Toronto GO Transit: Davenport Diamond Grade Separation | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

junctionist said:
It's a real choice that people made. 15 years ago, $400,000 could buy you a house in the neighbourhood or a new house in a nice subdivision in Brampton far from any railway line or factory. A lot of people chose to live in the city because they liked the older neighbourhoods and wanted to be less car dependent. There were neighbourhoods further from railway lines, but they weren't as affordable. There weren't that many trains using this railway line back then.

If people move to the suburbs, it's not like the street will empty out given the city's issues with housing. People will rent the houses out as rooming houses or divide them into apartments. You won't have as many middle class owners invested in the neighbourhood, and it could decline. Neighbourhoods declined throughout North America when cities built expressways through the urban fabric in the 1960s. I don't have anything against low income people, but most low income neighbourhoods end up undesirable places to live.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ on the premise that people will a) move out and b) the result will be diving the house into rooming houses and apartments. This ain't the 50s and 60s where urban living is an undesirable. And let me humour scenario b) for one second as unlikely as it maybe - if that is the case, you'd end up with an even higher density, and more housing availability for the lower income individuals - isn't that a good thing?

AoD
 
I find it a little ironic that the existing diamond is shown (0:40) and a reference made to noise given that the diamond would be removed. I assume (but always admit I'm not an expert) the folks living closest to the diamond would hear the banging of heavy CP trains going over it more than the noise of trains going on the guideway of the overpass. Not sure if there has been a comparison noise measurement in any of the reports.

2qvJvBv
 
Also lost in the debate seems to be the fact that there are countless multi-million dollar homes in many places around Toronto directly beside rail corridors (including those that carry flammable, combustible, and toxic substances, rather than commuters on an electrified GO train).
 
ADRM said:
Also lost in the debate seems to be the fact that there are countless multi-million dollar homes in many places around Toronto directly beside rail corridors (including those that carry flammable, combustible, and toxic substances, rather than commuters on an electrified GO train).
Click to expand...
So what, they chose to build and live next to these lines in the first place. Where do you expect these freight train to travel since they have to go by houses and business one way or another to bring your goods to you???

As for the noise from the diamond, it can be heard by people not living next to them since sound travels. With the new technology for road bed, the noise will be less on the ramps than the current grade, but the noise from the locomotives will be higher as they use the ramp that will require more horsepower. EMU's will be the same level regardless of ramp or grade.
 
drum118 said:
So what, they chose to build and live next to these lines in the first place. Where do you expect these freight train to travel since they have to go by houses and business one way or another to bring your goods to you???

As for the noise from the diamond, it can be heard by people not living next to them since sound travels. With the new technology for road bed, the noise will be less on the ramps than the current grade, but the noise from the locomotives will be higher as they use the ramp that will require more horsepower. EMU's will be the same level regardless of ramp or grade.
Click to expand...

My point was to challenge the assertion - which is reiterated frequently by opponents of this project - that these changes will cause property prices to plummet.
 
drum118 said:
As for the noise from the diamond, it can be heard by people not living next to them since sound travels.
Click to expand...
I assume you mean the sound from the existing diamond can be heard by people living close to it and people living further away from it, since sound travels.
 
junctionist said:
If people move to the suburbs, it's not like the street will empty out given the city's issues with housing. People will rent the houses out as rooming houses or divide them into apartments. You won't have as many middle class owners invested in the neighbourhood, and it could decline. Neighbourhoods declined throughout North America when cities built expressways through the urban fabric in the 1960s. I don't have anything against low income people, but most low income neighbourhoods end up undesirable places to live.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, but I think you are completely wrong in your assumptions about what impact this project will have on the neighborhood. There will be a GO station at Bloor and Lansdowne, giving residents access to a rapid transit line that will make it quick and easy to commute downtown (10 minutes to Union Station), or to York University. Combined with the considerable amount of development that is going on in the Junction Triangle - (Sterling Avenue, Edwin Avenue and elsewhere), with MOCCA, with the many art galleries that are already there, this area is going to become a much more desirable place to live, not less desirable.

Anyone who has been to places like Berlin, Tokyo, or Paris, knows that RER is really what this city needs: a way to travel longer distances at a greater speed than the subway can provide. UP Express gives a glimpse to what this can be like. In the video it is alluded to as an example of poor Metrolinx planning, but I doubt the “concerned residents" in the video are unhappy about the fact that they can walk to a train that gets them to Pearson in 15 minutes.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
I beg to differ on the premise that people will a) move out and b) the result will be diving the house into rooming houses and apartments. This ain't the 50s and 60s where urban living is an undesirable. And let me humour scenario b) for one second as unlikely as it maybe - if that is the case, you'd end up with an even higher density, and more housing availability for the lower income individuals - isn't that a good thing?

AoD
Click to expand...

Urban living is desirable based on the environment. It became more desirable as inner city factories closed and rail lines became sparsely used from the 1970s to the 2000s. Back in the 1950s and 1960s, it was normal to have factories next to houses in the older parts of cities. People started to move away when new options became available in the form of strictly zoned suburban housing isolated from industry and transportation corridors. A strong middle class presence is important for cities. It's important to have conditions that support the middle class like a large supply of housing in environments free of undesirable features like noxious industry and crudely designed infrastructure. That means infrastructure designed to minimize its impact on surrounding communities. Class shouldn't even matter. Why should low income people be relegated to undesirable living environments?

facepalming_brooklynite said:
With all due respect, but I think you are completely wrong in your assumptions about what impact this project will have on the neighborhood. There will be a GO station at Bloor and Lansdowne, giving residents access to a rapid transit line that will make it quick and easy to commute downtown (10 minutes to Union Station), or to York University. Combined with the considerable amount of development that is going on in the Junction Triangle - (Sterling Avenue, Edwin Avenue and elsewhere), with MOCCA, with the many art galleries that are already there, this area is going to become a much more desirable place to live, not less desirable.

Anyone who has been to places like Berlin, Tokyo, or Paris, knows that RER is really what this city needs: a way to travel longer distances at a greater speed than the subway can provide. UP Express gives a glimpse to what this can be like. In the video it is alluded to as an example of poor Metrolinx planning, but I doubt the “concerned residents" in the video are unhappy about the fact that they can walk to a train that gets them to Pearson in 15 minutes.
Click to expand...

It's not like they're going to get service anywhere near what's offered on the UP Express anytime soon. How can you say I'm wrong when your argument is based on the premise that the residents are about to get a rapid transit line into the downtown core? There's not even a fixed timeline for that kind of expansion to all day two-way service with 15 minute headways. It might be a generation before that happens, if it doesn't get shelved by future governments.

My argument is that infrastructure should be designed to minimize the impact on local communities, even if the local railway lines were already there when people bought their homes. I don't necessarily support the objections to building the new infrastructure. Sound barriers (even on the overpass itself), anti-vibration matting, and a well designed and landscaped overpass can minimize the impact on local communities effectively.
 
Allandale25 said:
I find it a little ironic that the existing diamond is shown (0:40) and a reference made to noise given that the diamond would be removed. I assume (but always admit I'm not an expert) the folks living closest to the diamond would hear the banging of heavy CP trains going over it more than the noise of trains going on the guideway of the overpass. Not sure if there has been a comparison noise measurement in any of the reports.
Click to expand...

The reference point for the studies was a surface level GO train versus an elevated GO Train. The freight traffic was taken as a given. You are correct, the removal of the diamond will make freights quieter - but the motor noise of the GO trains, which by being elevated is not blocked, and which emanates from the top of the locomotive, will be louder. GO trains will pass more often than freights do, so the conclusion is that noise (from GO) will increase.

To my mind, the issue posed by the freights is not noise, even at current volumes.....but rather speed. With the diamond removed, one of the factors that keeps freight train speed low will be gone. CP is likely to ask for permission to raise track speed. That is both a safety and a noise issue.

- Paul
 
junctionist said:
It's not like they're going to get service anywhere near what's offered on the UP Express anytime soon. How can you say I'm wrong when your argument is based on the premise that the residents are about to get a rapid transit line into the downtown core? There's not even a fixed timeline for that kind of expansion to all day two-way service with 15 minute headways. It might be a generation before that happens, if it doesn't get shelved by future governments.
Click to expand...

Aren't the noise concerns also based on the assumption of all day two-way service with 15 minute headways?

You can't have it both ways and complain about too many trains and not enough trains at the same time.

And why would Metrolinx invest in building the overpass and then not use it?

Sound barriers (even on the overpass itself), anti-vibration matting, and a well designed and landscaped overpass can minimize the impact on local communities effectively.
Click to expand...
Agreed!
 
facepalming_brooklynite said:
Aren't the noise concerns also based on the assumption of all day two-way service with 15 minute headways?

You can't have it both ways and complain about too many trains and not enough trains at the same time.
Click to expand...

There is an assumption of hourly diesel powered service until electrification is completed. . At the earlier consultation meetings, ML committed to a limit on the number of diesel trains per day. The planned noise walls on the overpass will not suppress the diesel noise as well as the electrics, because the diesel noise comes from the top of the loco (where the exhaust is) while the electrics emit noise from lower down where the various blowers and electrical components vent.

Sound walls on the overpass will suppress noise, yes, but at the expense of making the overpass more massive and therefore more intrusive. ML was trying to minimise the sound walls to make the structure lighter and more airy. That is a bit of a tall order IMHO.

- Paul
 
It's hard to complain if the only way to get a St. Clair station is to elevate. Can't be done with tunneled or trenched.

Was Metrolinx smart enough to explain this to locals?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top