Ill. Residents Want Train Whistle Ban To Remain

July 18, 2000 -- To prevent accidents at railroad crossings, the Federal Railroad Administration has proposed requiring trains sound their whistles at stations lacking state-of-the art safety devices.

While FRA officials believe the proposal would prevent collisions with vehicles and pedestrians crossing the railways, several witnesses today voiced their disapproval of the measure before a House panel and argued the bill would compromise their quality of life.

Several Illinois residents, including House Speaker Dennis Hastert, argued today that a bill requiring trains to blow their whistles would increase the noise level of their towns and prevent them sleeping at night. “The impact to my constituents and the people of Illinoiscannot be underestimated,” said Hastert, who represents a suburbanChicago district crisscrossed by railroad tracks.

Rail Safety Crosses Noise PollutionIllinois has more railroad crossings than any other state, and 64 percent of its population lives within a mile of a crossing. Wisconsin, Minnesota, Indiana and Virginia also havelarge numbers of quiet zone crossings. Fed up with sleepless nights and irritated by loud train whistles, nearly 900 communities persuaded state lawmakers to set up quiet zones where the whistles are banned.

The proposed FRA law would lift the ban, but according to FRA officials, the ban would be allowed to stay in place if stations take additional safety steps such as installing double gates at crossings. Those stations would have two years to upgrade their railroad safety devices. For stations that could not afford double gates, the measure would require neighboring communities to establish educational programs to better inform drivers about the dangers of railroad crossings.

But Rita Mullins, the Mayor of Palatine, Ill., claimed that the constant noise of the train whistles would be a nuisance to thousands of residents in her Chicago suburb.

“The horn would remain sounding almost constantly for 20 miles to its destination in Chicago,” Mullins said. “This would happen on an average of 70 times a day, impacting hundreds and thousands of residents within blocks of the crossing, creating noise pollution.”

Proposed ModificationsA FRA analysis has concluded crossings in quiet zones with conventional gates have 62 percent more accidents than those where horns are blown. But the agency has been inundated with complaints sinceannouncing its proposed plan earlier this year.

Hastert and Rep. Bill Lipinski, D-Ill., have proposed analternative that would exempt all intersections thathave been accident-free for five years and those with conventionalgates and lights that have had fewer than three accidents.

Their plan also would extend thedeadline for communities to upgrade crossings from two years to 10 years. They also have proposed safety modifications such as lower-cost automated horns that would blow only at the crossing and not for miles at a time.

“There are modifications to the proposed rule that must be madeif we are going to be able to accept this,” Lipinski said.

John Wells, an FRA deputy administration, stressed that theregulation would look much different when finalized. He suggestedone acceptable option — not now included — might be a combinationof conventional gates and flashing lights with aggressiveenforcement and public awareness. In addition, he said, the current proposal already containssignificant flexibility that could minimize the changes needed.The Associated Press contributed to this report.