Comment EI-23959
Received or sent (printed as 6/20/2016)
MP130 to MP140 according to the GLB proposal would result in one road stubbing" and two private rail crossing. Please explain how this is a "preferred alternative" to one that creates no private crossings and no road stubbing? I feel this portion of the route is poorly thought out. GLB wants a smaller river crossing here for the FOX river but does not take into account the hardship a road closure and two private crossing would have on the area. Any road closure would be a hardship to emergency response crews as they use little traveled roads in the area to quickly and safely make it to an emergency faster than using the heavily traveled roads. Farmers also use these roads heavily as they are safer than the major roads. Private crossing for residential homes is a very poor plan as it places these home owners in jeopardy each time they leave their homes or come back to their homes. People should not have to rely on their own judgement of how fast a train is moving and how far away the train is, especially when there will be 110 trains per day going 70 miles per hour. Please explain how you can allow these private rail crossing for home owners and ensure their safety?"
Submitted by: Dennis Scheppler
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-23959 · back to the docket sheet