'Monster train' fears rising in suburbs

'Monster train' fears rising in suburbs

There are 666 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Mar 10, 2009, titled 'Monster train' fears rising in suburbs. In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

Amid fears of monster trains running through their communities, residents saw the first two Canadian National Railway trains roll down a suburban line Tuesday, one of them a nearly mile-long freight that will ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

First Prev
of 34
Next Last
beagle

Canada

#672 Jun 6, 2009
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>We want CN to make Barrington whole, that is no increase in danger, delay, noise and disruption. We want CN to arrange mittigation of crossings so vital services are not delayed. CN is not something public like a highway. CN is a private for profit enterprise that could end up costing lives.
Your logic is flawed.
The railroad tracks and the land under them is privately owned. The railroad is a legal enterprise. Its owners have paid property taxes, state taxes, and federal taxes since they were installed. In the case of the EJ&E, for more than 100 years.
As such, they have the right to equal treatment before the law with other property owners.
The points where public roadways cross railroad tracks (and the privately owned railroad land underneath them) are negotiated with the owners (i.e. the railroad). A railroad is not responsible for building a roadway across their property. They merely provide a community with a specified and agreed upon passageway. The railroad still owns the land.
If you legally own and have remitted taxes on a property (house, farm, condo, etc.)you have the constitutional right to its continued use, enjoyment, and the transfer of those rights to a subsequent purchaser. So does a railroad.
If your governments have not provided its citizens with adequate road infrastructure, school system, medical facilities, airports, public transit systems, armed forces, police force, sewage treatment, fresh water, or whatever--that, is the fault of your elected officials, not a railroad.
A railroad, like you, pays taxes. It does not build roads.
beagle
Gramps

Lockport, IL

#673 Jun 7, 2009
I think that it should be noted that CN has not refused to allow highway overpasses or underpasses to be built across their right-of-way. CN, like every other railroad, welcomes and encourages the elimination of at-grade highway crossings. What the railroads won't do is bear the entire expense of designing and building them.
Here where I live, the city is considering replacing an at-grade street crossing over CN's Joliet sub-division with a flyover. The preliminary estimates pegs the cost of this project at around $8 million; if CN comes up with 5% of the total cost, we would be delighted. Its up to the city to come up with the rest of the money if we ever want to get it done.

Since: Nov 07

Detroit, MI

#674 Jun 8, 2009
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>We want CN to make Barrington whole, that is no increase in danger, delay, noise and disruption. We want CN to arrange mittigation of crossings so vital services are not delayed. CN is not something public like a highway. CN is a private for profit enterprise that could end up costing lives. The STB rubber-stamped the deal without seriously considering residents concerns. We feel we have been wronged and we will continue to fight CN in the courts and in congress! We have every right to do so! We refuse to roll over and play dead!
CN has been more than generous to the communities that followed the STB suggestion that they negotiate with CN for favorable mitigation. Barrington and a few other localities decided against all reasonable sensibility to fight this, mainly because their elected officials decided for whatever reason to forgo logical expansion of their road infrastructure over the years to accommodate additional traffic volume due to the very growth that they themselves fostered.
The STB went way beyond their legal obligation when they lengthened the discovery process to accommodate these communities when the merger should have fallen under the minor transaction guidelines. The opportunity has now been lost to gain additional consideration from the CN for these communities which, in a very real sense, gambled on very long odds that they would gain from their obtuseness.
You and your elected officials gambled and they lost, time to move on.
Its now time to save some of the tax money you are funneling into your attorney's cabin cruisers and spend it where it will do the most good; for improvements in your local community. The few trains that you gain from this transaction will be but a minor inconvenience, and won't even be noticed by most.
Sal

United States

#675 Jun 12, 2009
JBChitown wrote:
<quoted text>
We'll just have to wait and see...As my earlier comment to Beagle notes...these things are not decided in days or weeks, they take time. The 'hardliners', as you call them, could very well come out the victors.
Why do you NIMBYS feel there should be two sets of rules, one for you and one for everyone else?
My GGGeneration

Schaumburg, IL

#676 Jun 13, 2009
Gramps wrote:
I think that it should be noted that CN has not refused to allow highway overpasses or underpasses to be built across their right-of-way. CN, like every other railroad, welcomes and encourages the elimination of at-grade highway crossings. What the railroads won't do is bear the entire expense of designing and building them.
Here where I live, the city is considering replacing an at-grade street crossing over CN's Joliet sub-division with a flyover. The preliminary estimates pegs the cost of this project at around $8 million; if CN comes up with 5% of the total cost, we would be delighted. Its up to the city to come up with the rest of the money if we ever want to get it done.
Right. Every RR would love to eliminate crossings because if nothing else, it would eliminate the potential for a collision and resulting lawsuit. If I were in the cab of a locomotive, I don't think I would be too concerned about hitting a Lexus in Barrington, but hitting a 20-yard dump coming from one of the gravel pits in McHenry county might not be such a good thing.
dab

Winnipeg, Canada

#677 Jun 14, 2009
Hammer Head wrote:
I personally love the fact that a foreign owned company gets to run freight thru the U.S.however and whenever it wants!
It is US owned and run by Yankees so where is the Foreign come into effect?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 34
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Canadian National Railway Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Spadina coach yard limited edition print Apr 9 Joe 1
News The CNR viaduct in Port Hope, Ont. was built in... Mar '17 Pierre Berton was... 1
Diversity is White Genocide Mar '17 Thomas 2
News CSX to Hire Hunter Harrison as CEO Mar '17 Thomas 1
News CN strike could affect GO Transit service on Tu... Mar '17 Thomas 1
E. Hunter Harrison Earns $29,281 PER DAY !!! (C... (Feb '07) Feb '17 taggart 167
News Canadian National suspends former CEO Hunter Ha... (Jan '12) Oct '16 Anonamous 8
More from around the web