A Strange Railroad Track Intersection Setup

[Big John]

Oxnard, CA has a track running through its "Five Points" intersection (which used to include CA 1):  https://goo.gl/maps/YpdHuuAkF7VtpLFP7

The stitching on that aerial has me wondering if there are trains in both images.  The tiny piece of a boxcar to the west is an obvious stitchcraft.  But the half-boxcar in the middle of the crossing has got me scratching my head.  It is illegal to transport any railcars less than 55 feet in length.  I don't think it is real. 

Was that illegal when cabooses were around?

[Dirt Roads]

Oxnard, CA has a track running through its "Five Points" intersection (which used to include CA 1):  https://goo.gl/maps/YpdHuuAkF7VtpLFP7

The stitching on that aerial has me wondering if there are trains in both images.  The tiny piece of a boxcar to the west is an obvious stitchcraft.  But the half-boxcar in the middle of the crossing has got me scratching my head.  It is illegal to transport any railcars less than 55 feet in length.  I don't think it is real. 

I'm curious; why is that illegal?

Was that illegal when cabooses were around?

Oops.  I think that I've got the 55-foot rule messed up.  On the signal side, I was familiar with a 55-foot minimum track circuit length rule.  On the crossing signals side, we've got a minimum 55-foot window on either side of the centerline of a grade crossing.  Thus, for a perfectly perpendicular crossing, the absolute minimum track circuit length protecting the middle of the crossing is 110 feet.  Both rules are designed to protect trains and provide crossing warning in the case of maximum axle spacing and minimum axle spacing on railcars.  We would certainly be capable of detecting a shorter railcar, and indeed cabooses were usually shorter than 55 feet. 

But checking into this further, it looks like there are still some other shorter railcars.  In particular, I see a 35-foot long 70-ton covered hopper designed to carry cement and sand that was manufactured as recently as 1990.  And worse, even the "standard" 50-foot boxcar is only 54'-8" long.  It does look like most (or all) Class I railroads have restrictions on minimum railcar lengths, but that restriction is 44'-11" or so and it appears that they can still approve the movement of short railcars under certain conditions. 

I stand corrected, as there does not appear to be such a law or regulation.  I have corrected my original post.

[Dirt Roads]

And just in case you are doing the math, there is also a law that requires railroads to provide "equivalent of track circuit protection" in the case that the maximum length railcar (actually, distance between adjacent axles) exceeds the length of any track circuit.

[fillup420]

Here is one north of Charlotte

[jay8g]

East Marginal Way S/SR 99 at Diagonal Ave S in south Seattle is definitely a strange one, with a long, curving section of track (which is sort of street running on the northeast leg) running diagonal through the intersection, plus two crossings on the west leg (which appear to be abandoned).

The west end of the street-running section in downtown Renton is somewhat similar.

[Flint1979]

You have this crossing at Joslyn and Brown Road in Auburn Hills, Michigan.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7075522,-83.2854048,71m/data=!3m1!1e3

[bcroadguy]

The railroad runs diagonally through a regular four way intersection in Surrey, BC. I think the mix of regular traffic lights and railroad crossing signals is kind of neat.

Another intersection where the railroad runs through the intersection in Nanaimo, BC. This one is a 2-way stop.

[Chris19001]

Double your pleasure in Darby, PA.  Street intersection with trolley running meets CSX line.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9177747,-75.255714,3a,75y,96.52h,76.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slZBUDhqUm_tCqYCn8qHnAg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192