Re: Fwd: Next to the highway | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Joel Woodhull (jwoodhull![]() |
|
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 95 22:36 CST |
No, soundwalls aren't pleasant to drive next to, but the point is to protect the people impacted by the freeway. Since it is the people on the freeway that are causing the problem, they should absorb all the costs. Trees have little effect as a sound barrier. This is illustrated by the site in question. If I recall correctly there are many trees between the freeway and the area where the dwellings would be located, and the sound remains a problem. If trees could be planted so as to hide the soundwall it would be fine, or berms would be fine. But the continual additions of lanes to the highway system has in almost all areas chewed away any excess right-of-way, so nothing with significant width can be added without additional right-of-way. How about taking away lanes to put in the kinds of sound barriers we would all prefer? >if it was my house going up next to a road, I'd resign myself to >putting up with the noise for the few years it would take, and >save the motorists from the blight of another soundwall. Evan, perhaps you would be a good customer for the "sound barrier dwellings" that are planned for the site. Joel Woodhull Pasadena
-
Fwd: Next to the highway Joaniblank, January 28 1995
- Re: Fwd: Next to the highway Joel Woodhull, January 29 1995
- Re: Fwd: Next to the highway Evan Hunt, January 29 1995
- Re: Fwd: Next to the highway Joel Woodhull, January 30 1995
- Re: Re: Re: Re: Fwd: Next to the highway tom ponessa, January 31 1995
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.