Well, the day HSR is built and grade crossings are closed, there won't be any need for trains to blow their horns any more. Problem solved.

(Bonus: electric trains are much quieter than diesel trains.)

Close the grade crossings today. Palo Alto routinely blocks roads for lesser, even petty reasons so why not for public safety and tranquility?

Walt says: "Close the grade crossings today." How will Gunn students get to school? Via Mountain View and Los Altos to El Camino, then down El Camino to Arastradero!!!

California Avenue pedestrian tunnel, bus bridges and, anyway the city never worries about alternative routes anyway, according to the last City engineer I talked to.

The city can build pedestrian/bicycle bridges over the train tracks for a small fraction of the cost of grade separations.

A-diddly-men, Pedestrian. But that would be resolving a problem, and somewhere in the charter that is tabu.

The freight train horns are much louder than the passenger horns, and I am neither psychotic or hyper sound sensitive.

I have lived here for many years and can tell you that when Union Pacific uses the tracks, they not only have horns that project much louder and well beyond the immediate crossing, but they blow their horns much longer than Cal Train. It seems at least 50% more. Not sure why, but for trains that are traveling at much slower speeds it makes no sense. My guess is that they could care less about the communities that they travel through.

I have seen crossing in other communities where they have installed two features that eliminate the need for trains to blow their horns as loud and for as long:

1) Each crossing has loud speakers installed that project the sound of a trail horn directly at the crossing, thus eliminating the need to have the train sound its horn before and while traveling though the crossing.

2) In many areas when the city, in partnership with the railroad, installs double crossing gates and bell systems, the need to sound the train horn as loud and for as long is eliminated.

Both worth looking into, along with changing the Federal regulations, because the Union Pacific does not care and has no interest in spending anything to make changes, especially if they fear law suites should there be an accident.

Hee Hee Hee. Too funny. I'm sorry but no one has managed to convince me that this is even issue. Yes, yes, poor you. I know, I know the trains are very loud.

But see, the thing is, you bought a house near train tracks. Now I suppose the realator could have brought you to your new home via a route that avoided the tracks - perhaps you didn't see them while you were contemplating the purchase. Perhaps no train went by during the many times you probably visited the property prior to buying it. Perhaps, knowing that a potential new home owner was in the neighborhood, the trains ran on silent mode when you were there.

But, until someone actually claims any of those things happened - I'm sticking with the You Bought a House Near Train Tracks. Trains Are Loud. It's How They Are.

The trains will not shut up - but I know who could....

I live no where near the tracks - in fact over two miles away and for over 30 years.

This is not about, "If you don't like it here leave," it's about reality and doing what is correct for the community, not just increasing the bottom line.

ANY of you "really" smart people see those tracks before you signed on that realtors paper?

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

NONIMBYS and Anon,
Please curb the sarcasm.

I don't live anywhere near the tracks. I often hear the trains at night, even with all the windows closed. I actually live much closer to Foothill -- I don't hear any traffic noise a few streets away, but I hear the trains at night.

The more serious problem is how the stepped up usage would bisect our community. Has the state factored declining property values in its calculations? (Can anyone say "Kill the goose that lays the property tax eggs"?)