Along the southern edge of Sioux City, Iowa, between 3rd and what would be 2nd Streets is part of the east/west BNSF main line. The line crosses several busy north/south streets. Most have both gates and lights, some just have lights.
In recent years downtown Sioux City has undergone several economic changes, including the building of a brand new hotel next door to the Tyson Event Center. There are also other hotels in downtown Sioux City that have undergone remodels and face lifts. Sioux City has several events through out the year at the Tyson Event Center, Orpheum Theater and Sioux City Convention Center. All of which are in or near downtown. One such event is the one of the NAIA Championship’s.
The city council decided to ban the train horns from being sounded and installed signs that say: “NO TRAIN HORN” where the railroad tracks cross the north/south bound streets. Why? Because they want a quiet zone and think this will make for a better quality of life in the downtown area. The city manager even said: “It also allows for more safety” for motorists and pedestrians.” I fail to see how it will be safer.
So far there has not been a collision between a train and a motor vehicle, even where there are no gates and only lights.
The problem I see with this it is going to happen, despite the flashing lights and bell sounding at the crossing. It will happen because drivers cannot see around the buildings the trains in between until they are actually on the tracks in the crossing. In other words a driver will ignore the lights and bells, cross the tracks, not see the train until it is too late and get hit.
I lived in Seattle for 13 years and they have had a horn ban in the North end of town for as long as I lived there. The trains crossed probably 4 or 5 crossings. Not only is this area extremely busy with cars and people it is also near the piers for the cruise ships. They also had a trolley that used to run next to the tracks that didn’t sound a whistle either.
I never heard of any persons or cars being struck by a train at those crossings. I also don’t think it matters much if there is a horn or not when a person is at a railroad crossing with flashing lights and arms. If they are going to go, they are going to go regardless if there is lights or not, or if the train is blowing it’s horn or not.
Nothing is more irritating then living in a city and hearing train horns blaring at all hours of the night. The horn bans were a great idea. It really improved the relationship with the railroad and the people who lived in the city. Even though I am a railfan I didn’t miss the horn noise.
Another way cities are eliminating the horn noise is by installing large speakers on a pole at the railroad crossings. The trains don’t blow the horns. Instead the speakers play a recording of the horn sounds at a much more lower level.
There are specific guidelines for creating a “no horn zone.” They include various methods of completely blocking vehicle access to the tracks, including four quadrant arms and centerline barriers - all intended to prevent a driver from “going around the gates”.
Removing the opportunity to do so easily without damaging something (like their car) tends to deter folks.
I would presume that such measures have been taken there.
Even then, the engineer is authorized to sound the horn for specific reasons, generally emergencies.
Making a crossing “horn free” can get expensive, and it’s up to the entity that wants to do so, not the railroad (which gets to maintain the equipment once it’s installed).
If the city council has complied with the FRA regulations regarding the establishment of Quite Zones - no problem.
If the city council has done this, being impressed by their own power, they will find they are in violation of Federal Regulations and all they have done is put words on their ‘law book’ that they have no power to enforce. If they attempt to enforce their words it will be thrown out of court so fast their heads will still be spinning long after the BNSF attorneys have left the state.
The locals cannot dictate where the no whistle zone is or no train horn zone goes. If they have done this outside of the federal rule, the locals are in BIG trouble and railroads are not obligated to observe the ban. . No train horn zones can be voided either by a rise in the accident rate or by some party to the agreement being found to be in breach of contract. (49USC20153) If the locals turn a No Train Horn Zone into a “Stupid Zone” they risk losing a substantial investment used to make the zone a no-train horn zone in the first place.
BNSF’s listing for SD shows no quiet zones (none in the state), IA shows a new one in Sioux Falls. ( 1 of 10)
FRA also published a “model” easement law for vision distance at approaches that will figure into the crossing equation soon.(they are looking at adjusting threshold levels again)
While some of the operating guys like the zones (Zardoz and Jeff G from earlier forum discussions); some of us that have to deal with some of the irrational locals and political types have cause for reservation and hope FRA pulls out the trump card in certain areas.
Edit: The list shown above is dated 7/11/11 and I know there is a more current list. However, if this problem at Sioux City IA was done outside of the rule, I hope the politicians enjoy the jail time coming their way along with the cronies that were “in on it”. Balt’s comments are dead on.
…Don’t see how “one size fits all”, in horn blowing regulations.
How about deciding on the “fit to the community” to arrange what regulations should be followed. Then install “standard” information signs for the train engineer for that approaching crossing.
Edit: If a local council establishes an ordinance to “no train horn blowing”, against the wishes of the railroad…Have {railroad}, legal draw up obligations, will be to the city government, the responsibility to any claims of an accident resulting from “no horn blowing”.
To the first paragraph of what BaltACD said: He is absolutely CORRECT! The problems come as the locals have what they think is a great idea, without thinking it through. Just passing a local ordinance is going to be a really expensive lesson for the the Local Pols. ( who are sometimes just used to saying something to make it happen in their Own politivcal back yard).
We had a local personality who was tired of the BNSF trains blowing for one of the local crossings, and drowning out the music at here concerts. She went to the Ci
In cases where a no-horn zone has been set up with official approval, is it possible to have a no-horn crossing with no gates and only flashing lights?
Q: The federal rule creates a committee, which includes Federal, state & local members that takes on the block of crossings on a by case basis (you cannot exempt an individual crossing); there is a calculation that takes into all crossings in the zone and creates a weighted score and a threshold number that must be met for quiet zone status.
Not to pick, but Sioux Falls, my hometown, is in South Dakota. Sioux City, the OP’s hometown, is in Iowa. [:-^]
Your post got me curious about whether there was a quiet zone in Sioux Fall (SD). From the link, I didn’t see one, so I assume you meant Sioux City (Iowa).?
You’ve never encountered a city council with an ego? Some of them are quite inflated.
Since they don’t understand how said process really works, they think that all they’re taking on is the RR, and oftimes they don’t even understand how their relationship with the RR really works.
You may be giving the the local councils too much credit for intelligence and reasoning ability…
Carlsbad (Calif) wanted the AT&SF to establish quiet zone’s at a couple of grade crossings, but the negotiations broke down when the City wanted the AT&SF to retain liability for any grade crossing accident. This was before the FRA rule on quiet zones.
Some of the comments on this thread imply that local government officials may be subject to criminal prosecution for violating FRA rules… I would think the most likely action is that a federal court would throw out the local ordinance (interstate commerce clause rightfully applied) - though making the council members individually liable might improve their thinking through the ordinances.
I am not sure what list you’re looking at but Sioux Falls in in South Dakota, or SD and Sioux City is in Iowa, or IA. Sioux Falls, SD is an hour north of Sioux City, IA. Is this a typo on your part or is this what you actually see in the info?
I stand corrected on something. The no horn or quiet zone is only at 3 of the 5 or 6 crossings. Which is the area near the hotels and Tyson Event Center. All of these 3 crossings have the arms that come down and block all the lanes preventing drivers from going through. 2 of the streets are one way and the other has a median and is not as wide.
So you understand a little about how Sioux City’s government works, it is NOT mayoral or council style. It is managerial style of government. Sure we have an elected council and mayor, but they are really nothing more than figure heads. Yes they can pass ordinances, but if the managers office does not approve or throws a fit over it nothing gets done. And when the managers office requests the council do something it is more of an order or demand and it gets done or else.
The only reason the council really exists is to to give the citizens a forum at which to bring issues to during the open council meetings. But as I said if it is a proposal to change something the council does vote on it, but if the managers office says no, that is where it ends. The council listens to the people and votes on things is to give the people the illusion it is they who make the decisions and not the managers office. Thing is the people are smarter than they think.
Sorry to complain about the politics in my city, but this is how it is here.
Oh and Sioux City is not my home town. Just where I currently live. I was born in Jefferson, Iowa and grew up in Des Moines.
I have no issue with proper quiet zones, and I kind of prefer them in a way. Most people stop for the gates - not the horns. So if everyone is stopped, waiting patiently at the crossing, what is the sense of blowing the horn 4 times (or more)? * To me, it just seems to make the horn less effective and more like background noise. Then when you really do need to blow the horn, everyone has it tuned out. Just about every other country in the civilized world doesn’t have to need to make all this noise at a protected crossing.