Just as an FYI, Barrington is one of the more “Upscale” Chicago 'burbs. It was once cited in Trains by George W. Hilton in reference to the formation of a taxpayer subsidized Regional Transportation Authority. IIRC his line was “I can’t think of a more regressive way to spend tax monies than to haul the residents of Barrington around.” The upscale 'burb is on the UP/Metra Northwest commuter line. That line crosses the “J” at grade near downtown Barrington.
Typical piece of high school level reporting - lots of emotion, lots of yap, no facts or figures to use to judge the weight or value of the argument - only half of which was presented.
Followed, of course, by the same in blog format.
All this proves is that people in little upscale enclaves (Barrington is hardly alone) want to encapsulate themselves and pretend that the rest of the world doesn’t exist.
Hopefully the STB will weigh the facts and study the figures from the point of view of the entire United States, not just the point of view of Barrington, IL.
Many years ago, when we were residing there, my then-teenage son referred to Illinois as, “Sick and loud.” Maybe he was on to something…
Chuck
bunch of NIMBY idiots
While I happen to agree on your assessment of the reporting of this story and also happen to be on the side of CN on this one, I also took offense at the comment you attributed to your then teen-aged son calling Illinois residents “Sick and loud”…being one of those residents I am wondering if your son was also one of those “Sick and loud” people.
Just to play devil’s advocate for a moment, the reality is that if one owns property and someone else does something with their property that diminishes the market value of your property – and the market is ruthless as ever in this regard, regardless of whatever arguments can be made that the market is “wrong” – it seems to me that the person whose property has diminished in value has the clear right to speak up about it. Maybe not prevail but at least speak up. You’re talking about real money here. And as usual the taxing authorities are the last to acknowledge if your property has diminished in value by lowering your assessed valuation and your taxes.
Dave Nelson
According to Yahoo! Maps I found 8 at grade crossings in the area of Barrington that the “J” currently has (if I’m looking at the right line) from Otis Rd in the SW to HWY 12/S Rand Road in Lake Zurich. Of those 8 there are 5 (Lake Cook Rd, N Hough St, HWY 14, 60/V67/Ela Rd, and HWY 12) that seem to be either major roadways or highways. Maybe a good compromise on CNs part would be to help with funding of overpasses on some of those major road AGCs.
While adjacent properties may be negatively affected by the CN takeover, I find it hard to believe that there are 5000 properties adjacent to the railroad in that town.
An historical review of traffic on the line would appear to be in order, particularly if it’s possible that the new arrangement will actually have equal or less traffic than before. Of course, NIMBY memory is fairly short.
And who’s to say that CN won’t just negotiate trackage rights and run the trains anyhow?
There is that, too.
I was at the hearing and stayed during the public comment for about an hour. Although they had student aids counting the people entering the gym, I doubt that there were more than 1000 seated during the public comment-that’s counting the children that were dragged along by the moms.
Up until WWII, Barrington and many of the towns along the EJ&E sat at the outer fringes of the Chicago metro area and existed mainly because rail commuter service offered a connection to Chicago. Seemingly, the farmland between the towns and beyond the circle of the J was a vast land that would certainly remain empty of human dwellings to the end of time. WRONG!
One would think that a population so oriented to the use of the automobile would want, even demand, that the streets and highways be built to handle the tremendous growth in vehicle traffic that has occured in the last half century. The problem is that the population elects government representatives who promise to “hold the line” or “cut” taxes, and then continuously remind their constituents that “we can’t afford to build the things you want”. Ironically, Barrington is in the center of one of the wealthiest parts of the Chicago area. (There is also an attitude prevelant in the Barrington area that keeping through highways to two lanes and blocking side streets from going through town will somehow limit population growth and traffic.) As a consequence, at least for Barrington and the surrounding towns, not only is through traffic impeded by the lack of highway capacity, but the problem becomes worse because traffic just from one side of town to the other most go on to the through streets for the part of the trip through the center of town.
The draft EIS clearly shows that the increase in the number of trains that the CN will run will severly impact traffic flows, and yes, raise the risk of emergency vehicles being blocked by trains. You can argue all you want that sin
Your point is well taken and in fact the local and area government reps spoke of the problem of lower tax collections due to the potential change in property values. The Barrington Village president also suggested a drop in sales tax receipts due to traffic problems keeping shoppers area from in town stores. As far as the property tax bill dropping, there is always hope. I understand there is a top secret lab working to genetically modify pigs to grow wings.
You may be correct about the number of area residents actually within the zone that will be impacted by increased train noise and vibration. However one important element of the local opposition is that at least 50% of the high school student population will have to cross the tracks to get to school. Can’t say that the kids will mind so much being late for school because of a train, but going home?
They have to cross the tracks NOW. They’ll just have to get up 3 minutes sooner in case of a train.
Barrington has nothing to worry about. President Obama is already on their side. I would say something about the irony of a Dem coming down on the side of the wealthy, but I won’t.
This may sound cold and uncaring of me to say but if you don’t want to put up with trains, don’t live by them. If you don’t want to listen to airplanes, don’t live near an airport. I’ve seen several instances across the country where new upscale condos and townhouses are being built in inner city areas right next to train tracks. Then the people that move into them complain about the trains. The same thing holds true for airports and the FAA. They are constantly fighting with people that keep moving into homes in the arrival/departure corridor.
I understand that some people may have been there a long time and that they don’t want increased rail traffic near them but they need to understand that time aside, they are there by choice and should understand that times can and probably will change and they need to accept the potential consequences if and when they happen.
Just remember, everyone wants a new power plant. They just don’t want it by their house. Everyone understands the need for hazardous materials yet no one wants them to go near where they live. People live everywhere so someone is always going to be affected by something. The best decision is ultimately the one that benefits the greater overall good rather than what conveniences or inconveniences a few.
Businesses and taxes are always a concern that is raised. The same thing has been holding true for the no smoling ordinances that are thankfully taking effect across the country more and more. Bar owners and those against the ordinances argue that revenues will go down which will hurt business and ultimately value. However this nevers proves true and businesses typically benefit. It’s all about what conveniences the one rather than the many that seems to get the most attention.
no kidding, most of the NIMBY’s crying from the plainfield area are in all the new sub divisions they built up along the the tracks in the last 5-6 years where old normantown road used to be, that and the town itself because they were dumb to try and extend the downtown area across the tracks that used to be at the edge of downtown [|(]
“It will be gone in a few years folks no worries”
Plainfield has it easy though the crossing is already on a bit of a hill should be easy for them to build an underpass lol
the Rt34 crossing in Aurora should be easy enough to do an underpass at too, not that any of these towns would ever consider that they probly thing the railroad should build a bridge over there precious roadway LOL!!!
100 years ago if the railroad were to get rid of a line going through a town the town would become a ghost town now its all “We have cars now we dont need you go away!” [sigh]
“Those tracks will be torn up soon” or so they said in Brookings, South Dakota, when developers built a mile of houses within 100 feet of the south side of what was then C&NW track.
That was in 1968. By as soon as 2012, there may be PRB CP coal trains rolling by on those same tracks.
Ironically, there was another town called Medary, 5-10 miles south of Brookings, when the track were laid. Most of the town, buildings and all, moved to what became Brookings. With 5 years, Medary was a ghost town.
I always find NIMBY events like this really interesting. If an STB approval wasn’t required for the CN-EJE transaction and the train traffic simply increased without any fanfare, chances are no one would even notice. Take, for example, Hinsdale IL, which irivals Barrington as an upscale suburb. There are well over a hundred trains a day that travel on on the BNSF main line through the middle of the town and it’s simply a part of the fabric of everyday life. What brings the NIMBY’s out of the woodwork is the fact that, under STB rules, the applicants and STB notify everyone and their mothers-in-law and thus galvanize everyone.
Someone else in this string mentioned the possiblity of CN getting trackage rights over EJE. CN (WC) already has trackage rights over the north end of EJE through Barrington. CN (GTW) also has trackage rights over the south end of EJE. I’m not sure off the top of my head where they begin, but I think it’s at Eola. And UP has trackage rights over EJE all the way from Waukegan to Joliet, although it’s currently not making much use of the rights on the north end. But, of course, it could change it’s mind about that tomorrow, and there’s nothing anyone could do about it. For that matter, EJE could enter into haulage or other interline arrangements for runthrough trains with CN any other railroad as long as they changed crews near the junctions, and there’s nothing anyone could do about that either. The reason I mention all of this is that EJE - particularly on the north end - is currently a very underutilized railraod and, if this merger does not go through, will clearly be looking for other ways to get a return on the value of its assets.
One other interesting factoid. IF UP had not acquired CNW in 1995, CNW would have acquired EJE.
BNSF also has trackage rights from Eola to Joliet to get from the BN side to the ATSF side. BNSF currently runs several trains a day down the line, however, EJ&E agreed several years ago to let BNSF run a certain amount of trains, and BNSF isn’t even fully using the trackage rights yet. Traffic through Joliet is now up to around 20 trains a day on the EJ&E due to UP and BNSF run-throughs, as well as EJ&E’s own trains. If the STB doesn’t allow the merge there is no doubt traffic on the EJ&E will increase anyway because I’m sure CN, as well as BNSF and UP will eventually increase the amount of run-throughs on the line. With BNSF’s new proposed intermodal yard in Joliet, that means more trains will have to use the EJ&E. Otherwise they would have to go down the Barstow Sub to the Cameron connection then come back up on the Chillicothe Subdivision, wasting time. The EJ&E is a huge shortcut for BNSF. The problem I see coming if CN gets the EJ&E is that the line from Eola to Joliet is projected to have over 40 trains a day after the merger, which would make it a lot harder for BNSF to be able to add trains to the new intermodal terminal. CN might have some capacity issues as it is on that part of the line with the existing BNSF trains going on and off the line as well as UP and CN trains.
Falcon48 we’re actually up to around 150 trains per day on the BNSF mainline through Hinsdale and Downers Grove. Hinsdale has a very nice upscale sandwich shop in part of the local depot which seems to do a nice business in spite of the train volume. The only grade separation in Hinsdale is a one-lane creosote timber bridge just west of The Highlands station. It’s been saved for access to Hinsdale Hospital from the south. The next overpass is about 3 miles west at Route 83.
Historically, Barrington’s biggest congestion problem has been Metra which is up to around 65 trains per day through Barrington. However, it should be noted that both Barrington and Lake County have repeatedly refused offers of state money for major highway improvements in the region, including an extension of I-355. They seemed determined to stay comfortably stuck in the 1950’s.
I grew up in Naperville and the Route 34/Ogden Avenue crossing was a problem 30 years ago, but no one ever seemed to do anything about it. I also have a 1970 Official Guide which shows 8 scheduled trains per day on the EJ&E between Waukegan and Joliet, plus a pair of locals and the occasional unit train of coal moving to Waukegan.
The Illinois Commerce Commission says we have over 1,700 public highway grade crossings in northeast Illinois, that delay about half a million folks per day, generating around 11,000 hours of actual delay time. So this sort of begs the question, what’s the big deal?
Personally, let CN stay on it’s current lines. The reason CN is doing this is to get away from taking part in the CREATE project with the other carriers. This means they will get off on the cheap, and leave the other carriers holding the bag.
If it were my community, I would be fighting CN for more mitigation projects, on their dime. This is not caused by the taxpayers, but a private company. Thus, the ball lays in their court, not the tax payers.
A few random comments & replys… (Disclaimer: I’m too lazy to check facts this morning so if I’m a little off…)
-
The biggest gripe that I have heard so far are the traffic issues - the extra trains are going to make the morning & evening rush hours even worse. The “J” crosses a lot of railroads at grade and most of these lines have Metra on them, including Barrington. If there isn’t already a curfew in place for the morning and evening rush periods, I’m sure that Metra will ask for one. (And lets not forget that the CN/Metra North Central Line already has curfews in place.) That should help the kids get to high school in Barrington but could keep traffic tied up on Rt 34 in Aurora.
-
CN is a scheduled railroad, right? Schedule most of the trains to run at night.
-
If CN can’t buy it they’re still going to use it… Trackage rights. I don’t think a lot of residents who live along the “J” understand this part. Trains now, or trains later. They’re still going to get the trains on the “J”.
-
150 trains on the BNSF East End (Racetrack)?? I know my fact checker is on the fritz this morning but I know that’s way too high - @80 Metra (M-F), 8 Amtrak & @ maybe 25 freights (most to/from the Northwest with the bulk of Transcon traffic on the ex-SF). That will get @110 a day with a lot of those being Metra dinkies in the morning and evening rush periods.
-
The CREATE project has been around for years but the money for a lot of the proposed projects hasn’t been forthcoming. Only a few projects have been completed in the six, or so, years that CREATE has been around. The city of Chicago (ok, Hiz Honor Daley) wants the St. Charles Airline removed. That’s CN’s north/south route through Chicago. CN doesn’t want to buy the “J” to get away from any obligations with CREATE. They just want to get through - or around - Chicago!
CC