# NIMBYS - Your Thoughts?



## Qapla (Dec 11, 2020)

It takes time and money to build any means of travel expansion - that applies to air, road and rail.

However, the airports have been able to expand as have the roadways. Rail has not had the rate of expansion as these other methods.

While there are various things that impact the expansion of rail - one of them is surely the "*N*ot *I*n *M*y *B*ack *Y*ard" mentality ... as we can see from the number of lawsuits to stop, relocate or restrict rail expansion. 

What do you think? How much of an effect have the NIMBYS had on rail as compared to other factors?


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 11, 2020)

Have airports really been able to expand their footprint? That seems to be an extreme rarity.


----------



## Qapla (Dec 11, 2020)

If you look at the time frame of Amtrak - 1971 till now - yes, there have been several airports that have expanded


----------



## John Bredin (Dec 11, 2020)

IMHO, NIMBYs haven't had nearly as significant impact as those who oppose increased public funding for passenger rail or rail transit generally. 

Airport and highway projects are broadly accepted as generally proper expenditures of tax money, with quibbling over the usefulness or impact of particular projects. Some of that quibbling isn't just NIMBY, and some of it is valid (third airport for Chicago at rural Peotone, for instance). And plenty of modest but useful rail projects go through on a similar basis in regions where intercity and/or transit rail is a vital part of the economy.

But propose a new rail project for somewhere that doesn't have any or much passenger or transit rail, or propose a really large project (Second Ave. Subway or Gateway in NYC, California HSR) even for someplace that does, and opposition pours in. It seems to me to be rarely on a NIMBY basis -- from landowners near the project, objecting to the particular location of the project -- and more on an idea that the project will be a waste of tax dollars that nobody will use. 

Opponents will use NIMBY arguments as _one_ of their tools to kill a project, but will also generally propagandize against "socialist" rail projects as "social engineering" (cite) that will somehow "force" people out of their cars (cite). Those are not NIMBY but "not in _anyone's_ back yard" arguments that completely ignore that (1) roads are also publicly planned and funded, (2) choosing to invest in roads over rail also shapes society and could equally be called "social engineering," and (3) nothing is more unforced than whether someone who owns a car chooses to drive or take a train for a particular trip. Few of the attacks on high-speed rail documented here are on NIMBY grounds.


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 11, 2020)

Qapla said:


> If you look at the time frame of Amtrak - 1971 till now - yes, there have been several airports that have expanded


How many in 50 years? Hardly any.


----------



## WWW (Dec 11, 2020)

Exvalley said:


> How many in 50 years? Hardly any.


I can think of -3- right off hand - Salt Lake City (recently) - Denver from Stapleton to the new Denver International - and Kansas
City Missouri from downtown to the suburban location 15 some miles NW. Atlanta added an additional runway at its south border.
Dallas-Ft. Worth moved from Downtown Love Field (still active) to the mid-point between the two cities.
Expansion may not be outside of the physical perimeter of the existing facility.
Not so oddly railroads (tracks) have been pulled up and reverted to hiking/biking nature trails and even some given back to 
adjacent land owners - the amount of abandoned rail tracks is outstanding compared to new tracks laid for light and high
speed traffic.
Differences between rail and air are like the differences between apples oranges mangos and pears.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 11, 2020)

WWW said:


> I can think of -3- right off hand - Salt Lake City (recently) - Denver from Stapleton to the new Denver International - and Kansas
> City Missouri from downtown to the suburban location 15 some miles NW. Atlanta added an additional runway at its south border.
> Dallas-Ft. Worth moved from Downtown Love Field (still active) to the mid-point between the two cities.
> Expansion may not be outside of the physical perimeter of the existing facility.
> ...


Austin moved from Mueller ( now an upscale Housing Village) to Bergstrom, the old Air Force Base SE of town.


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 11, 2020)

Moving an airport to another existing field wasn’t what I asked about, I asked how many existing airports have increased their footprint. The number is incredibly small. Certainly nothing comparable to the rise in over travel by air.


----------



## Qapla (Dec 11, 2020)

In the last 50 years many of the airports in Florida have expanded and upgraded - that applies to regional ones as well as international ones like Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa and Miami

While the airport in Gainesville has expanded and/or upgraded more than once since 1971 ... the tracks from Gainesville to Waldo have been removed and the land used to widen the highway. The tracks to Ocala and those going to the east coast have been removes with many of them becoming "rails-to-trails"

Many of the people who have been born in the Gainesville since the 1980's (or have moved here) have no idea that trains ever came to Gainesville or that the tracks used to go to the Amtrak depot in Waldo (the Waldo depot is no longer active for trains - just a Thru-way bus stop)


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 11, 2020)

Ask anyone in the aviation community and they will tell you that the infrastructure hasn’t come close to increasing with demand. I know it’s fashionable to hate on the airlines, but our system‘s capacity is antiquated and strained in many cities.

I’m all for money being allocated to both forms of transportation. It’s shouldn’t be a competition. If you foster a competitive attitude, trains are bound to be on the losing side.


----------



## Qapla (Dec 11, 2020)

Exvalley said:


> Ask anyone in the aviation community and they will tell you that the infrastructure hasn’t come close to increasing with demand



Not increasing with demand is not the same as not increasing. Airports and the roads feeding them have increased in size and numbers while train tracks have been removed and the number and/or size of trains have been downsized.

Money being available is not the only reason trains have not increased like roads and airports. While lack of funding has had impacts on rail expansion ... here in Florida there has been quite a lot of NIMBYS that have tried to prevent rail while they have not objected to the Interstate system or improvements to local roads so they can build new neighborhoods and shopping areas.


----------



## Willbridge (Dec 12, 2020)

In the Denver area NIMBY's turned out to oppose us running trains on right-of-way that we had owned since before they moved into the neighborhood. The W-Line light rail runs past houses that were built to be near the interurban stations. During WWII trains with explosives and finished ordnance from the Remington Arms plant rolled past their homes. Their protests were subsidized by a political group opposed to public transit in general. One of the businesses opposing it had a temporary easement over our right-of-way for access to their landlocked property so they opposed the line on the grounds that they would have to buy the right to cross a neighbor's property. They had thought it was a big joke that there would be trains on the rail line again.

In my career I ran into varying degrees of NIMBYness and always had to listen carefully in case there was an actual issue. Sometimes it was just funny, though. For the original Denver LRT line we were holding a public meeting near the route in the Baker neighborhood (for those who know Denver) and a guy testified that the wires would have electro-magnetic waves that would cause cancer. I pointed out that the controversy about that involved high voltage AC power, not our 750V DC power. He didn't have much else to say, but afterwards -- in a walking neighborhood -- I saw him get into an old beater of a car which emitted a nasty blue-grey cloud when he fired it up to drive out of the neighborhood.


----------



## west point (Dec 12, 2020)

The new DFW (Dallas FtWorth ) airport actually was an expansion of the old Greater Southwest airport (GSW). GSW was a large American Airlines maintenance and office hub at one time . The GSW property was largely in what is now the SW portion of DFW. How much land was taken for DFW has been lost to time in my mind. Now another rather large expansion of an airport has been in stages .

That is Atlanta airport. Originally it only had one east west runway ( 9-27) , and NE - SW runway (3-21 ) and a NW - SE runway ( 15 - 33 ) which was the main instrument landing runway ( Radio range then ILS ). First another EW runway was built 5000 ft to the south of the first EW runway. Took in part of SOU RR tracks to Warm Springs. Then the new terminal was built which caused I-85 to be relocated to the west taking in much property . New terminal closed 3-21 and 15-33 runways, Then a parallel EW runway north of the original E-W runway which took in property including a SOU RR spur, part of Ford plant property, and much of Hapeville city. that was part of alternate route to Warm Springs. Ford plant had to build new RR spur to Ford plant.

Next another parallel E-W runway south of the 2nd E_W runway was built that resulted in the small town of Mountain view being obliterated. Not to be outdone a final E_W runway was built another 5000 ft south of the fourth E_W runway that included a runway bridge ( a monster ) over I-285 that took over CSX active spur to the west and many business and homes.

SO ATL probably in all its expansion took as much or probably more property as the many new build cited above. A small claim to fame about ATL is that have flown off and on all 7 runways in both directions. Cannot say that about ORD as missed 3 or 4


----------



## railiner (Dec 12, 2020)

I can understand the sentiment against new infrastructure being forced thru an established residential area , whether it be for roads, rails, or airports; but it really galls me when protests are made for restoring or improving rail service to a dormant line.
One that comes to mind is the former LIRR Rockaway line, that diverged from its mainline at Rego Park in Queens, and ran south towards Rockaway. The NYC subway took over its southern portion in 1956, and LIRR ran its last passenger train on the remainder around 1962.
When train service to JFK was first proposed, the best idea was to reuse that line, and have fast, comfortable, one seat LIRR service from Penn Station direct to JFK.
But the NIMBY’s put the kabash to that, and as a result, we have the Airtrain.


----------



## jiml (Dec 12, 2020)

My favorite NIMBY's are the ones who move in next to infrastructure of any kind (rail line, airport, hydro ROW) then complain that it's there.


----------



## railiner (Dec 12, 2020)

jiml said:


> My favorite NIMBY's are the ones who move in next to infrastructure of any kind (rail line, airport, hydro ROW) then complain that it's there.


That's so true. When Denver built its new airport, it selected a vast site so far from town, that wag's said it was "out in Kansas". I wonder how long it will be before developers will built new housing tracts nearby, and how long before its residents complain about flights over them?


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 12, 2020)

Isn't Eminent Domain the 'big gun' the constitution allows to counter NIMBY on the grounds it's for the public good?


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 12, 2020)

tgstubbs1 said:


> Isn't Eminent Domain the 'big gun' the constitution allows to counter NIMBY on the grounds it's for the public good?


It’s a very slow and expensive gun.


----------



## Qapla (Dec 12, 2020)

In Florida, the land along the Interstate where Brightline is building some of their new line, had been set aside for this use long before many of the people who live there purchased their land and houses. When Brightline started clearing the trees from the ROW they are allowed to use there were protests of "I didn't know they were going to cut down all the trees. I don't want to see the traffic on the Interstate" - even though it was clearly stated in their land deeds that the land had been granted for use by rail.

This is one case where the NIMBY mentality didn't work. They never read their own deeds and thought that complaining would stop the land clearing. Not the case.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 12, 2020)

Qapla said:


> In Florida, the land along the Interstate where Brightline is building some of their new line, had been set aside for this use long before many of the people who live there purchased their land and houses. When Brightline started clearing the trees from the ROW they are allowed to use there were protests of "I didn't know they were going to cut down all the trees. I don't want to see the traffic on the Interstate" - even though it was clearly stated in their land deeds that the land had been granted for use by rail.
> 
> This is one case where the NIMBY mentality didn't work. They never read their own deeds and thought that complaining would stop the land clearing. Not the case.


Where did that damn Railroad/ Airport/ Freeway come from?? Its ruining my Property's Value!!!


----------



## Qapla (Dec 12, 2020)

Jacksonville International Airport used to be way north of the city ... the airport hasn't moved but the city has grown up to the area. When they started to get up there with some of the higher-priced homes they began to complain about the noise the jets make flying in and out. They tried to get some sort of something passed with the city that would require the airport to make less noise.

It didn't work since the airport was there first.


----------



## Asher (Dec 13, 2020)

An airport 1 1/2 miles east of me has added a terminal for business class and private jets. The traffic over the last couple of years has greatly increased. The noise level of modern jets is far less annoying than in the past. But, the airport has added a new departure route that instead of turning 45 degrees shortly after clearing the runway, has now been giving straight out departures that crosses just to the south of my house. The jets are climbing out and pass so quickly they are gone in a flash so not too bothersome, its the small piston driven plane that is barely gaining altitude and makes about 5 departures right over my house that makes me want to call the tower and complain.


----------



## Willbridge (Dec 13, 2020)

railiner said:


> That's so true. When Denver built its new airport, it selected a vast site so far from town, that wag's said it was "out in Kansas". I wonder how long it will be before developers will built new housing tracts nearby, and how long before its residents complain about flights over them?


At RTD we used to joke about whether we would have to set up free transfers with the Wichita bus system. On the other side of NIMBYism was a faction that argued that because Stapleton airport was in the Local flat-rate fare zone, so should be the new airport. After all, it was only 19½ miles further from downtown.


----------



## railiner (Dec 13, 2020)

Yes, I recall riding the #32 out to Stapleton for something like a quarter, or so....


----------



## tomfuller (Dec 13, 2020)

There has been recent talk of making a high speed (over 100MPH) tube train system from Portland OR through Seattle and ending in Vancouver BC. Money in nearly equal terms to be supplied by Oregon, Washington, British Columbia and Microsoft. I fear that this is just a "pipe dream" but we'll see.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 13, 2020)

Willbridge said:


> At RTD we used to joke about whether we would have to set up free transfers with the Wichita bus system. On the other side of NIMBYism was a faction that argued that because Stapleton airport was in the Local flat-rate fare zone, so should be the new airport. After all, it was only 19½ miles further from downtown.


You mean the Kansas International Airport???!!!!


----------



## bms (Dec 13, 2020)

railiner said:


> That's so true. When Denver built its new airport, it selected a vast site so far from town, that wag's said it was "out in Kansas". I wonder how long it will be before developers will built new housing tracts nearby, and how long before its residents complain about flights over them?



Probably not long. I love the Tower Road area just because it's so unique, a strip of 20 hotels in the middle of nowhere with nothing around but a couple of dispensaries and restaurants. But numerous condos are being built in the area now.


----------



## railiner (Dec 13, 2020)

bms said:


> Probably not long. I love the Tower Road area just because it's so unique, a strip of 20 hotels in the middle of nowhere with nothing around but a couple of dispensaries and restaurants. But numerous condos are being built in the area now.


I used to love going out that way to Emilene’s Sirloin House, when it was “way out in the boonies”...but alas, it is gone now...


----------



## bms (Dec 13, 2020)

Yeah, there was nothing like 


railiner said:


> I used to love going out that way to Emilene’s Sirloin House, when it was “way out in the boonies”...but alas, it is gone now...



I think that place was there even before the airport. I hate that I won't see Denver in 2021, but I need to ration my vacation days to see so many friends and family who I couldn't visit in 2020.


----------



## Ziv (Dec 14, 2020)

If you are talking about a tunnel project, it is hard to imagine not talking about The Boring Company, at least a bit. (If you were talking about HyperLoop, you can quit reading this entry. ) When Linestorm actually delivered fairly fast and cheap tunnels, I really hoped that the next borer, Prufrock, would be even better. Linestorm was a modernized traditional borer with a 14' diameter initial bore that finishes down to a 12' diameter tunnel. You can just barely squeeze in a London Underground car from one of the older London subway lines. Maybe. No other railcars/subway cars in current production would fit. I was hoping Prufrock would have a finished diameter of at least 13' so that other, more roomy, rail cars would fit. Unfortunately, it looks like Prufrock is 12' finished diameter as well. 
After his breakout successes at SpaceX and Tesla, I was really hoping that The Boring Company would go mainstream, but given the small finished tube diameter, it will be hard for them to do so, even if they build miles of tunnels faster and cheaper than conventional boring machines.
Can you imagine taking a train from Portland to Vancouver with 1/3 of the trip underground at high speed (very few curves and those could be gentle ones) and 2/3 of the trip aboveground (the less populated & more scenic part) at nearly the same speed?
Ok, so this too may be a pipe dream... 



tomfuller said:


> There has been recent talk of making a high speed (over 100MPH) tube train system from Portland OR through Seattle and ending in Vancouver BC. Money in nearly equal terms to be supplied by Oregon, Washington, British Columbia and Microsoft. I fear that this is just a "pipe dream" but we'll see.


----------



## sttom (Dec 14, 2020)

NIMBYs are a problem, but the tend to only be a problem when it comes to changing zoning laws or local transit improvements. They might kill a subway, light rail or streetcar line because it will irreparably damage the immeasurably valuable character of the neighborhood, but they don't seem to care if Amtrak or a commuter rail system gets expanded so long as its "over there". One thing I have thought about is adding a "character of the neighborhood" surcharge on property taxes for ZIP codes that don't want to add housing or transit to fund those projects elsewhere. Cause if the value of the neighborhood is so high, the government should be taxing it to pay for things and 1% of an "immeasurable amount" has go to be enough to build a streetcar line. 

What really kills Amtrak and regional rail funding is that they aren't viewed as worthy of federal funding. Hell even here there are people who support the 750 mile rule and think that rail should continue to get next to $0 in funding from the federal government while roads and airports are kept open at federal expense. Why is it that a state owned and planned highway system gets at least 40% of its maintenance funds from the feds, but states have to squabble and beg for 10% of a transit project's capital funding? Cause its always been that way and things can never and should never change. We've accepted that roads and airports are how we should handle 95% of trips and a generation either doesn't care to change that or doesn't want to. 

Part of this is why I say people advocating for federally funding transit in general and Amtrak specifically cite economic impacts first before environmental ones. Most people know that trains are better for the environment on some level, but most people assume Amtrak has no redeeming value economically speaking. Studies have shown that increased highway funding does nothing to deal with traffic which is becoming an increasing burden on our economy and trains not only save the government money, but they reduce traffic and enrich local economies. Taking cars off the road and reducing air pollution is a bonus. Most people could be convinced if there was a coherent plan and the benefits beyond the environment were highlighted. I managed to convince someone who is fairly conservative that passenger rail on a statewide level would be a good idea just citing how our existing paltry system already generates more economic value that it costs to subsidize it.


----------



## Qapla (Dec 14, 2020)

Yes, money is a large part of the problem - and that is one impacts NIMBYS create - their law suits and public outcries lead to additional costs in legal fights and additional, often unneeded, expensive "studies" ... all of theses things delay projects and increase overall costs.


----------



## MARC Rider (Dec 14, 2020)

sttom said:


> NIMBYs are a problem, but the tend to only be a problem when it comes to changing zoning laws or local transit improvements. They might kill a subway, light rail or streetcar line because it will irreparably damage the immeasurably valuable character of the neighborhood,



"Ah, yes, the "character of the neighborhood." A lot of times, that's code for keeping certain kinds of people away, especially since transit is seen as something that's used only by the riff-raff who can't afford a car. Back in the early 1990s there was a Usenet (remember that) troll who used to scream in all-caps about the evils of what he called "LOOT RAIL...", that if you built one of these infernal systems the "thugs" from the inner city would be able to come into your neighborhood, and who knows what kind of increases in burglaries, robberies and other nasty stuff would happen. There was, in fact, one planned station on the Baltimore Light Rail that was eliminated because of these kind of neighborhood concerns. Of course, the whole time, plenty of buses were running every day from these same "bad" neighborhoods with no particular bad effect on the suburban havens.


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 14, 2020)

sttom said:


> Why is it that a state owned and planned highway system gets at least 40% of its maintenance funds from the feds, but states have to squabble and beg for 10% of a transit project's capital funding?


A very good question. I wonder if it has to do with the heritage of railroads, which began before our country had a big tax fund and so was privately funded. It seems like being the oldest and becoming well established and unionized works against railroads.


----------



## MARC Rider (Dec 14, 2020)

tgstubbs1 said:


> A very good question. I wonder if it has to do with the heritage of railroads, which began before our country had a big tax fund and so was privately funded. It seems like being the oldest and becoming well established and unionized works against railroads.


Well, the first publicly funded transportation infrastructure in the US was the National Road that connected Baltimore to Ohio. Then the State of New York funded, built, and maintained the Erie Canal. Also the Pennsylvania Main Line of Public Works, which was a combination of canals and railroads. At some point, the Feds started funding, building and maintaining inland waterways and also port facilities. In the early days of the Republic public funding of such "internal improvements" was politically controversial, as there were many wealthy and powerful interests that didn't see the point of using tax dollars to fund stuff that might provide competition to their vested interests. Perhaps after losing the political fights over the National Road and the canals, the vested interests were able to prevent significant public funding of the newly emerging railway technology and forced it to be developed with private capital.


----------



## me_little_me (Dec 15, 2020)

I remember back in the '90s when Atlanta's MARTA was being extended to within a mile of my home. My neighbor, a Southern gentleman (read bigot), was against it because inner city people would use it to commit theft in the neighborhood. Actually, they wanted to get to the still low (but better) paying jobs providing service to people like him at stores, restaurants, etc. But he didn't want rail in "his backyard".
Funny, in the years later when I used MARTA after it was bextended to go to the central city and to the airport, I never saw a single minority carrying a stolen TV on the train.


----------



## Deni (Dec 16, 2020)

me_little_me said:


> I remember back in the '90s when Atlanta's MARTA was being extended to within a mile of my home. My neighbor, a Southern gentleman (read bigot), was against it because inner city people would use it to commit theft in the neighborhood. Actually, they wanted to get to the still low (but better) paying jobs providing service to people like him at stores, restaurants, etc. But he didn't want rail in "his backyard".
> Funny, in the years later when I used MARTA after it was bextended to go to the central city and to the airport, I never saw a single minority carrying a stolen TV on the train.


Getaway trains never caught on for some reason.


----------



## jis (Dec 16, 2020)

me_little_me said:


> I remember back in the '90s when Atlanta's MARTA was being extended to within a mile of my home. My neighbor, a Southern gentleman (read bigot), was against it because inner city people would use it to commit theft in the neighborhood. Actually, they wanted to get to the still low (but better) paying jobs providing service to people like him at stores, restaurants, etc. But he didn't want rail in "his backyard".
> Funny, in the years later when I used MARTA after it was bextended to go to the central city and to the airport, I never saw a single minority carrying a stolen TV on the train.


This is not unique to Atlanta or the South. It is the most common argument tendered against the expansion of any Commuter lines in New Jersey. We in the advocacy community euphemistically call it the "Those people" argument.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 16, 2020)

jis said:


> This is not unique to Atlanta or the South. It is the most common argument tendered against the expansion of any Commuter lines in New Jersey. We in the advocacy community euphemistically call it the "Those people" argument.


Yep, it's always " they" and "them" that stir up the bigots.


----------



## flitcraft (Dec 16, 2020)

jiml said:


> My favorite NIMBY's are the ones who move in next to infrastructure of any kind (rail line, airport, hydro ROW) then complain that it's there.


In legal doctrine, this is described as "coming to the nuisance," and it deprives the party claiming injury from recovering. The idea is that allowing a successful lawsuit under those circumstances is a form of double-dipping--presumably the property is question was cheaper because of its location to the 'nuisance' property when purchased, so allowing such a buyer to win at law would let them have their cake and eat it too.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 17, 2020)

sttom said:


> What really kills Amtrak and regional rail funding is that they aren't viewed as worthy of federal funding. Hell even here there are people who support the 750 mile rule and think that rail should continue to get next to $0 in funding from the federal government while roads and airports are kept open at federal expense.



I can only speak for myself but that’s not what I mean at all when I support the 750 mile rule. 

Amtrak’s regular federal funding should only cover long distance trains. Corridors should be another funding source. Federal money can go to it, but it should be separate from the national fund.


----------



## jiml (Dec 17, 2020)

flitcraft said:


> In legal doctrine, this is described as "coming to the nuisance," and it deprives the party claiming injury from recovering. The idea is that allowing a successful lawsuit under those circumstances is a form of double-dipping--presumably the property is question was cheaper because of its location to the 'nuisance' property when purchased, so allowing such a buyer to win at law would let them have their cake and eat it too.


I hear you, but that doesn't stop the morons from whining. I live in a community built next to a century-old rail line and the #1 subject at our HOA meetings is not the golf course, the pools or snow removal, but train whistles at the two level crossings nearby. It consumes nearly 50% of every meeting and has gotten so bad we've stopped going.


----------



## MARC Rider (Dec 17, 2020)

jiml said:


> I hear you, but that doesn't stop the morons from whining. I live in a community built next to a century-old rail line and the #1 subject at our HOA meetings is not the golf course, the pools or snow removal, but train whistles at the two level crossings nearby. It consumes nearly 50% of every meeting and has gotten so bad we've stopped going.


Yeah, in some cases, it doesn't matter who would win in court. I once attended a public meeting about an Army Corps of Engineers project that the locals thought would mess up the fishing in the local COE flood control lake. (It was also a bad idea environmentally. Of course, most flood control projects aren't the best thing for the environment.) Total and absolute local opposition to this project. Witness after witness made statements denouncing the Corps. I almost felt sorry for the poor colonel sitting there taking the verbal abuse.

Wouldn't you know, next day, in the paper, I read that the Army decided that this project really wasn't necessary, after all.


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 17, 2020)

jiml said:


> I hear you, but that doesn't stop the morons from whining. I live in a community built next to a century-old rail line and the #1 subject at our HOA meetings is not the golf course, the pools or snow removal, but train whistles at the two level crossings nearby. It consumes nearly 50% of every meeting and has gotten so bad we've stopped going.


You know those whistles can be annoying at 2 AM. 

Isn't there a way to petition the authorities to make them stop?


----------



## jiml (Dec 17, 2020)

tgstubbs1 said:


> You know those whistles can be annoying at 2 AM.
> 
> Isn't there a way to petition the authorities to make them stop?


With a 75% VIA reduction there's been less complaining lately, but the bulk of freight is in the middle of the night. I'm used to them, but I guess being a "train guy" makes that unfair. The community is fairly evenly divided along safety lines - there's dashcam footage of people running the gates, which doesn't help the cause of eliminating the horns. Improvements to the crossings in the order of $1-2 million are needed, with contributions from the municipality and CN. The lobbying has gone on for 20 years apparently and we've only been here for 4, so I may not see resolution in my lifetime.


----------



## jis (Dec 17, 2020)

tgstubbs1 said:


> You know those whistles can be annoying at 2 AM.
> 
> Isn't there a way to petition the authorities to make them stop?


One easy way to fix the whistle problem is to move to somewhere where there is no whistle problem


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 17, 2020)

jis said:


> One easy way to fix the whistle problem is to move to somewhere where there is no whistle problem


That's what I did.


----------



## me_little_me (Dec 17, 2020)

jis said:


> One easy way to fix the whistle problem is to move to somewhere where there is no whistle problem


I don't hear any whistles. Just horns once in a while. And I'm sitting on the train.


----------



## jis (Dec 17, 2020)

From 1996 to 2014 I lived in a huge apartment 200 feet from NJTransit's second busiest line. There was no physical obstruction between the tracks and my bedroom window. There was a parking lot 20' below. But then it is an electrified route, though there were about a dozen diesel hauled trains that went by on weekdays. There was hardly ever a whistle/horn sound since it is a grade separated route there. I actually enjoyed being where I was, a railfan's dream apartment.

When the Kearney Connection made a one seat ride to Penn Station NY possible, property values along the M&E shot up like there was no tomorrow. All thos who had left fearing too much noise were left in the dust in terms of finaancial gains potentials that they gave up on.


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 17, 2020)

When I lived in a high rise the rumble of the trains didn't bother me. I think it reminded me of thunder.


----------



## flitcraft (Dec 17, 2020)

When I was a grad student, I lived in Somerville Massachusetts a block away from where they were building the Red Line MBTA extension. I would cheerfully have traded the sound of train horns for the blasting and digging that extended over much of my three year sojourn there. (And I never did get to ride the completed line, though I planned to do so just for fun during a business trip to Boston planned for this spring, which obviously COVID obliterated.)


----------



## Qapla (Dec 17, 2020)

My wife grew up in a house that had a rail line running about 75' behind her bedroom window. The house is only 3 houses from the road with the crossing. Her Dad was born on that land and had lived there all his life (he still does) and they hardly noticed the train.

It is now part of the "rails-to-trails" program and the dog barks at the frequent passage of bike riders and hikers more than they ever did at the trains.

The funny part is, some of those who complain the loudest about the train horns/whistles at the crossing complain just as much when they are "fixed" so that people can no longer "run the gate" and the train no longer needs to make a sound.


----------



## MARC Rider (Dec 17, 2020)

We live about a mile or so from the nearest train tracks. CSX (former Western Maryland) freight line, plus the Baltimore Metro parallel. Occasionally we hear the trains and the crossing horns. It seems to be related to atmospheric conditions. It's not really that much of a bother, and the traffic from the arterial street a block a away makes more noise, fortunately mostly blocked by apartment houses along the arterial.

I've also stayed at on-site airport hotels. Amazing, you can hardly hear any noise. Thus, it must be possible to sound-proof at any level you want. Perhaps the people who are "coming to the nuisance" should be suing the developers, who built houses with inadequate soundproofing, rather than the airport, which was there before the house was built.


----------



## bms (Dec 17, 2020)

NIBMYs normally fight against the very fire station that would put out the flames at their own house. I never understood why people think they have a right to control the properties near them. I bought the property I own and would be mad if someone comes into that area, but I don't deserve any control over the property next door because it isn't my property.


----------



## Siegmund (Dec 18, 2020)

crescent-zephyr said:


> I can only speak for myself but that’s not what I mean at all when I support the 750 mile rule.
> 
> Amtrak’s regular federal funding should only cover long distance trains. Corridors should be another funding source. Federal money can go to it, but it should be separate from the national fund.



I agree that, in spirit, national-network funding should not be diverted to corridor service. 

But given the difficulty in establishing multi-state corridors, I would prefer to see some criterion like "serves 3+ states, or travels 500+ miles." The first clause would allow federal help if necessary in getting medium-length corridors started - one additional Chicago-Cincinnati or Chicago-Kansas City frequency, for example. The wording of the second clause can be tweaked according to whether you think San Antonio-New Orleans and Sacramento-LA should be allowable; substitute "500 miles and 2 states" to block within-California service, for instance.


----------



## WWW (Dec 18, 2020)

me_little_me said:


> I don't hear any whistles. Just horns once in a while. And I'm sitting on the train.



Solution void the liability issues with "NO TRAIN HORN" ! Still have the flashing lights signs silent visual reminders !
But there will still be idiots ignoring the safety factors.
Hard to explain in a court hitting the 97th car of a 115 car train racing to beat it to the crossing !

Yet even in the silent mode trains make rumbling thunderous pounding on the earths surface transmitting
these shock waves sometimes miles away from the train - think of ole times putting an ear to the rail - but
don't wait for the train to come - then the engineer may have to sound the horn to get your attention !

Have no sympathy for those developers and buyers building next to an existing rail or airport facility.
Eventually upgrading will happen and it is some of the time in the interests of safety and community quietness!
But building next to tracks and airport runways is not going to make things go away - what are people thinking of ?


----------



## ehbowen (Dec 18, 2020)

Exvalley said:


> Ask anyone in the aviation community and they will tell you that the infrastructure hasn’t come close to increasing with demand. I know it’s fashionable to hate on the airlines, but our system‘s capacity is antiquated and strained in many cities.
> 
> I’m all for money being allocated to both forms of transportation. It’s shouldn’t be a competition. If you foster a competitive attitude, trains are bound to be on the losing side.


Grounded (medical) General Aviation pilot here...and at least in major metropolitan areas, GA airports are every bit as endangered as passenger trains. Where is the next generation of pilots going to come from?


----------



## ehbowen (Dec 18, 2020)

tgstubbs1 said:


> You know those whistles can be annoying at 2 AM.
> 
> Isn't there a way to petition the authorities to make them stop?


For thirteen years I lived one house away from a major branch line (UP/GH&H Houston to Galveston). I would sleep right through the train horns...except for one (expletive deleted) misbegotten son of a (censored) who would sound a continuous blast of his horn, all the way through our residential neighborhood, several times a week and almost always at two in the morning.

It really made me wish that I owned a high-powered rifle....


----------



## railiner (Dec 18, 2020)

bms said:


> but I don't deserve any control over the property next door because it isn't my property.


Ha! Tell that to overbearing HOA's (Home Owner's Association's)...


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 18, 2020)

WWW said:


> Solution void the liability issues with "NO TRAIN HORN" ! Still have the flashing lights signs silent visual reminders


I agree. Why don't trains take a clue from law enforcement/ambulance modern super bright flashing LED lights might alert more drivers than horns. 

After all, it's legal for deaf people to drive, but not blind people. Plus kids partying at night have those monster stereo systems that probably drown out the horn anyway.


----------



## railiner (Dec 18, 2020)

Grade crossings are such a potentially dangerous place, that I believe that every means available, including bright lights and loud horns should be employed to get the attention of unobservant motorists. Bright lights alone may be of little use, if a motorist is distracted by something, or partially blinded driving into a low sun.

The only 'sure' way of eliminating the danger, is to completely separate the grades of the road and rails.


----------



## jis (Dec 18, 2020)

railiner said:


> Ha! Tell that to overbearing HOA's (Home Owner's Association's)...


I suppose you may be displeased with overbearing zoning laws that keep a garbage dump away from your property too then? 



tgstubbs1 said:


> I agree. Why don't trains take a clue from law enforcement/ambulance modern super bright flashing LED lights might alert more drivers than horns.


Trains being inanimate things don't actually do anything by themselves.  It is FRA rules that govern what happens at grade crossings and FRA provides the exact rules to follow to remove the horn requirement at a grade crossing.


----------



## me_little_me (Dec 18, 2020)

railiner said:


> Ha! Tell that to overbearing HOA's (Home Owner's Association's)...


When you buy a house, condo or townhouse, you know that you are joining an HOA and agree to the rules. It's no different than the airport or tracks - they were there before you were and if you don't like living by community rules, don't live in that community.

I live in a townhouse in an HOA and have fought with the association at times and have been president at times. But we moved in here with open eyes and recognize that we agree that the community rules and we can always move or run for the board if we don't like things.

While president or just a board member, my attitude was always "how can we accommodate the request if possible" rather then just saying "no".

When the association voted to oppose a rezone to allow a "moderate income" development nearby, I totally disagreed with them as they would not be that close (about 1/4 mile from our closest edge to their closest edge and over the hill) but I was outvoted. That's what I gave up by allowing the majority of owners to decide even if they were bigoted. We don't always get what we want.


----------



## 20th Century Rider (Dec 18, 2020)

And for those of us who need to travel for hours so we can be at a place where trains roar through... we can only wish for the sound of the train horn... in fact, when I am in a train town I try to time it so that I arrive at the crossing as the gate is closing... to have a front row seat. Even more rare is a stopping where you can see an actual passenger train rush through.


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 18, 2020)

railiner said:


> Grade crossings are such a potentially dangerous place, that I believe that every means available, including bright lights and loud horns should be employed to get the attention of unobservant motorists. Bright lights alone may be of little use, if a motorist is distracted by something, or partially blinded driving into a low sun.
> 
> The only 'sure' way of eliminating the danger, is to completely separate the grades of the road and rails.


I should add that horns are much more acceptable (to me) during daylight hours.


----------



## ehbowen (Dec 18, 2020)

tgstubbs1 said:


> I should add that horns are much more acceptable (to me) during daylight hours.


I'm fine with them at night as long as the engineer sticks to the standard long-long-short-long whistle sequence; my subconscious registers that as "all conditions normal." But the engineer I referenced above who sounded the continuous blasts...he woke me (and the whole neighborhood) up every time. Which I'm sure was his intention.


----------



## railiner (Dec 18, 2020)

jis said:


> I suppose you may be displeased with overbearing zoning laws that keep a garbage dump away from your property too then?


That is not quite the same thing, as ruling on which shade of grey paint you may paint your house...


----------



## railiner (Dec 18, 2020)

me_little_me said:


> When you buy a house, condo or townhouse, you know that you are joining an HOA and agree to the rules. It's no different than the airport or tracks - they were there before you were and if you don't like living by community rules, don't live in that community.
> 
> I live in a townhouse in an HOA and have fought with the association at times and have been president at times. But we moved in here with open eyes and recognize that we agree that the community rules and we can always move or run for the board if we don't like things.
> 
> ...


That is true...but...if the regulations are changed, as by an HOA taking over control from the original developer, from what you thought you were buying into, or subsequent changes by new people moving in, and taking control of the board, with similar results...your only option is to take it, or leave it, as in moving out, often resulting in a loss financial or otherwise for you. Too bad, eh?

Live and learn....I won't buy into any HOA community in the future...


----------



## jis (Dec 18, 2020)

railiner said:


> That is not quite the same thing, as ruling on which shade of grey paint you may paint your house...


But the point is, you knew that or even if you didn't you ought to have known that since the HOA bylaws were part of your deed by refernce, and you also ought to have known that the HOA Board gets to decide how things evolve. There are both pluses and minuses to it. Balancing out whether the exact shade of grey is more important than doing something about someone trying open a car repair shop at his home next door is of course an individual's decision to make when they buy a property.


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 18, 2020)

ehbowen said:


> I'm fine with them at night as long as the engineer sticks to the standard long-long-short-long whistle sequence; my subconscious registers that as "all conditions normal." But the engineer I referenced above who sounded the continuous blasts...he woke me (and the whole neighborhood) up every time. Which I'm sure was his intention.



I lived near an area where there were numerous unmarked crossings so just laying on the horn was probably an energy saving strategy. 

It surely depends on how close you are. 

I don't see the point in a deserted industrial area in the middle of the night.


----------



## Siegmund (Dec 18, 2020)

Without getting into the politics of establishing no-horn zones... I'll just observe that at night, it is quite a bit _harder_ to spot a train / distinguish a train headlight from a car headlight or streetlight, than it is in the daytime. If that using the horn at a crossing is needed at all, it is probably more important, not less, to use it at night.


----------



## sttom (Dec 18, 2020)

My mom has a friend who lives with the BNSF tracks the San Joaquin runs on. After a day or two there, you stop noticing the trains going by. I can speak from experience.


----------



## John Santos (Dec 18, 2020)

Deni said:


> Getaway trains never caught on for some reason.


This is almost on-topic... My office is two blocks away from the Minuteman Bike Path, which was a commuter rail line closed in early 1978 and ultimately converted to one of the most popular and successful bicycle paths in the US.

It took about 20 years to get the necessary approvals, mostly due to NIMBY opposition. There were many many letters in the local papers in which people feared increased crime, due to "those people" (i.e. Black people) who would rob their houses and use "Getaway bikes" to abscond with the loot. Of course, this never happened, and after it finally got built, it significantly raised property values of houses with easy access. The real estate ads now always list "bike path" as a plus for any property anywhere near the path.


----------



## WWW (Dec 19, 2020)

Regarding those flashing lights at the crossing - a serious upgrade would perhaps fix the inattention.
F-L-A-S-H-I-N-G - - - S-T-R-O-B-E - - - L-E-D lights as previously mentioned used on emergency vehicle.
This being the season for putting up lights on the trees - houses and many other places - 
the closer the train gets to the crossing the sequence of flashing gets more rapid and perhaps brighter.
There are home security proximity sensors - as a vehicle gets closer to the crossing - the sensors could
kick in with a focused beam to the roadway with intense strobe lighting.
These lights could easily cost a lot less than the existing incandescent bulb or compact fluorescent.
A small video camera could record the crossing action like police body cameras fixing the blame where
it is almost always the fault of the motorist for the inattention.
Would not need all the fancy camera lighting action at rural crossings - only at major city crossings with
a history of collisions.
The locomotives could also have better warning lighting than the one headlight and 2 alternating flashing
bumper lights. When the train activates the crossing lights a LED bar on the locomotive would start flashing.


----------



## Qapla (Dec 20, 2020)

The flashing lights could be converted to hi-vis flashing LEDS. The current height of the flashing lights was designed for a rider on horseback. That height has never been adjusted for the height of a driver in a car. Add a second set of lights a bit lower while upgrading to flashing LEDS.

Also, extend the crossing arms to extend all the way across all lanes in all directions at the crossings so people can't drive around the ends to beat the train.


----------



## me_little_me (Dec 20, 2020)

WWW said:


> A small video camera could record the crossing action like police body cameras fixing the blame where
> it is almost always the fault of the motorist for the inattention.
> Would not need all the fancy camera lighting action at rural crossings - only at major city crossings with
> a history of collisions.


I've previously suggested a simple solution - cameras activated when the crossing protection is activated which simply record anything seen until shortly after the arms are raised and lights shut off. No data transmission is needed, just a simple SD card that records what is seen (and overwritten when data space is needed) so police or RR people can, after the fact, pull the card. 

Better would be another that only records any activity crossing the tracks at the same time so offenders could be caught and (optionally) cited. Something like red light cameras only with multiple warning signs they are activate (prevention is the key) and not government "adjusted" as some red light camera intersections have been to shorten yellow lights only at camera locations. Red light cameras are mostly money makers otherwise they would have a clear warning sign next to the camera.
Since prevention would be the primary purpose, the first citation would be a warning (unless of course it is the driver's last act).


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 20, 2020)

A motion detector lighting up an intersection at night could prompt the train engineer to blow the horn. That should be inexpensive.

I've seen lots of trucks with more lights than a locomotive. I guess the train doesn't need blinkers or stoplights but more lights than just a single headlight should attract some attention.


----------



## railiner (Dec 20, 2020)

Those old technology “Mars Lights”, did a pretty good job. Their gyrating beams would certainly catch your attention...


----------



## Ziv (Dec 20, 2020)

I was a Realtor in a former life, and when my clients asked me, "Are HOA's a good or a bad thing?" I would tell them the following...
"HOA's are a huge PAIN when you want to make a small improvement to your house that you have always wanted and that would be really cool. They are a huge SAVIOR when your neighbor wants to do some idiotic 'improvement' to his house that would be hideous."
And then I would look right at them and smile. Most of them thought that was really funny or insightful. Though there were a few that didn't get it. LOL!
In my book, HOA's have more good than bad, but there is plenty of both. As long as you stay out of the politics of it.



railiner said:


> Ha! Tell that to overbearing HOA's (Home Owner's Association's)...


----------



## TWA904 (Dec 21, 2020)

Qapla said:


> extend the crossing arms to extend all the way across all lanes in all directions at the crossings so people can't drive around the ends to beat the train.


And also create quite zones.


----------



## Qapla (Dec 21, 2020)

Also, install the cross-arms far enough back from the tracks that a vehicle getting caught "inadvertently" inside the arms can pull forward or back up far enough to clear the tracks without driving through the arms.


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 21, 2020)

tgstubbs1 said:


> A motion detector lighting up an intersection at night could prompt the train engineer to blow the horn. That should be inexpensive.
> 
> I've seen lots of trucks with more lights than a locomotive. I guess the train doesn't need blinkers or stoplights but more lights than just a single headlight should attract some attention.






These are really cheap but hard to miss at night.


----------



## jiml (Dec 21, 2020)

tgstubbs1 said:


> View attachment 19826
> 
> 
> These are really cheap but hard to miss at night.


I'll see your truck and raise you a train:


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 21, 2020)

jiml said:


> I'll see your truck and raise you a train:
> View attachment 19827


It's starting to look a lot like Christmas.

I wonder what the train looks like from the side?


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 21, 2020)

tgstubbs1 said:


> View attachment 19826
> 
> 
> These are really cheap but hard to miss at night.


Most trucks in Mexico are lit up.like this which is great idea!!


----------

