Centre For Local Research into Public Space (CELOS)


See also Site Map

Citizen-Z Cavan Young's 2004 film about the zamboni crisis

Contact

mail@celos.ca

Search


Custodians:

June 8, 2009, 6 e-mail

D. C. wrote:

Watch the video

Here is a link to the Clean Train Coalition video.

There's LOTS of important information on this video. So you'll have to hit the pause button to catch it all.

Copy and paste - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZ3QSNrkqyg

T. S. wrote:

Hi, there, T. S. here of Osler Street. I was just wondering if your group was aware that the construction has now become 24 hours long, 7 days a week. I’m pretty sure it was them working at 4:30am on Saturday morning and, as well, 11pm last night. My girlfriend works for the Ministry of Transportation Ontario (low level with sadly no influence) and asked her boss this morning about it and he said that GO informed MTO on Friday afternoon that they intended to work over the weekend and that this will likely carry forward throughout the summer. They also apparently told MTO that they informed the neighbourhood 2 days prior to beginning their extended hours work. I’m not sure if you were informed but I certainly wasn’t and was obviously rudely awakened Saturday morning by the noise.

Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help. The noise and vibrations are bad enough but the lack of communication on GO’s part is entirely unacceptable.

M. B. wrote:

Hello and thank you for sharing.

Exactly who is that is being informed two days prior to beginning their extended hours to 24 hours a day? I have been doing a casual poll around the neighborhood and no one on Indian Grove south of Dundas told me they had heard of this. In fact, no one I know who lives on Hook Ave or Indian Grove north of Dundas had either. So, who is it that the Contractors and/or Railroad actually consider to be “the neighborhood’?

My concern about the pile driving going 24 hours on their site is that the contractors on the old Canadian Tire site will ask/petition the city for the same privileges.

Let me say loudly and clearly that I do not support the extended hours.

From: Glenn Sernyk

Our leaders group has known that there will be a couple of times of this type of work, when the tracks have to be physically relocated to accommodate the progress of the hammering.

In doing this relocation, rail traffic is shut down through this corridor and/or re-routed. CN, CP and GO cannot be re-routed for long periods of time (at least in their own view), hence the 24-hour work period.

We were assured by GO, in face-to-face meetings, that these times of extraordinary work would not involve pile driving (which they haven’t) and that the community would receive proper notice (which they didn’t).

We were all taken by surprise. I think we all concur that 48 hour’s notice is pretty scant. This, again, is more fuel for the CTA Complaint. GO still just doesn’t get it.

I saw something in the paper today where the GO spokesperson said, on this matter, that further 24-hour periods would be needed, but, essentially, they would again have only very scant notice for the residents.

GO’s arrogance and dismissive attitude to our residents’ legally assured, reasonable expectation of the quiet enjoyment of their property begs for descriptive words. The fact that the railway lands are historically lawless makes for a real quandary that we (hopefully with the help of the City’s legal Dept. and some help from the Feds) can make sense of.

Carry out this pounding on any city street and you are probably closed down in 72 hours. Do this pounding on Federal Railway Land and you can go on until the local residents rise up and make you stop. What a difference 100 meters makes.

Regarding the radius of effect and GO’s willingness to provide adequate notice to those affected, it seems that GO is using the Environmental Assessment for this project (the EA) quite selectively. They have, for example, seemingly adopted a 75-meter radius from the noise/vibration source as a potential effect area, per the EA. If you are outside the 75-meter zone and your house gets blown to bits, you and your insurance company will have some work to do.

That radius, however, seems strongly to have been based on auguring in the piles, the method proposed in the EA., That is a very quiet and low vibration method that has since proven impossible, due to a high water table.

The vibration field for the diesel hammers, used instead of augers, is not the EA suggested, auger-based 75 meters. It is more like ½ to ¾ of a kilometer.

The auger-based 85 dB noise at source (dBA) that was promised by the EA has been supplanted by ~120 dBA (about 12X as loud) sound generated by the diesel hammers. That’s also not supposed to be a problem at 75 meters. As we know, the noise has been reported on, in no uncertain terms, from as far away as Avenue Road and Bloor, High Park, Babypoint and Weston.

Please keep feeding us information and impact statements. Your statements and thoughts will all be read in Ottawa.

If anyone would like a copy of the EA, please send me a note specifically to my e-mail (please don’t clog up the list-serve with that request). It’s a fairly lengthy PDF. It’s an interesting read. It sort of describes, like the rejected Delcan Engineering report (another PDF which I’m also happy to provide) kind of a parallel universe where this thing might have been undertaken with at least a modicum of intelligence and understanding.

I hope this is helpful.

Glenn Sernyk

West Diamond Leaders Group

J. J. wrote:

I wonder if the focus on 'noise' is perhaps getting us stuck, in view of the liberal 'noise' laws. These were, after all, dealing with noise.

We have actual documentable shocks, as in earthquake. I think damage to structures can be documented. Further, if one shock is minor, how about (i'm guessing) ten thousand of them?

What is one's legal recourse for damage to property; is it not a criminal act, potentially? like setting off an underground explosion near a building [but off the property], and causing its damage. Does it qualify as 'mischief,' for example.

M. R. wrote:

Metrolinx: The ongoing noise and further potential for environmental degradation emanating from the railway lands here in the Junction lead me to the question: Who is being served by all this disruption.?

Are you so enmeshed in bureaucratic procedures that you cannot see the immediate and long term effects this project is having and will have on both the Junction and the greater community of Toronto if you persist in your plan to run up to 400 diesel locomotives a day through the area?

The long term health costs arising from the pollution in this heavily populated zone far outweigh the short term business goal of following the"getting the job done/business as usual" methods displayed so far by the principals behind Metrolinx. The litigation which is about to be embarked on by those already impacted negatively by your actions is only the beginning.

The lawsuits arising from the disastrous health problems associated with diesel pollution will tie up our system for decades to come and further tax our Healthcare system.

Your irresponsibility in dealing with the direct effects of your actions is only building a financial and environmental deficit for our childrens' future which is already severely compromised on both fronts.

I strongly urge you to rethink your methods and make the switch to quieter construction methods and cleaner electric train systems to replace the toxic effects of diesel locomotives.

Thank you for your consideration in these matters.


Content last modified on June 13, 2009, at 03:00 PM EST