking at the Google Street View History .. It looks like the grading happened sometime before May 2008, but the second track did not show up until May of 2013.
https://goo.gl/maps/hY2IX
March 2008
https://goo.gl/maps/RM5pP
That area is already double track, so it is most likely just routine maintenance. Tangerine Road is one of the busiest grade crossings in Marana.
Not sure if this is related to new construction or just repairs ..
http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/story/27669266/road-closed-railroad-work-impacts-marana-commute
MARANA, AZ (Tucson News Now) -Construction work will stop traffic in Marana on Friday, as Union Pacific Railroad works to repair a railroad crossing.
Tangerine Road will stay closed through 4:00 p.m. on Friday afternoon while crews perform railroad maintenance and repair at the tracks, which are located right near Interstate 10.
The newest "new" UP bridge over the 91 is in place now, back-filling of the abutments and raising the former (original) grade should commence soon. Beside this websites reluctance to accept pictures from a whole host of other sites my shot in the late afternoon sun from the R-O-W leading to said new "New" bridge was difficult but I managed to shade it just enough .... The SanJac connector is pretty muddy, they piled dirt in the cut to reduce water flow onto the BNSF San Bernardino sub. This afternoon's SanJac was heading south at Barton road in full shade, likewise the UP Riverside local ran over the flyover light before backing down to Congress street yard to switch.
A10
SP657E44 ... snip ... I will try to determine whether work that began a decade ago is/was connected with UP's plan. A10
That was the kind of 'tea leaves' I was trying to read from old City of Ontario plans. Unfortunately, their web site is mind numbingly difficult to search for now stale details.
IIRC the San Antonio Ave separation was planned to be a road underpass. However, politicos these days are hypersensitive to so-called 'social justice' issues so not taking a few residential properties may be preferred to resolving traffic congestion for the majority.
Likewise I find it hard to believe either the City or UP will gain much from an expensive Campus Ave separation. IMO they could simplify the intersection by eliminating access to/from State Street east of Campus with negligible impact. UP used to have a siding there so maybe they can get the ROW back.
Looking forward to see what happens in both areas.
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! ***
SP657E44’s Follow-Up Reply (12-17) Inspires K.P.’s Follow-Up Reply:
This is about the LA&SL grade crossing where Campus Ave. and State Street meet in Ontario, CA.
Your example, SP657E44, of Rosecrans Ave. and Avalon Ave. in El Segundo, CA on BNSF’s Harbor Sub is well understood and point gotten. Thanks.
AERIAL LINK: BNSF and Metro Diagonal Overpasses at a Crossroads
I had made a reference to the hundreds of feet long Iconic Bridge of the Foothill Extension in Arcadia.
AERIAL LINK: Long. Curved Bridge with One Cross Support
The big difference between the above two bridges is that one involved straight track, while the other has curved, and such differences require different support approaches.
In El Monte, CA there is a long, curving concrete bridge structure used by Metrolink, off the Sunset Route, that UP has trackage rights on, but the supports are closer together.
AERIAL LINK: Concrete Curved Structure with Multiple Supports
The Ontario UP line’s location requires a future bridge over the Campus Ave. and State Street roadways that is curved, or at least can accommodate curved track!
AERIAL LINK: Curved Track and Five Road Meet
Because of its length, I see two types of bridges likely: (1) a two and a half- to three-track wide straight truss bridge for two curved tracks or (2) a two-track curved concrete structure with multiple cross supports. In Arcadia, where the Iconic Bridge is now, before the earthquake of 1994, Santa Fe’s “Second District” line’s structure there was a hundreds of feet long curved concrete with FOUR cross supports for heavy tonnage. So, likely a curved concrete structure at Campus Ave. and State Street would require at least one or two cross supports.
If a bridge is indeed put in at Campus Ave. and State Street, as you insinuated, SP657E44, it more than likely will be of a more interesting design than most bridges.
Best,
K.P.
If ("If") one were to look at the BNSF Harbor sub crossing of Rosecrans and Avalon it's easy to see how One bridge would work. The signal department could simply move down to the much larger space west of San Antonio (E). Additionally, since Metrolink and the State seem to like spending money... it could be double-tracked if they saw fit .... maybe. (caveat: But again, most traffic will be using the SP side)
The "Looking East" shot is interesting. When Omaha says it's ok, I'll tell you why.
SP657E44 (12-13):
The mind mustn’t be working too well right now, because it wasn’t clear WHAT, that you mentioned, came from Omaha, nor why.
Concerning a possible future grade separation at Campus Ave. in Ontario, CA that you thought would be easier, but would need much engineering, I don’t see much of a way of doing it. Most glaring, in my opinion, is Campus Ave. itself just north of the grade crossing. Access to UP’s own Signal Dept. property (to the west) would be cut off! Making State St. go straight through again sounds great, but TWO bridges would seem to be necessary or something similar, and that wouldn’t be cheap!
Take care,
That LA&SL / Campus Ave. Grade Crossing, Ontario, CA
Forum contributor SP657E44 (above) thought an underpass could be built at Campus Ave. and State Street. The below first three reshown photos (from March 15, 2012) conveys what is there.
Looking west
Looking east:
A northward view with a local Omnitrans transit bus stopped at the grade crossing because downed gates account of a train approaching
In K.P.’s opinion a single railroad bridge over lower roadways would be difficult to engineer.
Maybe (“maybe”) something like the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension (light rail) "Iconic Bridge" over the 210 Freeway in Arcadia (CA) might do the trick, but of a heavier quality capable of supporting coal trains and not just light rail. But, something of that nature is on the expensive side.
The just above photo was taken January 3, 2013.
So, instead of a single bridge, more likely TWO bridges would be necessary
But the purpose of the above photos and evaluation is to give the forum the tools about what is actually on site, so they can form their own opinion of the matter.
It was both planned and caused by the rain, that happens when you dig a hole and there's a forecast for rain.
The I-beam on the right are holding the conduit, those in the center are helping keep all the dirt to the right in place - especialy under the building.
Update as of Wednesday, December 10, 2014
Part “H” (of E to H; Overall A-H)
The Colton Flyover Related Constructing …
… on the ex-UP Riverside Industrial Lead …
… and the ex-BNSF San Jac Line
The new track connecting the old Riverside Industrial Lead (background) to the San Jac Line, looking southwest from Marlborough Ave.:
A northward view on the old San Jac route with new ties, signal, etc.:
A southward view:
Just above, the old Riverside Industrial Lead used to cross the San Jac Line on the ballast cross-strip towards the signal bottom and left.
In the just above view, a string of cars are parked. Apparently (“apparently”) the BNSF train stopped, uncoupled, went forward, and backed into the old Riverside Industrial Lead a half to a mile towards a Riverside industrial complex to service UP customers as per the Colton Flyover agreement. K.P. did not have the time to investigate that switching operation, but why else would cars be left on the branch and a switch left in reverse?
This will end the series.
Part “G” (of E to H; Overall A-H)
Constructing Three LA&SL Bridges
Riverside, CA
A couple of southward views of other equipment at the site:
Continued in Part H
Part “F” (of E to H; Overall A-H)
A piece of equipment came by and started shoveling dirt into the water.
Continued in Part G
Part “E” (of E to H; Overall A-H)
At the Clay Street underpass construction site, the site has taken on an underpass under construction site.
Just above, it was not clear if the rain caused it or if it was planned, but the recent rains may have flooded a portion of the site. See lower left of the last photo above.
A bunch of I-beams have been pounded into the dirt in a rather strange pattern, for an unknown purpose.
Near to the vertical I-beams.
Continued in Part F
Duly noted MikeF90 but my info came from Omaha, not SANBAG (but their Metrolink connectionidea s to ONT are comical if nothing else). Since it will be a UP project city money isn't necessary - it's also not airport-related other than by proximity. The Vineyard ave underpass does complete the last major hurdle construction-wise between Montclair and West Colton. A good portion of the traffic UP runs goes east on the Sunset anyway, not having to run over BNSF at all is desirable.
Though San Antonio (east) is a busy secondary artery I don't see a viable way of seperating the crossings without great cost - same with Sultana and Vine. Campus however looks quite a bit easier though complicated (returning State street to a straight route by putting the intersection with Campus under the UP).
I will try to determine whether work that began a decade ago is/was connected with UP's plan.
Part “D” (of A to D; Overall A-H)
At the new Streeter Ave. underpass, the southbound traffic lanes are open with both northbound and south bound traffic using it.
The ‘Detour’ grade crossing is no longer in use.
The present, temporary arrangement:
-----------
Continued in Parts E to H to be posted by 12:01 A.M. Pacific Time Sunday, December 14, 2014, but could be posted up to four hours early, i.e., Saturday night, and will deal with the Clay Street underpass construction in Riverside, CA,, as well as the area where the old UP Riverside Industrial Lead crossed the BNSF San Jacinto (San Jac) Branch, also in Riverside. Assumedly, because of a change in weather, the Clay Street construction has taken on a slightly different, unplanned approach …
Part “C” (of A to D; Overall A-H)
The grade crossing at Panorama Road and a red flag: Is the sign an illusion or did workers improvise and use a ‘No Trespassing’ sign to double as a red flag?
Continued in Part D
Part “B” (of A to D; Overall A-H)
From Panorama Road by the LA&SL tracks, the old right-of-way’s ballast (center):
At this angle, things are hard to identify and what is far and near.
Also, especially in the last photo above, horizontally, it almost looks like giant bridge I-beams are being formed. Anybody familiar with what those silver-like horizontal parts might be?
Continued in Part C
Part “A” (of A to D; Overall A-H)
Concerning the LA&SL railroad bridge over the 91 Freeway in Riverside, the wood form-work is off the new cement abutments and piers (far, non-camera side). View from the south looking north.
The west eastbound signal (upper right) of CP C056 SCRRA JCT and the bridging:
Continued in Part B
SP657E44There were 2 phases of the Ontario project: the first was the improvements to Montclair yard which have happened. The second part will become evident (to me anyway) when UP and the city agree on a grade crossing or grade seperation. More than that I cannot say as it's not "public" knowledge ... yet.
I've haven't seen anything current or believeable on the plans for San Antonio Ave grade sep in Ontario; this is near where KPH photographed that mysterious LA sub turnout upgrade. At least the Vineyard Ave / Al sub separation is proceeding (probably under water today). Funding of projects in Ontario may be impacted by the city's battle with LAWA to obtain control of the airport.
My only contact with SANBAG staff about status of other projects got a huffy response. Beware of extrapolating anything from out-of-date documents on their web site. Speaking of new studies, a new page on 'Ontario Airport Rail Access' has popped up. The consultant recommendations echo the SANBAG biases toward creating bus-to-Metrolink connections and ignoring the obvious (limited Metrolink frequency).
Reply Memo to SP657E44 (12-12):
Thanks for the clarifications and thoughts rephrased.
About San Jac trains changing crews by Citrus Street …
… it sounds like the old San Jac run uses a cheaper workforce on the Metrolink side vs. the BNSF side which likely uses their own BNSF crews. That seems to be in stark contrast to switching runs with UP on the Sunset Route. From what I can gather, UP’s agreements with lower cost labor outfits is that they can run on UP mainlines. Interesting contrasting arrangements if that is how the two railroads do things.
As you know, SP657E44, about the above photo for others here at the forum: The new Metrolink Perris Valley Line signals by Citrus Street in Riverside, looking north, with the big curve grading on the left background. Alternate Sunset Route trains go under the four-track signal bridge way, way in the background, but don’t pass by the near signals in the above view.
For SP657E44 again, concerning the railroad bridge and the UP track alignment over the 91 Freeway … It seems the 91 Freeway was put in in the late 1950’s or early 1960’s. In the past, one could see on aerials a faint tracing of an old track alignment to the south of the recently taken down old bridge. I’ve always considered that the original alignment, but maybe it was a shoofly. Whatever the case, back in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s there was NO freeway there before, so a shoofly would be a simple matter, unlike today where a shoofly needs a whole bridge to be built.
For Ontario, I’ve seen public documents that showed the powers that be masterminding a number of grade separations in town, such as San Antonio Ave, the two-lane Sultana Ave, etc. So, if those powers that be can orchestrate a bunch of grade separations in town, more power to them. But, they need to do such fast, because if the new Montclair facility starts to be used extensively, slow moving trains going into the Montclair facility would surely provoke the wrath of the citizenry of Ontario.
While a two-track Alhambra Sub between Colton and Pomona might be the most favored route, the “secondary” LA&SL route via Riverside may be used more than people would think. A future extension of Main 1 EAST at CP SP535 PEPPER to the Palmdale Cutoff wyes would help, but overall I believe UP will find West Colton Yard area mainlines to be a chokepoint corridor of sorts hindering free flow.
If you want to post those photos you say you have, may I suggest that you obtain a free photobucket.com account and in no time you’ll breeze through posting photos here at the forum!
The San Jac was holding behind the signal at Marlborough when I arrived with the Renzenberger van right behind me, she parked down on Citrus for about 10 minutes until said train rolled down to change crews. The signal at Citrus will govern the new connector switch to the SB sub.
The walls are not yet complete so any claim about their design is irrelevent - wait and see. UP is hot happy with the reduced speed of the shoe-fly bridge and curve so WE are paying to restore their original route.
There were 2 phases of the Ontario project: the first was the improvements to Montclair yard which have happened. The second part will become evident (to me anyway) when UP and the city agree on a grade crossing or grade seperation. More than that I cannot say as it's not "public" knowledge ... yet.
When it is built and all the other issues are "fixed" the LA&SL will become a secondary "overflow" route for freight. Metrolink and the state are paying for the grade crossing seperations for their convenience.
I'd post photos and even an editted version of the ONT map if this rinkydink website allowed it but not one of the 4 places I have pictures is "good enough" apparently.
SP657E44 (12-11A / 12-11 / 12-6):
Let me attempt (“attempt”) to respond to your above dated posts, in reverse order to the reply date.
The 12-11A reply:
While out roving the area, the LA&SL Riverside Ave. underpass construction site was not pursued, first because the important access is on the far, opposite side of the other construction sites, and second, almost too much unexpected time was spend on the Perris Valley Line matters. As it was, I got back to base with just minutes to spare!
To my knowledge, the San Jac was not involved in a crew change. About the “third grade crossing” you mentioned, I think, was likely a reference of the new “right” absolute two-headed signal by Citrus Ave. in the Highgrove area. Am I correct? If so, that signal will appear in a soon to be posted series in the “Perris Valley Line Updates” thread.
The 12-11 reply:
In your conversation with a foreman in the 91 Freeway project, what you uncovered was surprising, though it sort of makes sense. But, if it will be as you said, the abutments and walling does not quite make sense, at least to me. Of course, I have the actual photos to review, but they will be posted in a day or so for everyone’s evaluation.
The 12-6 Reply:
That one, the last sentence about Ontario, totally baffles me, as I am missing something somewhere! Can you rephrase the statement, or give more information? The grade crossings in Ontario will probably be around for years to come.
The LA&SL line through Pedley is a fast running line. It didn’t happen while on site at the Clay Street (Riverside) underpass construction site, but as soon as I left a westbound sped by, and as I came to the tracks again on Van Buren Blvd., maybe a half a mile from Limonite Ave., that westbound was seen on the swooping curve. It probably was traveling 60-65 M.P.H. What a shoofly it passed! I was keeping up with the westbound until Rutile Street, where the stoplights were flashing red. And, that was the end of that. But I managed to take a grab shot …
That LA&SL line will likely be an important line even after the Alhambra Sub between Ontario and Fontana is two-tracked. Under certain conditions, the LA&SL route via Riverside might actually be quicker than the Sunset Route.
Anyway, thanks for the input on the LA&SL bridge over the 91 Freeway. Few of us were expecting that stunning information!
It took me all of 2seconds to think "Cool, the San Jac is coming down" and they did a crew change at the third crossing (way down where the two-headed signal is to the right of the tracks).
No mention of the Riversdie ave. grade seperation ?
Tying Down a Sort of Loose End
Three to four weeks ago the new Hunts Lane overpass on the north-south border between Colton and San Bernardino, CA west of CP SP542 LOMA LINDA was posted about. A glaring omission in that posting was the close proximity of the I-10 Freeway, but on Wednesday, December 10, 2014 the freeway was photographed.
So, now you have a visual image (above) of the closeness of I-10 that often parallels the Sunset Route.
A previously shown June 2, 2013 southward view of I-10, this time south of the Sunset Route, in Sierra Blanca, TX:
That section between El Paso and Sierra Blanca reportedly has or will have some two-tracking take place.
While up on the new Hunts Lane overpass again (first photo), a stopped train was observed west of the Hunts Lane overpass.
After K.P. retrieved his auto and drove over the Hunts Lane overpass was the power of that stopping train clearly seen. It had finally come back out from some railroad customer’s property.
The Rest of the Day
After the above I-10 and Hunts Lane photo was taken, K.P. checked out the status of the 91 Freeway LA&SL second bridge, the Streeter Ave. underpass, and the Clay Street underpass, all of which are in Riverside (CA). An update report or reports on the advances of those LA&SL locations will be forthcoming in a few days.
K.P. was sidetracked a bit with new developments on the future Metrolink Perris Valley Line in Riverside. Sunset Route thread readers will undoubtedly remember that part of the Sunset Route agreement for funding the Colton Flyover included track changes involving the UP Riverside Industrial Lead and BNSF San Jac line. While the majority of the update will be in the Perris Valley thread, a few photos will be included in this thread.
Above, note the reversed red switch stand disk and the position of the switch points. What you don’t see are the rail cars that were tied down on a lowering grade BEHIND the camera on the lower right track in the above photo. It took a while for K.P. to figure out what was going on, but that will be covered in THIS thread too in several days.
So, that is what is in the works.
Since A10 had business in Colton this afternoon he took a swing by and talked to the foreman from Sema. Yes they are building a new bridge in the location of the original bridge and both UP and Metrolink will be using it. It will Not be double track.
"Are you going to slide that one onto the new abutments ?"
"No, we're building an completely new bridge and then we'll demo that one"
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.