I just came across this article from a Grand Island, NE newspaper; UP proactively has decided to ignore this quiet zone after some close calls:
http://www.theindependent.com/news/local/u-p-to-ignore-quiet-zone-after-nearly-hitting-pedestrian/article_19a8c676-a38e-11e1-8b90-0019bb2963f4.html
This will be interesting to follow.
Anyone know of a similar circumstance?
Links to my Google Maps ---> Sunset Route overview, SoCal metro, Yuma sub, Gila sub, SR east of Tucson, BNSF Northern Transcon and Southern Transcon *** Why you should support Ukraine! ***
It's about time.
Quiet zones can be recinded. Second instance on UP that I'm aware of. The fact that UP called for the FRA meeting tells me this quiet zone is on its way to permanent removal.
The threshold levels have become a political football. This may get the message across that the issue is safety first, inconvenience and annoyance second.
Quiet zones are a mixed bag. If the local government and the railroad are both co-operative and realistic, then a well-planned and executed quiet zone can work well. If the quiet zone was imposed or established hastily, then safety will be compromised.
The obvious and easy solution looks to be installation of a wayside horn.
An obvious and not quite so easy solution would be for the city to step up enforcement of traffic laws regarding RR crossings. The dirty feathered guy is implying that if a city wants a qiet zone, they better be willing to do their share on enforcing RR crossing safety.
- Erik
One thing that appears to be frequently overlooked in the request, design and implementation of Quiet Zone protection is that motor vehicles are not the only thing that is using the crossing.
Pedestrians are the parties that are almost totally overlooked with Quiet Zone implementations as virtually all the protections are aimed at motor vehicles. While motor vehicle drivers frequently are driving in a 'zone' that is outside the realm of reality, pedestrians are even more likely to be zoned out as they walk about the world lost in their own thought.
There are two situations, that are superimposed upon each other frequently, the, in my mind, weigh against implementing quite zones - curvature and building built right up to the railroads property line. Since in most cases, the railroad spawned the building patterns for many towns and the railroads also followed the meandering twists and turns of creeks, streams and rivers - put the two together and you have sight lines that are virtually nil for all parties involved at the point of the crossings. Even though crossing protection may be operating, the motorist and/or pedestrian doesn't see the train so in their mind the protection is falsely operating and they then disregard the warning as being false and proceed over the crossing. While motor vehicles may be prevented from crossing by 4 quadrant gates - generally there is no such protection to prevent pedestrians from going in harms way.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
erikem An obvious and not quite so easy solution would be for the city to step up enforcement of traffic laws regarding RR crossings. The dirty feathered guy is implying that if a city wants a qiet zone, they better be willing to do their share on enforcing RR crossing safety. - Erik
If this is what it takes, quiet zones are just too expensive. After all, the whole point of these zones is that they are supposed to be fail-safe.
Eliminate the whistles at the cost of hiring more traffic cops? I think not.
dakotafred Eliminate the whistles at the cost of hiring more traffic cops? I think not.
It's more a matter of the city (or whatever jurisdiction) being serious about enforcement. This might take the form of having police presence for the first week or so, with presence stepped up when too many close calls happen. As BaltACD mentioned, this applies to pedestrians as well as drivers.
NOTHING is built for pedestirans anymore?
Have you ever tried to walk to a mall?
Reality TV is to reality, what Professional Wrestling is to Professional Brain Surgery.
I'm glad that they are doing something about this. Quiet zones are not very smart, people pay so little attention to things today and they need the blast of a horn to stay alert about their surroundings. Railroads were there before any apartments or houses were built. If you don't want to hear the horn, then don't move by a rail crossing.
I enjoy hearing them, that's part of railroading. I always wave when a train goes by and get rewarded with a toot.
What is really needed is real barriers...either heave steel or concrete...be either rolled across the crossing or raised from the ground so that nothing can penetrate the crossing within a realistic time period.
I have often wondered about red strobe or laser lights which could form a solid curtain across the roadway...it has to be intense enough or dense enough to so that it appears solid enough to be inpenatrable. Communities have to accept that they and their inhabitants have to be responsible so as to not need be protected from being stupid...but, we all know better....
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Can't fix stupid.
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
Whenever you make something 'idiot proof', you only succeed in raising the level of idiocy.
Yeah...complacency or non chalance sets in..."in" being LA LA Land!
I really hate telling people this but ....no matter what you do...someone will find a way to circumvent the dang thing.
And some of these folks are suicidal....
I lived in Durand, MI for a time. It is a grandfathered quiet zone with two mainline crossings and two leading to the yard. There are signs at all crossings saying "NO TRAIN HORN".
The locals are well aware of this but I question what out of towner's know of this. Two of the mainline crossings are somewhat blind due to the angle of one and a curve on the other. Train speed limit on the mains is 40 MPH.
TTBOMK there have been no crossing accidents there.
Norm
I lived in Durand, MI for a time. It is a grandfathered quiet zone. The locals are well aware of this, but what of those from out of town? Two crossings are on the mainline and due to angle and a curve are somewhat blind. Train speed is 40 MPH.
TTBOMK there has not been a crossing accident there.
Sorry about the double post.
I have a question about liablity. When a railroad in effect relenquishes the protecting of the grade crossing by not having the engineers blow for the crossings, does the requesting community assume the liablity? Or is the railroad still being hung?
If I were the railroad and if something happened at a silent grade crossing...silent at the requirement of the local population...then I would make sure that, written into the agreement, that the railroad would be held harmless and not to be sued, if a mishap occured at the crossing due to the inability of the railroad to protect itself, its property, and its employees by not being able to blow a train whistle, relying soley instead on what the community asked for in the form of protection.
When the article says U.P. is blowing the horn at Pine St. “as needed,” does that mean they are blowing it every time they cross because they cannot see pedestrians approaching due to the proximity of buildings; and because they cannot see if pedestrians are there or not, horn blowing is needed to warn any pedestrians that might be approaching?
In other words, does “as needed” mean needed every time they cross Pine St.?
Not being a lawyer I can't say who would assume liability.
OTOH, I would think it would be written into the agreement between the city and the RR that the city be held liable. Durand, MI is a quiet zone with only standard gates and lights. Nothing to stop motorists from going around them.
Nevertheless you can safely assume the RR will get sued, and maybe the city too.
All these posts are interesting. I always assumed that whistle blowing for a grade crossing was a Federal, not local requirement, and the 'roads that didn't blow were in violation of US law. Am I wrong on this? It would seem to me that the 'roads getting grief from the locals about whistle noise could tell said locals "Hey, don't talk to us, talk to Uncle Sam!"
It is Federal law. But a local government can make arrangements with the FRA for a sort of varience.
To Henry6: Thanks for the reponse! Now it would seem to me that the 'roads can say "OK, you don't want us to blow the whistle? If the Feds say it's OK, we won't, but don't come cryin' when people get squashed!"
There are several issues in creating a quiet zone. First the zone must be at least 3 miles long. They will not quiet one road just to blow off the horns on the next block.
New highway engineering must be done at local expense. These could be four quadrant gates, or a raised barrier between the highway lanes. There are others.
In Bismarck they wanted trains to stop blowing at the Fraine Barracks Crossing. Railroad said it was a public crossing and others said no it was not since it only served the Barracks (and the back gate at that) . They have been dancing around that issue for some time, and I do not remember how it worked out. The Barracks are down by the river where the railroad is, but the NIMBYS are up on a ridge about 80 feet above the railroad, with no roads that would take them down to the tracks in any event.
There are plenty of websites that can be found that deal with quiet zones. We do not have a quiet zone here in Richardton. Three streets cross the tracks: HWY 8, B Street, and a dirt road which shall remain nameless. The dirt road "could" go away, it is almost NEVER used by anyone, and it does not go anywhere, but it must be there in case the other two crossings which are close together should be blocked by a train, at least this one would be clear.
Since there is a big ethanol plant in town, the horns must be used when switching the plant. Besides this is the old NP main line, and only sees about 20 trains a day. ☺
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
Norm48327 Not being a lawyer I can't say who would assume liability. OTOH, I would think it would be written into the agreement between the city and the RR that the city be held liable. Durand, MI is a quiet zone with only standard gates and lights. Nothing to stop motorists from going around them. Nevertheless you can safely assume the RR will get sued, and maybe the city too.
The city of Carlsbad wanted to establish a quiet zone on the Surf Line (don't recall if this was before or after NCTD bought the ROW from AT&SF). Negotiations broke down when the city refused to accept liability and IIRC there was no talk of upgrading the crossings to four quadrant plus median protection.
I've also remember hearing that one or more cities in the Santa Barbara area imposed quiet zones on the SP Coast line ca 1980 and forced the SP to continue to accept liability - but I am not sure if the facts were reported correctly on that statement.
http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/trainhorn_2005/hornrulerod042105.pdf
If a crossing is made so drivers cannot go around the gates, why would there be any need to blow the horn?
BaltACD http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/trainhorn_2005/hornrulerod042105.pdf
Tell us in six billion words or more.....
This is a good example of beauracacy bull (insert)! I don't know what is more horrendous, the insidious writing or the time it takes to read it or the time it takes to understand what it trying to be said. And there is a conclusion or two to be found in there, too! Its quadriple doublespeak at its best, a governement report at its worst as it ambles thorugh its preamble citing preambles from other just as verbose and obsurely written reports. Simply they could say, "Wwe interviewed people, read reports, and took all things given and said to us, underconsideration. We have concluded that this should be done and instruct the parties at hand to make the proper agreements and do the job." Think how much cheaper government and business could operate without all the fluff and invention to cloud situations, hedge bets, and inflate egos!
All the FRA variances issued also contain the requirement that, if the locomotive engineer feels there is a clear and ongoing danger to the train, pedestrians or automobile traffic, he must sound his horn in a standard crossing signal.
In other words, if he or she thinks a car or pedestrian is in the process of, or going to attempt to beat the train, he must sound the horn.
One of the prerequisites is that the local government assumed all liability at the crossings, unless the carrier violates a law, that burden is on the entity requesting the quite zone.
Of course, as pointed out, the carrier will be sued anyway, but....
23 17 46 11
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.