With the hopes of easing noise levels, Beaconsfield is asking Quebec to
reduce the speed limit on Highway 20 and is also requesting that rail
track users cut the speed of trains passing through the municipality.
Council voted 4-2 in favour of asking Transport Québec to reduce the
speed on Highway 20 to 70 km/h from 100 km/h and to install photo
radar.
The city is also requesting that Canadian Pacific, Canadian National, VIA and the AMT reduce train speeds to 70 km/h.
Passenger trains can pass through as fast as 160 km/h while freight
trains can go as fast as 100 km/h, said city manager Patrice Boileau.
As for the chances train operators will agree to the measures, Mayor David Pollock told The Gazette he is hopeful. “We’ll see.”
Regarding highway speeds, councillor Wade Staddon weighed in that
although noise might only drop a few decibels it could be enough to
bring levels at a number of homes near the highway below 65 decibels, a
standard set by the province. He admits the city faces an uphill battle
to persuade Transport Québec to reduce the highway speed in
Beaconsfield. The criteria used by the ministry to determine speed
limits take safety issues and highway traffic lights, such as in the
Île-Perrot area, into consideration, but they don’t include noise
pollution, he added.
Greg Stienstra, head of the Beaconsfield Citizens Association,
pointed out that large trucks deploying compression braking would
negate any potential noise reduction from lowering the speed limit.
“You are voting for a 43 per cent increase in commute time,” he
said. “You are voting for an increase in the cost of transporting goods
- and a longer rush hour. I don’t think the (transport ministry) would
ever approve this.”
Responded Councillor Rhonda Massad: “We need to at least try and help these people out. We can make it work.”
However, councillor Karin Essen, who voted against reducing highway
speed, said the only viable solution to cutting noise levels is a sound
barrier.
in the words of Jeremy Clarckson ” speed never kills anyone its comming to an abrupt stop that gets you”
People do not want to take resonsibility for their own actions. They bought a home at a discount because of teh proximity to the highway. Now, they want you to pay to bail them out.
They are cut from the same cloth as those who got the 15 repaved twice because it was noisy. The live 25 meters from a main highway. Ofcourse it is noisy.
Same for the whiners who want to shut down Le Circuit Mont Tremblant, a historic race track that has brought tourist and their money, and 100′s of millions in investments to the area, But no, these people buy at a discount, and want to impose their needs on existing installations.
Seriously!?! I lived in Beaconsfield for 10 years before moving to Dorval. The noise levels are not bad at all. Yes you could hear the trains sometimes but you can’t hear the highway unless you open the window.. so don’t open it!
In Dorval it is much louder than it was in Beaconsfield, because of the airplances.
How ridiculous….why don’t you go by an island somewhere in the middle of the ocean!!! Or how about if we remove the Beaconsfield stop on the AMT line all together to make up for the time lost to get to downtown Montreal. One less stop for me works fine in my almost an hour long train ride!!!
When is enough, enough? Next will we ask the airport to reduce the speed of the planes in order to lower noise level? If the people bought their houses next to a highway then they should expect to hear a bit more noise. Why should peole have to pay because someone decided to purchase a house next to a major roadway.
Yes that’s all we need slower speeds.
So for the few that live next to the highway, thousands must slow down?
When you buy a house next to a highway and complain later that it’s too loud, I say get lost.
Those houses are priced lower just for thier location, if you’re not happy move and find a quiet location you can afford. This society should not coddle idiots.
And I pray and hope that if a sound barrier is installed those right next to it will pay their fair share by doubling their home tax rather than put that burden on those that made intelligent decisions on where to live based on our wants and needs.
Another stupid idea from this council. When people bought houses next to the highway did they not expect to hear cars going by?
Many people have been in their houses since before the highway was a highway. So yes, they did not expect to hear the incessant noise of cars and freight trains (freight trains are the problem, not passenger trains) that is much more of a nuisance than the planes, which are quite loud also…
These residents bought houses (slums?) beside a highway and two rail mainlines, let them live with it.
It was pointless to ask the AMT to cooperate, as they have no say in the operation of the equipment or management of the line. This is handled by my employer, CP Rail.
Insofar as asking the CN and CP to “cooperate”, the town needn’t waste its time. Railroads are federally regulated, and the town will have absolutely no influence when it comes to making such a request of Transport Canada. Secondly, neither CN nor CP would ever stand back and voluntarily allow a precedent such as this to be set.
Why buy near the train tracks or the highway in the first place? Maybe the city should have never zoned those areas as residential in the first place?
The highway speed shouldn’t be reduced, it should be increased to 140 (all over Quebec)
I like it . Rather than give them 70km/hr raise it to 140km/hr. But we must mandate that all Ontario drivers have to stay in the right lane at all times!
Highway 20, then route 2, was a four-lane, divided highway in the 1950′s. While speeds may have been lower and traffic less dense, the fact remains that a major highway has been there much longer than most of the houses. The rail ine has been there even longer and, at one time, was used by steam locomotives that were even louder than modern trains, and had the added feature of burning cinders that could touch off fires along the right of way. Those who bought houses adjacent to the highway and rail line have only themselves to blame for the noise they live with now. And as for planes, Dorval has been there since the 1940′s and was home to piston-powered aircraft in the early days, such as North Stars and Constellations, that make modern planes seem positively silent.
Given that the highway and rail line (and the airport, for that matter) have all been there longer than virtually all of the homeowners who complain about the noise, and that those homeowners bought in the full knowledge that their houses would be subject to the noise and vibration associated with the highway and rail line, why should those of us who do not have a complaint get to contribute to a major public works project that will benefit only a handful of people? Lachine was a disgrace; let’s not allow that to happen again. If Beaconsfielders wants a sound barrier, let them pay for it.
The only solution is a SOUND BARRIER. I will gladly pay a special contribution to get this done. There are enough lawyers, high net worth people and business leaders around here who should be able to influence. How Lachine can get 5km erected and we can’t after 35 years of trying is odd. What’s wrong with this picture? Do we not all realise (especially those living within a few hundred meters of either side of the 20) the value of fighting hard for not having to endure the incessant freight train shakes, truck brakes etc.