Sweet deal proposed to overcome opposition to 278-mile NWI rail bypass

That last item is being called a "game changer" by Frank Patton, chairman of the Great Lakes Basin Transportation, speaking last week at a Times Editorial Board meeting.

"That commodity almost doesn't exist," he said.

The offer was put together in hopes of sealing the necessary deals with landowners without the need for the railroad to exercise its rights to take the land needed through eminent domain.

If the deal is rejected, the case would go to court and a judge will place a value on the land that is less than the $20,000-an-acre offer and without the other two perks, said Great Lakes Basin Transportation President Jim Wilson.

"The last thing you want to do is go to court," Patton said.

Nick Snow, an attorney for Residents Against the Invasion of Land by Eminent Domain, or, RAILED, told landowners during an opposition rally earlier this month to avoid making agreements to give up their property, because that’s when "they start putting dots on the map."

The proposed rail line between LaPorte and Wisconsin has stirred up anger and fear among residents along the proposed route through south Porter and Lake counties.

Chief among them is Porter County government, which is compiling its response, and possible alternatives, before the public comment period ends, Porter County Commissioner Jeff Good, R-Center, told The Times Editorial Board Thursday.

"I think the way the guy went about this thing is disingenuous," Good said.

Good said he and other officials were made aware of the proposal late in the process and without benefit of a formal presentation. Those with the Great Lakes Basin Transportation also bypassed regional planners.

"This is not something that's ever been discussed," he said. "This is not something that's been in our planning."

Moreover, last week, two major railroads said last week they are not interested in using the new rail line.

Norfolk Southern Corp.'s letter to the U.S. Surface Transportation Board said, in part, "... we are not inclined to think that the proposed Great Lakes Basin route would work well with our system or that we would be a user of the route."

The letter follows an earlier statement by Union Pacific Railroad, stating the company is not interested in moving forward with discussion on the rail bypass project — "an exceedingly expensive idea with no publicly identified funding sources."

Patton said he has 15 investors lined up so far, all from the Midwest.

Porter County Commissioner Laura Blaney, D-South, whose Boone Grove area farm and house are in the railroad's path, said the proposal threatens the areas where most residential growth is occurring.

"It's quality of life for us in Porter County," she said.

Wilson said the line would begin with 40 to 50 trains each day, though its daily capacity would be up to 110 trains. The tracks will be separated from many of the roadways along its route so as to improve safety and not interrupt traffic, he said.

Quiet zones will be pursued where there are crossings, Wilson said.

"We definitely want to be a good neighbor," he said. "We're not just here to run a route and run roughshod over anybody." 

Patton said there are national interests at stake in improving the flow of rail traffic through the heavily congested Chicago area.

"The United States of America has to better compete in the world markets," he said.

Freight traffic is expected to pick up by 45 to 50 percent nationally during the next 20 to 40 years, and there simply isn’t enough capacity in Chicago to handle that many trains, Wilson has said.

The bottleneck is worsened by the 25 percent of trains that must pass through Chicago on the way to somewhere else, but have no actual business there.

The proposed urban bypass, which would be the first constructed anywhere in the country in more than a decade, would cost an estimated $8 billion and would be the largest railroad project in the United States since 1911, he said.

Once the public comment period on the proposal ends next month, the project will undergo about a year and a half review by the U.S. Surface Transportation Board before a determination is made, Patton said.

"We've got a lot ahead of us, to say the least," Wilson said.