Not always the case I knew a couple of white middle class families who have nice homes. The train track were right be hide their backyards. Trains stop going on that route in the mid 2000s.
Local Residents Meeting and White People Problems
- Thread starter Trekker4747
- Start date
Not always the case I knew a couple of white middle class families who have nice homes. The train track were right be hide their backyards. Trains stop going on that route in the mid 2000s.
"Tend to be" doesn't mean always. Nor did I say anything about the race of those poor people. 
I don't know why Trekker felt the need to reiterate the point about the relative wealth of the people living near the tracks in his stretch of Kansas, since I didn't argue the point after he said it the first time, not being an expert on Kansas trainlines, but whatevs. Unless it was just to say the stupid middle class people should shut up and accept their situation.
I don't know why Trekker felt the need to reiterate the point about the relative wealth of the people living near the tracks in his stretch of Kansas, since I didn't argue the point after he said it the first time, not being an expert on Kansas trainlines, but whatevs. Unless it was just to say the stupid middle class people should shut up and accept their situation.
"Tend to be" doesn't mean always. Nor did I say anything about the race of those poor people.
I don't know why Trekker felt the need to reiterate the point about the relative wealth of the people living near the tracks in his stretch of Kansas, since I didn't argue the point after he said it the first time, not being an expert on Kansas trainlines, but whatevs. Unless it was just to say the stupid middle class people should shut up and accept their situation.
It was more to just expand on it, that the homes down there aren't lower-class families with little choice in their situation. They're middle-class people who CHOSE to buy a home near train tracks.
A
Amaris
Guest
"Tend to be" doesn't mean always. Nor did I say anything about the race of those poor people.
I don't know why Trekker felt the need to reiterate the point about the relative wealth of the people living near the tracks in his stretch of Kansas, since I didn't argue the point after he said it the first time, not being an expert on Kansas trainlines, but whatevs. Unless it was just to say the stupid middle class people should shut up and accept their situation.
It was more to just expand on it, that the homes down there aren't lower-class families with little choice in their situation. They're middle-class people who CHOSE to buy a home near train tracks.
So? There are middle class neighborhoods near defunct train lines that suddenly discover the trains aren't defunct anymore. I have an aunt who lives in an upper middle class neighborhood near train tracks, and in 10 years I have never seen a single train on that track. Still, having looked at the aerial views of that neighborhood, the train line is complete, so theoretically there could be trains using that line, and they may do so in the future.
It's not someone's fault for finding a nice place to live where conditions change. Why do middle class people live in Kansas when there are tornadoes everywhere? Why don't they just leave? Do you mock them for staying in that state?
"Tend to be" doesn't mean always. Nor did I say anything about the race of those poor people.
I don't know why Trekker felt the need to reiterate the point about the relative wealth of the people living near the tracks in his stretch of Kansas, since I didn't argue the point after he said it the first time, not being an expert on Kansas trainlines, but whatevs. Unless it was just to say the stupid middle class people should shut up and accept their situation.
It was more to just expand on it, that the homes down there aren't lower-class families with little choice in their situation. They're middle-class people who CHOSE to buy a home near train tracks.
And you yourself said that train traffic is increasing. Maybe some people think it's too much. Not being poor doesn't disqualify someone from complaining about a situation.
If the law allows for quiet zones, why not take advantage of it? My little suburban town did. The railroad that bisects the town is adjacent to one of the wealthiest gated communities in the state, and I'm sure that had something to do with it.
There are several of them near one of the most densely populated areas in the Phoenix Metropolitan area. One of them runs immediately (like less than 3 blocks) south of Arizona State University's main campus with 50,000 students. In this "quiet" zone, the crossbucks, gate arms, and lights are all still there....and attached to them is a bright yellow sign that reads "no train horn used". Drivers are expected to, you know, actually pay attention to what is going on around them.
Or people could recognize that they bought their home near a train track, and deal with it.
It's as bad as the people around here who bought homes right across from the airport, then complained about the jet noise.
Are you saying that petitioning the city to create quiet zones, as allowed by law, isn't dealing with it?
How is it that a train track crosses someone's driveway?
Just how long is the driveway, anyway? Short, like on a city street, or a long one like on an estate? Is it paved, or gravel? And what road does it lead out to? I'm probably misunderstanding this, but your description makes it sound like the driveway doesn't lead anywhere but to the train track.This reminds me of how it was when we had trains coming through town. If one was outside near the tracks, you could feel the train coming, and there was a rumbling sound. When it got close to the crossing, there was a "ding-ding-ding-ding" sound going on, the lights flashed, and if the crossing was equipped with an arm, it came down to prevent vehicles from crossing. During this, the train's horn was blowing. Of course all this still goes on at crossings, but it's been a long time since it happened within our city limits. Sometimes I actually miss hearing the train.
Many years ago, my city did a massive "rail relocation" project where the railyards were removed from the city center, and so were the tracks. The old railway station has been converted into offices, and the train overpass/bridge is now part of the trail system we have throughout our city for pedestrians and bikers. The roads where the tracks crossed them were resurfaced as proper streets, part of the railyards were converted to an upscale residential and commercial area, and other areas where the tracks were have been allowed to become green areas where deer and other animals can use them for their migration. This all happened within the last 30 years. I've lived here long enough to remember where all the tracks used to be, and the newer residents can't imagine how it was before, with tracks running everywhere and trains crossing here and there at frequent intervals. There were plenty of times when I missed my bus connection because there was one route that got frequently stuck when the trains were coming through town.
Yes, it's possible to get used to the noise. I lived in a part of town that was very close to the tracks - just across the alley, up an embankment, and across the road. The trains came through several times a day and we were used to it. And there was a summer my grandparents and I spent on Shuswap Lake, near Salmon Arm, in British Columbia. The train tracks were even closer there - just a dirt road, a row of biffies, and a barb-wire fence separated the cabins from the tracks. There was a crossing close by, and between the rumbling, the "ding-ding-ding-ding" and the horn, it was godawful noisy. But even then we got used to it after a week or so (freaked out my parents when they came to stay a couple of nights, in a tent in front of the cabin!).
I wonder... since the roads the OP mentions aren't actually roads that go anywhere/used by the public, perhaps a combination of updating the maps and just converting the land with the roads that go nowhere to land for some other purpose that doesn't have a roadway on the same side as the tracks - like a park, or other green space?
Yellow Line: The main road, runs parallel with the train tracks. On the North side there the road "turns" and heads West. That area is treated as a "T" intersection, there are actual stop signs on the corners. And I've known of people to get a ticket here not treating it as such.
Blue Line: The cross-road. Heading East towards the tracks is impossible to due to a barrier there of large cement blocks, and a gate with private/railroad property warnings. Used to be a large "ROAD CLOSED" sign here. There's a standard crossbuck with signal-bells there but no lowering gate. The road mostly ends at the tracks as there's no grading or anything like that to allow a vehicle to get across the tracks. (There once was.) The crossing signals are on both sides of tracks, however.
Once over the tracks the paved road turns into a gravely road and at about the tree-line turns into a muddy "path." Continuing on you'd run into the creek and go further across the creek you'd find yourself on the walking path in the nearby park.
Purple Line: The train tracks, a double set.
Red Line: The driveway. Largely paved but about as much as a driveway normally is, on the West side of the tracks mostly gravel there. No signal, bell or gate here just the crossbuck. It's a pretty large property, somewhere around 30 acres.
Green Line: The third "intersection." At the crossing there's nothing there. No crossbuck, no signal, nothing. The road literally ends at the tracks. There is a gate and a standard stop sign with a second sign on it with the crossbuck on it and giving some lip service about the tracks. On the gate there's warnings about it being railroad property. The "road" is a gravel one. On the otherside of the tracks the road pretty much just turns into a worn down trail in the grass/yard.
So, yes, I can see the argument that the warning horns are not strictly needed here other than for whenever the driveway is in use. At the same time, is still just makes me laugh when people buy a property near an active set of railroad tracks and then get upset when the trains are too loud.
Reminds me of another incident a few years ago where a new community was fighting to get a nearby executive airport closed because the noise of incoming/departing light aircraft was too noisy. Which, again, struck me as funny given that these people bought property near an airport. Air traffic was never closed or restricted there. (Though I believe as much as possible they try and to route air traffic to/from the side of the runway that wouldn't have air traffic going over the housing development.)
Sorry, it makes me laugh when people have "problems" like this. They buy a $200K to $300K home near railroad tracks or an airport and then they expect everyone else to adapt their lives to suit THEM. The railroad industry needs to change to suit them. An airport needs to close to suit them, even though both were their first.
Strikes me as entitlement. Why not just deal with it? Would living near train tracks be annoying? I suspect so but then don't buy your home near them. Why potentially put lives at risk? Yeah these crossings are largely meaningless but at least one of them is an active driveway and the possibility always exists there could be an inattentive driver going across this driveway (either a visitor to the home, someone lost and turning around, or someone living there just being absent minded) and a warning *may* save a life.
I just find it funny. There's a lot of problems in the world I think the people in this community should be tackling. There's a lot of problems in the community that probably need to be tackled. But, no, trains are kinda-noisy so let's take care of that! Who cares that the local school-district needs to build new schools because they're starting to get crowded and are struggling to pass a bond or that some park improvements are needed. These people are sometimes getting woken up in the middle of the night and then having to roll over and then go right back to sleep!
And if there's a way to change those crossings to a "no horn crossing" that hurts no one and improves the real or perceived quality of life for the people in that neighborhood, who cares?
Federal laws regarding trains, horns, and intersections, are insane. They don't blow three times for every intersection by choice; who would, when going through a city? I once rode a train that had to sound off because it intersected a dirt path through the woods used for ATVs and horses!
I grew up with a yard set on the railroad tracks, so despite my infatuation with trains I know what a noise nuisance they can be. The problem isn't the trains, or the people who live there, but the regulations forcing the trains to be obnoxious. A general warning toot should be enough -- if people can't discern that there's a great big train rumbling down the tracks toward them, they're bound to walk into a woodchipper. That's how oblivious you have to be to get hit by a train.
I grew up with a yard set on the railroad tracks, so despite my infatuation with trains I know what a noise nuisance they can be. The problem isn't the trains, or the people who live there, but the regulations forcing the trains to be obnoxious. A general warning toot should be enough -- if people can't discern that there's a great big train rumbling down the tracks toward them, they're bound to walk into a woodchipper. That's how oblivious you have to be to get hit by a train.
Yeah, I don't get that either. I'm white and have lived 2 blocks from a railroad crossing for 45 years, my mom and grandparents even longer. It's like soothing background music. I'd miss it if it was gone.
There's a train going by outside right now, in fact.
This is standard practice in England, and probably the rest of Great Britain at a guess. As the island is much more densely populated than the US there are quite a few rural pedestrian right-of-way paths, bike paths and bridleways that cross the tracks, and the trains always blow their horns upon approaching them. At a road crossing which has no barriers or warning lights/bells the train must come to a complete stop and blow its horn before proceeding at low speed. These kinds of crossings are only found way out in the sticks on mostly private roads with very infrequent traffic (I couldn't tell you if this happens for private driveways; I doubt it), but that's the length to which the railway system here will go to avoid an accident.
Despite all these precautions many people are still killed by British trains every year, and that's not including suicides. Imagine how much higher the number would be if the trains didn't sound their horns at these kinds of crossings.
I've seen a lot of terrifying train-safety (and general safety) videos from England/Europe. I don't know how English children don't have PTSD flashbacks and deep, dark, unexplainable fear of trains.
Or overconfident/impatient. A lot of people have been maimed or killed because they were just so sure they could beat the train and get across in time.
There are a few along a small branch line between here and Trowbridge, only small one carriage and freight trains tend to run along that line, tis a very good safety feature though as wouldn't want to be hit by one anyway.
Living right next to Great Western Line between Bristol and London Paddington, we have the noise of several trains an hour going past and to be honest, I rather like it, especially when the fast train from Bristol to Reading thunders past.
Also means I know how long the OH will be when getting home when the train goes past from Bath.
What you consider terrifying and what others would find hilarious because of the way they are trying to "shock" individuals to do hopefully a pretty common sense thing to do is vastly different.
Also, you know, even though England is part of the EU and yes, we're part of Continental Europe, England and Europe really isn't interchangable.
I lived opposite a rail freight yard where the stonking great big diesel engines idled when I lived in Thunder Bay, Ontario 25 years ago. That freight yard was busy 24/7 and the engines had to ring their bells every time they began to move, including in the middle of the night, though the ringing was quieter and not as long then. That was also where the freight trucks were shunted and joined to the engines, and if the shunting was a bit too robust my entire building would shake. For the first two weeks after moving into that apartment I barely slept but, despite being a light sleeper, I got used to it all. The bell ringing could be annoying but I no longer heard the engines idling or even noticed when the building shook, and rarely did the night-time ringing wake me up. It just became background noise.
Congress shall make no law ... abridging ... the right of the people ...to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Could Trekker4747 directly address what was meant by this?
Similar threads
