This is a widely debunked bad faith NIMBY talking point. A train, even at high frequencies, is less noise pollution than a highway or major road.

▲

driverdan 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

That's only if there are no crossings. Trains are required to sound their extremely loud horns at every crossing which can be heard from miles away.

▲

ceejayoz 3 days ago | parent [-]

Such crossings are pretty rare in NYC, and even rarer in passenger routes there.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Level_crossings_...

State/local governments can also declare a quiet zone. https://railroads.dot.gov/railroad-safety/divisions/crossing...

	▲	hamdingers 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Quiet zones require crossings to be up to a certain standard. If the people opposed to train noise were serious, they could pressure their local/regional gov to upgrade crossings and establish a quiet zone. This tends to be more successful than trying to prevent the train entirely.

▲

maerF0x0 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

In the house I lived it was not debunked. It was fact. The caltrain blasted it's horn hourly (or more) 24/7 within earshot of my house. I could not sleep with my window open and often slept with ear plugs even with the window closed. I get you might be tempted to spout generic statistics, but I can tell you without a doubt it was ear blistering loud up close, and sleep disturbing even 2 blocks away.

Also for what it's worth you have no idea if it's good or bad faith.

▲

hamdingers 3 days ago | parent [-]

So you would have preferred a roughly 12 lane freeway 2 blocks from your house to move the same number of people?

▲

maerF0x0 3 days ago | parent [-]

Perhaps, but more likely I would have preferred regulating the blasting of that damn horn.

	▲	hamdingers 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		There are regulations, encourage your local government to establish a quiet zone if that's truly your issue with the train. https://railroads.dot.gov/railroad-safety/divisions/crossing...