Citation

Raub RA, Lucke RE, Thunder TD. Transp. Q. 2003; 57(4): 11-22.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2003, Eno Transportation Foundation)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

In rapidly growing suburban areas, and as housing comes closer to railroad tracks, train horns have become an increasing problem. An option of providing "quiet zones" is becoming more difficult and expensive as a result of Federal Railroad Administration Rulemaking based on the Swift Rail Act. Mundelein, Illinois, has never been a quiet zone, but as a rapidly growing community with an increasing number of train movements, especially at night, complaints of train horns have become the number one issue with residents. As an option, the village decided to evaluate the effectiveness of using an automated wayside horn system in lieu of train horns. The evaluation of the change from train horns to wayside horns found that in terms of audibility to motorists, the wayside horn was no different. Moreover, the wayside horn presented an immediate warning, whereas motorists might not hear a train horn until the engine was close to the crossing. In terms of noise pollution, the wayside horn generated significant reductions in noise levels. Maximum sound levels beard by residents decreased by an average of 10 decibels (dB), more than halving the apparent noise level. Very importantly, decibel contours showed more than an 80% decrease in areas covered at 90 dB. In surveys, almost all residents indicated an improvement in their quality-of-life. Several issues remain. But more importantly is the duration of the wayside horn compared to the train horn. It starts when the gates activate (approximately 35 seconds prior) and continues until the train arrives. A train horn is heard only for an average of 17 seconds prior. Persons living in line with and close to the wayside horn are especially affected.