Logo


Menlo Park City Council Email Log

[ By Date ] [ By Message ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]


Fwd: Recopied Letter - H.O.R.N.Update

From: Margaret Petitjean <MPetitjean_at_(domain_name_was_removed)>
Date: Thu Aug 24 2006 - 15:22:55 EDT

Hon. Mayor, councilpersons, commissioners, et al: Tom Butt, Richmond's councilmember reported on July 15, '06 that an additional West One Quiet Zone went into effect that day. He states: "The establishment of Quiet Zones has been a long and arduous task, fought tooth and nail with BNSF...Thanks goes to the dogged determination of Assistant City Attorney Wayne Nishioka, City Engineer Rich Davidson and to the Quiet Zone Volunteer Team, Cochise Potts, Fred Arm, Louis Hagler and Terry Goode". The callous disregard for human health and numerous medical and legal opinions from those along the Caltrain Corridor are actionable. There are no excuses left. One cannot equate the injurious noise with that of highways or even aircraft without envisioning the addition of over a thousand brain-damaging horn blasts. As previously reported the District Attorney in southern California representing Del Mar to San Diego has enjoined with the individual cities to abate the public health hazard of blasting horns and to establish
Quiet Zones while at the same time settling any liability questions. The attached 2005 letter from Fred Arm, J.D. and Louis Hagler, M.D. refers to freight operations but the injurious horns and their impacts are the same. Margaret Petitjean, Menlo Park Peninsula H.O.R.N., H.A.L.T.,Citizens for Noise Abatement,S.A.D. (sleep-deprived Americans driving)

attached mail follows:


Hi Margaret,

I have copied below the letter we sent out yesterday to fit in this email.  Please feel free to use it for whatever educational purpose you desire.

Fred

 

H.O.R.N.

Homeowners Opposed to Railroad Noise

115 Buena Vista Ave.

Point Richmond, California  94801-4024

(510) 232-2559    Fax: (510) 236-2566

Email:  fha@bigfoot.com

_________________________________________________

Fred H. Arm, J.D.                                                                                                                                                                 Louis Hagler, M.D.


February 26, 2005

 

Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation

2650 Lou Menk Drive, 2nd Floor

P.O. Box 961057

Fort Worth, Texas 76161-0057

Phone: (817) 352-1000

 

Richmond Pacific Railroad

402 Wright Avenue

Richmond, CA 94804

Phone: 510-232-4422

Fax: 510-236-0129

 

Re:  Horn Noise from slow moving freight trains

 

Gentlemen:

We represent Households Opposed to Railroad Noise (HORN), a group of residents in the Point Richmond and Marina Bay areas of Richmond, California, organized specifically to rid our neighborhoods of loud noise from the horns of slow moving freight trains at grade crossings and in rail yards.  We are neither anti-business nor anti-railroad.  We understand that train horns are sounded as a safety measure and can see the need for this when fast trains cross public roadways.  However, in our view, the horns of slow moving freight trains at grade crossings and in rail yards produce noise that is, first and foremost, unhealthy, as well as being unnecessary, intrusive, and disruptive; this noise would appear to have little to do with public safety.  On the contrary, the continued auditory assault that results from the noise of your train horns robs us of our health and well-being on a daily basis.

As noted in 49 CFR Part 229.129, the horn must be capable of producing 96 decibels at 100 feet forward of the locomotive in its direction of travel.  In fact, the noise produced by the horns of slow moving locomotives may exceed this limit and can be heard over a mile and a half away in all directions from their source. 

As you are all certainly aware, the loud and prolonged horn blasts from your various trains have been - and continue to be - a significant nuisance, irritant, and most importantly, a hazard to the health and well-being of all who live and work within the Point Richmond and Marina Bay areas of Richmond.  Residents of these areas are subjected to a seemingly endless cacophony of dangerously loud, long, frequent, and unpredictable horn blasts that occur, without warning, 24 hours a day and 7 days a week.  These horn blasts cause unrelenting stress that produces medically significant, pervasive, and persistent harmful effects, from which there is no relief, save quiet, which is not to be had in these neighborhoods.  These loud horn blasts disrupt the sleep of nearby residents leading to significant immediate and delayed impairment in various biological and functional systems. 

In addition to sleep disturbances, which have medically and socially significant effects in themselves, and which are one of the major causes of stress in the United States, the potential health effects of loud noise of the type produced by train horns has been shown to cause, among other things, significant and persistent changes in blood pressure, heart rate, and levels of stress-related hormones.  Loud noise also reduces performance and causes a variety of annoyance responses.  These noise-induced adverse effects lead in turn, to social handicaps, reduced productivity, decreased performance in learning and on the job, absenteeism, increased prescription drug use, and accidents[1].  Thus, the unnecessarily loud, frequent, and prolonged noise produced by the horns of slow moving trains, either at grade crossings or in rail yards during switching operations adversely affects the health, emotional well-being, and welfare of the citizens of these communities.  Many of these adverse health effects, which are precursors of more serious disorders, are readily reversed by simply removing the source of the unremitting loud noise. 

The State of California and the US Government have promulgated a large number of statutes and regulations aimed at minimizing exposure of the public to – and thus the risks of - various types of noise pollution.  The state of California has long ago enacted the California Noise Control Act[2] and the Federal government has enacted the Federal Noise Control Act[3] out of awareness of the many persistent and pervasive health hazards that noise pollution represents.  The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) recently promulgated regulations[4] that would permit the establishment of “Quiet Zones” at grade crossings to curtail the offensive train-horn noise in individual communities.  These new regulations recognize the needs of the citizenry and the will of the Congress to put a stop to unnecessary noise in urban environments. 

Along with many communities around the state and the rest of the country, the City of Richmond is currently planning the establishment of Quiet Zones around the City and will soon take the necessary administrative steps to actually establish such zones at a number of grade crossings.  Once established, as noted in 49 CFR Part 222, Quiet Zones will preclude the sounding of the train horn for ½ mile on either side of the crossing.  Since it appears to be a forgone conclusion that railroads will have to maintain silence in the Quiet Zones, there should be no reason for the continued use of the horns by slow moving freight trains either at grade crossings or during switching operations in rail yards.  It is our contention that the horns could - and should - be silenced now, in anticipation of the time that they will be silenced by the formal establishment of Quiet Zones. 

Clearly, the California Noise statutes authorize a private action in either state or federal courts against a private nuisance; such action could also be instituted under the California Civil Code[5].  Action could also be taken against a public nuisance[6], whereby, in addition to actual damages, costs and attorney fees are also available.  The action may further incorporate the California Unfair Business[7] statues that could entail treble damages as well as costs and attorney fees. 

There may be additional considerations explored under the environmental impact studies that are required by the increased train activity in the area pursuant to Environmental Rules (49 CFR Part 1105) promulgated by the Surface Transportation Board of the Federal government. 

Continued alienation of the public and a large class action with this much potential liability is not in your best interest.  Therefore, HORN suggests, as a final solution to this matter, that you discontinue the use of train horns on all slow moving freight trains in the Point Richmond and Marina Bay areas forthwith, both within and without your train yards.

HORN is willing to forgo legal action should your voluntary compliance take effect immediately.  No one is interested in the publicity and expense of costly and lengthy litigation.  Nevertheless, unless a reduction in horn noise is expeditiously forthcoming, HORN will have no other option but to seek out a class action litigation firm and commence legal action.  HORN sincerely hopes that no such action will become necessary.  We shall await your response.

Very truly yours,

Fred H. Arm

H.O.R.N.

Households Opposed to Railroad Noise

kc/FHA

 

Footnotes:

[1]  World Health Organization (WHO)  “Occupational and community noise” http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs258/en/ 

[2] California Health & Safety Code §46000.  The Legislature hereby finds and declares that:

   (a) Excessive noise is a serious hazard to the public health and welfare.

   (b) Exposure to certain levels of noise can result in physiological, psychological, and economic damage.

   (c) There is a continuous and increasing bombardment of noise in the urban, suburban, and rural areas.

   (d) Government has not taken the steps necessary to provide for  the control, abatement, and prevention of unwanted and hazardous noise.

   (e) The State of California has a responsibility to protect the health and welfare of its citizens by the control, prevention, and abatement of noise.

   (f) All Californians are entitled to a peaceful and quiet environment without the intrusion of noise which may be hazardous to their health or welfare.

   (g) It is the policy of the state to provide an environment for all Californians free from noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare.  To that end it is the purpose of this division to establish a means for effective coordination of state activities in noise control and to take such action as will be necessary to achieve the purposes of this section.

[3] Federal Noise Control Act  42 USC 4901-4918

This index lists the sections under U. S. Code Chapter 65, known by popular title as the Noise Control Act.

42 USC 4901 Congressional findings and statement of policy

This section is a general statement of policy identifying noise as a growing danger to public health and welfare. The policy states that while primary responsibility for noise control rests in state and local government, federal action is necessary for control of noise sources in commerce. This section authorizes the establishment of noise emissions standards for products in commerce and provides for the collection of public information with respect to noise reduction.

[4] Federal Register/vol. 68 No. 243

49 CFR Part 222---Use of locomotive horns at public highway-rail grade crossings

Subpart A—General

§ 222.1 What is the purpose of this regulation?

The purpose of this part is to provide for safety at public highway-rail grade crossings by requiring locomotive horn use at public highway-rail grade crossings except in Quiet Zones established and maintained in accordance with this part. 

[5] California CIVIL CODE §§3501-3503

3501.  The remedies against a private nuisance are:

   1. A civil action; or,

   2. Abatement.

<>3502.  A person injured by a private nuisance may abate it by removing, or, if necessary, destroying the thing which constitutes the nuisance, without committing a breach of the peace, or doing unnecessary injury.

3503.  Where a private nuisance results from a mere omission of the wrongdoer, and cannot be abated without entering upon his land, reasonable notice must be given to him before entering to abate it.

[6] California Civil Code §§ 3490-3496

3490.  No lapse of time can legalize a public nuisance, amounting to an actual obstruction of public right.

3491.  The remedies against a public nuisance are:

   1. Indictment or information;

   2. A civil action; or,

   3. Abatement.

3492.  The remedy by indictment or information is regulated by the Penal Code.

3493.  A private person may maintain an action for a public nuisance, if it is specially injurious to himself, but not otherwise.

3494.  A public nuisance may be abated by any public body or officer authorized thereto by law.

3495.  Any person may abate a public nuisance which is specially injurious to him by removing, or, if necessary, destroying the thing which constitutes the same, without committing a breach of the peace, or doing unnecessary injury.

3496.  In any of the following described cases, the court may award costs, including the costs of investigation and discovery, and reasonable attorneys' fees, which are not compensated for pursuant to some other provision of law, to the prevailing party:   (a) In any case in which a governmental agency seeks to enjoin the sale, distribution, or public exhibition, for commercial consideration, of obscene matter, as defined in Section 311 of the Penal Code.

   (b) In any case in which a governmental agency seeks to enjoin the use of a building or place for the purpose of illegal gambling, lewdness, assignation, or prostitution; or any case in which a governmental agency seeks to enjoin acts of illegal gambling, lewdness, assignation, or prostitution in or upon a building or

place, as authorized in Article 2 (commencing with Section 11225) of Chapter 3 of Title 1 of Part 4 of the Penal Code.

   (c) In any case in which a governmental agency seeks to enjoin the use of a building or place, or seeks to enjoin in or upon any building or place the unlawful sale, manufacture, service, storage, or keeping or giving away of any controlled substance, as authorized in Article 3 (commencing with Section 11570) of Chapter 10 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code.

   (d) In any case in which a governmental agency seeks to enjoin the unlawful sale, service, storage, or keeping or giving away of alcoholic liquor, as authorized in Article 1 (commencing with Section 11200) of Chapter 3 of Title 1 of Part 4 of the Penal Code.

[7] California Business And Professions Code §17200

17200.  As used in this chapter, unfair competition shall mean and include any unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice and unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising and any act prohibited by Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17500) of Part 3 of Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code.

California Business And Professions Code §17082

In any action under this chapter, it is not necessary to allege or prove actual damages or the threat thereof, or actual injury or the threat thereof, to the plaintiff.  But, in addition to injunctive relief, any plaintiff in any such action shall be entitled to recover three times the amount of the actual damages, if any, sustained by the plaintiff, as well as three times the actual damages, if any, sustained by any person who has assigned to the plaintiff his claim for damages resulting from a violation of this chapter.

   In any action under this chapter in which judgment is entered against the defendant the plaintiff shall be awarded a reasonable attorney's fee together with the costs of suit.  The amendments to this section adopted at the 1959 Regular Session of the Legislature do not apply to any action commenced prior to September 18, 1959.




 

0

clip_image002.jpg
Received on Thu Aug 24 20:50:19 2006

[ Home ] [ By Date ] [ By Message ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]


Email communications sent to the City Council are public records. This site is an archive of emails received by the City Council at its city.council@menlopark.org email address. This site can be viewed by the public and sorted by subject, date, author or message thread. The email address of the sender is not disclosed for security purposes. It is the City's practice to remove SPAM (Unsolicited Bulk Email) email from the Council email log. If you believe your email has been removed in error, please contact the City at ccin.log@menlopark.org.