eolafan wrote:Take it from me, it's Chicago. I also have to wonder (now that we're on the subject), what percentage of the total U.S. number of crossings are in each state, and what the percentage would be in the five or six county "Metro Chicago" area.
What counties are in the Metro-Chicago area?
I would agree with the others -- Chicago. All roads lead to Chicago.
Second busiest would be the Los Angeles metropolitan area.
Third choice would by the greater New York area, particularly those lines and routes served by the Metropolitan Transit Authority, with Long Island and the Long Island RR having the most grade crossings in the region.
RJ Emery near Santa Fe, NM
rjemery wrote:I would agree with the others -- Chicago. All roads lead to Chicago.Second busiest would be the Los Angeles metropolitan area.Third choice would by the greater New York area, particularly those lines and routes served by the Metropolitan Transit Authority, with Long Island and the Long Island RR having the most grade crossings in the region.
By the FRA database, second is Houston with 1363. Philadelphia is third with 1036, and LA is fourth with 1019.
BUT... Those are not metropolitan area statistics. I could compile metro areas, but I would need to know which counties comprised each metro area.
Datafever wrote: rjemery wrote:I would agree with the others -- Chicago. All roads lead to Chicago.Second busiest would be the Los Angeles metropolitan area.Third choice would by the greater New York area, particularly those lines and routes served by the Metropolitan Transit Authority, with Long Island and the Long Island RR having the most grade crossings in the region.By the FRA database, second is Houston with 1363. Philadelphia is third with 1036, and LA is fourth with 1019. BUT... Those are not metropolitan area statistics. I could compile metro areas, but I would need to know which counties comprised each metro area.
Using a 23 county area for New York City, including counties in NY, NJ and PA, the FRA shows 4547 crossings.
For the five county LA area, there are 4829 crossings.
For a 15 county Chicago area (including IL, IN, and WI) there are 7980 crossings.
The counties for each metro area were taken from Wikipedia.
CG9602 wrote:I think it would be Chicago, but I might be wrong.
Which type do you mean, vehicular or rail? Do you include non-grade level crossings? If it's vehicular grade level crossings, there are suprisingly few in the city proper because of city ordinances. For example, the C&NW commuter routes are all above or below grade.
eastside wrote: CG9602 wrote:I think it would be Chicago, but I might be wrong.Which type do you mean, vehicular or rail? Do you include non-grade level crossings? If it's vehicular grade level crossings, there are suprisingly few in the city proper because of city ordinances. For example, the C&NW commuter routes are all above or below grade.
All of my statistics included grade and non-grade crossings.
Good point--I guess we're talking about vehicular/pedestrian crossings, as opposed to railroad crossings, as in Interlockings plus Brighton Park. There should be a DOT list of all railroad/non-railroad crossings (including grade separations) made a few decades back that would give a rough idea of what to expect. I don't know how recently (or how well) it's been kept updated, though--I've found a few mistakes in descriptions of specific crossings on my "home" line that were the fault of faulty updating.
Chicago was a true pioneer in the early part of the last century, requiring that crossings in the city be grade separated. I don't know what the criteria for this were, as some crossings still existed (and some have been built more recently, such as the Kilbourn Avenue grade crossing on UP West).
Now: did you know that the city also undertook a study on electrification of all of the major railroad lines--freight and passenger--in the city and environs? What an amazing thing that would have been!
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
*************************************
I'm reading some very authoritative statistics; nonetheless I'm not sure Chicago really is
no. one in crossings. The city's Master (Burnham) Plan in the very early 20th Century
prohibited any additional crossings to be built. Of course, some were grandfathered in,
and there are some exceptions; but in the City of Chicago itself you can drive
all over the place and not have to cross any tracks. Those horrendous crashes and driver/train
or pedestrian/train fatalities you hear about come from the suburbs, like Elmwood Park. Has
anyone got any stats on this that segregate City of Chicago from the remainder of
Cook County or the metro area (more on that later); or are we just making the (not
unreasonable) assumption that third biggest city + most rail lines + industrial heritage
"must" make Chicago no. 1? My vote would go to L.A.
I assume you mean road/rail crossings. As to rail/rail junctions or crossings of all kinds, it
wouldn't surprise me a bit to hear that Chicago is no. 1. But I don't know about that.
For road/rail crossings on a per capita basis, I don't know. If I had to guess I'd say Fostoria,
Ohio; but that's just a guess.
I for one would look for small/medium sized communities that are
(or were) very high in industrial jobs (including transporation) relative to population and
contain traditional rail yard(s)(not big huge sealed intermodal fiefdoms like UP's Global III
that lies just outside of the corporate limits of Rochelle, Illinois). I'm also thinking offhand of
Bensenville, Illinois, with its commuter line, light industry and the enormous CP yards which
once belonged to the Soo. But that's just speculation; I really don't know. Waycross, Georgia?
Bergen, New Jersey? City of Industry, CA? No idea, but probably someplace like these would
be my hunch. Sorry, don't know. It's not exactly the kind of thing city fathers like to
boast about. Maybe the FRA or some kindred federal gov't agency would have such stats.
BTW while we're on the subject, which cities in the U.K. have the most level
grade crossings and which towns the most per capita?
al
al-in-chgo wrote: eastside wrote: CG9602 wrote:I think it would be Chicago, but I might be wrong.Which type do you mean, vehicular or rail? Do you include non-grade level crossings? If it's vehicular grade level crossings, there are suprisingly few in the city proper because of city ordinances. For example, the C&NW commuter routes are all above or below grade. *************************************I'm reading some very authoritative statistics; nonetheless I'm not sure Chicago really is no. one in crossings. The city's Master (Burnham) Plan in the very early 20th Century prohibited any additional crossings to be built. Of course, some were grandfathered in, and there are some exceptions; but in the City of Chicago itself you can drive all over the place and not have to cross any tracks. Those horrendous crashes and driver/train or pedestrian/train fatalities you hear about come from the suburbs, like Elmwood Park. Has anyone got any stats on this that segregate City of Chicago from the remainder of Cook County or the metro area (more on that later); or are we just making the (not unreasonable) assumption that third biggest city + most rail lines + industrial heritage "must" make Chicago no. 1? My vote would go to L.A. I assume you mean road/rail crossings. As to rail/rail junctions or crossings of all kinds, it wouldn't surprise me a bit to hear that Chicago is no. 1. But I don't know about that. For road/rail crossings on a per capita basis, I don't know. If I had to guess I'd say Fostoria, Ohio; but that's just a guess. I for one would look for small/medium sized communities that are (or were) very high in industrial jobs (including transporation) relative to population and contain traditional rail yard(s)(not big huge sealed intermodal fiefdoms like UP's Global III that lies just outside of the corporate limits of Rochelle, Illinois). I'm also thinking offhand of Bensenville, Illinois, with its commuter line, light industry and the enormous CP yards which once belonged to the Soo. But that's just speculation; I really don't know. Waycross, Georgia? Bergen, New Jersey? City of Industry, CA? No idea, but probably someplace like these would be my hunch. Sorry, don't know. It's not exactly the kind of thing city fathers like to boast about. Maybe the FRA or some kindred federal gov't agency would have such stats. BTW while we're on the subject, which cities in the U.K. have the most level grade crossings and which towns the most per capita? al
Looking at only grade crossing within the city itself, Chicago has 621, LA has 721.
CShaveRR wrote: Now: did you know that the city also undertook a study on electrification of all of the major railroad lines--freight and passenger--in the city and environs? What an amazing thing that would have been!
Does anyone know of an online version of that study? It could provide a weekend's web surfing pleasure.
How many grade grossings on Amtrak's Washing/Boston corridor?
I believe the only state that still had grade crossings on the corridor
was Connecticut ?
morseman wrote:How many grade grossings on Amtrak's Washing/Boston corridor?I believe the only state that still had grade crossings on the corridor was Connecticut ?
That question is beyond the ability of the FRA database to answer as it applies to a specific route. But here is a state-by-state breakdown of grade crossings for Amtrak -
CT - 60 MA - 3 RI - 11 NJ - 11 DE - 4 MD - 5 NY - 4
If you would like, I could provide you with the locations, and you could see if they happen to be on the Acela line.
morseman wrote: How many grade grossings on Amtrak's Washing/Boston corridor?I believe the only state that still had grade crossings on the corridor was Connecticut ?
If I am correct, the N.E. Corridor Improvement Project of the 1970's and 1980's virtually eliminated all (but less than a handfull) of crossings between Washington D. C. and New York...can't speak for north of N.Y.
Datafever wrote: eolafan wrote:Take it from me, it's Chicago. I also have to wonder (now that we're on the subject), what percentage of the total U.S. number of crossings are in each state, and what the percentage would be in the five or six county "Metro Chicago" area.What counties are in the Metro-Chicago area?
Cook, Du Page, Lake, Will, McHenry and Kane are the counties that make up the typically accepted definition of "Metro Chicago".
eolafan wrote: Datafever wrote: eolafan wrote:Take it from me, it's Chicago. I also have to wonder (now that we're on the subject), what percentage of the total U.S. number of crossings are in each state, and what the percentage would be in the five or six county "Metro Chicago" area.What counties are in the Metro-Chicago area? Cook, Du Page, Lake, Will, McHenry and Kane are the counties that make up the typically accepted definition of "Metro Chicago".
There are 2273 grade crossings listed in the FRA database for the six counties that you listed.
Cook - 1327 DuPage - 184 Lake - 168 Will - 273 McHenry - 109 Kane - 212
These totals include both freight and commuter crossings, yes? Is there a difference? Should there be a difference?
doghouse wrote:These totals include both freight and commuter crossings, yes? Is there a difference? Should there be a difference?
The data that I have posted includes road/rail crossings, regardless of the rail traffic type. Although I suspect that there is no freight on Amtrak's tracks.
SimRacin40 wrote:Wonder how many are in Louisville. I'm bound to get a pic of every one at some point.
If you meant Louisville, KY (and not Louisville, IL), there are 246 grade crossings, and 403 total crossings listed in the FRA database.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.