Really happy to see the quiet zone coming to Fair Oaks. It would be great to extend it to Watkins.

Thanks to Ms. Dexter! Her thorough and dogged work got this quiet zone in place.

Caltrain lied!? Why am I not surprised. Typical. Expect Caltrain to throw more roadblocks in trying to extending the quiet zone.

I hope Menlo Park will also consider 'quiet zones'. On one hand, the city promotes living close to public transportation in order to reduce the number of trips by car and yet, Caltrain's loud horns can discourage people from living close by. A friend of mine moved to a home near Glenwood Ave. The family had a lease with an option to buy. They loved Menlo Park and thought the home was in a perfect location- within walking distance to downtown, Burgess Park, and public transportation options. As soon as the family moved in, they sold one of two cars. (They planned to sell the second car when they purchased the home.) The husband biked to work and his wife and toddler biked to Burgess several times a week. As a family, they would walk to downtown to enjoy shopping, farmer's market and other activities. The only negative living so close to Caltrain was the train's horn. The train's horn was something they never got used to - often their toddler would wake up when the train passed by. Even when the little guy was awake, the loud blast of the horn would make him cry. Even the adults found it hard to live so close to the loud train horn. Sometimes when they were working from home, they would have to interrupt a phone call because of a very loud, disturbing horn. The landlord replaced windows but it still did not block the very loud horns. They were so discouraged and ultimately, decided to move. If city officials want to encourage people to drive less, they need to make living near public transportation, less intrusive. More 'quiet zones' please....

> On one hand, the city promotes living close to public transportation in order to reduce the number of trips by car and yet, Caltrain's loud horns can discourage people from living close by.

I completely agree with Jenna's observation. I couldn't have said it better myself.


> More 'quiet zones' please

The changes made to the Ravenswood crossing make it closer to complying with the requirements needed to declare it a Quiet Zone (the barrier between oncoming lanes).

My hope is that with Atherton proving that QZs are possible, it will create a momentum for other towns within the ROW to do the same.

Doubt it's going to be as easy as this article implies.

I thought that the reason that Caltrain blows it's horn was for safety, to let people know it's coming through. Atherton does not have a grade separation, which makes it all the more important for the train to blow it's horn.

Of course the horns are for safety. Cars stopped on the tracks get whacked by trains all the time. No horns means less safety. Atherton may have granted Caltrain immunity from lawsuits if this happens, but does Atherton have enough money to defend these lawsuits itself? Banning the horns is a disaster waiting to happen.

Well, the flashing lights and the barrier gates and the big railway crossing signs on the road side and the big white crossing marks on the road are not enough to warn motorists that they are crossing train tracks and need to take appropriate precautions? What makes you think that the horn helps? Why would the city of Atherton of Caltrain be responsible for a motorists stupidity, as against say the DMV for even giving that person a license to drive?

The danger comes from impatient motorists, it has nothing to do with train horns. There's a problem that can't be fixed!

Over 90% of caltrain fatalities are due to suicides. Horns aren't going to help there.

According to the Federal Railway Administration (FRA):

Analysis of public highway-rail grade crossing accident reports indicated that 94% of the accidents, and 87% of the resulting fatalities, during the period 1994-2003 were due to risky behavior or poor judgement on the part of motorists (i.e., “motorists failed to stop at grade crossings or drove around activated automatic gates”).69 Over half (51%) of the public grade crossing accidents occurred at crossings equipped with automatic or active warning devices (i.e., flashing lights and/or and gates).

Caltrain suicides are almost all pedestrians. Car vs train is usually an accident. In most of these cases, the car was stopped on the tracks before the lights started flashing and the arms went down. Yes, stopping on the tracks is not smart, but it does happen, especially now that distracted driving is so common. Flashing lights may confuse the car driver, but the approaching train horn is unmistakable. In most cases, the driver is able to run from their car after hearing the horn.

"resident",a resident of Atherton: other wrote:
> No horns means less safety.

This is highly inaccurate.

The only way the FRA allows the horns to be quiesced is if a Supplemental Safety Measure(SSM) is put in place at a railway crossing. The SSMs *replace* the horns. There is no reduction in safety.

The Federal Railroad Administration(FRA) *supports and encourages* adding SSMs to railway crossings, since the addition of SSMs has shown to reduce the likelihood of collisions at a crossing.

It's also worth pointing out that when a train going 79MPH blows its horn, it leaves about 11 seconds to evacuate the vehicle; some of you may think that's a lot, but try doing that with kids, particularly those strapped into a carseat. The horn provides A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY.

The guardrails, lights and crossing bells alert drivers and pedestrians to an oncoming train long before the horn does, and provide more safety than the horns will ever accomplish.

Add in the SSMs, and a Quiet Zone crossing is SAFER. Even the FRA feels this way, and the safety metrics provided on the FRA website bears this out.

> Atherton may have granted Caltrain immunity from lawsuits

Atherton will do no such thing. No community needs to grant Caltrain immunity.

Caltrain can ask for it in the comment period of course, but Atherton is under no obligation to provide it.

Atherton will say "no", and there is nothing Caltrain can do about it.

How the scam works.
1. Feds trump state train horn laws.
2. Train horns whistle whip people into submission.
3. Railroad comes in and makes a fortune in overcharges and stolen signal equipment (OURS).
4.Somebody (not railroads) has to pay for ridiculous priced liability insurance so railroad is hold harmless.
5. WE will pay ridiculous amounts for railroad to service signals.
6.The crossings for GPS crew-less trains hid behind the curtains not a problem for railroads any longer.
7. Railroad directors pay themselves more millions we make up at check out lanes.

Correction: stopping on tracks is not only "unfortunate", it's ILLEGAL ... as is beginning to cross without sufficient room to get all the way across and clear, as per CVC sections 22450-1, 22526(d).

Also, remember that engineers will be free to blow the horn whenever they see a hazard -- much like you and I do when operating a motor vehicle.

Current regulations require train engineers to mindlessly automatically blast the horn 4 times in a specific pattern for every single crossing -- regardless of whether gates are lowered, lights are flashing, bells are ringing and no visible hazards.

To those that endorse this safety madness, I ask why we don't require the same for motor vehicles: 4 blasts of the horn for every intersection traversed! Hey, just think of how SAFE it would be! Can't argue against that, can you?

Actually, it's not possible for the gate arms to come down to trap a vehicle on the tracks. There are sensors in the crossing that detect if a vehicle is present. If one is present, the arm in front remains up. The vehicle can escape at any time.

@Apple, RR crossing gate arms are designed to easily swing or break-away, so gate arms can only psychologically (e.g. visually) "trap" a motorist. As alluded earlier, the far more serious "trapping" problem arises from motorists negligently and illegally queueing up bumper-to-bumper across the tracks.

I was unaware the Fair Oaks crossing was equipped with a motor vehicle occupancy sensor based linked to the far- or exit-side gates. You said "in the crossing" which sounds like they're using embedded induction loops instead of radar-based sensors. Have you confirmed sensor type by personal observation, or what is the source of your information?

@Reality Check

CPUC regulations require all quad gate setups to include a vehicle presence system. The Federal Highway Administration makes note of that in the following document:
Web Link

It's a long document, but here's the key sentence:
"On the other hand, the California Public Utilities Commission, which has modified its General Orders to address use of four-quadrant gates, requires installation of a vehicle presence system “subject to a Commission staff diagnostic field meeting recommendation and an engineering study performed by railroad or local road agencies.”"

The next time you pass by the Fair Oaks crossing, take a look at the ground in the crossing. You will see the square-shaped markers that induction loops are present.

@Apple, thanks! I wasn't aware vehicle detection was a CPUC requirement for four-quadrant gates. From what I've read, it appears "old school" induction loops are out of favor as less reliable maintenance headaches (just as at ordinary signalized street intersections). As the embedded video shows, radar detection looks to be the far superior way to go: Web Link

I am a 13 year old teen and I ride Caltrain every day. I hang out with the conductors and talk about stuff. Every time we hear the horn sounding, we know that every one is alert and safe. The train horn can be very annoying and you can't disagree with that but its is plain old safety. On rainy days, the condensation builds up in the train cars and the engineer has a hard time seeing what is ahead. The horn is the safety.I personally think that the people who want the no horn zone put in place should consider the safety risks and the safety of their kids.

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?