UP/W: Triple tracking through Geneva?

Not without a fight from the NIMBY's...

http://www.mysuburbanlife.com/geneva/ne ... -t-so-sure

Right now as it is if UP has to idle a freight, is it idled at CP Peck? I'm almost certain I've seen freights idled there before. I'd also think that the Fox River bridge already has enough room for a third track to be built.

Closing that gap sounds good to me, considering all the trains that pile up out west waiting for Metra. Using the Metra money isn't too shady either since they are the ones inconveniencing UP, and both companies will benefit.

The right of way appears to have been planned for another track to the south all along, the bridge piers on the Fox River are extra wide with the bridge offset to the north on the piers, although the article only mentions extending the third track to the river. One problem might occur at the Randall Road viaduct. There seems to be room for only the two tracks under there and therefor I would imagine some more traffic jams are in store for that stretch in the future.

NIMBYs kill me. The trains will run. Trying to thwart a third main only means trains will sit on sidings in a neighborhood and idle rather than cruising through that neighborhood.

1. If I have tracks in my neighborhood, I want the trains moving rather than idling and emitting diesel smoke.
2. I'm not dumb enough to buy a house near the tracks and complain.

Not only will a third track improve traffic flow, this project will also include, at long last, grade separation at Roosevelt Rd (rte 38) in Geneva; this has been needed for quite sometime. Squeezing in all the freight and Metra traffic on the two track, six mile corridor between CPY032 (Kress) and CPY038 (Peck) is hard enough, but it's even worse when eastbound coal trains headed for power plants in the south suburbs or Indiana show up. These trains access a connection to the EJ&E (oops, that's CN now) via a yard connection at West Chicago, entering at Kress about a mile east. And as these unit coal trains (which can be up to 7500ft. long) slow down to 10 mph, they can take up to 15 min. before clearing the crossing, backup up traffic for at least a 1/2 mile in each direction in the meantime. They've also been known to grind to a halt here as well, increasing the delays that much more while traffic is blocked. Seriously, they can't begin this soon enough, I hope it gets off the ground.

MetraBNSF wrote:Right now as it is if UP has to idle a freight, is it idled at CP Peck? I'm almost certain I've seen freights idled there before

You have, UP Omaha dispatchers use this location as a staging area for eastbound freights, usually short intermodals. Longer trains are held a little further west of here, in the vicinity of the LaFox depot...

Dorian, I think you and I are forgetting that NIMBYs do not encumber their arguments with facts.

Must be nice...

The article mentions that adding a third track would potentially cause freight trains to idle. Under current conditions I know eastbound freight trains idle at the following locations: I-355, between County Farm Rd and downtown Wheaton, Peck, and LaFox. Not 100% sure but I could see the area near the West Chicago yard as another mainline holding point. I support the addition of a third track between Peck and Kress, however if multiple eastbound trains are staged from I-355 going west then I could see how holding freights through the Geneva area could be an issue. It appears that most of the Geneva sub holding points are suited for freights shorter than 1 mile.

I've been stuck before on Roosevelt Rd where it meets the Geneva sub, once you get stuck there for any length of time it feels like you've been cut off from the rest of the town.

MetraBNSF wrote:The article mentions that adding a third track would potentially cause freight trains to idle. Under current conditions I know eastbound freight trains idle at the following locations: I-355, between County Farm Rd and downtown Wheaton, Peck, and LaFox. Not 100% sure but I could see the area near the West Chicago yard as another mainline holding point. I support the addition of a third track between Peck and Kress, however if multiple eastbound trains are staged from I-355 going west then I could see how holding freights through the Geneva area could be an issue

It could be, but the level of disruption could well depend on the staging location UP decides to use in Geneva if the third track gets built. If the Roosevelt Rd. grade separation is included, then IMO, the best location would be from here to a point just east of the Fox River, a distance of about 2 miles. This the extreme eastern part of the suburb, and except for a light industrial presence coupled with an equally small housing density, much of this area is otherwise unincorporated, which is a plus. If UP could sell that to the NIMBY's, it might have a chance...

I think the timeline for this project to start is way to short. I would be shocked to see this done by 2012. Even with some funding in place. The folks could have had an underpass about 7 or 8 yrs ago at Rt. 38 if Global 3 would have been allowed to have been where UP wanted to build it. With all the projects yet be started on along the Geneva Sub most are still waiting for money. Mud Creek project is behind right now. The work at West Chicago now to move all the autorack unloading to the northside. To prevent the need to take up mainline slots by not having the Toyota job come out 3 to 6 times a day it eats up slots for freights and Scoots. That project was also behind it was to have been done earlier last year. Eventually well have triple track all the way from Kedzie to Elburn. And eventually a little further west which doesn't have much to do with Metra at all, it will be railroad time when it gets done. As for staging trains between Peck and Kress if and when this project gets the go I'm sure UP and Geneva will work something out.

qboy wrote: The folks could have had an underpass about 7 or 8 yrs ago at Rt. 38 if Global 3 would have been allowed to have been where UP wanted to build it.

Interesting; you mean Rochelle wasn't the first option for Global 3? Where was the original intended location?

doepack wrote:

qboy wrote: The folks could have had an underpass about 7 or 8 yrs ago at Rt. 38 if Global 3 would have been allowed to have been where UP wanted to build it.

Interesting; you mean Rochelle wasn't the first option for Global 3? Where was the original intended location?

West Chicago south of Rt.38, Elburn, Maple Park, and finally Rochelle. To which the city and county that Rochelle was able to attract UP to build GLB3 out there. Which up to now is not the most ideal location for Intermodal Ramp.

qboy wrote:

doepack wrote:

qboy wrote: The folks could have had an underpass about 7 or 8 yrs ago at Rt. 38 if Global 3 would have been allowed to have been where UP wanted to build it.

Interesting; you mean Rochelle wasn't the first option for Global 3? Where was the original intended location?

West Chicago south of Rt.38, Elburn, Maple Park, and finally Rochelle. To which the city and county that Rochelle was able to attract UP to build GLB3 out there. Which up to now is not the most ideal location for Intermodal Ramp.

Thanks. Indeed, it would've worked out a lot better logistically for UP if they been able to build Global 3 in Kane or even DeKalb counties, instead of having to endure these 60-70 mile "shuttle moves" to the other two facilities. Score one for the NIMBY's I guess...