With all of these accidents happening between motorists and trains, why hasn’t grade separation become mandatory?
Extreme cost, The U.S and Canada have many thousands of level crossings and the cost of grade separating all of them would be astronomical…
Carnej1 beat me to it. I was going to say for three good reasons.
-
Money
-
More money
-
Even more money.
There are many reasons - they begin with $$$$$$$$ and they end with $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
Also, level crossing accidents are way down and keep going down, thanks in large part to better driver training and programs like Operation Lifesaver.
Money notwithstanding (and it does factor into what I’m about to say), next time you’re at a crossing, take a careful look at the surroundings.
In most built-up areas, you’ll find buildings and side streets very near the crossing. A reasonable grade on the road to create “ramps” up each side may take a couple hundred yards. If the approaches are fill, they will require lateral width for stability. If they are on a structure (like an elevated highway) you may be taking away access to businesses and residences, which is also true of the fill.
I’m not sure what the required clearance is for rails, but it’s probably 14’ or so, maybe more.
Bottom line is that there very often simply is not room to run one over the other.
In so many instances, highways were built parallel to railroads, or vice-versa–and sometimes parallel to rivers, as well. Being crowded together, it makes building bridges or underpasses virually impossible at a reasonable cost.
John Timm
I believe vertical clearance above tracks is now set at 25 feet.
Believe that is for the unlikely possibility of future electrification?
Double stack height is curently 20 feet 2 inches - I suspect there may be ideas in the maritime industry to increase the height of ocean shipping containers.
Remember, it wasn’t all that long ago 18 feet was considered a height that equipment would never exceed - as time marches on equipment gets larger and loads get heavier.
Where I am from, the amount of people being stupid on crossings is small compared to other places on the track.
I see far more kids on track playing “chicken” with and jumping on the BNSF mixed local for a ride than I do people doding between the drop-arms in their cars.
As long as there are people and railroads, there will be people trespassing on the railroads. And so long as that happens, people are eventually going to get hurt. So separating the two would be a waste of time, money, and resources.
I think that drop-arms at crossings, and programs like “Operation Lifesaver” are about all that are practacal to get people “smart” around the rails. If those don’t knock common sense into you, then little will.
Just my two cents,
S. Connor
[banghead]$$$$$$$$$$$$$
LARRY: Most states, minimum clearance is 22’-6", a few as low as 21’(NH, ND, OR); rational minimum height for catenary is 24’-6" (USDOT);
There is very limited (and shrinking) federal Section 400 funding in each state with long waits caused by assigning of priorities. (the locals certainly don’t have the $$$ to build bridges, they’re busy wastefully spending money on stuff with less public benefit, but more political advantage for pandering to the masses.
PDN probably could spend forever talking about how variables and priorities are handled. There is no such thing as a cookie cutter solution (Sorry Mr. Bailey’s bridge) anymore, especially with some of the esoteric, touchy-feely circus these days in public works projects. (Then again, the highway design bubbas go stupid anywhere within 100 feet of a railroad and repeat the same design errors and bad assumptions over and over and over and over and over and over, just hoping once they can guess their way thru a project[banghead][banghead][banghead]…it’s kinda scary
In the US we have our sensibilities - other countries have their own.
Statement in the following video credits India with killing 10 people a day with their railroad and road crossings are rarely involved.
I don’t know…why don’t you ask your local DOT why they insist on building roads and streets across railroad tracks, most of which were there long before the road was even needed.
Which makes the approaches just that much longer.
One thing that struck me the first time we travelled Highway 401 between Windsor and Hamilton (Canada) was the overpasses - dozens of them. That part of SW Ontario is billiard table flat, so they really stuck out.
Acquiring the right-of way isn’t easy.
Relocating utilities is another pain.
Environmental impact statements - even assuming there isn’t much effect. Noise can be an issue - although there’s usually much less warning horn noise.
Community objections to the loss of businesses and the tax revenues. Also to the “Chinese Wall” or ‘big ditch’ results of either tracks elevated on a fill or structure/ wall, or lowered tracks in a trench. (Note, however, that the Alameda Corridor and the Las Vegas and/ or Reno projects are essentially trenches.)
“Social justice” objections to the loss of “affordable housing” (i.e., low-income/ low value) and sometimes minority-owned.
Hard choices often need to be made . . .
- Paul North.
The costs, both construction and maintenance is the main issue. But as has been alluded to there is also the problem of clearences, both horizontal and vertical.
Structures over the railroads restrict what can move on the rails. Structures over the roads restrict what can be moved on the roads. The desired (required) minimums have greatly increased over the years, but even where they are exceeded they can be bottlenecks that are very expensive to overcome.
I was talking to a highway engineer who was responsible for the routing of oversize loads on the highways. It is required that the loads be resduced and loaded to provide the smallest footprint possible, by separating then into multiple loads when possible and the type of transporter used and their positining on the transporter.
He showed me the route of a particular load for an oil company. It was over 200 miles on State highways (conventional and freeway), County roads and City streets and required temporary moving or removal of overhead utilities, traffic signals and other obstacles. The actual shortist distance by road between the origin and destination was only a little over a mile but because of a freeway (which would of had to be torn down and rebuilt) between them the route permitted was less costly and disruptive. Railroads have the same problems.
I am aware of several places where cosly structures were built to separate highways and railroads. The railroads ceased operation and the tracks were removed within less than 10 years.
Also look at the current weather news and the number of accidents on grades due to ice and snow.
Both the PA Turnpike’s NorthEast Extension (now I-476), just north of the Lehigh Tunnel, and PennDOT’s SR 33, just north of the SR 512 = Wind Gap exit, had bridges for the Lehigh & New England RR to cross over those roads. I’m told that no train ever ran over either one (maybe only the scrapper’s train to pull up the tracks). That may be an exaggeration, but not much.
- Paul North.
Someone (was it you pdn?) once answered a query about the length of roadway for a highway overpass. With approaches and grades, I think it came to roughly 2000’ (1000’ on each side) plus the actual span over the tracks. Assuming that my memory isn’t off by an order of magnitude, that is a lot of affected adjoining property.