Regarding “Northwestern’s Ryan Field, Amtrak, Emanuel, Quantum, O’Hare Flyer all beset by objectors” (Sept. 9): I deeply respect the news media and the Tribune Editorial Board’s First Amendment right to opine. I would only ask that the editorial board likewise respect the right of River Forest residents to not be merely dismissed as “objectors” in a hodgepodge editorial that mixes completely different projects, each having totally unique circumstances.
I’d like to invite members of the editorial board to visit River Forest to see for themselves why residents are enormously concerned with the prospect of the O’Hare Flyer. Sit in the home or backyard of one of the more than 200 homes where the Flyer would fly by just yards away every 15 minutes from 4 a.m. until 10 p.m.
We are not talking about the expressway or the main street of a village’s commercial district. It’s a quiet residential neighborhood of single-family homes, where those quiet trains would still be rumbling by four times an hour for 18 hours every day of the week.
The editorial board should be asking: What benefit to the western suburbs would this really provide? What is the purpose of disrupting life in a quiet residential neighborhood a short distance from the forest preserves when there are clearly other alternate routes such as the Blue Line and Metra already serving O’Hare International Airport? Is this like the parking meters — selling out Chicago infrastructure (CTA and Metra) for the benefit of private equity? Why won’t the editorial board perhaps entertain a conversation about a public-private partnership that could make the Chicago infrastructure more robust?
So, our community is not a bunch of “objectors” who are anti-development and anti-opportunity. We are practical and reasonable. We ask questions and expect answers.
Do members of the editorial board understand that difference? Venture out from behind your computers, pay a visit to our village, look at the affected homes and their proximity to the tracks, and listen to residents about their concerns.
Perhaps encourage David Lundy to do likewise, because the O’Hare Flyer leadership team has done zero engagement with residents and other stakeholders in any of the communities along their proposed route.
— Cathy Adduci, village president, River Forest
Where is the research?
The Sept. 9 editorial is one-sided and dismissive of objectors to the O’Hare Flyer. It lacks the investigative research the Tribune is known for. I invite the Tribune Editorial Board to come sit on my front porch in River Forest and imagine an 80 mph train zipping through at several feet in the air just 150 feet from my front porch, all day long. Developers of some of these mega-projects overpromise and underdeliver, leaving homeowners and taxpayers in a bad situation.
The board should know that. Find out if there is merit to the objection before being dismissive of objectors and calling them obstructors.
The board claims objectors don’t offer alternatives. It is not listening to the objectors. Alternatives have been suggested. It takes 40 minutes on the Blue Line, due to infrastructure problems and slow zones, to get to the airport. Is 40 minutes really that bad? Building another line that might fail to meet its promises is not always the solution. Make the Blue Line work and invest the money in improvements before disrupting the lives of people who will see no benefit to their own community and suffer from the failures.
Get reporters out there to find out why the Blue Line doesn’t work as it should. Find out if there are alternative routes.
The people in the communities affected need to be heard. Come out and listen to us. Our representatives are listening, but the Tribune Editorial Board is not.
— William S. Piper, River Forest
More Top Picks Kits Soils
Why we object to new Ryan Field
Regarding the Tribune Editorial Board’s campaign promoting the new Ryan Field and demeaning the concerns of many of the residents of surrounding communities in Evanston and Wilmette: Let us clarify that the Most Livable City Association (MLCA) never opposed the construction of a new stadium. While many people loved the old stadium, most residents recognized Northwestern’s right to build a new stadium if it chose to do so.
What the MLCA opposed — and still does — was allowing a “nonprofit” university that pays no property taxes to operate a mega-commercial entertainment complex in a congested residential neighborhood. The Evanston City Council’s decision to overrule a 7-2 vote by its own Land Use Commission and permit the rezoning, thanks to the tie-breaking vote by Mayor Daniel Biss, upended court precedents and is the subject of an ongoing court case.
The editorial board may be relentlessly pro-development — the Sept. 9 editorial being another example — but having zoning laws that are effectively written in pencil does not strike us as a sound development strategy for Evanston, or anywhere else.
And we reiterate what we have said many times: You could search far and wide along the North Shore of Chicago, and it would be hard to find a worse place to locate a giant commercial entertainment complex than Ryan Field, which is nestled in a neighborhood of homes, schools, churches, small businesses and a hospital, bracketed by two-lane streets.
Northwestern is a nonprofit institution that should be focused on its educational mission, not profit — it has no business (literally) trying to turn its community into Wrigleyville North.
— Andrew Berman, president, Most Livable City Association, Evanston
Wary of developers’ promises
The Tribune Editorial Board’s condescending tone in its Sept. 9 opinion piece should raise some eyebrows among readers. In all of the projects considered in this editorial, save Amtrak, a private entity stands to profit financially. None of these are philanthropic efforts for the greater good.
Residents of the communities impacted should be wary of promises made by developers — how far along is Elon Musk’s tunnel to O’Hare? — and have the right to inspect, give input and object to plans that can permanently change neighborhoods. Belittling the people who live with the daily impact of these projects does nothing to earn their confidence.
Pushing projects through in the name of progress, without sufficient review, and trusting when the developers say, “Don’t worry, it will be great,” usually don’t end well.
— Joshua Poellot, Franklin Park
Important right-of-way for city
Chicago is about to develop two pieces of land immediately south of downtown: The 78, where the Fire stadium is being built, and Amtrak’s roughly 47-acre 14th Street Coach Yard, which could become a future White Sox stadium site. Before we build over everything, I think Chicago needs to preserve the right-of-way for a direct connection from the St. Charles Air Line into Union Station.
That connection could be incredibly important long term. It could allow Metra Electric trains to serve Union Station, enable through-running across downtown, create a direct O’Hare-to-McCormick Place service, and provide a Union Station approach for future Amtrak and high-speed rail trains using the Metra Electric corridor. Illinois is already studying high-speed rail routes that could enter Chicago this way, so it’s crazy to eliminate the physical connection before those plans are even finished.
I’m not saying we need to build the flyover now. We just need to figure out what land or air rights it would require and preserve them before developments make it impossible or dramatically more expensive.
— Seth Deegan, Chicago
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].
More Top Picks Executive Function Skills How To Build Them In Kids