Comment EI-11112
Received or sent (printed as 9/9/2008)
I have been a resident of the Oakhurst subdivision in the city of Aurora for 24 years. The many wonderful communities that have sprouted since our arrival have resulted in a wonderful residential and light industrial area for millions of residents. As a result of this growth and prosperity, we have endured significant tax increases, difficult road construction such as the current I-88 expansion leading to horrible commute times. As a proud American who has contributed to this areas growth, I find it disgusting to see a foreign company try to railroad" our community and your citizens with a merger or leasing agreement that would invite more hazardous material risks, incredible traffic delays through almost every significant east-west route while trying to pass the cost of mitigation back onto your constituants backs so that they can profit off the backs of US Citizens. Additionally, the impact to school transportation, medical and emergency vehicles and operations would result in significant decrease in service execution. Even if CN Rail agreed in writing to pay all bridge construction, it would need to execute before they increased rail traffic and would still result in traffic congestion during construction. I think I can speak for most of my neighbors in saying that we highly recommend that the STB reject this planned merger or leasing to CN Rail until an objective study of all the enviromental impact can be reviewed. Remember that urban sprawl in this area continues to move westward into Sugar Grove, Oswego, St CVharles and other towns that will need to move east through this rail traffic and make congestion even worse. Do proper diligence and THEN REJECT THIS PLAN"
Submitted by: Michael Voaden · Oakhurst Community
The Board publishes this comment in its environmental-comment table for this proceeding. It is quoted here as printed; nothing is inferred from it, and it states the commenter's own position in their own words, not this record's.
Permanent address docketyard.org/d/FD-35087/comment/EI-11112 · back to the docket sheet