Nope, not as far as I could see from my Google tour. There appear to have been businesses using the space. Not BIG business, mind you.

One was/is Serafin's Distribution. Or so the sign says. Across the street I saw huge stacks of pallets. Both areas were fenced, with gates. I saw no sign of a homeless encampment.

The date of the Google photos is unknown. Perhaps those businesses cleared out. I suspect not. Even if that's the case, it's still of interst to me how those two business were allowed to place those items under the freeway. WHO allowed that? Did/does Caltrans ever inspect its property? Were these spaces rented, or pirated? If the latter, why was that allowed? If the former, who received the rent checks?


spsalso

I see quite the extensive encampment a few feet from the overpass.

The homeless are surely to blame for stacking a few hundred tons of dry pallets under the bridge in a fenced off recycle yard.

It's certainly possible that a homeless person did start the fire. It's been known to happen.

But if those items were not under the freeway, the problem would have been FAR smaller.

BALLPARK WAG's:

A tanker truck full of gasoline (9000 gal) contains 1035 M BTU. (You know, like the one that destroyed the freeway in Philly back in June.)

A stack of pallets that I saw in the map view that was NOT under the freeway contained about 183 M BTU.
There was a stock of pallets UNDER the freeway that was pretty close to the same size.

So the stack under the freeway was worth about 18% of a full gas tanker, or about 1600 gallons. And then there's the other crap lying around.

Note that a stack of pallets gives REALLY GOOD ACCESS to air for the burn. If that much wood had been there as 12" diameter logs, the fire folks likely would have had it out in plenty of time.


On rexamination of the street view, I'm going to say that my estimate of the size of the piles was low, and will bump that 183 up to 200-300. That's for each stack. Now you've got 2/3 of a tank truck burning, equivalent.


spsalso

"The homeless are surely to blame for stacking a few hundred tons of dry pallets under the bridge in a fenced off recycle yard."

From the photo, it looks like they lessened the problem by removing a bit of the fuel. Probably should have kept at it.


spsalso

Listening to the fire radio, there were active commercial pallet yards involved in this fire. They were also having to tag hydrants outside the immediate area to supply enough water....multiple hose lines at 250 GPM, and master streams at 750 to 1500 GPM. Fire extended to buildings in the ares.

There is also an encampment directly under the overpass.

There were 25 engine companies, 12 truck companies and multiple chiefs and other LA fire department units assigned to this fire.

This is some fantastic video of the event:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4J-fD4mff8k


I noted a fair amount of explosions, including a strange "air-burst" around 18:49.

Seems like there might have been other interesting stuff stored, beyond the pallets.




spsalso

By the title of the thread, I was worried that I10 was closed in LA. But it is only in CA.

The small pops are common with hot burning wood fires, and it could also be spalling concrete. Some of the louder ones were probably truck tires, and the big ones, likely propane tanks from the fork lifts.

Crazy
As of 6:44 PM Eastern Time

Monday commute will be a bear.

Sick day :)

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand

That sounds to me like exploding concrete. Trees also explode when they are wet, but this is all very dry pallets.

There will be speculation about how and who started the fire, but the primary problem here seems to be permitting the stacking of large amounts of flammable material underneath critical infrastructure. If it was a building it would be against fire regulations to not have any fire suppression for such a use, right? So given that space under a bridge is effectively a building, usages like this should either be disallowed entirely or should have to maintain suppression systems suitable for the amount of flammable material they want to store there.

The east coast incident was not caused by material stored under a bridge, but it should have reminded everyone of why fires under bridges are bad and triggered them to check what was being done under their own bridges.

Looking at the intensity of that fire I would be surprised if the concrete was usable so that's going to be a big and expensive rebuilding job.

Safety concerns...

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/tustin-sc...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Since the structure has been used for the passage of heavy trucks, I expect that if only cars were allowed, it could continue to be used while additional support was placed underneath. Then trucks could again be allowed.

That said, I expect the phrase "an abundance of caution" will be operational.



spsalso

https://res.cloudinary.com/engineering-com/image/upload/v1699832521/tips/231112145529-01-la-pallet-fire-111123_h76kt4.webp

...need some hotdogs and marshmallows...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

An excellent photo provided by Caltrans:




Still no word on why Caltrans allowed the pallets to be stacked under the freeway.


spsalso

A similar fire occurred 25 yrs ago below the I-95 overpass in newark NJ, and it closed I-95 for over 1 yr. That fire originated in a junk recycling pile. The rebuild of I-5 could be improved using faster setting, fireproof geopolymer concrete. Alternatively the support pillars and underside of the overpas could have added a steel "radiation shield" in areas with a homeless populations. Better yet, spend as much money building homeless shelters as we spend supplying overpasses for cars.

"...when logic, and proportion, have fallen, sloppy dead..." Grace Slick

Homeless were affected, but it doesn't sound like they were the main problem.
https://www.wfsb.com/2023/11/13/los-angeles-motori...

What are the wide flange members that were under this area?

Google Maps Link

The "main problem" was the property owner allowing hazardous/dangerous materials to be placed under the freeway by leasees.

From Debirlfan's link:

"California Secretary of Transportation Toks Omishakin said storage yards under highways are common statewide and across the country. He said the practice would be reevaluated following the fire."

There's nothing wrong with the practice. There IS something wrong with not inspecting properties to make sure they are being properly used. Especially when having been put on notice with the June gas truck fire and the Newark fire mentioned by davefitz, above.




spsalso

The IBC does not let you store anything in a stairwell because it might one day catch fire.

I'm surprised that Omishakin portrays storage yards under highways as "common". "Common" maybe as in "don't blame me".

Quote:

I'm surprised that Omishakin portrays storage yards under highways as "common".

But they are; I've seen them in San Francisco as well, specifically under portions of the approaches to the Bay Bridge

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

I just drove up and down Perry Street, next to those approaches (using Google). It's nearly exclusively vehicle parking, much of it appearing to be diesel buses and/or government vehicles.

Didn't see any pallets.

Omishakin says storage yards are common. That is what is called a "red herring". The problem isn't whether storage yards are common under freeways. It's whether they contain dangerous materials (and why that was allowed), something he didn't appear to address.

No dangerous materials--no fires under freeways.

Or, put another way: You could store a LOT of sand and gravel under a freeway without risking a big fire.



spsalso

Pallets are only marginally more flammable than cars; I could see a bunch of cars getting burned by an arsonist, intentional or otherwise.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

Well, we've certainly seen cars burning on ships, lately.


spsalso

"...the state authorities said they now believed that arson had caused the huge fire..."

I look forward to hearing why they believe this.


"When asked by reporters why the flammable material was allowed to be stored under the bridge, the governor said, “That’s all being assessed.”

I look forward to hearing the results of that assessment. Seems to me that it wouldn't take over 24 hours.


"Newsom said the tenant of the site is in violation of their lease. “We’re in litigation, their lease has expired and we have been aggressive in addressing concerns as it relates to the lease itself,” he said.

Officials believe the tenant “subleased the space … with multiple subleases, that’s part of the litigation posture,” Newsom said."

Is it this pesky litigation that obstructed the removal of flammable materials? Could not the Attorney General of California have figured out a way to remove the materials? Apparently not.



spsalso

Are pallets defined as hazardous material? From experience I know that they are excellent for starting fires but they meet no criteria that would cause them to be labelled as hazardous. The key here is that there may have been no enforceable rule that an AG could act on.

Pallets really should get special consideration under NFPA 704. Smolderability? Doesn't really fit in with the classical flash point and fire point definition.

I can see it now, every pallet labeled; Do not store pallets within 100 feet of homeless encampments.

Quote (Pallets are only marginally more flammable than cars;)

I would have thought that with the large surface area and non-confinement that they would be much more flammable than automobiles.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

A car can auto-ignite, a stack of pallets cannot. In other words, it's more difficult to set a car on fire than a pallet but the car is more likely to catch on fire than the pallet. As this is being called an arson it's unlikely a car was a cause.

If this was a building and the owner decided to change the basement parking garage into a paint manufacturing facility, codes compliance or the Fire Marshall would declare the use to be non complying.
The inability to eject the subleasors may be a quirk of California's tenant laws, and the wording of the lease.

Comparing pallet storage and car storage (numbers approximate):

Wood has a BTU content of 9000/lb
A pallet weighs 40 pounds
A pallet is 6" thick
A stack of pallets 18' high contains 36 pallets
A stack of pallets weighs 1440 pounds
There are 13 M BTU in a stack of pallets
A pallet occupies 14 square feet
Stacked pallets contain roughly 1 M BTU per square foot


Gasoline has a BTU content of 125,000 BTU per gallon
A car has a typical gas tank of 15 gallons
A car holds 1.8 M BTU
A car occupies 85 square feet
A car contains roughly .02 M BTU per square foot


Note the difference between 1 and .02


spsalso

"The inability to eject the subleasors may be a quirk of California's tenant laws, and the wording of the lease."

There will, of course, be a variety of legal documents filed to attempt that ejection. And those documents are on file.

So a person could find out the time line and other details.

If a person looked.

Also of interest would be whether there was mention that the cause was non-payment of rent, or non-compliance with a safety directive.



spsalso

Does California have overly excessive commercial tenant protection? As a commercial leaser, they should be able give the notice as per the lease and the day after the notice date they should be able to start clearing the area without suffering legal issues. If the lessee doesn't pay rent they should be able to start clearing the area the day after rent was due.

It sounds like they did not learn from GDOT when the I85 bridge near downtown Atlanta collapsed. That fire was due to people starting a fire that became significantly larger due to GDOT storing items such as large spools of polyethylene conduit and numerous other flammable items under the bridge.

A few years ago, the bridge on Cheshire Bridge road, only a few miles from the I85 bridge, was destroyed because someone started a fire which then set off a gas line.

The I85 bridge was rebuilt in record time but Cheshire Bridge took a few years.

California apparently brought suit with the leasor for non-payment of rent about a year ago.

I've seen no indication that California brought suit based on improper and dangerous storage on their property.

There is a legal concept called "civil asset forfeiture". It is commonly used by various government agencies to take large sums of cash from people who have such. It is done immediately on discovery of the cash. It has also been used to take cars from drivers who are involved in "side shows".

Civil asset forfeiture could have been used in this case. Immediately.


spsalso

Then the state would have to find storage space for the junk. Civil asset forfeiture is generally used to extort valuables from innocent people. Even if the state agency knew about the pallets, they aren't easy to convert to cash.

Quite true.

But if the state had been serious about removing the material, this route would have worked*.

I agree with your "extortion" comment (although sometimes they accidentally pick a guilty one). This time it could have been a "force for good".

The pallets don't have to be converted to cash. They have to be removed. They can be stored in some MUCH safer place, and the storage fee could likely be billed to the, uh, perp.


spsalso

*If for no other reason, because the state has unlimited legal resources. And a peasant doesn't.

Xi Jinping wasn't slated to visit beneath that freeway so Gavin didn't have the area spruced up for company.

He could always have hung some curtains in front of it.


spsalso

There was quite a large fire at a homeless camp under highway 880 today. The smoke did drift over to SF.

Makes one wonder if this was not an effort to remove the homeless by fire?
Sort of eco movement thing. A response to a government that is not doing it's job.

Note, I have not been in CA in several years, so I would not know first hand.

An interesting video featuring comments by the guy who owned one of the businesses located at the site:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCfbchOSpMI


Also, I would have thought the fire department would have come through on occasion to do a fire inspection.


Sounds like Caltrans and the fire department knew, or should have known, that there were pallets stacked there. By allowing the pallets to remain there, they both then were also responsible, in some way, for the fire.


spsalso

Caltrans Continues Progress on Fire Cleanup and Repair on I-10 Published: Nov 16, 2023 Link
"Caltrans and contractors working in close collaboration to repair the damage and reopen I-10 in three to five weeks."

Someone from Caltrans must be watching webanars from the Concrete Preservation Alliance, the schedule seems to be a bit ambitious unless they intend to fully shore the roadway.

The prior fire in Newark NJ was on 7 Aug 1989 under I-78 and not under I-95. It required a 1 yr closure. That fire origninated at a garbage recycling company, located under I-78.

I suspect that all states will need to inspect storage facilities under interstates and penalize those companies that are storing flammable materials under the overpasses. It really is a no-brainer.The practical problem is that all political deals are quid pro quos , so nothing will effectively be done unless the families of the politicans see real profits flow into their accounts.

In those cases where homeless encampments are involved, a balanced approach would be to fence off the overpass and also build an adjacent overhead shelter for the homeless, no more sophisiticated than a car parking lot with overhead rain protection. In theory, such shelters could also be under the overpass but using steel roofing that would act as a radiation shield in the event of a uncontrolled fire in the encampment.

"...when logic, and proportion, have fallen, sloppy dead..." Grace Slick

Since these businesses have been allowed to use and store dangerous materials under the freeways for quite some time, and the various government agencies that should have disallowed that practice did not,

then those agencies should relocate those businesses to a safe location at no cost to those businesses, and with the same rental fees at the new location.

Alternately, the appropriate government agencies could use an idea from the previous post on this topic, and suspend "radiation shields" under the freeway, and over the dangerous locations. Also around the columns. Of course, there's still be a messy fire to deal with, as there would be with his shelter suggestion for the homeless.

spsalso

The collapse on I95 in Pennsylvania earlier this year was due to a tanker truck colliding with the bridge and catching fire. Different type bridge, and maybe not so long, but they got it up and running in about 2 weeks.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-28...

Did they get the bridge open in 2 weeks or did they just get the roadway open in 2 weeks? When, if yet, did they get the bridge open since it fell out of the news once the roadway was open?

I’ll see your silver lining and raise you two black clouds. - Protection Operations

I95 was reportedly reopened in 12 days, which was the critical thing. Not sure about the roadway below.

I am not a CE nor familiar with the ACI code, but an extended fire under an overpass will cause high shear strain between the rebar and the concrete, due to the difference in thermal expansion of steel vs concrete. Since managing the shear strain under load is a primary design consideration in the original construction ( design loads being vehicular traffic and earthquakes) , one likely needs to calculate the magnitude of the shear strain caused by differential thermal expansion between the rebar and the concrete.

As I seem to recall, the apparent thermal shear strain between 2 dissimilar bonded elements is (delta T) * (delta a), where (delta T) = heated temp minus original casting temp and (delta a) is the difference in coefficient of thermal expansion of steel rebar vs concrete. If this resulting shear strain exceeds the ACI limits of strain, then the original design load cannot be reliably sustained. The original casting temperature is about 60 F, while the heated temperature can be calculated either using legacy curves or via finite element model.

Anyhow, the 2 questions of the moment are (a) has such a calculation been made to confirm the ACI limit strain has not been exceeded and (b) is the decision to not demo a political decision or an engineering decision?

The reason this is bothering me is that I personally witnessed the failure of the crystal river unit 3 reactor containment dome by virtue of a poor "political decision", likely composed of the executive's rubbing his stomach 3 times in the counter clockwise direction, as opposed to following the recommendations in the engineering study for replacement of the steam generator.

The possibility of an earthquake occuring between now and November 2024 ( when the Newsome /Rice ticket is up for election) is pretty slim, so it is feasible that a political decision is being made.

"...when logic, and proportion, have fallen, sloppy dead..." Grace Slick

Quote (davefitz)

...due to the difference in thermal expansion of steel vs concrete.

The thermal coeff of concrete and steel is nearly the same (about 10 x 10^-6/°C)...that is one of the reasons why they are compatible to form a composite material.

thread815-507741: Section of I-95 collapses after fire burns under overpass...
I updated that thread with current reports. Time to repair 2 lanes of I95 in PA about 4 months.

As long as the I-10 bridge deck is not broken up too much, the main question with a shoring solution likely is something like:https://www.eng-tips.com/postedit.cfm?id=8946462&a...

• Is removing load from the support columns enough?

or

• Does the underside of the deck need to be uniformly supported to remove bending loads.

Can the state file a lis pendens and freeze the lessor's assets?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Can the state and the sublessors sue the Lessor for fraud?

10 Freeway Closure: Caltrans inspections uncovered lease violations before property caught fire By Cristy Fajardo Published November 17, 2023 10:19PM FOX 10
Includes a copy of the
"September 16, 2022 NOTICE TO CURE BREACH OF LEASE AGREEMENTS"

which contains a bunch of references to the building and fire codes, including,
2019 California Building Code 105.1
– Remove all unsprinklered wooden sheds and buildings observed on site. Remove all electrical modifications observed from existing city lighting and rack storage over 12 feet

A Calfire spot inspection report dated 9/6/2022 is attached with additional detail of building code violations.

The report also indicates there is an inspection report dated Oct 5 2023. but that is not included.

I love original source material.

Since the violations were apparently never corrected, I would expect an eviction was filed 30 days after the letter from Caltrans (dated September 16, 2022). I wonder where that went.

I am quite pleased that inspections were done.



spsalso

Quote:

Since the violations were apparently never corrected, I would expect an eviction was filed 30 days after the letter from Caltrans (dated September 16, 2022). I wonder where that went.

That's where lawyer's come in; I recall that there used to be lawyers claiming that any tenant could easily stay put for 6 months after the posting of an eviction notice. Due process is part of the Constitution, asset forfeiture and eminent domain, not withstanding.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

I suspect that with caltrans knowing about these violations for a long time substantially weakens their claims and may even be liable for some of the damage. We'll see how the lawyers spin this.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

If caltrans filed the eviction promptly and the delay was all due to the "due process" it could strengthen the position that the subletting lessor is due a very large bill. The future lawsuits will be around some time, and could be entertaining.

The staying put for 6 months (long past, by the way) makes sense for non-payment (But they ARE the State).

But this was a rather large safety violation. I wouldn't want to be the judge who delayed THAT eviction.



spsalso

Quote:

But they ARE the State

That doesn't allow them to do anything other than asset forfeiture or eminent domain, since they have no more power than anyone else in a court.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

It DOES allow them to put an awful lot of lawyers and investigators on the case, should they feel the need--something most "anyone else"s have trouble doing. This would appear to move the eviction process forward about as fast as possible.

Cristy Fajardo looks to be a pretty good investigative reporter. I am hoping she will turn up more facts and documents.



spsalso

Cal Trans real time video and announcements. "Fix the 10" https://dot.ca.gov/fix-10

Quote (https://www.foxla.com/news/how-leased-airspaces-le...)

Newsom said that Apex Development Inc. is the lessee of the pallet yard that caught fire early Saturday morning, and that the state has filed an unlawful detainer against the company for a number of alleged violations. According to Newsom, "the lease had expired. We believe they subleased the space to as many as five maybe six tenants without authorization from Caltrans." The state has a court date scheduled for early 2024.

Does anyone else see the irony in propping up a overpass damaged by a pallet fire with wooden shoring? Hopefully the fire department is on hand.

Cool controls, if you can get one of those 12x12s to catch fire directly, you let me know. Same thing as mass timber construction...without a massive fire already started (again), they'll never catch.

That was my thought about the hangar fire... all that lovely timber going up in smoke...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

I've had to deal with a few utility pole fires over the years, but they usually only smolder (right up until their embers land in a field of dry phragmites)

Our welders use 4x4s as blocks. A few beads of red hot metal get them smoldering. A few hours later the 4x4 will be mostly gone, no flames.