McHenry County Blog

I’ve reached the conclusion that U.S. Representative Melissa Bean’s 8th congressional district seat can be “had.”

The latest to concur is Barrington-born Joe Walsh.  In the press release below, he announces the launch of an exploratory committee.

Joe Walsh Launches Exploratory Committee for IL CD-8

BARRINGTON, IL – Long-time free market activist Joe Walsh has launched an exploratory committee to determine whether he should become a candidate for the Republican nomination for the 8th District Congressional seat currently held by Democrat Melissa Bean.

According to Walsh,

“Voters are incredibly angry and frustrated by Melissa Bean’s performance over the past couple of years. 

“She voted for the failed stimulus package and Cap and Trade legislation and has voiced support for the Public Option in healthcare. 

“Now, when her constituents want their voices heard the most, she ignores their wishes by refusing to hold open town hall meetings in the district.

“The stakes are too high in this election.  We need to a put a check on the one-party rule in Washington that is bankrupting our country. 

“It is absolutely essential that we return more Republicans to Congress as a counter-balance to this out-of-control majority. 

“Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that any of the announced GOP candidates in the 8th district race has what it takes to defeat Melissa Bean.  If voters continue to tell me that it will take a different kind of candidate to win this race, I’ll run.”

Mr. Walsh has spent the last few months meeting with party officials, conservative activists, potential donors, and 8th district voters in an effort to assess his chances. 

His candidacy has been warmly received in the district and he has been invited to Washington D.C. this week to meet with Rep. Kevin McCarthy, Recruiting Chairman for the National Republican Congressional Committee. 

The NRCC has targeted Illinois’ 8th District as a potential chance to pick up a seat and is interested in fielding the most competitive candidate possible.

“The fact of the matter is, a competitive challenge to Melissa Bean will cost at least $2-3 million in the general election,” said Walsh.  “None of the announced candidates has demonstrated the ability to field that kind of campaign.  I think that my team and I can.”

Walsh is a native of Barrington, Illinois and he plans to move back to his hometown when he launches his campaign. 

He began his career as a teacher and a social worker before becoming a fundraiser for a number of charitable and political causes. 

Today, he works for a boutique private equity firm, raising investment capital for new and expanding businesses.  He believes that his background in raising money will be one of his greatest assets as a candidate.

He also brings the experience of running for elective office before.  In 1996 he challenged long-time incumbent Sidney Yates for the 9th Congressional District seat and in 1998 he ran for the Illinois Assembly.  According to campaign advisor and conservative activist James Leahy,

“Running for office is like learning a trade.  Having had that experience in the past will make Joe a much more effective candidate in this race.”

Mr. Walsh holds a Masters Degree in Public Policy from the University of Chicago and a Bachelor of Arts Degree in English from the University of Iowa.  He and his wife Helene have five children.

More information about Mr. Walsh and his campaign can be found on his exploratory committee’s website at Joe Walsh for Congress.

Here are photos that Drew Veeneman took Sunday at the Young Republicans regional candidates’ day in Barrington.

Adam Andrzejewski, candidate for the Republican nomination for governor. Andrzejewski prospered in the private sector. His web site touts “Adam for Illinois.”

Bob Schillerstrom, candidate for the Republican nomination for governor. His web site touts “Bob for Illinois.” It emphasizes his opposition to the video poker (read “slot machine”) law supported by oh-so-many Republican legislators, but not their constituents. It does not emphasize his role in breaking suburban unity with regard to the Regional Transportation Authority resulting in tripling the RTA sales tax.

Bill Brady, candidate for the Republican nomination for governor. His web site uses his last name.

Robert Zadek is running for the Republican nomination for the United States Senate. Here is the Rockford resident’s web site.

Paul Mitchell is a candidate for the Republican nomination for state representative who is running against incumbent 62nd District Sandy Cole in Lake County. His web site is headlined, “Pro Life, Pro Liberty, Pro Happiness.”

It was a hot day, as can been seen by looking at the candidates.

The band Clone Radio is playing above. Also appearing was Bros & Joes’ band.

You can see the banners for the Lake and McHenry County Young Republicans in this shot of the stage.

Below are mentions of Barrington, Illinois, in the Surface Transportation Board’s decision to allow Canadian National to buy the Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway.

While Barrington is not in McHenry County, lots of folks use Route 14 to commute to and from the area. I can find nothing that would encourage people to use Route 14 after Canadian National starts running its freight trains on the EJ&E.

Many also use Metra to commute through Barrington. Cooperation seems to be encouraged to make sure the trains run on time. I do not see a mandate, however.

There is also nothing in the way of improvements that are required for the Route 59 commuter route.

Barrington residents did win the whistle blowing fight. Its current “quiet zones” will continue, as I read the document from which the excerpted below.

The Board approves, with certain conditions, the acquisition of control by Canadian National Railway Company and Grand Trunk Corporation of EJ&E West Company, a wholly owned, noncarrier subsidiary of Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway Company.

= = = =

Page 21 & 22 – West Chicago, IL and Barrington, IL Interlockings. Metra notes two major locations of special concern where Metra trains cross the EJ&E at grade:

(1) at West Chicago, IL Interlocking, where Metra trains operating over UP’s West Line (UP-W Line) cross EJ&E; and
(2) at the Barrington, IL

Interlocking, where Metra commuter trains operating over UP’s Northwest Line (UP-NW line) cross EJ&E. These trains are operated by UP pursuant to a Purchase of Service Agreement with Metra. Metra states that it seeks to upgrade the UP-W Line service.

EJ&E controls the interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington. Metra states that EJ&E has been vigilant in minimizing freight train interference with Metra commuter trains at those locations. Metra asserts that the potential increase in EJ&E freight traffic, as well as the substantial increase in train lengths, could threaten efficient commuter rail operations crossing this line. Moreover, Metra asserts that any delays to UP freight trains crossing the interlockings could result in dire consequences to Metra’s commuter rail service, as both lines rely upon intense coordination between commuter and freight train traffic.

Accordingly, Metra requests that approval of the proposed transaction be conditioned on the control of the West Chicago and Barrington interlockings being transferred from EJ&E to Metra as of the date of consummation of CN’s control of EJ&E. In the event that control of those interlockings is not transferred to Metra, Metra states that the following alternative conditions are required:

(1) CN shall cause EJ&E dispatchers in control of the interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington to impose a curfew for freight train operation over those interlockings during peak periods of Metra’s commuter operations;

(2) CN shall cause EJ&EW dispatchers in control of the interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington to give priority to Metra commuter trains over EJ&EW freight trains at those interlockings during all non-peak hours and avoid any undue interference with the commuter service; and

(3) CN shall cause EJ&EW dispatchers in control of the interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington to take due account of UP freight traffic in protecting Metra commuter trains at those crossings.

CN strongly opposes these proposed conditions and asserts that adequate capacity exists for Metra trains and that any additional and longer trains will not be running over and sharing UP lines, but merely cross the same diamonds as UP lines.

Metra’s Requested Reporting Condition. Lastly, Metra requests that CN cause EJ&EW to report to the Board regarding the effect of the foregoing conditions on delay of Metra commuter trains at West Chicago and Barrington. The reports sought by Metra would be filed at 6-month intervals for a period of 10 years, beginning 6 months after the date of consummation of CN control of EJ&E. Metra would have the right to reply to any such report. Metra would have the Board expressly retain jurisdiction over the subject matter of the conditions during that 10-year period to take any action that might be required in the public interest.

The Board will not impose Metra’s requested conditions concerning the STAR line, the Southeast Service line, or the West Chicago and Barrington interlockings, because they are unrelated to the competitive effects of the proposed transaction. Several of the issues that Metra raises are typically dealt with through negotiations and contracts between railroads. Metra has offered no reasons why the combined CN/EJ&E would be less inclined to negotiate than EJ&E.

The Board encourages Metra and CN to negotiate reasonable commercial agreements concerning the STAR line, the issues surrounding the introduction of the Southeast Service through Chicago Heights interlocking, and the interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington.
= = = =

Page 23 – The Board further notes that many of the concerns surrounding the proposed STAR line and Southeast Service have been addressed in the EIS prepared by SEA.41 As a voluntary mitigation measure, applicants state that they will operate the West Chicago and BarringtonInterlockings according to the current agreements under which EJ&E operates, which require EJ&E to give priority to passenger trains over either UP or EJ&E freight trains. Applicants also commit to working with Metra to explore all options for service on the proposed STAR Line, including use of the EJ&E rail line. The timing and implementation of the STAR Line service remain subject to numerous variables, including securing government funding, but applicants are committed to continuing discussions with Metra on the STAR line. Lastly, applicants commit to complying with any written and executed curfew agreements that are now in effect regarding operations affecting passenger or commuter train service.

= = = =
Page 39 – In addition, there is mitigation requiring applicants to install a closed-circuit television (CCTV) system with video cameras to facilitate emergency service response at seven locations in Illinois and Indiana. 84 The Board’s mitigation also includes noise and vibration mitigation, including assisting Barrington to maintain its existing quiet zone85 and vibration mitigation for Fermilab in Batavia, IL. Mitigation related to school and pedestrian safety, including mitigation requiring appropriate fencing, also is imposed. Other conditions address the potential effects of the transaction-related construction activities. There also will be a 5-year environmental reporting and monitoring period condition requiring applicants to file quarterly reports on their progress in implementing the Board’s mitigation conditions and also to notify the Board if applicants substantially depart from their traffic projections on the five existing CN lines through Chicago on more than a short-term, temporary basis. This monitoring and reporting condition will allow the Board to take appropriate action if there is a material change in the facts or circumstances upon which we relied in imposing specific environmental mitigation.
= = = =
Page 43, Footnote 95 – In its updated analysis, SEA used the same three criteria thresholds to determine if highway/rail at-grade crossings would be substantially affected:

(1) crossing LOS,
(2) effects on queue length, and
(3) cumulative delay for

all vehicles delayed at a crossing in a 24-hour period.In some cases, SEA has found it adequate to use only LOS, which determines the effects of a proposed transaction at a single point along a roadway at the affected crossing. Crossing LOS, however, does not take into account the effects of a proposal on mobility in a community or region. There are many locations along the EJ&E line where roadways are important to regional mobility, such as Hough Street (IL 59) in Barrington, IL, an important commuter route in the region. Therefore, SEA used queue length and total vehicle delay, in addition to LOS, to fully understand the effects of the transaction on mobility. See Final EIS at 4-7 to 4-8.
= = = =

Page 44, Footnote 97 – The eight crossings needing some form of mitigation are: Old McHenry Road, Hawthorn Woods; Main Street, Lake Zurich; Hough Street, Barrington; Ogden Avenue, Aurora; Plainfield-Naperville Road, Plainfield; Woodruff Road, Joliet; Washington Street, Joliet; and Lincoln Highway, Lynwood. The five crossings not needing mitigation are: Diamond Lake Road, Mundelein; Montgomery Road/83rd Street, Aurora; Western Avenue, Park Forest; Chicago Road, Chicago Heights; and Broad Street, Griffith. See Final EIS, Figure 2.5-1, at 2-34. A thorough discussion of why the Board is excluding five of the substantially affected crossings from any mitigation can be found in section 2.5 of the Final EIS.
= = = =

Page 45 – The Board will also impose mitigation requiring traffic advisory signs for four of the other substantially affected at-grade crossings to alleviate the potential to block an adjacent intersection because of increased queue length.

Footnote 100 – While numerous commenters requested grade separations at other substantially affected crossings, or questioned how effective traffic advisory signs could be, we agree with SEA’s analysis in the Final EIS explaining why a grade separation (or other mitigation such as requests to place the EJ&E line in a trench in Barrington) would not be practical or warranted at those crossings.101 See Final EIS at 4-12, 4-14, 4-18, and 4-22. No mitigation related to roadway modifications (including closures) will be imposed, but as SEA explained (Final EIS at 4-16), where, as in Barrington, IL, roadway modifications could improve conditions, nothing in this decision prevents the community from negotiating with the applicants for roadway modifications.
= = = =

Page 45, Footnote 101 – The Board will also impose mitigation requiring traffic advisory signs for four of the other substantially affected at-grade crossings to alleviate the potential to block an adjacent intersection because of increased queue length.100 While numerous commenters requested grade separations at other substantially affected crossings, or questioned how effective traffic advisory signs could be, we agree with SEA’s analysis in the Final EIS explaining why a grade separation (or other mitigation such as requests to place the EJ&E line in a trench in Barrington) would not be practical or warranted at those crossings.101 See Final EIS at 4-12, 4-14, 4-18, and 4-22. No mitigation related to roadway modifications (including closures) will be imposed, but as SEA explained (Final EIS at 4-16), where, as in Barrington, IL, roadway modifications could improve conditions, nothing in this decision prevents the community from negotiating with the applicants for roadway modifications.
= = = =

Page 49 – Noise and Vibration. As explained in the Final EIS, applicants have proposed voluntary noise mitigation that would result in meaningful and appropriate noise reduction (see VM-3 through VM-5 and VM-77 through VM-83), which include constructing noise control devices such as noise barriers, installing vegetation or berms, or installing enhanced warning devices to allow communities to achieve quiet zone requirements. Also, the Board has imposed additional noise mitigation that requires applicants to consult with affected communities to identify locations where wheel squeal is considered a nuisance. The Board is also imposing a quiet zone condition for Barrington, noise mitigation for transaction-related construction activities, and vibration mitigation for Fermilab. Thus, the concerns raised about noise and vibration have been appropriately addressed.

Page 51 – Biological Resources. The Board’s mitigation requires applicants to designate a local resource agency liaison to work closely with Federal, state, and local natural and water resource agencies, for 5 years from the effective date of the Board’s final decision to ensure that adaptive management strategies are developed to protect the area’s threatened and endangered species habitat and sensitive ecological resources, such as Cuba marsh and the Lake Renwick heron rookery, near Barrington. See conditions 29-33. In particular, the Board’s mitigation requires applicants to work with relevant natural resource stakeholder groups, forest preserve districts, and Federal and state agencies, including USFWS, to establish, and fund for a 5-year period following this decision, appropriate monitoring programs to identify baseline conditions and post-transaction conditions in areas adjacent to forest preserves and designated natural areas for species of concern to these groups. See condition 30.
= = = =

Page 64 – VM 38. Applicants shall operate the key interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington, Illinois, according to the current agreements under which EJ&E operates. Those agreements require EJ&E to give priority to passenger trains over either UP or EJ&E freight trains (Applicants 2008k).
= = = =

Page 75 – Quiet Zones

Applicants shall work with Barrington, Illinois, to determine which improvements would be necessary for the City to maintain its quiet zone designation, should the transaction cause it to fall out of compliance with FRA regulations. The existing Barrington Quiet Zone includes the highway/rail at-grade crossings at Lake/Cook Road, Otis Road, Penny Road, Old Sutton Road, Shoe Factory Road, Spaulding Road, and West Bartlett Road. For 3 years from the effective date of the Board’s final decision, Applicants shall fund reasonable improvements FRA deems necessary to maintain the existing quiet zone.
= = = =

Page 76 – 15) Applicants shall coordinate with IDOT and the appropriate counties and affected communities to develop a program to install traffic advisory signs on roadway ROW at certain public highway/rail at-grade crossings along the EJ&E rail line. These signs shall clearly advise motorists not to block intersections, and the format and lettering of these signs shall comply with FHWA’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. These signs shall be in place within a year of the effective date of the Board’s final decision, subject to the approval of the coordinating agencies, and shall be located near the following intersections:

1. Old McHenry Road/Midlothian Road, Hawthorn Woods, Illinois
2. Main Street/IL 22, Lake Zurich, Illinois
3. Hough Street (IL 59)/Northwest Highway (US 14), Barrington, Illinois
4. d.Plainfield-Naperville Road/IL 59, Plainfield, Illinois

= = = =

Below are mentions of Barrington, Illinois, in the Surface Transportation Board’s decision to allow Canadian National to buy the Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway.

While Barrington is not in McHenry County, lots of folks use Route 14 to commute to and from the area. I can find nothing that would encourage people to use Route 14 after Canadian National starts running its freight trains on the EJ&E.

Many also use Metra to commute through Barrington. Cooperation seems to be encouraged to make sure the trains run on time. I do not see a mandate, however.

There is also nothing in the way of improvements that are required for the Route 59 commuter route.

Barrington residents did win the whistle blowing fight. Its current “quiet zones” will continue, as I read the document from which the excerpted below.

The Board approves, with certain conditions, the acquisition of control by Canadian National Railway Company and Grand Trunk Corporation of EJ&E West Company, a wholly owned, noncarrier subsidiary of Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway Company.

= = = =

Page 21 & 22 – West Chicago, IL and Barrington, IL Interlockings. Metra notes two major locations of special concern where Metra trains cross the EJ&E at grade:

(1) at West Chicago, IL Interlocking, where Metra trains operating over UP’s West Line (UP-W Line) cross EJ&E; and
(2) at the Barrington, IL

Interlocking, where Metra commuter trains operating over UP’s Northwest Line (UP-NW line) cross EJ&E. These trains are operated by UP pursuant to a Purchase of Service Agreement with Metra. Metra states that it seeks to upgrade the UP-W Line service.

EJ&E controls the interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington. Metra states that EJ&E has been vigilant in minimizing freight train interference with Metra commuter trains at those locations. Metra asserts that the potential increase in EJ&E freight traffic, as well as the substantial increase in train lengths, could threaten efficient commuter rail operations crossing this line. Moreover, Metra asserts that any delays to UP freight trains crossing the interlockings could result in dire consequences to Metra’s commuter rail service, as both lines rely upon intense coordination between commuter and freight train traffic.

Accordingly, Metra requests that approval of the proposed transaction be conditioned on the control of the West Chicago and Barrington interlockings being transferred from EJ&E to Metra as of the date of consummation of CN’s control of EJ&E. In the event that control of those interlockings is not transferred to Metra, Metra states that the following alternative conditions are required:

(1) CN shall cause EJ&E dispatchers in control of the interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington to impose a curfew for freight train operation over those interlockings during peak periods of Metra’s commuter operations;

(2) CN shall cause EJ&EW dispatchers in control of the interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington to give priority to Metra commuter trains over EJ&EW freight trains at those interlockings during all non-peak hours and avoid any undue interference with the commuter service; and

(3) CN shall cause EJ&EW dispatchers in control of the interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington to take due account of UP freight traffic in protecting Metra commuter trains at those crossings.

CN strongly opposes these proposed conditions and asserts that adequate capacity exists for Metra trains and that any additional and longer trains will not be running over and sharing UP lines, but merely cross the same diamonds as UP lines.

Metra’s Requested Reporting Condition. Lastly, Metra requests that CN cause EJ&EW to report to the Board regarding the effect of the foregoing conditions on delay of Metra commuter trains at West Chicago and Barrington. The reports sought by Metra would be filed at 6-month intervals for a period of 10 years, beginning 6 months after the date of consummation of CN control of EJ&E. Metra would have the right to reply to any such report. Metra would have the Board expressly retain jurisdiction over the subject matter of the conditions during that 10-year period to take any action that might be required in the public interest.

The Board will not impose Metra’s requested conditions concerning the STAR line, the Southeast Service line, or the West Chicago and Barrington interlockings, because they are unrelated to the competitive effects of the proposed transaction. Several of the issues that Metra raises are typically dealt with through negotiations and contracts between railroads. Metra has offered no reasons why the combined CN/EJ&E would be less inclined to negotiate than EJ&E.

The Board encourages Metra and CN to negotiate reasonable commercial agreements concerning the STAR line, the issues surrounding the introduction of the Southeast Service through Chicago Heights interlocking, and the interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington.
= = = =

Page 23 – The Board further notes that many of the concerns surrounding the proposed STAR line and Southeast Service have been addressed in the EIS prepared by SEA.41 As a voluntary mitigation measure, applicants state that they will operate the West Chicago and BarringtonInterlockings according to the current agreements under which EJ&E operates, which require EJ&E to give priority to passenger trains over either UP or EJ&E freight trains. Applicants also commit to working with Metra to explore all options for service on the proposed STAR Line, including use of the EJ&E rail line. The timing and implementation of the STAR Line service remain subject to numerous variables, including securing government funding, but applicants are committed to continuing discussions with Metra on the STAR line. Lastly, applicants commit to complying with any written and executed curfew agreements that are now in effect regarding operations affecting passenger or commuter train service.

= = = =
Page 39 – In addition, there is mitigation requiring applicants to install a closed-circuit television (CCTV) system with video cameras to facilitate emergency service response at seven locations in Illinois and Indiana. 84 The Board’s mitigation also includes noise and vibration mitigation, including assisting Barrington to maintain its existing quiet zone85 and vibration mitigation for Fermilab in Batavia, IL. Mitigation related to school and pedestrian safety, including mitigation requiring appropriate fencing, also is imposed. Other conditions address the potential effects of the transaction-related construction activities. There also will be a 5-year environmental reporting and monitoring period condition requiring applicants to file quarterly reports on their progress in implementing the Board’s mitigation conditions and also to notify the Board if applicants substantially depart from their traffic projections on the five existing CN lines through Chicago on more than a short-term, temporary basis. This monitoring and reporting condition will allow the Board to take appropriate action if there is a material change in the facts or circumstances upon which we relied in imposing specific environmental mitigation.
= = = =
Page 43, Footnote 95 – In its updated analysis, SEA used the same three criteria thresholds to determine if highway/rail at-grade crossings would be substantially affected:

(1) crossing LOS,
(2) effects on queue length, and
(3) cumulative delay for

all vehicles delayed at a crossing in a 24-hour period.In some cases, SEA has found it adequate to use only LOS, which determines the effects of a proposed transaction at a single point along a roadway at the affected crossing. Crossing LOS, however, does not take into account the effects of a proposal on mobility in a community or region. There are many locations along the EJ&E line where roadways are important to regional mobility, such as Hough Street (IL 59) in Barrington, IL, an important commuter route in the region. Therefore, SEA used queue length and total vehicle delay, in addition to LOS, to fully understand the effects of the transaction on mobility. See Final EIS at 4-7 to 4-8.
= = = =

Page 44, Footnote 97 – The eight crossings needing some form of mitigation are: Old McHenry Road, Hawthorn Woods; Main Street, Lake Zurich; Hough Street, Barrington; Ogden Avenue, Aurora; Plainfield-Naperville Road, Plainfield; Woodruff Road, Joliet; Washington Street, Joliet; and Lincoln Highway, Lynwood. The five crossings not needing mitigation are: Diamond Lake Road, Mundelein; Montgomery Road/83rd Street, Aurora; Western Avenue, Park Forest; Chicago Road, Chicago Heights; and Broad Street, Griffith. See Final EIS, Figure 2.5-1, at 2-34. A thorough discussion of why the Board is excluding five of the substantially affected crossings from any mitigation can be found in section 2.5 of the Final EIS.
= = = =

Page 45 – The Board will also impose mitigation requiring traffic advisory signs for four of the other substantially affected at-grade crossings to alleviate the potential to block an adjacent intersection because of increased queue length.

Footnote 100 – While numerous commenters requested grade separations at other substantially affected crossings, or questioned how effective traffic advisory signs could be, we agree with SEA’s analysis in the Final EIS explaining why a grade separation (or other mitigation such as requests to place the EJ&E line in a trench in Barrington) would not be practical or warranted at those crossings.101 See Final EIS at 4-12, 4-14, 4-18, and 4-22. No mitigation related to roadway modifications (including closures) will be imposed, but as SEA explained (Final EIS at 4-16), where, as in Barrington, IL, roadway modifications could improve conditions, nothing in this decision prevents the community from negotiating with the applicants for roadway modifications.
= = = =

Page 45, Footnote 101 – The Board will also impose mitigation requiring traffic advisory signs for four of the other substantially affected at-grade crossings to alleviate the potential to block an adjacent intersection because of increased queue length.100 While numerous commenters requested grade separations at other substantially affected crossings, or questioned how effective traffic advisory signs could be, we agree with SEA’s analysis in the Final EIS explaining why a grade separation (or other mitigation such as requests to place the EJ&E line in a trench in Barrington) would not be practical or warranted at those crossings.101 See Final EIS at 4-12, 4-14, 4-18, and 4-22. No mitigation related to roadway modifications (including closures) will be imposed, but as SEA explained (Final EIS at 4-16), where, as in Barrington, IL, roadway modifications could improve conditions, nothing in this decision prevents the community from negotiating with the applicants for roadway modifications.
= = = =

Page 49 – Noise and Vibration. As explained in the Final EIS, applicants have proposed voluntary noise mitigation that would result in meaningful and appropriate noise reduction (see VM-3 through VM-5 and VM-77 through VM-83), which include constructing noise control devices such as noise barriers, installing vegetation or berms, or installing enhanced warning devices to allow communities to achieve quiet zone requirements. Also, the Board has imposed additional noise mitigation that requires applicants to consult with affected communities to identify locations where wheel squeal is considered a nuisance. The Board is also imposing a quiet zone condition for Barrington, noise mitigation for transaction-related construction activities, and vibration mitigation for Fermilab. Thus, the concerns raised about noise and vibration have been appropriately addressed.

Page 51 – Biological Resources. The Board’s mitigation requires applicants to designate a local resource agency liaison to work closely with Federal, state, and local natural and water resource agencies, for 5 years from the effective date of the Board’s final decision to ensure that adaptive management strategies are developed to protect the area’s threatened and endangered species habitat and sensitive ecological resources, such as Cuba marsh and the Lake Renwick heron rookery, near Barrington. See conditions 29-33. In particular, the Board’s mitigation requires applicants to work with relevant natural resource stakeholder groups, forest preserve districts, and Federal and state agencies, including USFWS, to establish, and fund for a 5-year period following this decision, appropriate monitoring programs to identify baseline conditions and post-transaction conditions in areas adjacent to forest preserves and designated natural areas for species of concern to these groups. See condition 30.
= = = =

Page 64 – VM 38. Applicants shall operate the key interlockings at West Chicago and Barrington, Illinois, according to the current agreements under which EJ&E operates. Those agreements require EJ&E to give priority to passenger trains over either UP or EJ&E freight trains (Applicants 2008k).
= = = =

Page 75 – Quiet Zones

Applicants shall work with Barrington, Illinois, to determine which improvements would be necessary for the City to maintain its quiet zone designation, should the transaction cause it to fall out of compliance with FRA regulations. The existing Barrington Quiet Zone includes the highway/rail at-grade crossings at Lake/Cook Road, Otis Road, Penny Road, Old Sutton Road, Shoe Factory Road, Spaulding Road, and West Bartlett Road. For 3 years from the effective date of the Board’s final decision, Applicants shall fund reasonable improvements FRA deems necessary to maintain the existing quiet zone.
= = = =

Page 76 – 15) Applicants shall coordinate with IDOT and the appropriate counties and affected communities to develop a program to install traffic advisory signs on roadway ROW at certain public highway/rail at-grade crossings along the EJ&E rail line. These signs shall clearly advise motorists not to block intersections, and the format and lettering of these signs shall comply with FHWA’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. These signs shall be in place within a year of the effective date of the Board’s final decision, subject to the approval of the coordinating agencies, and shall be located near the following intersections:

1. Old McHenry Road/Midlothian Road, Hawthorn Woods, Illinois
2. Main Street/IL 22, Lake Zurich, Illinois
3. Hough Street (IL 59)/Northwest Highway (US 14), Barrington, Illinois
4. d.Plainfield-Naperville Road/IL 59, Plainfield, Illinois

= = = =

Here is the press release from 16th congressional district United States Representative Don Manzullo to the Federal Surface Transportation Board’s approval of the the Canadian National’s purchase of the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway:

[CRYSTAL LAKE] Congressman Don Manzullo issued the following statement today concerning the Surface Transportation Board’s approval this morning of the Canadian National Railway’s proposal to purchase the EJ&E Rail line.

The decision will allow CN to run an extra 15 to 20 freight trains each day on the line through Barrington, which would create significant traffic and safety hazards for McHenry County motorists who travel Route 14, Route 59 and County Line Road east to work each day:

“Today’s decision by the Surface Transportation Board is a joke. They never answered any of the big questions, such as how do you mitigate the safety hazards posed by the 800 school bus crossings in Barrington each day?

“Canadian National paid for the environmental study, and they obviously authored this decision. The STB gave CN everything it wanted. Congress needs to pass legislation early next year to ensure the presumption in these deals is with taxpayers and motorists, not the rail companies.”

The Federal Surface Transportation Board has decided that the Canadian National Railway can purchase the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway on January 24th.

During the next 30 days, aggrieved parties can ask for reconsideration of the unanimous decision based on the following grounds, according to Public Information Officer Dennis Watson:

• the appearance of new evidence,
• a belief in material error in the decision and/or
• a belief or appearance of changed circumstances.

The decision cam also be appealed to federal court.

Below is the press release from the Surface Transportation Board:

The Surface Transportation Board today unanimously approved the Canadian National Railway Company and Grand Trunk Corporation application to acquire control of the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway Company (EJ&E), subject to a number of Board-imposed conditions.

In announcing the decision, Board Chairman Charles D. Nottingham stated:

“Approval of this important railroad merger, with the conditions we have imposed, marks a significant step forward in our nation’s efforts to alleviate rail and highway congestion.

“I am pleased that the Board agreed, in a bipartisan and unanimous manner, after an unprecedented public involvement process, to grant the relief that this merger will provide to the many Chicago neighborhoods that have been disproportionately burdened for many decades with severe rail traffic-related roadway congestion.”

In reaching its decision, the Board considered both the transportation-related aspects of the transaction and the potential environmental impacts. In considering the transportation aspects, the Board found that the transaction will not result in a substantial lessening of competition, the creation of a monopoly, or a restraint of trade in freight surface transportation in any region of the United States. The Board also found that any minor anticompetitive effects that may result will be outweighed by the overall transportation benefits of the transaction.

In considering the environmental aspects of the transaction, the Board found that, although the transaction will result in environmental benefits to those living in and near Chicago, it will have adverse environmental impacts on communities along the EJ&E rail line. The Board undertook an extensive evaluation of the environmental aspects of the applicants’ proposal, hosting 22 public meetings over an 8-month period in the Chicago area. A Draft Environment Impact Statement (DEIS) was issued and widely circulated in that region, and the Board received more than 9,500 public comments in response to the DEIS. The Board issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement on December 5, 2008.

After carefully considering the results of the environmental analysis and the comments raised—both pro and con—the Board imposed substantial environmental mitigation to minimize potential adverse environmental impacts of the transaction. The mitigation includes:

• Two highway-rail grade separation projects (and requires applicants to bear 67 percent of the cost of one and 78.5 percent of the cost of the other);
• Cameras to monitor highway-rail crossings to assist in the timely response of emergency providers;
• School and pedestrian safety measures;
• Noise reduction measures; and
• A 5-year environmental reporting requirement mandating applicants to file quarterly reports on the implementation of the Board-imposed environmental mitigation.

In addition, the Board imposed a 5-year, formal oversight period, with applicants required to submit monthly operational reports to the Board. Finally, the Board’s decision also requires applicants to comply with mandatory labor protection, with their extensive voluntary environmental mitigation, and with the negotiated agreements that they have entered into with Amtrak and communities in Illinois and Indiana containing tailored mitigation that applicants have agreed to provide.

Chairman Nottingham added:

“I commend the approximately 10,000 citizens who submitted comments to the Board, and I thank the Board’s dedicated environmental and legal staff, for ensuring that this decision was made in an informed, balanced and expeditious manner.”

The Board issued its decision approving, with conditions, the applicants’ acquisition of EJ&E today, December 24, 2008, in Canadian National Ry. and Grand Trunk Corp.—Control—EJ&E West Co., STB Finance Docket No. 35087. That decision will be published in the Federal Register and is available for viewing and downloading on the Board’s Web site at http://www.stb.dot.gov, under “E-LIBRARY” on the home page, then under “Decisions & Notices,” beneath the date “12/24/08.”

Here is the press release from 16th congressional district United States Representative Don Manzullo to the Federal Surface Transportation Board’s approval of the the Canadian National’s purchase of the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway:

[CRYSTAL LAKE] Congressman Don Manzullo issued the following statement today concerning the Surface Transportation Board’s approval this morning of the Canadian National Railway’s proposal to purchase the EJ&E Rail line.

The decision will allow CN to run an extra 15 to 20 freight trains each day on the line through Barrington, which would create significant traffic and safety hazards for McHenry County motorists who travel Route 14, Route 59 and County Line Road east to work each day:

“Today’s decision by the Surface Transportation Board is a joke. They never answered any of the big questions, such as how do you mitigate the safety hazards posed by the 800 school bus crossings in Barrington each day?

“Canadian National paid for the environmental study, and they obviously authored this decision. The STB gave CN everything it wanted. Congress needs to pass legislation early next year to ensure the presumption in these deals is with taxpayers and motorists, not the rail companies.”

The Federal Surface Transportation Board has decided that the Canadian National Railway can purchase the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway on January 24th.

During the next 30 days, aggrieved parties can ask for reconsideration of the unanimous decision based on the following grounds, according to Public Information Officer Dennis Watson:

• the appearance of new evidence,
• a belief in material error in the decision and/or
• a belief or appearance of changed circumstances.

The decision cam also be appealed to federal court.

Below is the press release from the Surface Transportation Board:

The Surface Transportation Board today unanimously approved the Canadian National Railway Company and Grand Trunk Corporation application to acquire control of the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway Company (EJ&E), subject to a number of Board-imposed conditions.

In announcing the decision, Board Chairman Charles D. Nottingham stated:

“Approval of this important railroad merger, with the conditions we have imposed, marks a significant step forward in our nation’s efforts to alleviate rail and highway congestion.

“I am pleased that the Board agreed, in a bipartisan and unanimous manner, after an unprecedented public involvement process, to grant the relief that this merger will provide to the many Chicago neighborhoods that have been disproportionately burdened for many decades with severe rail traffic-related roadway congestion.”

In reaching its decision, the Board considered both the transportation-related aspects of the transaction and the potential environmental impacts. In considering the transportation aspects, the Board found that the transaction will not result in a substantial lessening of competition, the creation of a monopoly, or a restraint of trade in freight surface transportation in any region of the United States. The Board also found that any minor anticompetitive effects that may result will be outweighed by the overall transportation benefits of the transaction.

In considering the environmental aspects of the transaction, the Board found that, although the transaction will result in environmental benefits to those living in and near Chicago, it will have adverse environmental impacts on communities along the EJ&E rail line. The Board undertook an extensive evaluation of the environmental aspects of the applicants’ proposal, hosting 22 public meetings over an 8-month period in the Chicago area. A Draft Environment Impact Statement (DEIS) was issued and widely circulated in that region, and the Board received more than 9,500 public comments in response to the DEIS. The Board issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement on December 5, 2008.

After carefully considering the results of the environmental analysis and the comments raised—both pro and con—the Board imposed substantial environmental mitigation to minimize potential adverse environmental impacts of the transaction. The mitigation includes:

• Two highway-rail grade separation projects (and requires applicants to bear 67 percent of the cost of one and 78.5 percent of the cost of the other);
• Cameras to monitor highway-rail crossings to assist in the timely response of emergency providers;
• School and pedestrian safety measures;
• Noise reduction measures; and
• A 5-year environmental reporting requirement mandating applicants to file quarterly reports on the implementation of the Board-imposed environmental mitigation.

In addition, the Board imposed a 5-year, formal oversight period, with applicants required to submit monthly operational reports to the Board. Finally, the Board’s decision also requires applicants to comply with mandatory labor protection, with their extensive voluntary environmental mitigation, and with the negotiated agreements that they have entered into with Amtrak and communities in Illinois and Indiana containing tailored mitigation that applicants have agreed to provide.

Chairman Nottingham added:

“I commend the approximately 10,000 citizens who submitted comments to the Board, and I thank the Board’s dedicated environmental and legal staff, for ensuring that this decision was made in an informed, balanced and expeditious manner.”

The Board issued its decision approving, with conditions, the applicants’ acquisition of EJ&E today, December 24, 2008, in Canadian National Ry. and Grand Trunk Corp.—Control—EJ&E West Co., STB Finance Docket No. 35087. That decision will be published in the Federal Register and is available for viewing and downloading on the Board’s Web site at http://www.stb.dot.gov, under “E-LIBRARY” on the home page, then under “Decisions & Notices,” beneath the date “12/24/08.”

The efforts of Canadian National Railway to force federal regulators to grant it permission to take over the 198-mile Elgin Joliet and Eastern Railroad.

The purchase of the circumferential route would allow CN to bypass Chicago congestion.

It sought appellate court permission to expedite the $300 million deal, but did not get it.

The Chicago Tribune article by Richard Wronski says the CN must wait for the completion of the environmental impact statement

Outer suburbs like Barrington oppose the purchase, while inner suburbs are in favor.

The efforts of Canadian National Railway to force federal regulators to grant it permission to take over the 198-mile Elgin Joliet and Eastern Railroad.

The purchase of the circumferential route would allow CN to bypass Chicago congestion.

It sought appellate court permission to expedite the $300 million deal, but did not get it.

The Chicago Tribune article by Richard Wronski says the CN must wait for the completion of the environmental impact statement

Outer suburbs like Barrington oppose the purchase, while inner suburbs are in favor.