rbt
Senior Member
A noise wall is a pretty reasonable request. That seems to be the only demand.
|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
A noise wall is a pretty reasonable request. That seems to be the only demand.
drum118
Superstar
At what cost and how long for it? Are there other location wanting this as well and do they meet the requirement for one in the first place???
Is there clearance for one?? Does this require the removal of trees along the property line as a lot of the backyards have trees there before the 3rd track was built??
What happens when the 4th track is built in the future??? A whole block of townhouses will have to go for that 4th track since the rear of them are very near to the line now without the track.
Any wall will require the closure of track 1 during the day to have it built and will be done over a number of weeks.
They better hold off to see what going to happen to grade separate this crossing location. This will require closing off streets, removal of home and business.
From the map, how many homes effected??
A noise wall was built on the north side to the east during the construction of the new track.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
I'm curious.... is there a website of archival timetables for the GO service 22 years ago?
It would help confirm veracity of claims --
If it was hourly, did not run as late, and the trains passed each other almost at the same time, that could be almost an hour of peace and quiet between the pair of hourly opposite-direction trains passing. And more sleep, too.
Now if it's half hourly, the trains pass each other at very different times, you may have only 14 minutes respite between trains for a much longer span of the day. You know how your sleep feels if you woke up every 15 minutes (Half-hourly, opposite-direction trains out-of-phase of each other) rather than every ~55 minutes (Hourly, two trains passes each other almost simultaneously).
Unlikely secondary factor: If there's now an infill station nearby that did not exist 22 years ago, then there's much-louder acceleration noises for two trains an hour accelerating out of the nearby station... Especially if it's using a track closer to the house. And if engines were newer 22 years ago pulling shorter trains, that may be additional factor too. All combined, can be far more annoying at only twice the train traffic. But we'd need comparative info to confirm.
Depending on the data, a noisewall may actually be highly justified, as they are going up all the time throughout the GO network, and many more will also go up between now and GO electrification.
This may be plain old NIMBY, and patience needed for inevitable scheduled noisewall installations coming during GO RER construction (tree clearing needed for 4th track resulting in noisewall installs becoming simultaneously necessary & easier), but historic data exists and a verification check may be possible/reasonable (timetables, stations, locomotive fleet, most commonly used track) to determine best phasing/prioritization of specific noisewall installs...
Last edited:
drum118
Superstar
Until the 30 minute service went into effect, hourly trains ran with a few peak trains added over those 22 years.
The building of the new track 1 was by GO and before Metrolinx time.
There used to a stop at Lorne Park Rd on the west side and the south side of it and it was move to Clarkson to speed up service.
There is about 10 minutes between an eastbound passing the area first to the arrival of the westbound, since this is my normal trip route. Track 1 is westbound with track 3 being eastbound.
That 10 minute time frame apply when service was hourly as well.
Some of those extra peak trains ran deadhead from either Oakville or Burlington back to Toronto for another trip in the PM after dropping riders off.
Last edited:
DonValleyRainbow
Senior Member
drum118
Superstar
If ones look at the homes in this area, we are not talking about houses $500,000 to $1,000,000, but up to $15,000,000.
steveintoronto
Superstar
It's not just Go, it's CN, CP , Via, Amtrak and occasional specials. And before the North Toronto By-Pass, a hell of a lot more volume of freight.
There may be an issue here that has to be addressed, but like with a lot we read in the press, the issue is far below the hysterical comparative claims of some. Is the problem *audible* noise, or infrasonic? The latter a wall won't address, save for a slight reduction of travelling wave intensity with lighter stock, and freight it won't touch.
I'm sorry to say anyone who bought next to the Lakeshore corridor in the last twenty years *must* have known what was in store, or is "due diligence" a foreign language? Perhaps Mississauga would be willing to split the cost of sound wall? They obviously gave building approval to this building.
TOareaFan
Superstar
drum118
Superstar
Most of those homes were built before Mississauga came into existent. Some have been torn down and built bigger.
No way will Mississauga paying 1 cent for these walls.
As I have stated in the past and will continue, unless you do your homework as to what is around you at least 1-2 km, you have made the choice buy there, accept what there and live with it. Otherwise, move on.
Anyone living next to an RR corridor must understand things change over time from good to worse depending what taking place in that corridor. Since you chose to live there, than you have nothing to complain about. Just think how many trains would be passing your house today if this was the 50s that would be greater than what being plan for now.
Today you have VIA Rail running less train than the past and could be running more down the road. CP has stop running trains on this corridor with CN running the odd train from time to time. GO has double the number of trains and will double again within the next 10 years.
salsa
Senior Member
Recently I read about a plan to build new entrances to an overcrowded Manhattan subway station on the Lexington Line. A bunch of rich Upper East Side residents fought hard against a proposed station entrance that would have been close to their highise apartments, complaining that the increased foot traffic will destroy the "bucolic" and "pristine nature" of their neighbourhood, as well as the usual anti-transit talk about how it will attract criminal non-whites and that "people to the west don’t take the subway. Not to be elitist, but they don’t."
They threatened legal action against the MTA unless their demands were satisfied. The scope has been reduced, the project is now 4 years late and the budget went up from $8M to 65M due to the more complicated new design and the need to acquire property. It's a slap in the face to thousands of subway riders who have to wait years longer for transit improvements because of a few selfish NIMBYs who felt that their "bucolic" street in America's densest urban area was under threat.
Attachments
salsa
Senior Member
But these rich homeowners have a "massive backyard, swimming pool, hot tub, bar area and ample tree coverage for privacy"! Please have some sympathy for these 1%-ers who chose to live next to the rail corridor.
drum118
Superstar
I would if I got invited to the BBQ pool parties and swimming in those pools while watching the trains go by. Otherwise.....
steveintoronto
Superstar
Perhaps you missed the "There may be an issue here that has to be addressed"?
From the following posts to yours, consensus is clear on this. I'm not for a moment counselling ignoring their plight, but they have no grounds to expect the impossible due to their lack of vision.
TOareaFan
Superstar
I bolded the part of your statement I was in disagreement with.
steveintoronto
Superstar
Well since they're apparently not hard done by, I'd suggest getting acoustical db level readings to make a case. Their 'recollection' doesn't count.