I thought this would be an interesting fact which is the largest city in each state that is not serviced by a rail line? I believe the largest in Wisconsin would be West Bend although it was once serviced by a rail line up until about 2003. Does anyone know what the largest one would be in their state?
Des Moines. Iowa is severely underserved by passenger rail. In fact, the largest city that has a rail line going through it is Burlington (pop. 25K--18th in the state).
As far as rail of any kind, I think the largest city without a line is Marion.
Manchester NH, as far as I know, has no passenger rail (I think it still has freight). Amtrak goes nowhere near Manchester, and Manchester does not have its own train system.
Manchester is the largest city in New Hampshire.
Are we counting light rail? Or rail lines operated just as tourist attractions?
In Hawaii, there is no freight rail anywhere, except perhaps internal lines within military bases. Honolulu is working on LRT, and had (if not taken over for the LRT project) a tourist rail line in the SW corner of the metro area. A similar tourist line is in the west end of Maui.
Unless you exclude the in-progress LRT in Honolulu, Hilo (population > 43,000) wins the prize for Hawaii.
In Alaska, heavy freight/passenger rail serves all the big cities except Juneau (population > 32,000).
If you are talking about freight service, West Virginia has an extensive system due to coal, so you have to go all the way down to the "city" of Spencer, with a huge population of 2,322.
Passenger service would be the state's 3rd largest city, 31,429 resident Parkersburg,
New Britain has the 8th largest population in CT, and is the highest not served by a passenger rail line (although many consider the station in nearby Berlin to be the de facto New Britain station). Four of the top 6 (Bridgeport, New Haven, Stamford, Norwalk) are directly on the Northeast Corridor. Hartford has Amtrak branch service but will soon have commuter passenger rail service, while Waterbury and Danbury have branch service of Metro North.
In Maine, Lewiston (2nd largest city in the state) lacks passenger rail.
Similar to NH, Vermont's largest city (Burlington) also lacks passenger rail. Though Essex Junction, 25 minutes away, functions as the defacto station for the city.
Ohio's largest city, Columbus, lacks passenger rail, and it just might top the list nationally in this category
Though if you're talking any type of rail (as in freight) than that would be an interesting thing to try and look up
As far as passenger rail goes. 3 of the four largest cities in Alabama (Mobile, Montgomery, and Huntsville) aren't served by any kind of passenger rail. Not sure what the largest city here in Alabama is without an active rail line of any kind though. as just about every town of a decent size tends to have one. Maybe Centreville, AL though?
Quote from: dvferyance on February 01, 2017, 02:56:15 PM
I thought this would be an interesting fact which is the largest city in each sate that is not serviced by a rail line? I believe the largest in Wisconsin would be West Bend although it was once serviced by a rail line up until about 2003. Does anyone know what the largest one would be in their state?
While the line going thru town was removed in 2004, a dead-end line still services an industrial park on the far southern side of the city (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3828856,-88.166713,15.23z).
If we're talking passenger rail, then for California it would be Long Beach (does have light rail and freight lines).
San Francisco has heavy passenger rail (Caltrain), light rail, subway and freight lines, but no connection to Amtrak.
As far as any rail line, it's not a single city, but I'm thinking the Monterey Peninsula.
Suggested terms of reference:
Passenger rail=a station with regular passenger service.
Freight service=an industrial spur or siding capable of supporting freight operations
We don't have commuter rail in AZ, but if light rail and streetcars count, the largest city without such service would be Chandler (fourth largest city in Arizona). As for freight trains I am not sure, since practically every Phoenix suburb has freight train tracks either from UP or BNSF.
Quote from: Buck87 on February 01, 2017, 03:52:48 PM
Ohio's largest city, Columbus, lacks passenger rail, and it just might top the list nationally in this category
Though if you're talking any type of rail (as in freight) than that would be an interesting thing to try and look up
Sorry if I didn't make this clear enough I was really intending this to be about the largest city in a state without any kind of rail line. But if you want to talk about the largest cities without passenger rail I would be open to it. Madison WI is not served by passenger rail however the Amtrak Empire Builder does have a stop in Columbus which is only 25 miles to the NE.
In California, Murrieta and Temecula - which are pretty close in population - both have no railroads. I think those are the largest cities. Inglewood, which is a little larger, I think may not have any rail either.
Quote from: Buck87 on February 01, 2017, 03:52:48 PM
Ohio's largest city, Columbus, lacks passenger rail, and it just might top the list nationally in this category
Though if you're talking any type of rail (as in freight) than that would be an interesting thing to try and look up
Until someone can find a larger city in Ohio, I say Xenia, with a population of 25,000 would be Ohio's largest city without any railroad lines. It's former 2-3 rail lines have all since been converted to rail-trails.
Quote from: SP Cook on February 01, 2017, 03:31:13 PM
If you are talking about freight service, West Virginia has an extensive system due to coal, so you have to go all the way down to the "city" of Spencer, with a huge population of 2,322.
Passenger service would be the state's 3rd largest city, 31,429 resident Parkersburg,
Actually, the largest WV city would be Wheeling (pop. just over 28000), unless you count about 10 feet of overgrown-with-weeds tracks that just enter the southern city limits. Wheeling used to have at least 2 lines, but they've all been dismantled. One B&O route, which used to be visible from I-70 at multiple points between the Wheeling Tunnel and Washington, PA, was ripped out rather hastily circa 1987. I suspect it was a "shoot first, ask questions later" type of abandonment.
There are active tracks just across the Ohio River, though.
Louisiana:
No passenger service: Shreveport, Monroe, Alexandria.
No freight rail: Houma, Thibodaux, Winnsboro, Ferriday/Vidalia,
In Maryland, the state capital, Annapolis, is the winner with a population of about 38,000. No trackage whatsoever; much of the Baltimore & Annapolis RR that did serve the city at one time is now a bike trail.
However, you could formerly include Frederick, the second largest city in the state with over 60,000. There's an abandoned line that runs right in the middle of a downtown street. But a section to the south was reconstructed maybe 15 years ago for commuter service and at least one freight customer. (Rare to see a disused railroad rebuilt nowadays.)
Quote from: DaBigE on February 01, 2017, 04:15:52 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on February 01, 2017, 02:56:15 PM
I thought this would be an interesting fact which is the largest city in each sate that is not serviced by a rail line? I believe the largest in Wisconsin would be West Bend although it was once serviced by a rail line up until about 2003. Does anyone know what the largest one would be in their state?
While the line going thru town was removed in 2004, a dead-end line still services an industrial park on the far southern side of the city (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3828856,-88.166713,15.23z).
It appears that the line does run into the city limits just a we little bit. I know the 2 major Milwaukee suburbs without any rail is Franklin and Muskego.
Indiana's largest without passenger service would certainly be Fort Wayne as the nearest Amtrak station is 20 miles to the north in Waterloo.
Largest without a railroad would be Carmel. The only railroad through that city became the Monon Trail years ago.
Here in Wisconsin, the largest muni without a common-carrier rail passenger station is indeed Madison. Among the top ten munis in population in the state, only Kenosha, La Crosse and Milwaukee have active stations.
As for freight service (discounting suburbs), that's a tough one. Antigo has no active railroads and may be the largest without, although Sturgeon Bay and Clintonville are also within that size range. Two Rivers has a dormant rail line that extends into the city, but IIRC, it hasn't yet been used in the 21st century.
Mike
Illinois has a very extensive rail system, both freight and passenger (Amtrak and Metra). Thus, the largest municipality without direct (as in within municipal limits) rail service would have to be Bolingbrook. Otherwise, the area without any rail whatsoever is pretty far down the list.
Anyntown of any significance that was founded before 1940 was on a railroad. Lots of towns were moved to be on railroad lines
LGMS428
In New York, Binghamton for passenger rail. Closest Amtrak station is Syracuse, commuter rail is Middletown. As far as any rail service, likely Gloversville (population 15,315) if we're talking cities/villages. There may be a larger town with no active rail.
Quote from: cl94 on February 01, 2017, 11:29:55 PM
As far as any rail service, likely Gloversville (population 15,315) if we're talking cities/villages. There may be a larger town with no active rail.
Hm. I've checked a few larger places but haven't found anything yet, but there's got to be something bigger than that without any rail service. :D
Quote from: Rothman on February 02, 2017, 10:03:55 AM
Quote from: cl94 on February 01, 2017, 11:29:55 PM
As far as any rail service, likely Gloversville (population 15,315) if we're talking cities/villages. There may be a larger town with no active rail.
Hm. I've checked a few larger places but haven't found anything yet, but there's got to be something bigger than that without any rail service. :D
For cities, Gloversville is indeed the largest.
If we're talking suburban villages, Kiryas Joel has a larger population, but that's such a strange case that I don't know if it can really be counted. Kenmore is slightly larger than Gloversville.
Quote from: andrewkbrown on February 01, 2017, 07:44:14 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on February 01, 2017, 03:52:48 PM
Ohio's largest city, Columbus, lacks passenger rail, and it just might top the list nationally in this category
Though if you're talking any type of rail (as in freight) than that would be an interesting thing to try and look up
Until someone can find a larger city in Ohio, I say Xenia, with a population of 25,000 would be Ohio's largest city without any railroad lines. It's former 2-3 rail lines have all since been converted to rail-trails.
If there was a category for stand alone cities, Xenia would take it for Ohio. Though it does get beat by several bedroom community suburbs...
Cleveland Heights 46,000 (which comes within 200m of the freight/RTA corridor by Case Western)
Beavercreek 45,000
Westerville 36,000
Reynoldsburg 35,000
Brunswick 34,000
North Royalton 30,000
Ran New York's using GIS data. Largest city without any railroad is indeed Gloversville. Largest town without any rail is Amherst.
Largest Minnesota city without any rail is Woodbury.
Quote from: froggie on February 02, 2017, 10:47:21 AM
Ran New York's using GIS data. Largest city without any railroad is indeed Gloversville. Largest town without any rail is Amherst.
Largest Minnesota city without any rail is Woodbury.
Ah, okay. My bet was somewhere in western NY, so I am glad Amherst came up. :D
Quote from: Rothman on February 02, 2017, 11:42:17 AM
Quote from: froggie on February 02, 2017, 10:47:21 AM
Ran New York's using GIS data. Largest city without any railroad is indeed Gloversville. Largest town without any rail is Amherst.
Largest Minnesota city without any rail is Woodbury.
Ah, okay. My bet was somewhere in western NY, so I am glad Amherst came up. :D
Assuming light rail construction proceeds as planned, Amherst won't be without for much longer. As it stands, tracks end a few hundred feet from the T/L.
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on February 01, 2017, 04:59:11 PM
Suggested terms of reference:
Passenger rail=a station with regular passenger service.
Freight service=an industrial spur or siding capable of supporting freight operations
Your use of dual equal signs invites this image:
(https://deadon.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/mono-rail.jpg)
Pembroke Pines, Florida has an estimated population of 150K, and no rail lines nor service. Coral Springs, Florida (127K) naturally has no rail lines, as it was master-planned and incorporated in 1963. They're about 4 miles to the Tri-Rail station from their easternmost borders, so it's not completely cut off from service.
Gainesville, Florida has a population 127,000 and no active rail lines. Ironically, their city logo prominently features a locomotive...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbantheboxstates.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F10%2FCity-of-gainesville-florida-seal-ban-the-box-solutions-1-300x300.jpg&hash=0be8e0857907fa9c90e8257f56582f499bb89cd8)
In terms of NJ, giving it some thought, it's possible the largest city without a rail line may be one of the shore towns. Even then, in decades past, they used to have a fair amount of train lines running thru the towns. Evidence of them includes some of the old railroad bridges one can see along NJ 147 heading towards Wildwood. And on occasion in towns such as Cape May, when the sand gets swept out to sea, old, long buried and forgotten railroad tracks are uncovered.
Quote from: 1 on February 01, 2017, 03:12:21 PM
Manchester NH, as far as I know, has no passenger rail (I think it still has freight). Amtrak goes nowhere near Manchester, and Manchester does not have its own train system.
Manchester is the largest city in New Hampshire.
You are correct. Manchester NH presently has no passenger rail service. There have been off and on discussions about restoring commuter rail service from Boston to Concord NH (extension of the current MBTA service to Lowell), but the MBTA won't do it unless the state of New Hampshire funds it, and the state has been unwilling to do so.
Quote from: roadman on February 02, 2017, 02:37:25 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 01, 2017, 03:12:21 PM
Manchester NH, as far as I know, has no passenger rail (I think it still has freight). Amtrak goes nowhere near Manchester, and Manchester does not have its own train system.
Manchester is the largest city in New Hampshire.
You are correct. Manchester NH presently has no passenger rail service. There have been off and on discussions about restoring commuter rail service from Boston to Concord NH (extension of the current MBTA service to Lowell), but the MBTA won't do it unless the state of New Hampshire funds it, and the state has been unwilling to do so.
And since New Hampshire has no income tax and thus can't tax the incomes of people working in Massachusetts but living in New Hampshire, there's probably a lack of incentive to fund such an endeavor. If anything, funding an MBTA line to Concord would just increase sprawl and drive up property values. The Seacoast of NH (along the Downeaster Amtrak route) is pretty expensive as it is and York County, ME isn't too far behind.
I'm a supporter of the MBTA line to Concord but I can see why NH wouldn't be.
NH has been talking about passenger rail forever. Of course, the idiots in the legislature won't even let federal funds be used on the project, so...
Quote from: lepidopteran on February 01, 2017, 08:57:15 PM
In Maryland, the state capital, Annapolis, is the winner with a population of about 38,000. No trackage whatsoever; much of the Baltimore & Annapolis RR that did serve the city at one time is now a bike trail.
However, you could formerly include Frederick, the second largest city in the state with over 60,000. There's an abandoned line that runs right in the middle of a downtown street. But a section to the south was reconstructed maybe 15 years ago for commuter service and at least one freight customer. (Rare to see a disused railroad rebuilt nowadays.)
Poor Annapolis is in a bad spot for transportation.
Every major metro in TX has at least some rail presence. It's been quite a look around the map to find the biggest city around without any rail. One of the more successful to have not ever had rail would be Canton, east of Dallas. But their popu-count is 3568 at last look. Without knowing better about the Austin, San Antonio, or Houston suburbs, I'm gonna do the shot in the dark and (for now) go with Mineral Wells, west of Fort Worth. Last count has them at 16,773; IINM, there used to be some kind of RR out that way. I thought Seagoville might be close, but not quite (15,519; there used to be an SP/ex-T&NO line there along US 175 till the mid-1980s when it was abandoned).
The route through Nashua, Manchester, and Concord was part of the Boston and Maine Railroad route to White River Jct., VT. The freight dried up past Concord. The state bought the line, but allowed B&M to rip out the rail. This used to be a major Boston-Montreal route.
Quote from: Conn. Roads on February 03, 2017, 08:08:57 AM
The route through Nashua, Manchester, and Concord was part of the Boston and Maine Railroad route to White River Jct., VT. The freight dried up past Concord. The state bought the line, but allowed B&M to rip out the rail. This used to be a major Boston-Montreal route.
In retrospect, a very terrible idea. New Hampshire and Maine having limited rail is really unfortunate. I guess it's fortunate that Greyhound (formerly Vermont Transit) offers bus service from the WRJ area to Manchester and points south. There's no actual way to get to Concord from the Upper Valley though without just driving. It's easier to get from Claremont, NH to Montpelier and Burlington, VT than to get to Concord and Manchester.
Even with its numerous miles of abandoned track, Pennsylvania still remains fairly well covered–at least as far as freight rail is concerned. Judging by the PennDOT Railroad Map (http://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/Planning/Maps/Documents/Pennsylvania%20Railroad%20Map.pdf), the most populous standalone city with no rail service of any kind would appear to be Clarion (pop. 4,936). There may be a more populous municipality in the Philadelphia or Pittsburgh metro areas that lacks any trackage within its borders, although I don't think that fits the spirit of the question.
Since most of us aren't in the business of shipping coal or pig iron by the ton, I think the more relevant question would be: What are the largest cities that lack
passenger rail? In Pennsylvania, none of the Lehigh Valley cities, neither Scranton nor Wilkes-Barre, nor Reading, nor Williamsport have any passenger rail service.
Quote from: lepidopteran on February 01, 2017, 08:57:15 PM
(Rare to see a disused railroad rebuilt nowadays.)
Yes, it is rare, although I saw it happen south of Williamsport about ten years ago. A rail line along the west bank of the West Branch of the Susquehanna had fallen into disuse decades ago and was severely damaged in a 1996 flood. The tracks were rebuilt around the mid 2000s to provide service to a new industrial park north of Allenwood–so its promoters could advertise "rail service available" . Unfortunately, the only "industry" the park has attracted in more than a decade has been a small ophthalmology office.
For Virginia it appears to be Poquoson.
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 01, 2017, 04:08:28 PM
As far as passenger rail goes. 3 of the four largest cities in Alabama (Mobile, Montgomery, and Huntsville) aren't served by any kind of passenger rail. Not sure what the largest city here in Alabama is without an active rail line of any kind though. as just about every town of a decent size tends to have one. Maybe Centreville, AL though?
Vestavia Hills is not served by a rail line, if I remember correctly. Several communities in Baldwin county are not served by railroads either.
Quote from: mgk920 on February 01, 2017, 09:44:03 PM
Here in Wisconsin, the largest muni without a common-carrier rail passenger station is indeed Madison. Among the top ten munis in population in the state, only Kenosha, La Crosse and Milwaukee have active stations.
As for freight service (discounting suburbs), that's a tough one. Antigo has no active railroads and may be the largest without, although Sturgeon Bay and Clintonville are also within that size range. Two Rivers has a dormant rail line that extends into the city, but IIRC, it hasn't yet been used in the 21st century.
Mike
I'm not sure if there are any others larger, but Platteville with a population of 11,224 has no railroads. The last rail line was taken out of Platteville in about 1974.
Quote from: formulanone on February 02, 2017, 12:43:53 PM
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on February 01, 2017, 04:59:11 PM
Suggested terms of reference:
Passenger rail=a station with regular passenger service.
Freight service=an industrial spur or siding capable of supporting freight operations
Your use of dual equal signs invites this image:
(https://deadon.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/mono-rail.jpg)
Pembroke Pines, Florida has an estimated population of 150K, and no rail lines nor service. Coral Springs, Florida (127K) naturally has no rail lines, as it was master-planned and incorporated in 1963. They're about 4 miles to the Tri-Rail station from their easternmost borders, so it's not completely cut off from service.
Gainesville, Florida has a population 127,000 and no active rail lines. Ironically, their city logo prominently features a locomotive...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbantheboxstates.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F10%2FCity-of-gainesville-florida-seal-ban-the-box-solutions-1-300x300.jpg&hash=0be8e0857907fa9c90e8257f56582f499bb89cd8)
Gainesville exists because of the railroad. Newnanville was the county seat of Alachua County.. Then the railroad came thorough in the 1840s or 1850s so a new town was built at the railroad tracks.. County seat moved. Newnanville was abandoned and now is part if Gainesville
LGMS428
St. George, UT (currently about 82K and heading rapidly toward 100K) has no rail line; the UP LA-SLC line bypasses it about 40 miles to the northwest; that's probably the largest Utah city lacking any rail service at all.
Quote from: tchafe1978 on February 03, 2017, 11:08:29 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 01, 2017, 09:44:03 PM
Here in Wisconsin, the largest muni without a common-carrier rail passenger station is indeed Madison. Among the top ten munis in population in the state, only Kenosha, La Crosse and Milwaukee have active stations.
As for freight service (discounting suburbs), that's a tough one. Antigo has no active railroads and may be the largest without, although Sturgeon Bay and Clintonville are also within that size range. Two Rivers has a dormant rail line that extends into the city, but IIRC, it hasn't yet been used in the 21st century.
Mike
I'm not sure if there are any others larger, but Platteville with a population of 11,224 has no railroads. The last rail line was taken out of Platteville in about 1974.
Though if you count suburbs Franklin 35,451 Greenfield 36,720 and Muskego 24,135 top that.
Quote from: dvferyance on February 04, 2017, 11:38:07 PM
Quote from: tchafe1978 on February 03, 2017, 11:08:29 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 01, 2017, 09:44:03 PM
Here in Wisconsin, the largest muni without a common-carrier rail passenger station is indeed Madison. Among the top ten munis in population in the state, only Kenosha, La Crosse and Milwaukee have active stations.
As for freight service (discounting suburbs), that's a tough one. Antigo has no active railroads and may be the largest without, although Sturgeon Bay and Clintonville are also within that size range. Two Rivers has a dormant rail line that extends into the city, but IIRC, it hasn't yet been used in the 21st century.
Mike
I'm not sure if there are any others larger, but Platteville with a population of 11,224 has no railroads. The last rail line was taken out of Platteville in about 1974.
Though if you count suburbs Franklin 35,451 Greenfield 36,720 and Muskego 24,135 top that.
I was thinking along the lines of standalone cities/villages.
Quote from: sparker on February 04, 2017, 03:32:15 PM
St. George, UT (currently about 82K and heading rapidly toward 100K) has no rail line; the UP LA-SLC line bypasses it about 40 miles to the northwest; that's probably the largest Utah city lacking any rail service at all.
Wonder what happened there, since Saint George was an early settlement, for settlements in Utah. Perhaps the rail line bypassed it because of topography/terrain?
In Quebec, with the abandon and removal of some tracks. Victoriaville, Sainte-Agathe-des-Monts, Mont-Laurier hadn't got a service by rail line since the late 1980s.
Quote from: Rothman on February 06, 2017, 08:41:21 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 04, 2017, 03:32:15 PM
St. George, UT (currently about 82K and heading rapidly toward 100K) has no rail line; the UP LA-SLC line bypasses it about 40 miles to the northwest; that's probably the largest Utah city lacking any rail service at all.
Wonder what happened there, since Saint George was an early settlement, for settlements in Utah. Perhaps the rail line bypassed it because of topography/terrain?
The LA&SL (Los Angeles and Salt Lake) railroad (a "side-project" of the Harrimans, the UP owners), was deployed out in the desert west of the western Wasatch ridge specifically to take advantage of topography. It was built southwest-to-northeast -- so when the surveyors got past Las Vegas, NV to the Glendale area, they needed to find the path of least resistance re gradients to the Salt Lake Valley. Ahead of them were two paths: NE up the Virgin River gorge or north via Meadow Valley. They evaluated the Virgin River path as too costly to construct plus prone to regular flooding. So the ran the tracks north via the Meadow Valley watershed to Caliente, NV before turning east along what is now NV 319 and UT 56. Near Modena the line struck off northeast along the edge of the desert to what is now Milford; from there it parallels present UT 257 to Delta, US 6 to Eureka, and UT 36 north via Tooele to the southern extremities of the Great Salt Lake, where it followed the shoreline east toward SLC proper (eastbound on I-80 you can see the rail line cut into the hillside above the freeway).
Both Cedar City and St. George were settled at about the same time -- but Cedar City, some 50 miles north of St. George, featured extensive iron deposits nearby. So when the rail line was constructed around the turn of the 19th/20th centuries, a branch was constructed from Lund, SW of Milford, into Cedar City specifically to haul iron ore. St. George, being a farming community, didn't have sufficient shippable resources to warrant a rail line, so one was never built. Until after WWII, Cedar City was the largest town in southern Utah; but the iron played out after the war. It wasn't until the 1980's, after I-15 was completed in both directions, that St. George, with both a favorable climate and relatively low cost of living, became a "magnet" for retirees and subsequently the most populous city and region in southern Utah.
Then it makes you wonder how the Mormons chose Saint George for their temple (predating Salt Lake's) rather than Cedar City. You'd think the larger community would have been chosen for the site.
Quote from: Rothman on February 07, 2017, 11:36:19 PM
Then it makes you wonder how the Mormons chose Saint George for their temple (predating Salt Lake's) rather than Cedar City. You'd think the larger community would have been chosen for the site.
Cedar City, because of its status as a mining center, had attracted a significant number of non-Mormon outsiders to the point that the Mormon population was a distinct minority there; quite the opposite of St. George in the early years, which was overwhelmingly settled by Mormon farmers. The Cedar City situation was similar to that of Ogden, which during the late 1800's was the most populous Utah city -- but because of its main purpose as a Western railroad hub, and its population largely consisting of railroad employees representing multiple faiths (or none at all!) -- was bypassed when major temple locations were being considered. It's likely that St. George was made a temple location
because of its relative isolation from outside influences rather than
despite such isolation. And despite the advent of the Rio Grande rail line that entered the SLC area in the 1880's and the Western Pacific doing the same circa the very early 1900's, the
relative isolation of SLC compared to Ogden's role as the longstanding rail "crossroads" of the West prompted its emergence as the functional LDS "HQ"; a role it had already assumed prior to the incursion of rail lines into the immediate area. Compared to the relatively pristine and staid SLC, Ogden, as well as the early Cedar City, was more of a idiomatic Western "boom town".
I'd argue that Brigham Young's decision for the location of the Salt Lake Temple (which he made shortly after arriving in 1847 and recovering from an illness (rocky mountain spotted fever, I believe?)) played a bigger role as to where the headquarters of the LDS church ended up. The idea of planning communities around a temple square was actually developed earlier by Joseph Smith in the Nauvoo, IL era.
Heh. Ogden's still an armpit of Utah. There was a little-known, Mormon-produced film called The RM where someone gets a job as a telemarketer and starts flipping through the markets he's been assigned. Something like, Detroit, East LA...Ogden.
Quote from: Rothman on February 08, 2017, 08:25:03 AM
Heh. Ogden's still an armpit of Utah. There was a little-known, Mormon-produced film called The RM where someone gets a job as a telemarketer and starts flipping through the markets he's been assigned. Something like, Detroit, East LA...Ogden.
An acquaintance from the specialty audio business has his HQ/main plant way out on the west side of Ogden, close to the salt flats. He's often said that if he didn't need a RR spur to receive bulk shipments of copper (he makes connecting cables), he'd move somewhere else in the state (he's mentioned Logan as where he'd ideally like to be); cars in his parking lot have been broken into more than once.
Quote from: Pink Jazz on February 01, 2017, 05:07:54 PM
We don't have commuter rail in AZ, but if light rail and streetcars count, the largest city without such service would be Chandler (fourth largest city in Arizona). As for freight trains I am not sure, since practically every Phoenix suburb has freight train tracks either from UP or BNSF.
Scottsdale, Litchfield Park, Cave Creek, Carefree Have no Freight rail Service
Freight Rail operates in:
Buckeye (UP), Goodyear (UP), Avondale (UP), Tolleson (UP), Surprise (BNSF & ARZC), El Mirage (BNSF & ARZC), Youngtown (BNSF & ARZC), Peoria (BNSF & ARZC), Glendale (BNSF & ARZC), Phoenix (BNSF, ARZC & UP), Tempe (UP 2 Lines), Mesa (UP), Chandler (UP 2 Lines), Gilbert (UP), Queen Creek (UP). (ARZC = Arizona & California RR (Trackage rights on BNSF)
Amtrak Operates on 2 routes:
On BNSF Southern Transcon In Northern AZ (Kingman, Flagstaff, Winslow, Holbrook)
On UP Southern Transcon in Southern AZ (Yuma, Gila Bend, Maricopa, Casa Grande, Tucson, Benson, Wilcox)
Light Rail/Streetcar
Valley Metro Rail: Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa
Tempe Trolley (Under Construction open 2019)
Tucson Sun link Trolley
Tucson: Old Pueblo Trolley (may be out of service)
Other than Milwaukee (ok Kenosha) and the towns serviced by EB and Hiawatha, the whole REST of Wisconsin.
Quote from: dzlsabe on February 22, 2017, 11:03:42 PM
Other than Milwaukee (ok Kenosha) and the towns serviced by EB and Hiawatha, the whole REST of Wisconsin.
If you're only thinking of Amtrak passenger service, then yes. But WI overall is one of the better-served states regarding freight rail: BNSF, CP, CN, and UP have trackage within the state -- plus a number of short/regional lines, including Wisconsin Southern.
As far as passenger rail in Mississippi, Tupelo would be the largest. An Amtrak goes through the larger city of Southaven, but doesn't stop there. Since it's so close to Memphis, I won't count Southaven.
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 01, 2017, 04:08:28 PM
As far as passenger rail goes. 3 of the four largest cities in Alabama (Mobile, Montgomery, and Huntsville) aren't served by any kind of passenger rail. Not sure what the largest city here in Alabama is without an active rail line of any kind though. as just about every town of a decent size tends to have one. Maybe Centreville, AL though?
Did the Sunset Unlimited line discontinue through Mobile?
Quote from: golden eagle on February 23, 2017, 01:08:45 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 01, 2017, 04:08:28 PM
As far as passenger rail goes. 3 of the four largest cities in Alabama (Mobile, Montgomery, and Huntsville) aren't served by any kind of passenger rail. Not sure what the largest city here in Alabama is without an active rail line of any kind though. as just about every town of a decent size tends to have one. Maybe Centreville, AL though?
Did the Sunset Unlimited line discontinue through Mobile?
Yea, that's why they don't have passenger rail. However, Amtrak is thinking of bringing the Sunset Unlimited back through there.
Quote from: sparker on February 23, 2017, 12:59:34 AM
Quote from: dzlsabe on February 22, 2017, 11:03:42 PM
Other than Milwaukee (ok Kenosha) and the towns serviced by EB and Hiawatha, the whole REST of Wisconsin.
If you're only thinking of Amtrak passenger service, then yes. But WI overall is one of the better-served states regarding freight rail: BNSF, CP, CN, and UP have trackage within the state -- plus a number of short/regional lines, including Wisconsin Southern.
Don't forget, too, that Kenosha, WI is the terminal station on Metra's Union Pacific (Chicago and Northwestern) North line. It's their only station that is not in Illinois and is used because there is room there for a coach yard.
Mike
In Oregon, the largest city without passenger rail service is Bend (about 77K population); Medford (75K) isn't too far behind. The largest city without any rail service whatsoever is Newport (10K); the branch line extending west from Corvallis ends at Toledo, 5 miles east along US 20.
For Washington State I suspect Bellevue would be the largest with no rail since the Woodinville Sub was abandoned a few years ago, which was the end of the Spirit of Washington and of seeing trains on the Wilburton Trestle. This will change when light rail is built across Lake Washington, in 2020.
I believe that Bellevue is also the largest city without passenger service, but again that will change when light rail is operational.
Idaho - can't think of any larger towns without freight rail service; either BNSF in the Panhandle or UP in Southern Idaho. Not sure if trains still pass through Coeur d'Alene- they used to deliver lumber to the area around North Idaho College and the City Park, but I believe that is gone now.
Sandpoint is the only passenger train station in the entire state, with the Empire Builder passing through at about midnight or so,one in each direction. The only exception is if a tourist railroad exists somewhere in the state - would the theme park train at Silverwood count?
Quote from: stwoodbury on February 24, 2017, 05:58:40 PM
For Washington State I suspect Bellevue would be the largest with no rail since the Woodinville Sub was abandoned a few years ago, which was the end of the Spirit of Washington and of seeing trains on the Wilburton Trestle. This will change when light rail is built across Lake Washington, in 2020.
I believe that Bellevue is also the largest city without passenger service, but again that will change when light rail is operational.
Idaho - can't think of any larger towns without freight rail service; either BNSF in the Panhandle or UP in Southern Idaho. Not sure if trains still pass through Coeur d'Alene- they used to deliver lumber to the area around North Idaho College and the City Park, but I believe that is gone now.
Sandpoint is the only passenger train station in the entire state, with the Empire Builder passing through at about midnight or so,one in each direction. The only exception is if a tourist railroad exists somewhere in the state - would the theme park train at Silverwood count?
I must say, even though I know exactly what you're talking about, it still seems very strange to me to see the words "Bellevue" and "no rail" in the same sentence
Light rail isn't arriving in Bellevue until 2023. They just started digging the tunnel under downtown, which will have no stations because of some stupid political decisions a few years ago. :pan:
Our Bellevue is ten times larger than your Bellevue, and even sports a pretty decent skyline:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Bellevue,_Washington_skyline_from_the_southwest,_September_2015_(21419282956).jpg/1180px-Bellevue,_Washington_skyline_from_the_southwest,_September_2015_(21419282956).jpg)
Quote from: Bruce on February 24, 2017, 07:47:32 PM
Our Bellevue is ten times larger than your Bellevue, and even sports a pretty decent skyline:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Bellevue,_Washington_skyline_from_the_southwest,_September_2015_(21419282956).jpg/1180px-Bellevue,_Washington_skyline_from_the_southwest,_September_2015_(21419282956).jpg)
17 times larger actually. Pretty surprising a municipality of that size doesn't have at least a freight rail line.
Quote from: Buck87 on February 24, 2017, 08:14:58 PM
Quote from: Bruce on February 24, 2017, 07:47:32 PM
Our Bellevue is ten times larger than your Bellevue, and even sports a pretty decent skyline:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Bellevue,_Washington_skyline_from_the_southwest,_September_2015_(21419282956).jpg/1180px-Bellevue,_Washington_skyline_from_the_southwest,_September_2015_(21419282956).jpg)
17 times larger actually. Pretty surprising a municipality of that size doesn't have at least a freight rail line.
Bellevue is a suburb first and foremost, with most of its jobs in the tech sector. Traditional industrial uses are dying, with the major industrial center being redeveloped for housing and offices when light rail comes in 2023.
The freight rail line got taken out a few years ago in preparation for conversion into a regional bike trail.
Quote from: sparker on February 23, 2017, 12:59:34 AM
Quote from: dzlsabe on February 22, 2017, 11:03:42 PM
Other than Milwaukee (ok Kenosha) and the towns serviced by EB and Hiawatha, the whole REST of Wisconsin.
If you're only thinking of Amtrak passenger service, then yes. But WI overall is one of the better-served states regarding freight rail: BNSF, CP, CN, and UP have trackage within the state -- plus a number of short/regional lines, including Wisconsin Southern.
@sparker? How bout "douser"? We are not talking about freight rail. EB takes a scheduled eight hours to go once a day? between MSP and downtown Chicago. Add an hour? to either airport. A straighter, faster route IS available to make it FIVE (no HSR required) to ORD, opening a great option for west, central, even northern WI.
Quote from: dzlsabe on February 25, 2017, 12:54:43 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 23, 2017, 12:59:34 AM
Quote from: dzlsabe on February 22, 2017, 11:03:42 PM
Other than Milwaukee (ok Kenosha) and the towns serviced by EB and Hiawatha, the whole REST of Wisconsin.
If you're only thinking of Amtrak passenger service, then yes. But WI overall is one of the better-served states regarding freight rail: BNSF, CP, CN, and UP have trackage within the state -- plus a number of short/regional lines, including Wisconsin Southern.
@sparker? How bout "douser"? We are not talking about freight rail. EB takes a scheduled eight hours to go once a day? between MSP and downtown Chicago. Add an hour? to either airport. A straighter, faster route IS available to make it FIVE (no HSR required) to ORD, opening a great option for west, central, even northern WI.
Uhh...read the OP! Nothing about passenger rail only; that was added more or less as one option for a reply by subsequent posters. If you want to talk about passenger rail exclusively, then by all means start another thread to that effect. Actually, it might not be a bad idea if someone were to initiate an off-topic thread, possibly in the "transit" subsection or remaining within off-topic, about Amtrak in general; its routing and scheduling issues could be discussed within that context.
We know there is (or could be) freight rail virtually everywhere.
Quote from: dzlsabe on February 25, 2017, 03:26:37 AM
We know there is (or could be) freight rail virtually everywhere.
There are a lot fewer freight lines than there used to be. I would imagine that 1910 or so is the peak for US mileage. Since then many branch lines and spurs have been abandoned or converted to recreational trails. Also the frenzy of mergers and bankruptcies in the last five or six decades have led to abandonment of even main lines. Examples are the GN line North of Spokane leading into Hilliard, or the Milwaukee Road. The main lines that remain carry more tonnage now than ever, and quite a few branch lines still do exist to serve remaining rail captive industries like coal, ore, lumber, or other low value bulk commodities that cannot absorb higher truck freight or simply cannot be hauled by road at all but this is using a lot less mileage than what existed when the railroads were nationalized during World War I. At that time, just about all domestic freight was hauled by rail with rivers and canals being distant rivals and road primarily functioning as local drayage to the closest rail terminal. Now trucks and airplanes have siphoned off high value commodities leaving the less revenue rich freight to rail, exceptions being new cars and intermodal. It is not surprising at all that many cities are now bypassed by rail especially as the USA shifts from industry to information and service. There is not much need of a siding at Microsoft in Redmond or Intel in Hillsboro, Oregon. Places like that are being outfitted with new light rail stops for their employees.
Another one that I totally forgot for Wisconsin, but it also just barely misses the criteria for this thread, is West Bend (2010 USCensus 31,070). There is a warehouse on the city's extreme south edge that has rail freight service. Otherwise, the city is without. The former CNW line northward from there through the city towards Fond du Lac was abandoned in the mid 1990s.
Sad, too, in that it would be the ideal routing for if (or more accurately 'when') common carrier rail passenger service is restored into the Fox Valley/NE Wisconsin. (Even though it will not likely happen within my remaining lifetime, I can envision it someday being reclaimed, rebuilt and restored to service.)
Mike
Quote from: dzlsabe on February 25, 2017, 03:26:37 AM
We know there is (or could be) freight rail virtually everywhere.
We know there isn't freight rail in Hawaii. That died with the sugar plantations, and is unlikely to come back. The old rail bridges and ROW on the Big Island became part of HI 19.
In Canada, Newfoundland once had a money-losing freight line (IIRC, with a rail ferry connection to the mainland), but its government subsidies were transferred to highways, and the old rail ROW converted to hiking trails. I don't think Prince Edward Island province has rail of any kind. Just one line in the Arctic territories, starting in Alberta and ending in Hay River NT on the south shore of the Great Slave Lake.
Quote from: mgk920 on February 25, 2017, 12:25:51 PM
Another one that I totally forgot for Wisconsin, but it also just barely misses the criteria for this thread, is West Bend (2010 USCensus 31,070). There is a warehouse on the city's extreme south edge that has rail freight service. Otherwise, the city is without. The former CNW line northward from there through the city towards Fond du Lac was abandoned in the mid 1990s.
West Bend was already mentioned on page one. The line services a growing industrial park on the far southern border of the city.
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2017, 03:28:36 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 25, 2017, 12:25:51 PM
Another one that I totally forgot for Wisconsin, but it also just barely misses the criteria for this thread, is West Bend (2010 USCensus 31,070). There is a warehouse on the city's extreme south edge that has rail freight service. Otherwise, the city is without. The former CNW line northward from there through the city towards Fond du Lac was abandoned in the mid 1990s.
West Bend was already mentioned on page one. The line services a growing industrial park on the far southern border of the city.
I could see that line extended one day a mile north if that Industrial Park gets some major growth. Actually the line was abandoned around 2004 the state trail opened in 2006.
QuoteAs far as passenger rail in Mississippi, Tupelo would be the largest.
I'm a little late to this, but as others mentioned, the dropping of the Sunset Limit east of New Orleans (after Hurricane Katrina) means that Gulfport is the largest Mississippi city without passenger rail service. Now while there's been talk since Katrina of bringing it back, there is still a ways to go (not to mention finding funding) to do so...
Quote from: froggie on February 28, 2017, 09:46:46 AM
QuoteAs far as passenger rail in Mississippi, Tupelo would be the largest.
I'm a little late to this, but as others mentioned, the dropping of the Sunset Limit east of New Orleans (after Hurricane Katrina) means that Gulfport is the largest Mississippi city without passenger rail service. Now while there's been talk since Katrina of bringing it back, there is still a ways to go (not to mention finding funding) to do so...
Amtrak ran a test train last year along the route of the Sunset Limited east of New Orleans, LA.
Quote from: Bruce on February 24, 2017, 08:58:29 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on February 24, 2017, 08:14:58 PM
Quote from: Bruce on February 24, 2017, 07:47:32 PM
Our Bellevue is ten times larger than your Bellevue, and even sports a pretty decent skyline:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Bellevue,_Washington_skyline_from_the_southwest,_September_2015_(21419282956).jpg/1180px-Bellevue,_Washington_skyline_from_the_southwest,_September_2015_(21419282956).jpg)
17 times larger actually. Pretty surprising a municipality of that size doesn't have at least a freight rail line.
Bellevue is a suburb first and foremost, with most of its jobs in the tech sector. Traditional industrial uses are dying, with the major industrial center being redeveloped for housing and offices when light rail comes in 2023.
The freight rail line got taken out a few years ago in preparation for conversion into a regional bike trail.
Bellevue was completely rural until after WWII, by which time railroads were no longer growing.
Quote from: tdindy88 on February 01, 2017, 09:15:30 PM
Indiana's largest without passenger service would certainly be Fort Wayne as the nearest Amtrak station is 20 miles to the north in Waterloo.
Largest without a railroad would be Carmel. The only railroad through that city became the Monon Trail years ago.
It is so weird to me that Fort Wayne isn't served directly by Amtrak given its significant railroad history and regional importance.
Quote from: briantroutman on February 03, 2017, 10:50:46 AM
Even with its numerous miles of abandoned track, Pennsylvania still remains fairly well covered–at least as far as freight rail is concerned. Judging by the PennDOT Railroad Map (http://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/Planning/Maps/Documents/Pennsylvania%20Railroad%20Map.pdf), the most populous standalone city with no rail service of any kind would appear to be Clarion (pop. 4,936). There may be a more populous municipality in the Philadelphia or Pittsburgh metro areas that lacks any trackage within its borders, although I don't think that fits the spirit of the question.
Since most of us aren't in the business of shipping coal or pig iron by the ton, I think the more relevant question would be: What are the largest cities that lack passenger rail? In Pennsylvania, none of the Lehigh Valley cities, neither Scranton nor Wilkes-Barre, nor Reading, nor Williamsport have any passenger rail service.
Quote from: lepidopteran on February 01, 2017, 08:57:15 PM
(Rare to see a disused railroad rebuilt nowadays.)
Yes, it is rare, although I saw it happen south of Williamsport about ten years ago. A rail line along the west bank of the West Branch of the Susquehanna had fallen into disuse decades ago and was severely damaged in a 1996 flood. The tracks were rebuilt around the mid 2000s to provide service to a new industrial park north of Allenwood–so its promoters could advertise "rail service available" . Unfortunately, the only "industry" the park has attracted in more than a decade has been a small ophthalmology office.
Allegedly NJ Transit wants to expand to Allentown and Scranton, I'm sure that'll take years, but seems like a cool idea. Allentown's now part of the NY metro, depending on how it is defined.
The tracks of the line that ends in High Bridge, NJ would be extended to Phillipsburg and then somehow Allentown, but I remember reading (probably on this forum) that when 78 was built around Alpha they severed the tracks into Phillipsburg and so that question is a big one.
Quote from: sbeaver44 on March 15, 2017, 09:50:28 AM
Quote from: tdindy88 on February 01, 2017, 09:15:30 PM
Indiana's largest without passenger service would certainly be Fort Wayne as the nearest Amtrak station is 20 miles to the north in Waterloo.
Largest without a railroad would be Carmel. The only railroad through that city became the Monon Trail years ago.
It is so weird to me that Fort Wayne isn't served directly by Amtrak given its significant railroad history and regional importance.
It
was served by Amtrak's "Broadway Limited", which used the old Pennsylvania RR main line that generally followed US 30 across Indiana and western Ohio; it was discontinued in 1995. Pre-Amtrak, passenger trains from PRR, Wabash, and Nickel Plate (NYC& StL) served the city. The Amtrak train was dropped because Conrail had downgraded the former Pennsylvania and was in the process of selling it to a local line, which had no interest in maintaining the tracks to the level Amtrak requires -- also, it had the lowest ridership of any of the trains between Chicago and the East Coast until it got to Pittsburgh; it was partially replaced by a dedicated Pittsburgh-Philadelphia-New York train. But currently Ft. Wayne regularly hosts steam excursions using restored former Nickel Plate locomotives (primarily Berkshire/2-8-4 #765) -- so there remains a connection to the city's railroad history.
Quote from: sbeaver44 on March 15, 2017, 10:00:32 AM
Allegedly NJ Transit wants to expand to Allentown and Scranton, I'm sure that'll take years, but seems like a cool idea. Allentown's now part of the NY metro, depending on how it is defined.
The tracks of the line that ends in High Bridge, NJ would be extended to Phillipsburg and then somehow Allentown, but I remember reading (probably on this forum) that when 78 was built around Alpha they severed the tracks into Phillipsburg and so that question is a big one.
Actually, NJ Transit may not have to extend the High Bridge line. Back when Conrail consolidated most of the fiscally insolvent NE US lines into one system, there were
two roughly parallel lines connecting Bound Brook with Phillipsburg and Easton, PA: the Jersey Central (CNJ) and the Lehigh Valley; both lines were essentially coal slurries on rails taking their cargo to port facilities in, respectively, Newark and Carteret. NJ Transit shared the CNJ tracks through Dunellen and Elizabeth, while the LV trackage to Carteret was freight-only. There was and is a major interlocking junction in Bound Brook that connects all the lines and distributes traffic to the old CNJ line to High Bridge, which is now owned and operated by NJ Transit, the ex-LV line via Manville and Quakertown and passing through the Pattenburg Tunnel en route to Phillipsburg; this is still in use as the main NS freight line west from metro NY/NJ -- it passes through Allentown and merges with the NS line from Philadelphia in Reading, PA. The third branch is the ex-Reading RR line (do not pass go, do not collect $200!), now part of CSX, which diverges between Bound Brook and Manville and heads toward Philadelphia. From Bound Brook east to Newark the multiple-track line is shared by NS, CSX, and NJ Transit (it gets a
lot of use!). The NS freight line was originally double-tracked; it was single-tracked in the late '80's, but retains the easement for restoration of double tracking. If NJ Transit actually extends commute service to the Allentown/Bethlehem area, it'll likely use the existing NS tracks but will also likely foot the bill for restoration of the 2nd track -- still a lot cheaper & easier than restoring the severed former CNJ line from High Bridge to Easton.
For Missouri, that would probably be Springfield. And Springfield has the 3rd largest population of any city in Missouri. If your talking Amtrak service.
Arkansas, maybe Blytheville, I don't know, I haven't been to Arkansas in a while. It is served by BNSF (Burlington Northern Santa Fe), and there's a spur that leads off to a coal-fired power plant in Armorel.