Barrington reopens argument on CN rail underpass

Oct 25, 2011 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Daily Herald

Barrington is touting new evidence in its long-running argument that Canadian National should pay a hefty portion of the cost to build a road underpass where Northwest Highway crosses the railway's tracks in the village.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 16 of16
beagle

Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Oct 25, 2011
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Here is the link to the recent submission to the STB by Barrington Village: http://www.stb.dot.gov/filings/all.nsf/ba7f93...

Notable, the State of Illinois first approached Barrington in 1993 about improving Hwy 14. Barrington councils consistently vetoed any improvement right up to and during their failed appeal last year before the Washington Circuit Court.

This very simple and inexpensive study should have been done and presented to the STB in 2007. Instead, the citizens of Barrington got political posturing and a bill for $2.5 million in legal fees.

Oh, and then you re-elected Karen Darch.

beagle
dave

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Nov 2, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Beagle do us a favor and concern yourself with issues in Vancouver or are you a shill for CN ?
Beagle Butt

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Nov 2, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

1. The original traffic study was a piece of @#$%. 2. Stuck in gridlock for hours once when one of these massive trains broke down - just as well it wasn't a trip to ER.
3. CN makes billions in profits - they can afford 85% of $69m. That probably equates to a bonus for one of their suits.
4. Darch took on the powers that be - good for her and thats why she was reelected Beagle butt
beagle

Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Nov 6, 2011
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Beagle Butt,
Shame on you, pretending that you are familiar with "the original traffic study" --you haven't read it and don't know where to find it. Here is the link to the July 25, 2008 Draft Environmental Impact Study (DEIS) by the STB.
http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom....

I suggest the following reading:
Executive Summary -- Section 3.03 Transportation --Section 4.02 Safety -- Section 4.03 Transportation -- Chapter 6.

Have a read. Karen Darch spent $2.5 Million of Barrington Taxpayer's money fighting this document--and got nowhere (except re-elected). She should have started with the simple $80k study I provided in the first posting in this thread and then spent $100k on a legal presentation.

Tell me, isn't ignorance bliss -- and its own reward?

beagle
Dave

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Nov 8, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Beagle,

You need a big sign saying :

"STOOGE"

"All comments have been paid for by Canadian National".
beagle

Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Nov 14, 2011
 

Judged:

4

4

2

Dave wrote:
Beagle,
You need a big sign saying :
"STOOGE"
"All comments have been paid for by Canadian National".
Dave

You are just being silly. Railroads own the land underneath their tracks. They pay property taxes to the local governments for the land under their trackage. It is the public roads and streets that cross the railroad property - not the railroad that crosses the roads.

The "merger" between CN & EJE (or any other US railroad transaction) is regulated by the STB. The STB is affiliated with but, independent of the US DOT. Decisions are made based on the rule of law -- not popular opinion or media manipulation.
The STB acts like a court of law. Their decisions and the precendents they utilize are all part of the public record and published on the STB website.

Your local politicians knew all this and have collected property taxes from the EJ&E for over 100 years.

Finally, after wasting 4 years and $2.5M of Barrington Village taxpayer's money Karen Darch (a lawyer) hired an "expert" who crafted a responsible approach,
And no, I am not a "stooge" of CN. I am the former owner of a shortline railroad.

beagle
Dave

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Nov 18, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

No waste of time or money as you have claimed Beagle

- a decent analysis has been done by Civiltech which uncovered numerous material errors in previous study.
- a Federal grant has been awarded as there is a recognition that a grade separation is needed as it is a busy Federal highway
- new STB filing with more robust evidence
included

They paid for other grade separations down the line so why not this one ?

Beagle it still mystifies me how someone who doesn't live here and who claims not be a shill for CN can be this concerned
beagle

Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Nov 19, 2011
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Dave

The CN/EJE merger will be used as a case study for MBA and community planning schools on how to NOT maximize the financial mitigation of a community.

The official position of Barrington Village was presented in their filing to the STB on Sept 30, 2008.

http://docs.stb.dot.gov/...

Notable: page 3 No-Action Alternative (block deal) page 20 Mitigation (CN build/maintain trench 5914 feet through Barrington Village)

Barrington's position did not change until their most recent filing (October 2011).

CN did not require "shills". The CN/EJE merger was about the private property rights of a railroad vs the media and electoral manipulation of a Village council.

My interest mystifies you? I read the STB filings and decisions regularly--just as a lawyer, engineer, or doctor would peruse their respective "trade" journals. Additionally, on a much smaller scale, I often had to deal with the misperceptions of the public about railroads.

beagle

beagle

Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Nov 24, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

So Dave, are you still there?

You asked: "They paid for other grade separations down the line so why not this one ?" and the answer is--Barrington Village never asked for a grade separation at the Hwy 59 and 14 level crossings. Barrington sought to block the transaction outright.

All that talk of deserved mitigation by Barrington Village--was political "doublespeak".

Karen Darch's strategy (elected by 845 votes of a total of 1600 cast in 2005)was to block/prohibit the sale of a legal tax paying business(EJ&E)owned by US Steel to another legal business (CN).

Her position lacked any legal substance.

So, why didn't you challenge Darch's strategy? After all, it is your town--not mine. You are the one suffering the inconvienence and delays--not me.

Learn the facts, do your own due diligence--if you want more info--just ask.

beagle
KAH

Prescott, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Nov 25, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Just asking ?

CN is a transportation services provider.

If they by order of Surfboard build, lets call it the stand alone bridge/culvert (SAB)would they not then be allowed a 180 percent return on their investment ?

Illinois state music coins rattling in the hopper.

Also as their Civiltech consultant more or less said the METRA/UP/EJ&E crossing first with Barrington a big contributor as they stand to benefit the most at all their crossings.
Lower the UP/METRA 4 or 5 foot and raise the (EJ&E)
about 25 foot. Just like the old (IC) South.

Kind of tacky (CN) not thanking tricky Dickie Durbin for his gift of the Divine Memorial Bridge to nowhere (sorry Goose Lake). AKA (Bridge 552)

Got to think the money spent on this unneeded piece of pork would have built several of these need a pack or a six pack in a hurry projects.

As for down the line look a little farther like (CSX)Garrett Indiana or (UP) Kate Skelly to see what a project should cost without the (IDOT) Governor Bagonovich factor added in.

Those federal funds are my taxes after all.

KAH
KAH

Prescott, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jan 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pretty much says it all see footnotes 12 & 13.
http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.... .

KAH
KAH

Prescott, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jan 30, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

OK, for those don't want to look it up.

[12] See Friends of Sierra R.R., Inc. v. ICC, 881 F.2d 663, 667 (9th Cir. 1989)(“newly raised evidence is not the same as new evidence” for purposes of reopening an administratively final decision)(emphasis in original); Canadian Nat’l Ry.– Control – Ill. Cent. Corp., 6 S.T.B. 344, 350 (2002)(“‘new evidence’ is not newly presented evidence, but rather is evidence that could not have been foreseen or planned for at the time of the original proceeding”).
2.5 mill worth of planning anybody.
beagle

Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jan 30, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

KAH

I had looked up the citations you had listed on over the weekend. It is good to see someone else reads the primary documents.

beagle
Duke

Lockport, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Nov 10, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

The Surface Transportation Board has denied Barrington's request for Canadian National to pay for a grade separation at US Highway 14 and the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern railroad tracks. the STB decision stated that Barrington provided no new evidence that would support approval of their petition.
beagle

Mexico

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Nov 18, 2012
 
The Nov 7, 2012 ruling by the STB

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.... $file/42285.pdf
beagle

Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jan 9, 2013
 
The saga continues. On Dec 31,2012, the Village of Barrington applied for a judicial review of the STB ruling.

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom....

beagle

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 16 of16
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
Algonquin Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Algonquin Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Algonquin People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Algonquin News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Algonquin
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••