Comment EI-22045
Received or sent (printed as 4/14/2016)
[VALPARAISO] I was unable to attend the local meeting regarding the proposed 278 mile railway traveling through our South Porter County area. I am against this proposal for the following reasons: This area is rural farmland and by putting a railway through this area, you are negatively impacting the lives and livelihoods of local farmers. Drainage issues already exist in our area, so how will the railway help this? I am certain it will make it more difficult for the farmers, cutting their farmlands in half in some cases. By putting in this railway, you are endangering the safety and lives of the residents who depend on well water, which could possibly be contaminated due to chemical railway spills. The children and families it would affect are immeasurable. There are schools in this area and the safety of our children should be a #1 priority. You are increasing chances of bus-train and car-train accidents in our area, which already has car accident issues which we are regularly dealing with near 500 West and St. Route 2. Our first responders (police, firefighters, ambulances) already have issues getting quickly to rural areas and now we would require them to fight train traffic to get to emergencies, too. How many lives will be lost and how much property will be destroyed waiting for train tracks to clear? Our wildlife would be impacted, too, which already has issues with our roadways in our rural areas. Finally, there are so many unused railways in N.W. Indiana that could be used and refurbished if necessary. Why aren't those being looked at instead of bringing in a whole new railway to an area that currently does not have trains?
Submitted by: Janet Koutelas · VALPARAISO, Indiana
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-35952/comment/EI-22045 · back to the docket sheet