Home Open Account Help 194 users online

Passenger Trains > Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente


Date: 02/23/24 15:02
Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: GenePoon

Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall to Protect Trains in San Clemente
Times of San Diego
by Chris Jennewein

Construction crews are scheduled to begin work next Tuesday on a retaining wall to protect trains from landslides north of the San Clemente Pier in Orange County.

Officials from the Orange County Transportation Authority and Metrolink said they expect the wall to be completed by late March, providing rain does not cause disruption.

Initial designs call for a structure 10 to 15 feet tall and 160 feet long, supported by steel beams, each about 30 feet deep.

Passenger traffic on Amtrak and Metrolink trains was halted on Jan. 24, though freight trains were allowed to continue at 10 mph. However, freight traffic is now also halted because of recent movement of soil and debris.

The line is the only rail link from San Diego to the rest of the country, and is considered especially important to supply the Navy and Marines with heavy equipment.

Over the past three years, Southern California’s eroding bluffs have repeatedly forced the closure of the rail line which had operated largely uninterrupted for more than 125 years.

IMAGE: View of slide area

https://timesofsandiego.com/politics/2024/02/22/crews-to-begin-building-160-foot-long-wall-to-protect-trains-in-san-clemente/




Date: 02/23/24 17:25
Re: Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: jp1822

Well, I think that will be a waste of money and aimed at appeasing those wanting to have a unique house and back yard right "on the waterfront." How close can we get.....More review of permits and waterfront buildings as things move forward, but it'll end up in some payoff I am sure. Bring the complaints on when the back yard slides down into the tracks below. It's just going to continue to happen due to over-developing and meeting those dreams of waterfront views.

All will, eventually, be a the cost to the tax payer (to build the walls); not the home-owner. 



Date: 02/23/24 17:59
Re: Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: ts1457

band-aid



Date: 02/23/24 19:20
Re: Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: joemagruder

I have just come back from a trip through the Cascades on the Starlight. There are lots of very sturdy concrete snow sheds on the route. Why not do the same thing along the coast?



Date: 02/23/24 20:24
Re: Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: OnTime

in terms of weight and volume a snowshed is no match for a large mudslide



Date: 02/23/24 21:25
Re: Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: coach

joemagruder Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have just come back from a trip through the
> Cascades on the Starlight. There are lots of very
> sturdy concrete snow sheds on the route. Why not
> do the same thing along the coast?

Now that's in interesting idea.  I'll take it 1 step higher and remind everyone of what SP used along the Scotia Bluffs on the old NWP:  a causeway supported by many concrete piers, along and below all the bluffs, which allowed all the sand to pass BELOW the elevated tracks and into the river.  I wonder if that would work??



Date: 02/23/24 21:40
Re: Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: PHall

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, I think that will be a waste of money and
> aimed at appeasing those wanting to have a unique
> house and back yard right "on the waterfront." How
> close can we get.....More review of permits and
> waterfront buildings as things move forward, but
> it'll end up in some payoff I am sure. Bring the
> complaints on when the back yard slides down into
> the tracks below. It's just going to continue to
> happen due to over-developing and meeting those
> dreams of waterfront views.
>
> All will, eventually, be a the cost to the tax
> payer (to build the walls); not the home-owner. 

Nah, just send the bills to the City of San Clemente. They're the ones who issued the building permits.



Date: 02/23/24 23:06
Re: Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: mp51w

Here's the Google Earth view from 2011.  Looks like they already had a problem back then!
It almost looks like there was a sink hole developing near the tracks!  Is there a culvert there?
Zoning should have never allowed that guy to put in that huge patio,
although it may be holding the hillside in place now.
 




Date: 02/24/24 00:51
Re: Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: GenePoon

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Now that's in interesting idea.  I'll take it 1
> step higher and remind everyone of what SP used
> along the Scotia Bluffs on the old NWP:  a
> causeway supported by many concrete piers, along
> and below all the bluffs, which allowed all the
> sand to pass BELOW the elevated tracks and into
> the river.  I wonder if that would work??

It didn't REALLY work on the NWP, as landslides regularly blocked the rail line there anyway.  Equipment was permanently placed there when the NWP was hauling long, heavy trains of lumber on the North End, and in the January 1953 a train pulled by 4-6-0 NWP 184 was swept off the tracks into the Eel River, killing its engineer, fireman and head brakeman.



Date: 02/24/24 08:41
Re: Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: masterphots

Not to mention a river is no match for the Pacific Ocean



Date: 02/29/24 10:50
Re: Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: Alco251

And to believe these guys are on the payroll of schools of higher learning....this from the LA Times "Letters ToThe Editor" earlier this month. Are thgese people known as "bike activists?" I know they exist.

To the editor: The Times’ Feb. 9 editorial on the coastal rail line between San Diego and Los Angeles raises an essential Southern California policy issue as we decide how to spend scarce infrastructure dollars. However, we feel that the options currently being considered by the transportation agencies and implicitly endorsed by your editorial are based on questionable assumptions. 
The recurring closures of the rail corridor due to crumbling bluffs in Del Mar and San Clemente underscore the imperative for action. However, is it wise to spend 11 years and $20 billion ($4 million per average daily round-trip rider) to sustain the southernmost 60-mile segment from San Clemente to San Diego? 
In this stretch, passenger use is in decline, limited cargo is hauled (only 0.04% of California’s total), and alternatives for point-to-point transport via smart technology-enabled entities like Uber and electric buses are growing. 
Moreover, a rails-to-trails conversion along this span could offer exciting possibilities for sustainable, efficient, healthy and equitable recreation and transportation for many more people than the train will likely serve. 
We have world-class universities in our region that can help study transportation alternatives to find the most cost-effective and sustainable ways to serve our needs. Let’s seize this opportunity to redefine coastal mobility in a holistic and evidence-based manner that safeguards our environment, promotes public health, encourages tourism and ensures the resilience of our transportation infrastructure for generations to come.
Peter Cramton and Kevin Patrick, Del Mar
Cramton is a professor emeritus of economics at the University of Maryland, and Patrick is a professor emeritus of public health at UC San Diego.
 



Date: 03/01/24 13:21
Re: Crews to Begin Building 160-Foot-Long Wall in San Clemente
Author: randgust

If you look at the history of Scotia Bluffs and the SP, it's even worse.   I've seen historic photos where there were lines of piles from ABOVE the tracks to all the way into the river below the active tracks, and a pile driver was stationed nearby.   They kept driving piles in the mud above the tracks, anticipating movement, and apparently  just shifted the caps over to the new piles when it got bad enough, and let the old ones keep sliding downhill.  You have to admire SP for keeping the line open, but I think Santa Fe made a great deal when they pulled out of the partnership.   The real solution that never happened was not building there but bridging over to Rio Dell to literally stay out of the mud.

There are very real cases out there where the military and DOE pull the defense card, and they'll do whatever necessary to keep a line open.



[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.0775 seconds