Case Number: 13-0657

  • July 17, 2014

    I am a resident of River Ridge, South Elgin - This note is to reiterate my concern regarding docket 13-0657 - ComEd's Grand Prairie Gateway Project since the deadline for the ICC decision has been extended to 10/24/14.

    Please vote NO - No more overhead power lines in residential, school, medical, inhabited, natural preserve areas – Please! How is this considered acceptable?

    Argument (1) - According to ComEd, the addition of the transmission line will allow for more efficient flow of electricity across the electrical grid, alleviating congestion and providing ComEd and other electric suppliers and their customers the ability to secure the electricity they need at the least cost. If this is as much of an advantage to the power grid as they (ComEd) are fighting for then they will gain in many ways from this - reduced overall cost of operation, increased supply to probably over 100,000,000 customers – They reap the reward. They are also working to have much of this initial cost covered by government funding. ComEd cannot hide behind the excuse that they must use the lowest cost way and that burying the line would be too high a cost. They have not even submitted a plan to bury the power lines wherever in conflict w/ living presence.

    Argument (2) The law's expedited procedures required ComEd to hold public meetings that were held in affected counties (with the DeKalb and Kane county meetings combined) between July and October 2013. There is evidence that these meetings were not well communicated. Many land owners, owners in close proximity and pending land owners were not properly informed of this.– Some only by word of mouth from neighbors months after the meetings, many including myself did not know about this until 2014. ComEd is not advertising this project because they know that this is not beneficial to anyone and anything in it’s path and this is not the safest way to transmit power.

    Argument (3) I went to the meeting at the Hemmens, Elgin on 4/24/14 and listened to testimony of 30+ people representing 100’s-1000’s in their neighborhoods, businesses, communities regarding how this overhead power line project will diminish, damage, destroy their environment and add significant, questionable, non-recovering risk of injury – This cost is infinite damages and must be considered as more important and completely outweigh the least expensive-(only initially) way to transmit power. We were informed that these testimonies and comments would be submitted as evidence for consideration before a decision is made –-please investigate and listen to these real concerns.

    Conclusion - Please vote NO to building 345,000-volt transmission lines on steel poles 135-170 feet tall that have no long term benefit to any living human, plant, animal, environment around it and if the power grid needs improving and is that important then ComEd needs to find a better solution that involves burying the power lines wherever possible.
    Our living environment must be held more important than construction costs.

    Gordon Roman
  • July 3, 2014

    I strongly oppose any change in the original route that COMED has submitted to the ICC. There are countless studies with documented proof that power lines can cause cancer. Therefore, this would greatly reduce the property values of our homes, but more importantly it puts many residence at risk for health problems.
    Melody Wilcox
  • June 20, 2014

    The ICC has delayed the decision on the Gateway project & this should never had been delayed.
    This project will effect the financial lives if everyone in the communities it will run through.
    By allowing this project to de ision to mopve from July 9, 2014 to October 24, 2014 you have now allowed this to pit more neighbors against each other.
    No one wants this running 100 feet from their hones.
    Instead of delaying the devision & allow more people to say what it will do to their lives, how about making ComEd figure out hiw to pay to bury these lines wherever it runs by "anyones" home?
    Money has been spent to fight a battle that we should not have had to fight.
    ComEd has taken hard working people & forced them to spend thousands on attorneys because this process takes an attorney to keep up with every obstacle that has been used by them to get this approved.
    Would I have bought my home here if I knew that this was a possibility, of course not!
    NO ONE would have bought a home to live near 345,000 volt power lines, really, think about this.
    This whole project should never be approved the way it is proposed.
    Stop pitting residents against each other.
    Stop making young, old people from wasting hard earned money to fight something that should not be our battle to fight.
    Our group has spent over $100,000.00 on this.
    Does that make any sense, of course not !
    Now the end is extended months down the road, WHY ?
    Just so neighbors can fight amongst each other to try & justify why you should have the lines in your yard not mine, insane
    We should be living in harmony not fighting for a cause that is not good for any of us.
    I urge the ICC to say NO TO GATEWAY, if it is really necessary, show you the money to bury the lines where lives will be placed anywhere near these 345,000 volt power lines.
    ICC please do the right thing.
    VOTE NO on October 24th to THE GATEWAY PROJECT!

    Sue McMahon

    Sue McMahon
  • June 17, 2014

    It is an abomination that the state of Illinois inclusive of Kane & DeKalb counties are turning a deaf ear to the tax paying citizens regarding the issues we have regarding the Grand Prairie Gateway debacle. I recognize that unfortunately our state representatives most likely get campaign contributions from the likes of companies like ComEd which is most likely why elected officials are not commenting on such and/or representing the issues the people have brought to all parties attention.

    In reading 300+ complaints as well as contacting the ICC to express my concerns and reaching out to our Illinois Senators for their intervention...it still is mind boggling how ComEd and Illinois can move forward with their ruination of property and health by building 65 foot towers that emit EMF.

    These monstrous towers (65 feet high) across 60-68 miles in length will ruin some of the most beautiful land that northern Illinois has to offer, it will be an assault visually and a health hazard via the EMF. The book "Dirty Electricity; Electrification and the Diseases of Civilization" by Dr. Samuel Milham - clearly states how the electromagnetic fields emitted by these types of towers is a known carcinogen and is a major contributor to higher incidences of cancer, heart disease and many other health concerns. Dr. Milham goes on to point out that the diseases plaguing modern man--heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc. etc. is triggered by a prevalent yet nearly entirely overlooked cause, EMF being delivered via these exact high tension wires that ComEd is looking to put in our back yards.

    Please listen to the citizens complaints and do not allow ComEd to continue their practice of erecting these monuments that visually and health wise poison us.

    I built my dream home on the 17th Fairway of the Bowes Creek Country Club. This land before then was a wild life reserve. That was what made me gravitate to this beautiful area of the state from the north shore.

    As so many have mentioned in their comments below. Please listen to our pleas and intervene on behalf of all of us. Stop the Grand Prairie Gateway - ComEd project or at the very least insist that ComEd bury these lines!!!

    Diann L. Corvino
  • June 17, 2014

    We have just encountered our fifth (that we know of) power outage in the last six weeks. Mind you, the sky is clear, the weather beautiful, and there are no storms in the area. We have had more power outages in the last six weeks than in the eighteen years that we have lived here.

    It seems odd that this happens just when ComEd starts to have this "dispute" with the citizens who do not want to lose their property values and their health to a project that only serves to line the pockets of their corporation.

    It appears that they are trying to play "hard ball" with the customers that are not in favor of just letting them have whatever they want. ComEd is sending a message - do not get in our way or you will have your power shut off.

    Do not allow ComEd to strong arm their customers. Send the message back to them- your customers are important and have a right to steady and consistent service regardless of their opinions. Perhaps, it would serve us all better if ComEd would concentrate on providing their customers with dependable service instead of unnecessary and greedy projects. Please don't approve this project.

    James A Montgomery
  • June 16, 2014

    customer states she is opposed to the proposed lines ComEd is running thur pher area. Customer states she has spent almost one million dollars on her home and that she feels Comed is ignoring them when they are asking to have the lines buried. Customer feels they should run the lines away from highly populated
    areas.

  • June 11, 2014

    I was driving home today listening to the radio and a MD was being interviewed about EMF on cell phones. He was saying that 3 percent of the population has a hypersensitivity to any form of EMF and they are doing studies on this group of people as to why it physically affecets them. He said it was a proven problem and he mentioned this 3 percent can not live near high tentsion power lines. I got started thinking about this unneeded project again and how Mister Donlley from ComEd voiced how concerned he is about all of us when channel 2 interviewed us in South Elgin. I'm sure he is worried sick about the people that will be forced to leave their homes at a substantial loss to values because of the power lines. Thank you for your concern sir.

    On second though I was reading ComEd's brief and they Acually said that high power lines in your backyard increase property values because of all the beautiful open space that they can't build on. LOL I still can't believe that put that in there. I never knew lawyers had such humor. Thanks for the comic relief guys!!!

    I wanted to be complaint number 300. I Acually doubt the judges read these but a lot of lives will be affected because of ComEd's mismanagement and failure to make money on Byron nuclear plant. Please do not approve this project, and if it does somehow get approved please make them put it as far away as you can from people's homes in South Egin and the entire route. I think everyone but ComEd thinks this project is a joke I hope you men and women of the ICC also do.

    Thank you.

    Thomas Redmond
  • June 9, 2014

    run the tracks and forest preserves like it has been done in bartlett and wayne or run this eye sore under ground!there is no need for these lines anyway.
    jeff hamilton
  • May 29, 2014

    I vote no to power lines on county line rd and buzzell rd in Sycamore Il

    I just receivedved a fed x package showing the proposed power lines going right behind and the side of my property.

    I have worked and saved for 32 years to buy a farmette in the county, finally 3 years ago my dream came true and was able to purchase my dream home.

    I chose this location because of its beautiful views and farmland as far as the eye can see.

    This is where I wanted to raise my family and spend the rest of my life.

    Now! I want to sell my dream house and move becase of this. This is why I moved out here to get away from stuff like this, I am worried about the health and safety of my family and farm animals and the value of my property.

    I looked at the map and why can't it go down the train tracks where it looks like it will bother no one ?, why can't it be burried under ground? why do we need this extra power? arent we useing less power these days beacause of all the energy efficient products? when do I get a say so? Will you purchase my property? or do I get a credit for the loss of property value?

    Please don't ruin my dream property, beautiful country views, Health and safety of my family,animals and propety value. PLEASE...

    Thank You. Dean Family Farm.

    Frank Dean 1-815-895-3080
  • May 20, 2014

    I am greatly opposed to this line going anywhere near Cirlce K-D Horse Farm. I live within a mile of this horse farm. I moved to Dekalb county in 2011 because of health conditions. Now I come to find out that these high voltage power lines are to run 100 feet from my backyard is horrific. This will in essence impact the whole subdivision where I live. The fact that we have open farm land in abundance in this area and they propose to put power lines near a subdivision is asinine. Why would this even be allowed to benefit two people? What about my whole subdivision that has been here since 2003 and other people that have been established in their homes for a longer period of time than these other two people? What about the fact that due to my health that I will be forced to uproot my three children yet again? I specifically bought my house because there was no power lines. The lines to my house are buried and now they are going to put giant poles in my backyard. This is unfair to the people who live here away from the madness that is closer to Chicago. Why should we be penalized for the many who live in Kane county. This whole project is to benefit them and to punish us who moved away from it all. Because of Kane county my views, health, nature, and aesthetic views will all be destroyed. All the reasons I moved here in the first place.
    Jennifer
  • May 20, 2014

    I oppose any change in the original route that COMED has submitted to the ICC. Any change should be made public and the impact on the residences involved. I read the response by COMED on May 9, 2014 to the proposed alternative route by Kenyon/Deutsch in DeKalb County.. This is unacceptable. Their proposed route would benefit 2 people and do harm to many others. Both Kenyon and Deutsch purchased their properties in 2003 and 2009 respectively. Only 1 residence was purchased after that date in 2012. Treadwell property in 93, Salisbury property in 98, Secco property in 99. Circle K-D horse facility many years earlier. So for "new" land owners to adjust the proposed line to benefit themselves is unjust. Mr. Deutsch lives approximately more than a mile from the proposed route and Mr. Kenyon's residence is in South Elgin. To point a fact, Mr. Kenyon is on the Kane County Board and serves as Forest Preserve Commissioner, as secretary of district, seems like a conflict of interest when he deals with Kane County and COMED. The original route was acceptable for it followed parcel and property lines, did not impact residences, and was a reasonable distance from residences. As stated in testimony by Mr. Deutsch, 375 feet from one his residence was unacceptable, but the proposed Kenyon/Deutsch route would be less than 500 feet from 1 residence, less then 500 feet from Circle K-D horse facility and also less than 500 feet from the Secco residence. Do not consider this Kenyon/Deutsch proposal and stick to the original primary route as submitted on December 2, 2013.
    Robert Treadwell
  • May 20, 2014

    I live in River Ridge in South Elgin and am highly opposed to this project. It seems that there are some alternative routes that would be a much better option for everyone that lives here. Not only will home values go down but seriously, more power lines through an area that is supposed to be enjoyed and used by everyone in the community - a park?!?
    Jamie Galliart
  • May 14, 2014

    No power lines through my backyard please.
    jason
  • May 13, 2014

    We moved to our current South Elgin area home in 2001 !!! Our family property is located at 7N625 Woodcliff Drive, South Elgin, Il 60177. On the west side Bank of the Fox River, North of Stearns Road. My ancestors, The Lloyds, were some of the original founders of the South Elgin Village. I am 5th generation residing in South Elgin Illinois..... My Grandchildren now make this 8 generations still in this area.

    Our family will be directly impacted by this project. The towers will be going directly through/on our property on an easement that no one knew even existed. Keep in mind, this easement is huge. My septic Field sits in it and our 1600 square foot out building is in the middle of it. This large easement is not on our plat of survey and per Kane County they show no records on any of their plat records either. Unfortunately this easement was recorded in Kane County in the late 70's but no one from the Title Companies to the Surveyors ever found it. Based on this HUGE EASEMENT this property was not buildable and basicly now holds 0 (Zero Value) !!! Interesting that Commonwealth Edison had no problem producing it !! Hmmm.

    I QUESTION HOW MANY OTHER HOME OWNERS IMPACTED BY THIS PROJECT HAVE HAD EASEMENTS SHOW UP THAT THEY DID NOT KNOW EXISTED ?

    I have attended most of the Lip Service Meetings that Comm Ed has put on. It was at the Comm. Ed meeting held at Kane County Fair Grounds that I was made aware of this easement on our property by Commonwealth Edison !!! At that time I was also advised about the 2nd proposed route through South Elgin that would allegedly run on the south Side of the CN. Railroad Line. What a farse, I knew then that the second proposed route was IMPOSSIBLE !!! The Satellite imagery that Comm Ed provided was out dated and from before the construction of the Stearns Road Project !!! The alleged 2nd proposed Route runs on the Stearns Road 4 Lane Highway. Comm Ed had to have complete knowledge and been fully aware that the 2nd proposed route was IMPOSSIBLE !!! Needless to say, I had some not so nice things to say to the Commonwealth Edison Officials. I believe Dishonesty and Scam as well as other verbiage that would not be appropriate for this forum rolled out of me !!! Not very lady like for a Grandma in a Bun !!!

    I find it sad that NOW the word is getting out and I am seeing... Stop the Tower Signs on the roads, Channel 2 News Media Coverage etc. When it appears to be too late to stop anything. I recently attended the ICC meeting held at the Hemmens Auditorium in Elgin. Please tell me why the court stenographer was released when it came time for the Question and Answers !!! Please tell me why your ICC representative states that A final ruling will be made in mid July and then we are told that Commonwealth Edison will begin approaching Land Owners for Purchase negotiations' starting in about 3 weeks. I feel that is contradictory given that a decision won't be made till Mid July !!! Hmmm !!!

    Please tell me that Commonwealth Edison will be compensating all of the land owners for the 20% to 40% Loss in Value on all of their Homes !!! Not just those alongside the project route, but the surrounding properties that will also take a huge loss.

    Please Tell me that all the Counties, Kane County being the first, Will be reassessing All properties IMMEDIATELY to drop their assessed tax values by 40% !!!

    Please tell me that our system is really a good / honest system and the ICC judges will rule to stop the project !!! The Only ones benefitting from this project are those that will be gaining $$$ !!!

    Please tell me that 220 Foot space between dwelling and this High Impact EMF Project is Legit as I was told Per Comm Ed and Kane County !!!

    As for the public that reads this !!! Here is my email TLTTETER@YAHOO.COM

    Please let me know if anyone has discovered an unplatted easement !!! Curious to see if we are the only ones !!!

    And also... Kane County Property Owners. Please email me. I believe it is time to lay the ground work for all impacted properties to be reassessed and their Real Estate Taxes Dropped by 40% And begin the process of ensuring that Commonwealth Edison Compensate all property owners for their 40% loss.

    Thank you

    Tracy Teter-Chan




    Tracy Teter-Chan
  • May 12, 2014

    To the ICC:

    Please deny ComEd's proposal to construct the 354kV power lines from Byron to Wayne. As a long term resident of Kane County I am adamantly opposed to the construction of these lines. My parents house is directly in line with the proposed alternate route through Plato township. We live in a rural area with views or rolling farm fields and forests from our backyard, a view that I have enjoyed for the last 28 years. Construction of these lines would sit a few hundred feet from our property, would destroy the aesthetic, and would severely reduce the value of my parent's home. The same could be said for the thousands of people that theses lines would affect. I am also very concerned about the health effects of these lines, not only for my family but also for the children who attend the schools that would be affected.

    How can destroying the value of thousands of homes and properties to save a few bucks on an energy bill be a public benefit, especially knowing that the Byron nuclear plant has a very limited lifespan? It seems like this entire project is unnecessary, but if the lines must be run then BURY THE LINES! The extra cost associated with burying the lines would be far less than health effects and reduction in property values associated with above ground transmission lines. When will we start putting the health of residents and the rights of property owners above the bottom line costs of big business? Please do the right thing and deny this application to ComEd.

    Sincerely,

    Dan Hadley

    Daniel Hadley
  • May 12, 2014

    I strongly disapprove of any high voltage power lines being erected near schools or residential homes. The money saved is not worth the health risk to our children. Studies have shown that these power lines can cause cancer. Let's put this money saving idea in our back pockets and move on. Saving money will never trump saving even one life.
    Karen Redmond
  • May 12, 2014

    ICC- I am in support of the Sugar Ridge residents in South Elgin who are opposed to the construction of new transmission lines closer to their homes. It will not only hurt home values, but medical studies have shown there are SERIOUS health risks for people, mainly children, who live within those close proximities to high voltage power lines. Please make the smart and ethical choice and insist that they either move their proposed power lines away from homes (on the other side of the tracks) or not be allowed to construct at all.
    Jenna Schaberger
  • May 12, 2014

    As a resident of the Sugar Ridge community, I oppose ComEd's attempt to utilize property on the north side of the train tracks to run a 345kv tower and power line system when they had already agreed to Kane County giving them permission to use the property on the south side of the tracks.

    Please force ComEd to honor the agreement with Kane County and put their towers on the south side of the tracks.

    Terence Kisly
  • May 12, 2014

    I oppose this project completely. The more I read about it the more unnecessary it seems to be. I see a economists saying, no is not feasible. This type of project has never been done before in the state. I see electrical engineers saying it Will not help the reliability or transmission of electricity. What it WILL do is ruin beautiful subdivisions with children living and playing in it in South Elgin and many other areas. The proposed route is 20 feet over people's property in River and Sugar Ridge. That is completely unacceptable with the unproven safety of EMF. When the CDC and WHO have guidelines to keep away from EMF we should know it is not completely unfounded. Comed didn't even do a study on this.
    If Terry Donnelly from ComEd really takes our concerns seriously and this unneeded project actually makes its way through, please consider the alternate route and give the residence of South Elgin a small reprieve
    Thank You.

    Franks Schaberger
  • May 9, 2014

    I along with all the comments before me and the hundreds of people who attended both local
    ComED / ICC forums strongly oppose the Grand Praire Gateway Project. I just watched the 10:00pm
    news and saw the report of ANOTHER ComEd rate increase. Yes, another ComEd price hike !!!!
    The report stated their will be a 38% increase effective next month. This is supposedly due to the
    harsh winter we had. Here's another reason to BURY THE LINES !! On top of that increase their will
    be an additional $3.00 a month increase in delivery fees. This is on top of the $5.00 increase we
    already received earlier this year. Com Ed doesn't inform people about the Gateway project but
    has no issues making sure everyone knows about the price increases !! Bottom line is Com Ed
    should use all this extra money to BURY THE LINES ( if they are even needed at all ).

    ICC -

    Please review everyones comments and seriously do something about this terrible project.

    Thank You.

    Ralph Perry

    Ralph Perry - River Ridge resident
  • May 9, 2014

    The South Elgin Parks & Recreations Department posted the NO MOWING signs in the area to provide a sound buffer to Stearns Road. For any questions, please contact Jim Reuter at 847-622-0003 or email at jreuter@southelgin.com.
    Jim Reuter
  • May 7, 2014

    Please note, I am against the Grand Prairie Gateway Project. After researching this case it is clear to me that Com Ed has negotiated with South Elgin and Kane Co. in bad faith. I am aware that 2 Com Ed representatives visited with our village attorney and village administrator and agreed that if clearance was given by South Elgin and Kane County to route these new lines on the south side of the railroad tracks and along Stearns Rd. that Com Ed would utilize this alternative route. I am also aware that after the alternate route was presented, Com Ed said the offer was off the table. This is a clear example of bad faith. Not even the 2 representatives that were sent out to meet with the Village of South Elgin could believe how their employer (Com Ed) was behaving.
    Secondly, in the interview on CBS Terry Donnelly said that the new lines "should" provide $500,000,000 in net savings. The word "should" is suspect. What are the true figures, we all know that the savings are undoubtedly inflated in order to help sell this project to the ICC. What if there isn't $500,000,000 of savings...do they take the lines back down...I don't think so. Even if there were $500,000,000 of net savings (which again is most likely an unfounded number), what will that save the consumer. The consumers bordering the project will already be $50,000-$90,000 up side down per house, I don't think a dollar or two off the electric bill will be helpful.
    Thirdly, the plant in which these lines will originate in Byron is teetering on no longer being in operation by Com Eds own admission!
    Lastly, I have 3 children and I fear for the possible illnesses that they will be subject to with the installation of these lines including Leukemia. When my husband and I purchased our home we were so proud to live in a community as highly rated as South Elgin...now we're just plain scared.
    ICC at minimum require Com Ed live up to the deal they made to keep these lines on the South Side of the railroad tracks...preferably make Com Ed bury the whole line and you should surely study the round numbers that Com Ed is advertising, I would be willing to bet that they can not be substantiated.

    Suzanne Levin
  • May 7, 2014

    ICC - Please do the right thing and make Com Ed bury the lines through the River Ridge and Sugar Ridge subdivisions in South Elgin! You have 287 public comments about this case, and ALL OF THEM ARE OPPOSED TO THE BULIDING OF THE TOWERS in our neighborhood, schools, parks and residences. The towers are bad for the environment, people and the economy of South Elgin. Please, BURY THE LINES!
    Connie Jones
  • May 7, 2014

    I wish to voice my opposition to the Grand Prairie Gateway Project. Commonwealth Edison should not receive approval to proceed with this project. They have not proven that this is a public neccesity and I have read that they are considering closing plants including the plant that this project will connect to.
    Although my home is not directly effected, several of my neighbors have shown me just how close these new proposed power lines will be to their homes. I am astonished that putting these types of high power/high tension power lines so close to peoples property and schools is even being considered. I know there are alternate areas for these lines and the ICC should require that this project use a route that doesn't destroy my neighbors property values and possibly health providing that Commonwealth Edison can even prove that these lines are needed.

    Sugar Ridge Resident

    Beth Starkey
  • May 6, 2014

    I am a small business owner how lives in Bowes Creek Country Club, near where the power lines are proposed. My children will attend Otter Creek Elementary school, where the power lines will also be. I strongly oppose the above ground placement of these high voltage wires. Homes and schools near the route are preexisting. Placement of these lines will potentially have a negative impact on property values, the environment, and our and our childrens health. I understand the need for upgrades, but not at such a great expense to people and communities who have been here long before the proposed power lines. It is feasible to place these lines underground, at a much high monetary cost, but sometimes that is just the cost of doing business. Please don't allow Commonwealth Edison to potentially jeopardize the value of our homes and the health of our children.
    Chanda von Heimburg
  • May 6, 2014

    Dear Commissioners:

    My fiancé and I live at 12N032 Waughon Road Hampshire, IL 60140. We purchased our home on July 22, 2013. On Sunday April 20, 2014, we heard about the proposed project for the first time through some neighbors and the route is on our property. As you may know we attended the public hearing on April 24th; we would like to reiterate some of our concerns that we mentioned at the public hearing.

    After the public hearing, two ComEd representatives (Mark Falcone and Fidel Marquez) pulled us aside and mentioned they would reach out to us to discuss the error. They apologized for the mistake that had been made. We exchanged contact information and as of today May 5th, we have not heard from ComEd. On May 1, 2013, ComEd submitted a supplement to the verified petition. This supplement talks directly about our situation and how we have not been notified. ComEd submitted this supplement to tell the Administrative Law Judges that their list is full and accurate. However, I think the bigger issue is that we still (to this date May 5, 2014) have not received one single notification from ComEd or the ICC. If we had not gone over to our neighbors on Sunday April 20th we still would have no idea about this project. We have not been given the same rights as everyone else to attend public meetings and to intervene in the process. This is a very sad situation and we hope that the Commissioners and the Administrative Law Judges will look at this discrepancy and determine that all homeowners and property owners need to be given the same rights. We are only one household, but this line will ruin our hopes of living in our home and raising our children there. It is sad that ComEd can take away everything we have worked so hard for. We deserve the opportunity to be heard instead of ignored.

    Furthermore, there is a proposed alternative to the primary route that has been submitted for consideration that again we were not made aware of and have found out that none of the other neighbors were aware of either. If ComEd says they would like to operate a transparent project why must we keep hearing of the project through 3rd party sources when it should be coming directly from them since it directly relates to our property? We have also read many of the briefs filed by interveners in the process and have found that many of the remarks made by those attorneys in regards to our circumstance are inaccurate. Some stated that our "silence" of the project and alterations to the primary route was our acceptance of the alteration which is 100% not true. We simply were not aware of it. We now feel that people are taking advantage of our particular situation knowing we can't do anything about it because all the deadlines have passed. We, at least, would like the ICC to carefully review those types of comments relative to our situation. Since we learned about that project, we have been patient and respectful and only ask that we be treated the same way with the same rights as everyone else. We would also ask that you take a serious look at your processes for projects like this as it appears there are many flaws.

    From what knowledge we've gained we have a strong inclination that we will take a financial loss on our home and property which we can simply not afford as we are just getting started in our lives in hopes of building a family very soon. We would like to at least have some comfort from ComEd and the ICC that we will be "whole" on our mortgage when it's all said and done especially since the project will be of financial gain to ComEd at our expense.

    I encourage the commissioners to take this into deep consideration this issue and look at either (1) requiring ComEd to use their current easements along the railroad tracks, (2) allow us to have the same rights as everyone else, (3) simply deny the project, or (4) require the burial of the lines for the entire route.

    Thank you.

    Riley Skaggs
  • May 6, 2014

    I would like to state my opposition to the project as proposed. The primary route through South Elgin is going to brush over Sugar and River Ridge. CBS channel 2 Chicago came out for a piece they aired on the 10 o'clock news about this and asked great questions and were here for some time in the neighborhood. We were all kind of disappointed they didn't bring up the alternate route when it aired. They really cut it up on the editing floor! Terry Donnelly the ComEd COO said he takes our complaints seriously when interviewed for the news clip. Why then won't he work with us on this? If the ICC tells ComEd to us alternate route south of the train tracks that alone would bypass a large percentage of homes along the whole proposed route. We trying to get a hold of Mr. Donnelly from ComEd but have yet had no luck. If he means what he said on TV and really cares he will reach out and work with us.

    Thank you.

    Thomas
  • May 5, 2014

    I am opposed to the location of the towers in the South Elgin area. South Elgin and Kane County worked together to provide an alternate route farther away from residents' backyards by placing them along Stearns Road south of the railroad tracks. If ComEd is given the right to erect its towers then a condition should be imposed mandating that the towers be erected south of the railroad tracks along Stearns Road. Thank you.
    Scott Richmond
  • May 5, 2014

    I respectfully request the commission to deny the application of ComEd. The Sugar Ridge subdivision has already been subjucated to power lines literally in our backyard foe some years. Since that initial installation, property values have decreased as some families with small children moved from the area due to the controversy surrounding the electromagnetic influences on the health go the human body. We stayed only because our children were much older.

    ComEd has the means and technology to build lines underground which is 100% safer than their proposal. Please require them to do so for our sake and the sake of taxpayers and the young children who live in this subdivision.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    John J Castaneda
    17 Locust Court
    South Elgin Il 60177
    847-697-2341

    John J Castaneda
  • May 5, 2014

    This seems so easy in the planning phase. ComEd should work with its users and the community and move the power lines to the South side of Stearns OR bury them all.
    Marisol Acevedo
  • May 5, 2014

    Please bury the lines or find a better place for them. Our kids lives an future are at stake! Let's stop looking at cost and worrying about human life!
    Margaret Vollman
  • May 5, 2014

    I believe that the Sugar Ridge residents are correct in their protest regarding the placements and type of equipment being proposed. It seems to me that either an underground placement along communities like Sugar Ridge or at minimum relocating the structures and lines closer to Stearns road would be a cause that the ICC was founded for.

    I would hope that the local politicians and the ICC board are not being influenced by and for political gain and perks from Com Ed. It seems toe that if a local politicians family or ICC members family lived in Sugar Ridge that the above mentioned reasonable accommodations would be made.

    Stewart Levin
  • May 5, 2014

    I support the Sugar Ridge residents in South Elgin. Kane county said ComEd could use the property south of the train tracks and Com Ed agreed then changed their mind. Please use the alternate route south of the tracks as agreed originally. Thank you
    Karie Schaberger
  • May 5, 2014

    At what cost does Commonwealth Edison put on the Health and Safety of the residents this would affect.Oh 500 million savings over 5 ears.I have a better answer. Spend the money to bury the lines and spread that savings over 10-15 years.This is just another example of Big corporations taking advantage of the little people.

    Please don't approve this plan.

    James Hannigan
  • May 5, 2014

    Please consider the best option here... Bury the lines! The mistakes we make today after it affects too many individuals and families. 15 years from now, everybody will say why didnt we bury the lines. We need to be proactive!
    Liz
  • May 5, 2014

    I understand that com ed needs to improve inastructure, however there is a perfectly good alternative to putting these high voltage massive structures in our back yard. Across the railroad tracks, along Sterns Road is a perfect location. Why is com ed not trying to easily accommodate this request? Please do not put this in my backyard!!
    Joanne Yakes
  • May 5, 2014

    Please bury these lines. I live just south of the Stearns Road Bridge on the east side of the Fox River. These lines worry me for the families that live close and the wild life, including several pairs of Bald Eagles that live nearby.
    Martha Chesterfield
  • May 5, 2014

    Please don't do this to my beautiful neighborhood! Bury them or put them south of Sterns Road where there are no homes!
    Jeanette Trumbo
  • May 5, 2014

    ICC.....If ComEd claims that they are not yet working on this project, then why are there white flags, stakes and signs that say 'Do not remove' and 'Do not now' just beyond my backyard? How can work be started on a project that has not received approval?
    Sue
  • May 5, 2014

    An initial brief was submitted by counsel to the Illinois Commerce Commission on April 30, 2014. The brief appears detailed and cites various parts of testimony, case law, and utility statutes. This was six days after over 300 people appeared before certain members of the ICC staff at a public forum in Elgin. No mention or concerns expressed at that forum are even alluded to in that brief. Due to the length and detail of the brief, it is inconceivable that the staff was not writing this document before or at the time of this forum.

    It is extremely disappointing that no revisions to this project were referenced in the brief. Did the authors of this brief even consider one comment from all the comments citizens wrote on this ICC site? What was the Elgin forum intended to accomplish?

    Robert Avants
  • May 5, 2014

    ICC, Why did ComEd Agree to work with South Elgin on using the alternate route South of the train tracks. The village asked Kane County Forest Preserve to let ComEd put the towers on the south side of the tracks, and they agreed. Even the Forest Preserve District knows we deserve a buffer to these power lines. No homes are on that side on the tracks. The Comed lawyers had an agreement in principle and then changed there mind. Please give us the buffer we are asking for if this project is aloud to move on. I feel for the U-46 school and other people of the 4 county area that don't even have an alternate route in the plans. Please tell them to use Ours to bypass two subdivisions of homes.

    Thank You

    Sugar Ridge Resident
  • May 5, 2014

    I am opposed to the path selcted by Com Ed for the Grand Prairie Gateway Project. My property backs up to the railroad tracks. Com Ed seeks an easement to come onto my side of the tracks and I protest this. I feel it should go on the opposite side of the tracks.
  • May 2, 2014

    ICC please look into the banter regarding MJ Electric already being contracted to do work on this project. The project is not approved..is the ICC ruling just a formality to appease citizens and is this already a done deal for Com ed? I sure hope not. Citizens have spent time and energy opposing this project. South Elgin and Kane Co have already made land available on the South side of the railroad tracks (along Stearns Road) in South Elgin to keep these monstrosities out of our back yards. Com ed originally agreed that if the land was made available to them to utilize south of the tracks and away from houses they would make the change and when the land was made available by South Elgin and Kane County, Com Ed rescinded the alternate route away from peoples home with no explanation. ICC, do your job and stop this project. The necessity is yet to be identified. They're putting stakes in the ground and signs up yet this project is not approved....
    Jason
  • May 1, 2014

    Dear ICC Commissioners, please do not allow this project to continue as submitted. As many others have stated there are numerous reasons as to why this is WRONG and ComEd should not to be allowed to proceed with this project as proposed.

    As a resident of River Ridge for 15 years I would hate to see my neighbors suffer with lines running over their yards or to see our park overtaken with power these lines.

    The correct answer here is to bury these lines. Is this the most cost effective, no, but is it the best option for the residents and communities, YES.

    The additional cost involved in burying these lines should be a non-issue since we as consumers will pay for this project whether the lines are buried or not. Please listen to the people. Do the correct thing and bury these lines!!

    Thank you

    Keith Kuligowski
  • May 1, 2014

    I say No for ComEd's power Grand Prairie Gateway Project as proposed. They need to move them further away The River Ridge and Sugar Ridge homes. They will be in these peoples back yards (20) feet from property lines!! We will all hear their hiss. They need to go on the south side of Stearns Road which is wide open and would not be very expensive to do. Why do they insist putting them in out back yards!! Please use the alternate Route if you insist this is a project Illinois needs, You will help many families out.

    In California, there is a "set back" distance on transmission lines from private property of 150 feet, but a 2005 study by Oxford University's childhood cancer research group reports, "Children living within 220 yards of an overhead power line had a 70 percent greater risk of falling victim to leukemia."

    Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_5656146_dangers-high-tension-power-lines_.html#ixzz30Qa48sAu

    Richard Jonas
  • May 1, 2014

    I am opposed to the route that has been proposed for the placement of high voltage power lines in our community. There are other options that would have less impact on peoples health and homes.
    People's lives should be the primary concerns here, not Commonwealth Edison's bottom line.

    Jim Hines
  • May 1, 2014

    I would rather have the lines buried than to see more towers near my home. The extra cost for burying the lines could be passed on to all customers.
    Don Rusnak
  • May 1, 2014

    I would like to add my voice to the many neighbors in the River Ridge subdivision who are AGAINST this project. Please require the proposed lines be buried.
    Kristin Greenlee
  • May 1, 2014

    The new line will be much to close to my house. I will be disturbed and inconvenienced by the sound it makes, and the value of my home will be less than it should be when it comes time to sell. No one buys a house so close to electric lines!!!!!
    Janice Tompkins
  • May 1, 2014

    As a resident of the Oak Ridge Farm Homeowners Association, which is located adjacent to the Grand Prairie Gateway Project, in unincorporated Plato Township, I wish to express my objection and opposition to the Project, as proposed, and request the ICC's intervention.

    I have three small children that reside approximately 400 feet from the proposed route. There have been numerous studies conducted on high voltage power lines and their link to childhood leukemia. I can't believe that the government would be willing to support a project that could cause health problems for anyone, especially small children without conclusive proof that they are safe. That proof does not exist! Please force ComEd to change their plan and bury the lines. This would eliminate the health risks for all of the people that live near these lines. As our state representative, it is your responsibility to see that all of our citizens are safe. ComEd is willing to put my family at risk; please don't do the same.

    Carrie Zierk
  • May 1, 2014

    I am opposed the Grand Prairie Gateway Project. I think the power lines are too close to where our children play and spend their time. The wires should be buried. This is danger to our children.
  • April 30, 2014

    ComEd, please find another option! The general public was mislead by ComEd and was told that there was a potential option to put the power lines on the south side of Stearns road.

    In our advancing world of technology, I find it hard to believe that ComEd can not come up with an alternative regardless of costs.

    You can't put a price on the health of our children and neighbors. It might be time to come together and chain ourselves to the trees during ground breaking!

    River Ridge Resident of 15 years
  • April 30, 2014

    I am against the above ground development of power lines that will be located less than 1 mile way from my place of residence.
    Cynthia Newland
  • April 30, 2014

    I don't want the gateway project to be approved. Use other forms of energy, solar wind. This is unnecessary and ruins the area they are going through. Possible health hazzards to life and decline in value of homes is my concern. If it is necessary make them BURY the cables. I don't care about the cost.
    Yvonne Vallone
  • April 30, 2014

    The construction of this transmission line would be deeply disrespectful to the residents of Kane County and and Illinois in general.

    Not only will this hurt property values and the landscape of this region, but most importantly, ComEd would be directly putting the well-being and safety of Illinois residents (who also happen to be their customers) in jeopardy. That is disgusting and wrong and will not be accepted.

    For a company that says they pride themselves on environmental responsibility and conservation, it is highly hypocritical to be proposing such an extreme, damaging, irresponsible, and unnecessary change to the landscape of Illinois.

    Patrick Knudsen
  • April 30, 2014

    As a longtime resident of Plato, I am appalled that ComEd is coming forth with this proposal to tear up our city and neighboring cities in the name of "energy." There are alternatives to this and of course, corporate ComEd has no appreciation for the well being of their customers. Leave it to shameful ComEd to consider the cheapest choice only to leave the homeowners health and financial well being at risk.
    Jess
  • April 30, 2014

    I live in the River Ridge subdivision in South Elgin. We have received notice from Commonwealth Edison regarding the new Gateway Project. After investigation, it has come to my attention that the new power lines are currently set to be installed parallel to the current lines, however 70 feet north. This location puts power lines directly in the back yards of some of my neighbors, right at the edge of a park heavily used for sporting events and playing children, and even closer to my home.

    We have been told that there are alternate options, including the burial of the lines, movement of the lines south between the new Stearns road and railroad tracks or even entirely south of Stearns road. I am asking that you approve one of the alternatives, preferably the burial of the lines.

    If the lines are installed as currently proposed, you will negatively affect our property values, as well as the enjoyment our properties. In addtion, Com Ed stated that although they don't believe there would be any negative health affects, several people dispute their claims. In addition, they stated that it is likely to hear a buzzing from the lines.

    Our home values have already been considerably affected by the foreclosures in the area. We have already suffered the adverse effects of the Stearns road extension and the constant noise of traffic that echoes through our once quite neighborhood. Enough is enough!!!

    I am asking to be respected and heard. There are viable options for approval. Please consider them and do the right thing.


    Terry Karner
  • April 30, 2014

    This project seems to be irresponsible of ComEd. Aside from the hardship it is causing homeowners, by risking property value and the personal health and well being of residents, the project is an unnecessary answer to finding energy.

    Shame on you ComEd.

    Gwen Hadley
  • April 30, 2014

    My feeling is that Commonwealth Edison is acting irresponsible is the Grand Prairie Project. Whether the power lines are above ground or below ground, this whole project needs to be evaluated as to its need. I feel Commonwealth Edison should act in a responsible manner. I feel energy audits need to be conducted on major companies and corporations. Cutting energy use should be more of a priority than building high voltage towers.
    David Hadley
  • April 30, 2014

    I am a home owner in west Elgin. My husband and I built our home 29 years. Our property is south of Corron Rd. We have lived in this rural setting and have enjoyed this tranquil setting and quiet way of life. We look out in our backyard to rolling grand praries and beautiful farmland. We recently found out the alternate route for the Grand Prairie Gateway project would be crossing these grand prairies. This project would completely destroy this beautiful land. We are also so very concerned about the health hazard of these high voltage lines. Please consider what these power lines would do to this rural setting, the people and the homes around them.
    Susan Hadley
  • April 29, 2014

    Burying the lines is the ONLY acceptable solution that enables this project to move forward without adversely affecting families, children and property values across the entire route. Do the right thing. As a resident of River Ridge subdivision, I am outraged with the currently proposed route and with the lack of care demonstrated by ComEd to not pursue an ethical resolution to this problem, but to instead be driven by strictly financial motivations. Both resolutions can be achieved with common sense. If it costs more to bury the lines, so be it. Pass the cost on to the consumers instead of unfairly demanding the residents along this route pay for the project with their health and property values.
    Ginny Wolak
  • April 29, 2014

    I ask that you consider a relocation of these power lines for environmental, health, and aesthetic purposes!
    Angela Gall
  • April 28, 2014

    I found the link online that said Exelon is threatening to close three nuclear generating stations and one of them is Byron. here is the link from March 9th 2014.
    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-03-09/business/ct-exelon-closing-nuclear-plants-0308-biz-20140309_1_quad-cities-plant-byron-plant-exelon

    ALL the residence in the Sugar Ridge and River Ridge area are totally opposed to this project. Com Ed is being unreasonable in there bull headed approach to this whole project from start to Finnish. Please read Steve Ward's rebuttal (the South Elgin village President) in Rebuttal Testimony on behalf of the Village of South Elgin
    Derke Price on 4-3-14 in the documents.

    I feel they are trying to threaten closure of the Byron plant and others unless the ICC lets them install new power lines to make the stations profitable. They will threaten to close the plans and cost the state of Illinois tax revenue and jobs. They have an expedited schedule so they can ram this project through. Just today I have a neighbor that lives on Arlington Lane that thinks the power lines are going south of the train tracks and give the residents the needed buffer. Commonsense tells me that there should not even be a question that they will be south of the tracks on the WIDE OPEN STEARNS ROAD CORRIDOR but that's not Com Eds plan. They don't need this project, energy use is should be going down in the future. You cant even buy incandescent light bulbs anymore, my office in Naperville just got 500 solar cells on the roof last fall and is generating a surplus of energy on some days. Furthermore Illinois population is not growing. Illinois Population, percent change, April 1, 2010 to July 1 definition and source info Population, percent change, April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2013 that's down 0.4%.

    I remember a few years ago in Naperville I saw signs all over the place " No more power towers " a few years later they went up. In Woodstock signs " No more power towers" a few years later the towers went up.
    Com Ed already started marking the spots where they want to put the new poles with white paint and sticks. I have the pictures of them. The com ed employee just said he was just a guy doing what his boss told him to do!! Is this a done deal already? Why is Com Ed asking the ICC to recommend the go ahead with this proposed project? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Time to call the major network investigative reporters and see who is pushing this through. They have the resources that the residents don't have. This proposed project has a bad smell to it and Illinois politics written all over it. We the people of Illinois are all too tired of this game.

    Step back and look at the big picture ICC, put the breaks on this project until Exelon decides if they are going to keep the plant open. they said they will decide by the end of the year. This should be no rush as it will only save individual consumers a few dollars a year.Im sure they wont mind. The state is getting strong armed!! Why rush this unneeded project through as fast as they can!!!




    Thomas Redmond
  • April 28, 2014

    I have lived in far west Elgin for 20 years. The reason I moved to this area was that it was not very populated and there we no huge power lines. If these lines can be put underground, they should do that, just as they do in the City of Chicago. The area will be greatly reduced.
    Christine S.
  • April 28, 2014

    No electrical towers in river ridge.
    Heather
  • April 28, 2014

    I am requesting support from the ICC to require that Com Ed bury the planned 345 kilowatt power lines that they are installing on the 60 mile stretch of land to Elburn-DeKalb. I have lived in the River Ridge subdivision in South Elgin for 15 years and love my home, my neighbors and living in South Elgin. I appreciate the ICC holding the last public forum at Hemmens for those of us to attend and hear as interveners and other individuals presented their comments. After attending that meeting, I am more concerned about the potential dangers of having the power lines over our properties. It's beyond disappointing that Com Ed, not my family and I, are having us now make the decision to move from my home of 15 years because of the adverse impacts of having those lines near my property line. We didn't ask for this....why are we having to strenuously oppose the power lines erected over our yards, pools, walkways?
    Instead of 'passing on the savings to the customers' as mentioned in the meeting, Com Ed can keep our rates as they are now and use the 'savings' to pay for burying the lines instead.

    Please consider this decision seriously as you determine your approval/ non approval. We ask that you put yourselves in our shoes ....what would you want?

    Thank you for your consideration ,
    Therese Vasseur

    Therese Vasseur
  • April 28, 2014

    To The ICC and Commonwealth Edison Company,
    First of all thank you for your time and effort you gave us regarding the meeting at Hemmens on Wednesday night the 24th of April. I'm sure this process is not easy.

    Listening to all of the attendees including yourselves it seems the simple way to resolve the issues and do the right thing for everyone is to bury the lines. We all know that your company has the ability to do this and can do it with the proper planning and Project Management professionals you have @ Comm Ed.

    I am a technical recruiter in the Engineering field and have recently placed over 25 Senior Level Engineers in the Coal Fired Power industry specializing in Emissions, Nox and R&D Analysis Engineers to redesign and improve the Air Quality for those Boilers and Stacks. These are units that are mounted inside the boilers to control and contain the pollutants and process based on new EPA regulations set forth by our current administration, you know President Obama from Illinois! I know it's a small % of improvement however a step in the right direction.

    We live in the River Ridge subdivision about 1/8 of mile North into the subdivision and really not sure what the effect will be for us. I do know that based on facts and findings available on line and facts presented at the meeting that there are health hazards with those overhead lines close to those schools, day care, all residents, preserved Forrest and wetlands and possibly myself and in general the environment. We should do the right thing for the those impacted here and chose to bury the lines even though it being a small % inclusive that impacts everyone and keep the land and our environment in tact for those people impacted by the Gateway Project.

    Please reconsider the project, reevaluate the cost and let's plan this thing even if it means passing some of the cost onto the consumer by putting those lines underground where it impacts those mentioned over that 30 year period, even though it sounds like based on recent profit and revenues at 24 billion you can absorb those additional costs. Let's do something right the first time here , why don't you accept this opportunity to lead by example and for once listen to us that have to live with these issues for now and people involved in the future. It sure sounds like a simple solution to a big negative impact to our environment and population. Thank you

    John W Kelker
    Owner and Technical Recruiter
    STI
    1250 Larkin Ave # 210
    Elgin, Il. 60123
    847-214-9709 W
    630-336-0309 C
    Jkelker@sourceti.com

    John W Kelker
  • April 28, 2014

    Do NOT approve this project. We DO NOT want high voltage power lines running through our area. If they must be built, bury the lines underground. This will devastate local property values, even further than they've already declined...
    Christine Patrick
  • April 28, 2014

    We just purchased a home in the Bowes Creek subdivision and unfortunately NOW am hearing about this through news as it was not disclosed to us prior. Having a medical background and having done MUCH research on health concerns of living near high voltage power lines, I am appalled that this is even being proposed. There is NO documented research that can prove these do not pose a health risk and multiple studies that actually DO suggest a negative impact on health, increase in cancer, and many other negative consequences. As a mother of two small toddlers this sickens me. I have read hundreds of residents stating they would rather pay the increased cost to bury the lines... how can this be argued now?! Bury the lines!!! There is no price tag that can be put on the health of our residents in our community.
    Kelly
  • April 28, 2014

    Below is the majority of the speech I gave at the ICC Public Hearing on April 23rd.

    My story is only one of many, but no individual deserves to live this story. On July 22nd, 2013 my fiancé and I closed on our very first home. We used up our small savings but we were finally able to put a down payment on our dream home. On that very same day, at our new home, my fiancé asked me to be his wife—it was a day we will never forget. Since July we have been thinking about the day we will raise our children on this land with so much room for them to run free.

    On Easter Sunday, just five days ago, we learned these hopes and aspirations would soon be crushed. We stopped by one of our neighbors to wish them a Happy Easter. During the conversation they brought up the project and asked us if we had heard anything about it and we said no we have not. We got home on Sunday night and did some research, to our surprise the primary route runs right through our backyard. We were astonished and could not believe that we had not been informed of this when it was on our property. We further learned that this has been going on for a while and we knew nothing. Further to our surprise our names were not even on the list of property owners that were notified! How is that possible? How can ComEd proceed with a proposed route without even doing due diligence to the homeowners.

    We went to talk to our neighbors down the road and we found out some more shocking news. Nine families in our neighborhood got together and hired attorneys to get the line moved away from their properties and to place it directly beside our house. This is a different route than the proposed primary route and it was recently recommended to the ICC in a pending case. Once again we were not made aware of it.

    Is this really a game of time, politics and money? Or more importantly is this a game of turning neighborhoods and communities against each other? Can everyone hire an attorney and keep getting the route moved to another road, another home, and another family? I really hope not, we are real people, real families.

    Since Sunday night my fiancé and I have stayed up countless hours and wiped away countless tears trying to figure out what is best for us. We realize that no one is fighting for us except ourselves and we have to give this fight everything we have. However, in this game of money and politics, we lose because we do not have either of those. We will use the little money we do have to fight this battle; however, we already used our small savings for this house—our house. We are also paying for our own wedding in September. It hurts so bad knowing that in only a year; we might lose both our house and our wedding to a problem we did not even ask for.

    We understand that we are only one—one voice, one property owner, one family, and one young couple with hopes and dreams. But our voice matters and our opinions should be heard. There are many other families and potential families that this will affect and I hope and pray that you take into consideration the lasting impact this will have on our lives and the lives of many other families.

    We urge the ICC to honor the voice of all residents and families and decline ComEd’s request to continue on with this project. ComEd already owns property along the railroad tracks, so why was this route moved away from the railroad tracks in the first place? And isn’t ComEd supposed to use the shortest route so it costs the least amount of money? If so why would ComEd take away someone’s property instead of using their own existing property? The ICC should also look into the option of burying the lines near homes.

    Most importantly the ICC needs to take into deep consideration the words you are hearing from citizens and fight with our voice to deny this project.

    If you haven’t listened to one word I have said I want you to remember this: My fiancé, Riley, and I have tried to do everything right in our lives and we have always been committed to being good citizens. We went to school and got our degree, we completed higher education and we have good jobs, we saved money and bought our first home, we are hard workers and are trying to live the American Dream. In the last five days we have learned that none of that matters and we may lose what we worked so hard for. And we won’t lose it by our own actions but by the actions of others.

    My story and everyone else’s story is real, how beneficial are these towers really going to be to ComEd customers and is it worth taking everything from a handful of hard working property owners? Please put yourself in my position for one second. You will see that my fiancé and I are a young couple trying to start our lives together, and that opportunity is being taken from us, without us even knowing.

    Rachel Lange and Riley Skaggs
  • April 28, 2014

    No
    Tim Greco
  • April 28, 2014

    These lines need to go underground. I don't think that is even much better, but may be the only option. When there will be 600 children spending 6 years of their lives next to these high powered lines while going to school its inconceivable that ComEd would be allowed to do this. These parents have no choice but to send their children to this school. The expense may be greater going underground but lets put ethics before MONEY people!! This is an elementary school!! Otter Creek.
    Jaime Hjelm
  • April 28, 2014

    As a 50 year resident of South Elgin, Kane County, Illinois I am strongly opposed to the proposed above ground electrical transmission lines and related towers.
    I understand that per Illinois law, Commonwealth Edison is obligated to explore the lowest cost option.
    It is time to have Illinois law amended to allow exploration of multiple options, including but not limited to the burial of lines along the proposed route.
    As an electricity consumer, I would be open to paying a related higher cost per kilowatt hour to accommodate this expense.

    Jeffrey A. McMenamin
  • April 28, 2014

    We say NO to the Com Ed Grand Prairie Gateway - we feel the erection of power lines next to the River Ridge neighborhood will not only reduce the value of our homes, but will also have a negative impact on our community. With home values going down, the tax base will be reduced, affecting community services and the ability to attract new homeowners and business to South Elgin. It will also have a negative impact on the wildlife in the areas that will be deforested for the project and affect our enjoyment of our neighborhood and surrounding areas. One of the reasons we moved to River Ridge is because we liked the areas around this subdivision. Find someplace else for the power lines - better yet find another way to do this.
    Marisa Bloomquist
  • April 28, 2014

    I am writing today to voice my opposition to another line of high tension wires being considered to be run through our neighborhood. We already have one line of towers and now Commonwealth Edison wants to run another line of towers parallel to the existing but closer to our neighborhoods, homes and parks. This will only degrade our slowly recovering property values and of course will pose a threat to our health. There is room on the other side of the existing power lines to erect this additional eyesore but Commonwealth Edison will need to get authorization from the county in order to proceed. I understand that burying the lines is expensive but with the profits that are being taken from the consumers in Illinois they can certainly afford it.

    Please deny the erection of another line of towers in our backyards.

    Sincerely,
    Charles Balboa
    South Elgin, IL

    Charles Balboa
  • April 28, 2014

    Please do the right thing and bury the lines for the com ed grand prairie gateway project. There are so many reasons for not running the lines above ground which the commission has heard time and time again. Com Ed continually counters with cost restrictions. No price can be put on the lives of children. Please, I beg of the commission, do not allow the lines to be installed above ground. Thank you.
    Barbara Auwerda
  • April 28, 2014

    I do not want ComEd to add power lines in my neighborhood as it will decrease my property value by 30% or more.
    Josephine Bachelder
  • April 28, 2014

    Dear ICC Commissioners, I attended the public forum on the Gateway Project on April 24, 2014 at the Hemmens Auditorium in Elgin. I listened to citizen after citizen comment on their strong opposition to this project. Regrettably the decision makers in this case were not even in attendance. From farmers to business owners, retirees to families with small children, from the superintendant of U46 and to the young engaged couple starting their life in a home with these pending towers looming in the background....person after person shared their stories as to why it is just WRONG for Comm Ed to be allowed to proceed with this project as submitted. Com Ed repeatedly talks about the high cost involved in burying these lines. Guess who will pay for this project whether the lines are buried or not....US!!!! Listen to the people. Bury the lines. Do the right thing!!!!!
    Beth Theriault
  • April 28, 2014

    I am a resident of River Ridge subdivision and I am opposed to the placement of more towers and high voltage lines which has the potential of lowering property values and impacting the health of the residents in this area. There are alternate routes that would have less impact to people but if the lines are placed in our subdivision BURY THEM!
    Gary Jones
  • April 28, 2014

    Please do not proceed with putting up power lines. We do not want our property values to go down. Please consider how the residence of south elgin feel about this. Thank you for listening!!!
    Megan Duginski
  • April 28, 2014

    I have been following this since the beginning. Interesting how a few selfish individuals are. I have spoke to the concerns at the pubic forum on 4/25/14. I once again state, that any deviation of the proposed routes should be resubmitted for public comment and scrutiny. When I looked at the Kenyon Documents, it was very disturbing to see the route this "farmer" chose to submit. Since he lives in Kane county, does not live near the proposed lines, his only interest lies within himself. As for his dairy farmer friend who was concerned with stray voltage for his cows, why would you want the lines to border two sides of a horse facility? I raise some calves that are pastured on the back of my property, would they not be effected by stray voltage? The proposed COMED primary route was a fair route, that would not cause harm to the residents of Lukens/Baseline road, would not border two sides of Circle K D riders club, border 2 sides of a neighbor on Moose Range road. For two individuals you should make 5 different direction turns?! The proposed route is nowhere near Mr. Kenyons or Mr. Deutschs homes or livestock. As far as aerial spraying of their crops, this has never happened since they purchased the property that the lines are near. All the residents that are near the proposed route that Mr. Kenyon proposed, Deutsch has approved, have been here longer than they have owned the parcels that COMED has proposed for the lines to border. Do not consider the proposals of two individuals to impose on many others!
    Robert Treadwell
  • April 28, 2014

    I am a resident of River Ridge, South Elgin.
    Regarding docket 13-0657 - ComEd's Grand Prairie Gateway Project - Please vote NO - No more overhead power lines in residential, school, medical, inhabited, natural preserve areas – Please! How is this considered acceptable?

    Argument (1) - According to ComEd, the addition of the transmission line will allow for more efficient flow of electricity across the electrical grid, alleviating congestion and providing ComEd and other electric suppliers and their customers the ability to secure the electricity they need at the least cost. If this is as much of an advantage to the power grid as they (ComEd) are fighting for then they will gain in many ways from this - reduced overall cost of operation, increased supply to probably over 100,000,000 customers – They reap the reward. They are also working to have much of this initial cost covered by government funding. Comed cannot hide behind the excuse that they must use the lowest cost way and that burying the line would be too high a cost. They have not even submitted a plan to bury the power lines wherever in conflict w/ living presence.

    Argument (2) The law's expedited procedures required ComEd to hold public meetings that were held in affected counties (with the DeKalb and Kane county meetings combined) between July and October 2013. There is evidence that these meetings were not well communicated. Many land owners, owners in close proximity and pending land owners were not properly informed of this.– Some only by word of mouth from neighbors months after the meetings, many including myself did not know about this until 2014. ComEd is not advertising this project because they know that this is not beneficial to anyone and anything in it’s path and this is not the safest way to transmit power.

    Argument (3) I went to the meeting at the Hemmens, Elgin on 4/24/14 and listened to testimony of 30+ people representing 100’s-1000’s in their neighborhoods, businesses, communities regarding how this overhead power line project will diminish, damage, destroy their environment and add significant, questionable, non-recovering risk of injury – This cost is infinite damages and must be considered as more important and completely outweigh the least expensive-(only initially) way to transmit power. We were informed that these testimonies and comments would be submitted as evidence for consideration before a decision is made –-please investigate and listen to these real concerns.

    Conclusion - Please vote NO to building 345,000-volt transmission lines on steel poles 135-170 feet tall that have no long term benefit to any living human, plant, animal, environment around it and if the power grid needs improving and is that important then ComEd needs to find a better solution that involves burying the power lines wherever possible.
    Our living environment must be held more important than construction costs.

    Gordon Roman
  • April 28, 2014

    As was discussed previously in these comments and in testimony before the ICC, the ICC's own staff does not believe the benefits were greater than the costs. ComEd spent a great amount of time and money trying to discredit the ICC's own staff. The staff was not talking about the route. They were testifying about the actual necessity of the project.

    Please read the comments of the citizens at the April 24th forum in Elgin. The opposition was obvious. Before destroying property values, putting people's health at risk, and destroying businesses, please read those comments. Local governments, counties, and residents near these high voltage towers do not want this project to proceed.

    ComEd's estimate to bury these lines is absurd. Furthermore, their testimony regarding the minimal effect on property values defies logic. I suppose they could find an "expert" to testify that if they were building a quarry, that too would not decrease property values.

    I would suggest the ICC follow the precept of "Do No Harm."

    Robert Avants
  • April 28, 2014

    I'm writing this letter to express my feelings about the proposed power lines at the Bowes Creek housing development. As many other people along the path I'm apposed of overhead wires going through our area.

    I've looked at the costs that were in the paper this morning and I found them very questionable. ICC needs to have them justify the cost differences because the numbers that are being put out to the public are just silly.

    It stated that it would cost $250 million to complete the 60 mile run with 400 160 foot tall towers. That is $4.17 million per mile.

    Also stated in the article was it would cost $50 million to place the cable underground for 1.6 miles in front of Bowes Creek development. That's $31.25 million per mile. A factor of 7.5 times. At that rate it would cost $1.850 billion to place the whole ting underground. Do these people think we could believe numbers so out of line.

    That can't be true. Just to compare the obvious, a trench is dug with a machine and the cable is laid in the hold and filled in.

    The proposal of 400 towers that are each 160 feet tall. That is 48 miles of vertical tower supports, not including any horizontal supports. (400 towers x 160ft. tall=64000ft /5280ft/mile=12.12 milesx4sides=48.48 miles of towers)

    There 60 miles of cable have to be strung 160ft. in the air as apposed placing it in trench. There is no way the difference could that great.

    Marino Lamantia
  • April 28, 2014

    At the meeting on 4/24 at Hemmens Auditorium in Elgin the Com Ed attorneys stated that Com Ed had not begun with any work on this project and denied the fact that Com Ed workers were staking out areas in both Sugar Ridge and River Ridge. The Com Ed workers were in our subdivisions and told a resident to not interfere and that the worker was only doing his job....yet Com Ed legal said that nobody from their company was there. They were there and the stakes are in the ground!!

    Also, did Com ed host the legally required 3 open house meetings per county...if so were they properly/legally posted?

    ICC, please make sure that the proper parties read the transcript from last nights meeting.

    compromise and Bury the Lines....

    Jason Levin
  • April 28, 2014

    Will be lucky to get what we paid for house in 1999 without new power lines. . Install new lines and price drops even more. Didn't move into sugar ridge to have view of electrical poles out my back window. Install new poles and lines, you will lower property values and disturb all the wild life that is in the area. Find a new route for these lines.
    paul kosiek
  • April 25, 2014

    I am a Sugar Ridge Resident for 22 years and I am writing again, as I am perplexed at how I have heard nothing in the public comments, nor from ComEd about the original lawsuit filed, in the 90's, by the Residents and Lexington Homes, relating to the Current Power Poles that are installed. When ComEd proposed the current poles that exist in the ROW along the rear of our homes, we the residents, along with Lexington Homes, filed a lawsuit and it was determined that Only the current height of the poles installed,the placement of these poles, along with the size of the extension arms, presently installed, were to be constructed in this ROW. ComEd had originally proposed exactly what they are proposing now, to have these Massive Structures in this ROW and move the wooden poles to our lot lines (which is against our covenants) and it was determined to be to close to residential development and the case was settled and the poles were constructed based on this settlement. I am very unclear at how ComEd has chosen to ignore that settlement and that it is not part of any documents that have been submitted for this case. They should have to stand by this settlement, we agreed to it, in good faith, when the original poles were installed. Since that time, we have had to overcome the loss of value to our homes, that the current poles have created, now +- 15 years later after the worst economic downturn and loss of values in our homes, we are starting to see minimul growth in proerty values and ComEd is again trying to diminish our home values. Please ICC, look into the previous settlement and make ComEd uphold thier agrement and do not allow them to diminish our home values, as well as our quality of life, once again.
    JoAnne Bowers
  • April 25, 2014

    According to a published article on Nuclear Street on April 24, 2014 they state:
    Speaking to the U.S. Energy Association Wednesday, Chief Strategy Officer William A. Von Hoene Jr. said market-distorting policies may contribute to the early closure of as many as a quarter of U.S. nuclear plants if left unchanged. As an example, he cited market conditions in Illinois, where the utility reportedly told state legislators recently that its Byron, Quad Cities and Clinton plants are at risk of closure. He acknowledged that low natural gas prices and low load growth have been unfavorable for nuclear plants. Nonetheless, he said transmission bottlenecks and public policies like state renewable energy mandates and the federal production tax credit for wind power help push some areas' wholesale electricity prices to levels that make nuclear plants uncompetitive.
    So if the Byron plant is on the verge of closing, why build the transmission line? Or is the remark by Excelon CSO Von Hoene Jr. just an idle threat in an attempt to secure favor or funding from the State of Illinois? In either case, it appears to be disingenuous. Either the plant is closing and the line is unnecessary; or Excelon is not being truthful about the Byron plant. Since both can't be true, one is a lie.

    Joe Leonas
  • April 25, 2014

    Kane County resident Bob Duffy said it best when he stated, "Just bury the stinking lines and be done with it." I wholeheartedly agree! Please do the right thing for the citizens you are trying to serve. How can you put a price on peoples' health and well-being?
    Kim Martin
  • April 25, 2014

    We live off Bowes Rd in the Dell Webb community east of
    Bowes Creek, wheee my brother lives.
    We, my wife and I believe the power lines should be buried.
    If you take into consideration the weather, I believe there is less
    Maintenance on underground lines. No ice or storm damage
    And no vandalism.

    Robert E Smith
  • April 25, 2014

    Re: correction to Tracking #86939

    Correction: The amount of loss that I would have to bear is in the area of $150,000. Unfortunately, I could not get into the program to correct before it was sent. It incorrectly printed $100,050,000. Please keep this error in mind when reading the comments for 13-0657, Commonwealth Edison high voltage power lines., and my previous Tracking #86939.

    Thank you in advance for understanding this typographical error.

    Respectfully, Pat Castelluzzo, 3878 Seigle Drive, Elgin, IL 60024

    Patricia Castelluzzo
  • April 25, 2014

    I am a resident of Bowes Creek Active Adult Community. The power lines will destroy our property values and force many of us to sell and move. Myself and my wife are retired and this will place a big financial burden on us. Please help us. We are asking you to either deny their application, or have them bury the lines. I sincerely hope that the I.C.C and Com. Ed. will come to an agreement and save our lives. This situation has caused many sleepless nights for all of our residents. Please do the right thing. --- Thank You -- Richard A. Smith
    Richard A. Smith
  • April 25, 2014

    As a homeowner in the Active Adult Villa Homes in Bowes Creek, I cannot believe in the year 2014 that we are pleading for you to relocate, cancel the project or BURY THE HIGH VOLTAGE POWER LINES scheduled to pass through Bowes Creek back yards. I signed my contract the last week of October 2013 and moved in to my home located at 3878 Seigle Drive, Elgin, IL (Bowes Creek) in November 2013. Never heard about this Gateway Project until Christmas when I first ran into a neighbor. Nice Christmas present. I am sure nobody at Commonwealth Edison would want such a nice housewarming gift for their new home. I purchased my home from Toll Brothers and they did not disclose any mention of this project to me at anytime. I only have a "cookie cutter" utility easement clause in the contract, that everyone has in their contract when purchasing a home. I believe I was bamboozled and would never have bought a home for my retirement if I knew these HIGH VOLTAGE POWER LINES were being installed. I just took a beating, because of the recession, on the sale of my home, believing I would make it up on the purchase. With these high voltage power lines, our property values will decline drastically . . . I would sell today, however, I would have to disclose Project 13-0657, Commonwealth Edison, and I am sure nobody would want to live here knowing about the lines. ALSO, I CANNOT AFFORD TO LOOSE ANOTHER $100,050,000 just because I unfortunately bought in Bowes Creek.

    If you bury these lines it will eliminate the negative health impacts of the overhead line corona effect - they cannot electrocute people or animals - will not interfere with agricultural operations - eel emirate costly power outages - buried lines do not fall over I hurricanes, tornadoes or other high wind or ice storms - buried lines would eliminate costly power outages, are not affected by wildfires - they make a loud humming sound and are an eyesore. Being these towers will be 165 ft. Tall (twice as tall as the older towers in existence) and will creat possible crashes with helicopters, airplanes and hot air balloons. They will negatively affect the economic development opportunities and will negatively affect the environment . Millions of birds and wildlife will be killed through collision. Not to mention that these wires can be buried for almost the same cost capital cost as overhead lines.

    I do not believe for one minute that anyone has taken an in depth study into this project, the concerns of the people, their health issues, property values or the hundreds of school children that will be affected by this project. There are hundreds of homes in Bowes Creek as well as the other areas affected by this project. PLEASE DO THE RIGHT THING AND CANCEL THIS PROJECT OR BURY THE LINES . . . IN CASE YOU DON'T KNOW, THIS IS 2014. Please read carefully the RETA's research, the cost of burying high voltage power lines is NOT 4 to 20 times the cost of building overhead lines, as suggested by the Alberta Electric System Operator and Alberta Energy and Transmission Facility Owners in Alberta. Everything gets amortized and the Maintenance costs to bury these lines are substantially lower than for overhead lines, and this is because underground lines are not subjected to weather deterioration, birds colliding and weather conditions knocking out the power for long periods

    Our telephone wires, water, gas lines, etc. are all underground . . . What seems to be the problem. You do not see these towers gracing the Downtown Chicago skyline or along Lake Michigan as these lLINES ARE UNDERGROUND.

    PLEASE REVISIT THIS PROJECT 13-0657 AND VOTE TO CANCEL THIS PROJECT OR BURY THE LINES. DO NOT RELOCATE THIS LINES AS YOU WILL ONLY BRING THIS GRIEF TO OTHERS. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION

    RESPECTFULLY, PAT CASTELLUZZO, HOME OWNER IN BOWES CREEK

    Patricia Castelluzzo
  • April 25, 2014

    Hello,

    My family and I do not want any more power lines in our community. There are enough and there are other places to put them. I do not need my property value to decrease any more nor do I wish for increased health hazards as I sit in my home.

    Please do not start construction and implementation of the power lines where they are currently planned. There are other options.

    Thank you.
    Janis

    Janis Diasio
  • April 25, 2014

    I am opposed to the construction of new power lines along this corridor. Our property values have been negatively effected by the recent recession and this can only reduce the value of the properties in view of the project further.
    Also, to my knowledge no one truly knows the long term effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation. The homeowners and school along this path should not be exposed to this possible hazard. The only responsible thing to do is to bury the transmission lines and spread the cost among all consumers since everyone is suppose to benefit from their construction. So please bury the lines.

    Michael Davis
  • April 25, 2014

    I have been a resident of Elgin for 15 years and I strongly oppose project 13-0657. There are many reasons why I oppose this project and it is currently constructed. First, the proposed route will be very close to my property and runs right behind U46 Otter creek Elementary school. Second, there is no doubt our property values will decrease as a result of this project. Some estimates 15-30%. Third, there are health risks associated with high voltage power lines.
    I am not asking for this project to be stopped as I understand the need for additional energy sources. I urge the ICC and ComEd to do the right thing in this case which is to bury these lines. The estimate cost of doing this is around 50 million. However, given the benefits and revenues ComEd will receive over time they will make up this difference in a few years.
    Please do the right thing and bury these lines. I think the ICC for its consideration in this matter.

    Timothy J. Mote
  • April 25, 2014

    We have an opportunity to make wise choices that impact our future for the good. Although many "experts" say that there is little evidence to prove power lines cause, contribute or link to cancer; I believe that life choices do contribute. Cancer rates in the early 1900's in America were 1 in 20, in 1970's they were 1 in 10, today (2013) they are 1 in 3. Many everyday choices impact our future, this is an everyday choice that will affect too many people to count. The children that are impacted by this decision are the main reason why these power lines should be buried! please bury the power lines! (please stop experimenting on children- stay away from the schools with power lines!)

    Respectfully,

    Wendie DiNapoli
  • April 25, 2014

    I believe putting in any more lines will adversely affect our community. The long term effects of living near electric lines will be heightened with the additional lines. Home values would most likely be affected as well. I hate living near the lines we currently have but love my community. I would hope that there could be a less invasive solution than putting these lines near residents' homes. I can't imagine that there is no better solution - has ComEd truly looked at all its alternatives? I'm hoping that ComEd is not trying to put these lines in the most economical place for them in order to save on their costs. Lives of the residents and the community as a whole will have to deal with this decision for years to come. I suggest that an alternative area be chosen for the placement of these new lines regardless of the inconvenience or higher costs.
    Pat Kolodziej
  • April 25, 2014

    Please do not build these high voltage power lines in our neighborhood. This is bad for our families and for our property values. Deny this case and keep our neighborhood safe.
    Carl and Dawn Schulze
  • April 25, 2014

    What you're proposing is right against an elementary schools playground. I strongly encourage you to find another place. The health of generations of children could be affected by this decision. They don't have to option of moving to a different school; you have the option of moving your lines.
    beth
  • April 25, 2014

    Absolutely NO to Power lines in River Ridge subdivision.
    Christine Friedman
  • April 25, 2014

    I live in River Ridge - Please vote NO to the #13-0657 COM ED GRAND PRARIE GATEWAY. Any addition to power lines above ground north of the tracks will reduce the value of all the property and the environment of that area and add a questionable amount of health risk. Millions of miles of underground lines have been run and proven economical so underground lines should not be ruled out a possibility. Any improvement in the power grid will bring an increase in efficiency and add to Comed's profit so they can not argue about cost.
    The overall cost of damages and risk must be considered.

    Gordon Roman
  • April 25, 2014

    I am a homeowner in the Creekside subdivion located accross the street from Otter Creek Elementary School. My biggest concern regarding the proposed new power lines is the general health and well-being of residents and students living and studying in close proximity to the route. According to the website www.cancer.gov, there is inadequate evidence that electric and magnetic fields can cause cancers in children. Let me convey that again: "inadequate evidence". I understand that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, but I don't understand the few needing to potentially sacrifice their health and well-being. Our country's Declaration of Independence states that we all have right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". I would guess that there are some actuaries that have run the numbers and odds of a wrongful death lawsuit and have probably come up with likely out of court settlement figures... But I ask you; how can you place a value on the health and life of a child??? How much more can it be to bury these power lines?

    My second concern relates to the potential of a 10-15% loss in the value of my home due to the close proximity of the proposed power lines. We've all already taken a tremendous beating due to the recent housing collapse! I cannot afford to take another financial blow...

    It is my sincere belief that burying the power lines is the very best solution. Although there may be an addditional cost to do so, I feel it is a happy compromise to accommodate progress and the needs of the many while keeping the health AND financial well-being of the few in tact. I beg of you; please direct ComEd to bury their lines.

    Thank you for your time and consideration.

    Regards,

    Robert Witkowski
    1448 Blume Drive
    Elgin, IL 60124

    Robert Witkowski
  • April 25, 2014

    I oppose the installation of above ground high voltage power lines in Kane County. Aside from the significant toll this would take on area property values, the eyesore it presents for the community, and the lack of substantive value it would provide, I am extremely concerned about the many research studies that have linked proximity to high voltage power lines to the possible causation of childhood leukemia. The proposed high voltage power lines would be directly adjacent to an elementary school. This is irresponsible and does not take safety into account. ComEd has the ability to route the power lines through alternative areas or bury the lines. These proposed power lines will harm our community and our children and I urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to deny approval for the high voltage power lines to be installed in Kane County.
    Megan Larson
  • April 25, 2014

    We oppose the expansion of the transmission line infrastructure north of Stearns Road. As original resident of the Sugar Ridge subdivision we have had to deal with the former ComEd expansion (the current power lines on the south side of our subdivision) as well as the construction of the Stearns Road corridor. Both of these things negatively impact the property values of tax-paying homeowners, who are still hurting from the poor housing market. We have already had to deal with extra noise pollution from vehicles on Stearns Road, trains and even air traffic to ORD. The large utility poles from the first expansion are already a visible nuisance. Towers for a 345 kV transmission line would substantially worse. I believe that the Sugar Ridge and River Ridge communities have been quite understanding and cooperative of past expansion projects, but please do not ask any more of us - this affects not just financially, but in other ways too - all of which lower our quality of life. I don't believe you will find one resident in favor of this expansion. I do believe you will find several residents considering relocation to escape this unpleasant situation. I have lived in Sugar Ridge for 18 years and we stay here because of the great neighbors and neighborhood. I do hope to stay here many more years with our friends, and am saddened to think of our neighborhood breaking apart because of this. I ask that you please consider other options rather than through our neighborhood. At least consider the south side of Stearns Road between IL Route 31 and McLean Blvd.

    Regards,
    Mark & Kathy
    Schamberger

    Mark & Kathy Schamberger
  • April 25, 2014

    Dear Comed, I am father of 2 children living in River Ridge subdivision in South Elgin. We currently live approximately 1000' from the existing power lines north of the railroad and Stearns road. They do not bother my family too much BECAUSE THEY ARE SILENT. I understand the new 345kv lines WILL produce the humming noise we are all familiar with. The thought of sitting in my yard on a cool summer evening listening to crickets and power lines humming away........OUTSTANDING!

    My wife and I are vehemently apposed to the new Comed 345kv lines. The new lines will not only negatively effect the property value of the homes in the neighborhood, the health of EVERYTHING living near them, it will also diminish the quality of life that my family has become accustomed to.

    Thank you Comed for listening to the CUSTOMERS that this project will affect. I trust the every measure will be taken to find alternative plans for the 345kv lines.

    KEVIN SUMKA
  • April 25, 2014

    I am very opposed to ComEd building these power lines along the homes and schools. They pose as a health risk for my children that go to Otter Creek Elementary. There are many health concerns associated with living and playing near high tension power lines. These power lines will also negatively impact the area's property values.
    Kelly
  • April 25, 2014

    Please consider the children's health and safety and Please do not put up power lines right next to Otter Creek School. Thank you.
    Chris Serain
  • April 25, 2014

    This is a terrible position. My wife and I strongly oppose the idea of new power lines. As a new home owner in the River Ridge subdivision, I am deeply concerned with the implications this will have on:

    1. Nearby park will have less space for children to play safely (this is not best for the kids. dont we have enough problems with childhood obesity and type II diabetes? Should we really be decreasing areas that provide a huge benefit to the health of all that surround it?!)

    2. Home values will decrease

    3. Aesthetics will drastically decrease - no way to make it look good

    4. Noise levels during construction as well as noise from wires after completion of project

    5. Potential health implications on humans and wildlife after completion

    6. Wildlife including animals and plants that will be affected by the process

    Other options must be carefully considered.

    My wife and I are both STRONGLY opposed to this #13-0657 COM ED GRAND PRARIE GATEWAY the way it reads with the current proposal.

    Carl
  • April 25, 2014

    Please make Comm Ed build the new power lines on the south side of the New Sterns road were it will have minimal impact on the River Ridge and Sugar Ridge subdivisions. Otherwise it will dramatically effect home values and take away a good portion of the River Ridge Park with our kids play sports.

    Thanks for your consideration.

    Tim Lee

    Tim Lee
  • April 25, 2014

    how much is comed spending to payoff judges to get this proposal through
    michael doyle
  • April 25, 2014

    I am opposed to Com Ed installing power lines along Otter Creek Elementary School in Elgin. My children are students there, we have been an Otter Creek family for over 8 years now. I do not want my children (or any children, for that matter) exposed to any health risks that would be caused by these power lines. Please reconsider your plans!
    Laurie Durec
  • April 25, 2014

    Please reconsider the location of the power lines near Otter Creek . I see that Comed needs to implement with least cost to customers and that is why the underground lines are not considered. That is the hard costs associated with the project, how about the indirect costs? People's health? Children's health? Posing a direct health threat causing long-term health issues doesn't cost anything? How much would ComEd save on lawsuits by putting the lines underground? Consider this ComEd parents of small children....would you want this right next to your child's school?
    Florence Rafael
  • April 25, 2014

    I live in the Sugar Ridge subdivision with our backyard right on the easement where these powerlines are proposed to be. I am asking that Com Ed do the right thing and bury these lines. All of us that have homes along this easement already have to have the train tracks, the noise and constant dust of the gravel pit, and most recently the traffic noise from Stearns road. Not to mention, it's us homeowners that maintain (mow) this easement. Also, all of the nice woods that used to run along the easement have been leveled. NOW THIS?? Enough already!! Please bury these power lines! Would you want this in YOUR back yard?

    I say NO to the Grand Praire Gateway unless buried under ground!

    Curt Barth
  • April 25, 2014

    I am a resident of River Ridge Subdivision who does NOT want any more power lines. We currently have two sets behind our home which we have to live with. Adding this third set will not only add to our risk for future health problems but also decrease the value of our properties in an already crippled economy.

    Thank-you,
    John Drews
    605 South Haverhill Lane
    South Elgin, Il

    John Drews
  • April 25, 2014

    Please do not put the power lines up in our community. We are children and schools just feet from your wires. We are forest preserves and animals who will be harmed by your intrusion. We are hard working people with homes who will lose more value and equity in their investments. This is not the place for your project.
    Julie Fisher
  • April 25, 2014

    After reading the proposal, it appears that Commonwealth Edison is already prepared to accept the alternate route placing the proposed power lines on the other side of Stearns Rd in South Elgin, IL that is further away from our neighborhoods.

    At first glance this would appear to be the lesser of the two evils, but I think that Com Ed should take full responsibility for the health and property values of their customers and bury the lines whenever they are anywhere near existing neighborhoods. I'm sure this would add additional cost to the project, but the benefits will pay off for everyone involved in the long run.

    Thank you for considering our comments.

    Lori Carrara
  • April 25, 2014

    I live in the River Ridge subdivision (9 Stratford Ct.) along the eaesement where the proposed poles are being considered. My house is the closet to the lines along this easement. I don't understand how ComEd proposes to add another pole/line near my house without impacting the quality of life and property values near this area. We are fine with the facilities that currently exist. There are other options that need to be explored along this corridor before making this decision.
    Andy Underwager
  • April 25, 2014

    I'm totally against these power lines going through my property. Please consider burying the lines if this must be done. Don't ruin people's property & farms,We have all worked so hard for. It's not healthy for people or animals on the farms.


    Nancy M
  • April 25, 2014

    I HAVE WORKED AND SAVED FOR 31 YEARS TO BUY A FARMETTE IN THE COUNTRY TO GET AWAY FROM STUFF LIKE THIS AND RAISE MT FAMILY, NOW I FIND OUT THAT MY VIEW ON COUNTY LINE ROAD IS GOING TO BE POWER LINES ***NOT HAPPY***NOT RIGHT*** NOT FAIR*** I FEEL LIKE PUTING MY HOUSE UP FOR SALE RIGHT NOW! ***VERY SAD***
    I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR UPGRADES AND INPROVEMENTS,BUTT WHY CANT THESE BE INSTALLED ALONG THE TRAIN TRACKS OR UNDERGROUND LIKE OTHER POWER LINES SO THEY HAVE LESS OF AN EFFECT.
    ***PLEASE DONT RUIN MY BEAUTIFUL COUNTRY VIEW THAT I HAVE WORKED AND SAVED SO LONG FOR***
    =THANK YOU= FRANK DEAN AND FAMILY 4 KIDS 2 CATS 1 DOG 1 GOAT AND SOME CHICKENS.

    FRANK DEAN
  • April 25, 2014

    I Say "No" to more line in our neighborhoods.

    This will not only pose a danger to the health of our children, it will decrease our property values. The most obvious choice to place these lines is along the Sterns Road corridor or to bury the lines.

    Wendi Hancock
  • April 25, 2014

    our government use to be our government but it is no longer our government. ComEd electric lines should never be allowed in parks and in public areas those places or for the public to enjoy not be be endangered by electric lines.
  • April 25, 2014

    I believe the high voltage lines for the Grand Prairie Gateway Project should be buried. I have been involved in the Community of Elgin for many years. I will be moving to Bowes Road and I do not want the lines overhead there. Commonwealth can't continue to do these projects that diminish the quality of life of the people. I strenuously protest the above ground plan. The lines should be buried.
  • April 23, 2014

    As a resident of the Sugar Ridge subdivision, I am opposed to ComEd constructing these towers. The effect on the area will be so negatively dramatic regarding the property value that any cost savings the lines promise will be far less than the loss on the value of the property. The noise from trains, the traffic on Stearns Road, and the quarry will have no buffer. Not to mention the huge impact on the natural wildlife.
    There was a good point made in another post speaking of the dangers possible storm damage and the lines threating fire to the homes. One can just see the homeowners’ insurance bill doubling when the companies have to calculate this new opportunity.
    If the power lines are truly necessary the better option is to bury them on the other side of the train tracks. This would have a limited impact on the trees, wildlife and property values

    Paul Clanfield
  • April 23, 2014

    I live in River Ridge which is a subdivision in South Elgin where these power lines will be running through.I was told that our park would be affected because the new lines will be taking more space in the park to accommodate the project,also affecting the youth sports that have practice and or games there.The lines will actually be in the backyards of the residents here which is obsurd.How safe will that be for families especially ones with children? I understand that the new electricity efficiency, but the safety of residents is far more important than that.How about the decrease of property value for current residents? There are many homes for sale already here let alone in Sugar Ridge and other subdivisions.This new project will decrease property values by 30 percent or more.The new lines will also run next to Otter Creek Elementary.It definitely is a concern of mine if those power lines are built because all of those children will be affected.There are many health concerns that rise with the project and have several safety issues.Please consider the lives of the children you will affecting as well as the residents whose lives will be changed.
    Krystle
  • April 23, 2014

    I do not want these high Voltage lines near my house. Danger to health and detrimental to home prices.
    Tim Lundquist
  • April 23, 2014

    Please do not put these up, bury them instead.
    kristen lundquist
  • April 23, 2014

    I understand the need for Com Ed to continue to improve the grid however I feel the responsible thing to do is to bury the lines or plan on reimbursing all homeowners who will be within visual distance from these power lines for the decrease in their property value due to the eye sore. Homeowners have lost enough value in their homes with the market turn in the last several years, don't further the pain and make Com Ed bury the lines!

    Sincerely,

    Philip Moore

    354 Misty Meadow Lane
    Davis Junction, IL 61020

    Philip Moore
  • April 23, 2014

    Please prayfully consider burying lines along areas where there are homes. The research regarding health issues from high voltage power lines is substantial. The families living along this route do not deserve these risks. I oppose the high voltage power lines along this route unless they are buried.

    Thank you.

    Jennifer Reisinger
  • April 23, 2014

    I am 100% against the moving of the power lines any closer to my house. When I bought my house over 10 years ago, it was a concern and I was told the lines would never come any closer. With all the debate on whether or not power lines cause cancer, why would you EVER consider moving the lines closer to families WITH children. That seems extremely inconsiderate and possibly criminal-to move the lines closer to families and possibly cause cancer to innocent families. While one understands the bottom line of businesses and making a profit, that profit should not come at the expense of innocent children.

    This does not even begin to address the financial damage such a move would do to all the property owners affected. For many, their home is a big part of their retirement nest egg and to just destroy that is extremely irresponsible and heartless.

    I truly hope that Commonwealth Edison will listen to the people and develop an alternative strategy that will not impact innocent families and their children, just to make a profit.

    Mark Henry
  • April 23, 2014

    As residents of a home that backs to the railroad tracks in Plato Center, along which the proposed ComEd 345kv transmission lines would run, I would like to state we are in complete disapproval of the lines running above ground along this path. It will be completely detrimental to the many well established neighborhoods that lie along the proposed path. Not only from an aesthetic appearance, but also with regard to all the homeowners property values & health. I feel like this decision is being made in the best interest of ComEd, and not the many homeowners & residents who live along the proposed path. Please reconsider this decision and protect the many residents who are voicing their opinions in the comments related to this case.

    Respectfully,

    Megan & Phil Adams
    Plato Center, IL

    Megan & Phil Adams
  • April 23, 2014

    I oppose the construction of the 345 kilovolt transmission line behind our homes in River Ridge. Not only will this negatively affect property values it is a serious health concern not only for us but residents all along the proposed route (including senior communities and large subdivisions with children). As a healthcare worker I understand the danger all to well and propose that ComEd find an alternative way to provide this power. Underground lines are much safer and will not be so disruptive to our health and our property and wildlife. Please vote "no" to this proposed project
    Kate Sumka
  • April 23, 2014

    I currently live along the Sugar Ridge easement in South Elgin and I'm considering selling my house. I have lived here for 10 years and absolutely love it here. I actually may not move. But either way I vote NO to the #13-0657 COM ED GRAND PRARIE GATEWAY. It will reduce the value of my home and also it will disrupt the family activities that we do along the easement which is my backyard. Also, not to mention, WHAT AN EYE SORE!!!!!!!! So again, NO. NO. NO. to #13-0657

    Thank you

    Eric Barth

    Eric Barth
  • April 23, 2014

    Please deny this petition. We have one park in a very large subdivision and the kids are not going to able to safely play at the park. There has to be something better that will not effect the neighborhood property values or possibly harm the children.

    Let me also say that no one bothered to notify us of the proposal. We are lucky to have such great neighbors who found out and passed on the information to us all.

    Brooke Rzeppa
    River Ridge

    Brooke Rzeppa
  • April 23, 2014

    There is no need to add powerr lines on the North side of Stearns Road. This will place power lines too close to existing homes.
    Ed Domaracki
  • April 23, 2014

    I respectfully request that you decline the request of CommEd to put additional power lines behind our neighborhood. I purchased 14 years ago in River Ridge Subdivision. We have a wonderful neighborhood full of active families. We have a nice park where kids constantly play soccer, football, baseball and other sports. It is great to see kids outside playing. Unfortunately the lines that CommEd wants to install will run even closer and will come right up to this park. I went to one of the Comm Ed meetings and asked a couple of questions. One was if there was any health risk. They disclosed that nothing could be proven either way. Not very reassuring to those of us who would like to retain our health. I asked if they would be noisy. I was told they would only be noisy in the rain, humidity and heat. In other words, during the seasons we would like to be outside enjoying our homes. I also asked if there were any other alternate routes. I was told there was a viable route south of Stearns. This seems to make the most sense, as there are no residential properties that would be affected. Lastly I asked if the lines could be buried. They told me they could, but it would be very expensive. So, what I am hearing is that it is more important for us little homeowners to take a HUGE financial hit (and possibly health risk), while BIG CommEd gets to save their money. Doesn't this seem a little backward?
    I was told the reason for these lines was to make the power cheaper. Let me give you some food for thought. All of the safety items in the car (seat belt, air bags etc) were supposed to be installed and it would bring our car insurance down. I don't know about anyone else, but my insurance never went down. However the cost of the car went up. That is exactly what I see here. Many homeowners will pay a BIG price for CommEd, and likely little or no decrease in the cost.

    Debbie reyna
  • April 23, 2014

    Please bury the power lines.
    Denise Main
  • April 23, 2014

    Please bury the high voltage cables on this project. No one wants unsightly power lines running through neighborhood.
    Rob Main
  • April 23, 2014

    I oppose the power lines. These lines will increase health concerns (whether real or not) which will further deteriorate property values.

    There is no need for this lines in the first place.

    If the power lines have to be run, they should be run as far away from homes as possible, meaning that they should be run alongside Stearns Road to the South of the ICG railroad tracks.

    Many of the trees that were planted on the north side of the tracks are there because COM-ED negotiated this when they put up the current power lines. These trees are the abatement we have for the traffic noise from the new Stearns road.

    Happy Earth Day.

    Jon Mielke
  • April 23, 2014

    As a residents of River Ridge Subdivision, our family opposed the installation of new power lines. Our biggest concern is the health and welfare of our family. I do not believe that there has been enough evidence that supports these line will not have any impact on our health. Secondly, we already have power lines and train tracks that run through the area. I seriously question there not being any other area that doesn't have a populated neighborhood that these lines could be placed??? If there is a will there is a way. Come on Comed, we pay our bill to you faithfully each month. Do what is right and think of your customers, not the corporation... How would the executives feel if this was in their backyards? I am sure there would be an alternative.
    Andrea Williams
  • April 22, 2014

    "NO" to more lines in our neighborhoods.
    Jeanette Hocking
  • April 22, 2014

    The communities that will be impacted by this project have strongly verbalized concerns about this decision moving forward. As voters, we count on our local government to hear and represent the positions and opinions of the people they serve. We've all been hit very hard by the downturn of the economy over the last several years. We continue to experience tax increases even though the value of our homes have been severly impacted. When we made decisions to buy in this area, We invested in our properties, our homes, and put the trust of our families and security in the hands of those who are intended to protect us. Do not move forward with placing above ground lines on the north side of the railroad tracks.
    Karyn Palumbo
  • April 22, 2014

    I oppose the Illinois Gateway Power Line Project. I just purchased a house in the neighborhood & feel strongly negative about the proposed location of power lines.
    Please honor residents request & decline Comed's request

    Pior Romanek
  • April 22, 2014

    I don't accept any new power line in my south elgin neighborhoods
    grace krasowski
  • April 22, 2014

    I am writing to protest further installation of power lines, along the cooridor of Stearns Road in South Elgin.

    1st when these power lines that are currently installed, we, the sugar ridge residents filed a law suit against Com Ed and won and the size of the poles had to be reduced, as well as the extension arms. How is it now, that Com Ed can ignore that lawsuit and install what they had previously tryed to install when this Lawsuit was filed?

    2nd, the Commonwealth Edison Easement is located within the Plat of the Sugar Ridge Subdivision and the Declarations for the Sugar Ridge Subdivision, contain a provision that No Power Lines are permited to be installed within the community, specifally within the right of way, this should have been researched when the current poles are installed. Only the members of the community can change this declaration.

    3rd the installation of these poles ABOVE GROUND, will Greatly diminish the value of our homes, being a resident here for 22 years, we have already lost money when the original poles were installed and these poles will further deteriorate the value, as no one will want to buy a home this close to a major power highway, we already have to overcome what is existing in the sale of our homes.

    I do understand that power is needed, if there is no other route, then I feel in such a populated area, which Com Ed has chosen then they need to Bury the lines, so as to not diminish our home values. Maybe the residents of sugar ridge would consider this change to our declarations, without this, the power poles, cannot be installed, as no permit should be issued.

    JoAnne Bowers
  • April 22, 2014

    I am strongly opposed to these high tension power lines running through our community, near homes where children reside and play. My home is in the River Ridge subdivision through which the proposed lines will run. I am concerned the health effects of my children and all the children in our neighborhood from growing up near these lines. There are many health concerns associated with living near high tension power lines that are outlined in the Bioinitiative Report 2012 and other scientific studies such as higher instances of childhood leukemia, breast cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, and autism just to name a few. It is unacceptable to put the health of the residents along the proposed lines in jeopardy. In addition, the tree line that runs between the railroad lines and the subdivision has recently been thinned (I am not sure who authorized such work) - this has already increased noise pollution in the neighborhood from train traffic and the somewhat recently build Stearns Road. From what I understand, more trees will be culled in order to permit these lines to pass through the proposed route, further exposing our homes to noise pollution. The lines will also decrease the size of the park in which our children play, which is also a location where many children practice for team sports. These lines will be an eyesore,not only to anyone living near them, but also anyone who drives past. I do not want to look out of my window at monstrous power lines. Erecting these lines in the proposed location will lead to a decrease our property values. Please require ComEd to bury the lines or find an alternative solution. What happened to the plan to move the lines to the other side of the railroad tracks? We have been duped! Please, please, please consider our requests to relocate or bury the proposed transmission lines.
    Bridget Meltesen
  • April 22, 2014

    Our family lives in River Ridge and we respectfully request that the ICC deny this application. There are too many children who play near the route where the power lines would hang. It would destroy property values and harm the aesthetic beauty of the neighborhood. At best CWE should re-apply to bury the lines anywhere near the proposed route.
    Lance Bell
  • April 22, 2014

    As a resident of River Ridge in South Elgin, I strongly oppose Com Ed's current plan to place above ground power lines in and around a large residential neighborhood. Like many political and often negatively consequential issues, this proposal was not fairly distributed to and/or fairly informed all residents involved, thus preventing what would be a major uprising from all residents concerned opposing this plan. When there are legitimate alternatives to placing these lines in unbuilt/nonresidential areas, or burying these lines underground where they most likely will be much better protected in the long term there is no reason to consider sacrificing and ruining the land where people and wildlife live exist in harmony. There is a time to spend money smartly and a time to save. This is a time where spending money outweighs the negative impact to the community both large and small. Illinois government has often done the WRONG thing when it comes to spending money smartly and working in the interest of the people who reside in this state. Its time for the ICC to set an example of how to prioritize PEOPLE over THINGS and BIG BUSINESS. Since the PEOPLE are footing the bill for the electricity, they should have a VOICE in this decision. ICC PLEASE DO THE RIGHT THING FOR THE PEOPLE OF THIS COMMUNITY AND THE PROTECTED LAND AND WILDLIFE. THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN AND THERE ARE ALTERNATIVE PLANS THAT ARE LESS INVASIVE AND DESTRUCTIVE TO WHAT ALREADY EXISTS. THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. THERE IS NO PLACE FOR BULLYING.
    Alycia Roman
  • April 22, 2014

    this e mail is to advise that I am against #13-0657 com ed grand prarie GATEWAY
    vote no to moving the power lines closer to the homes (north) of the existing powerlines.

    gary hogy
  • April 22, 2014

    It has come to my attention that ComEd will not work with the villages and will place these new lines in our back yards. This will not only pose a danger to our children, it will decrease our property values and we will have these lines very close to our houses. The most obvious choice to place these lines is along the Sterns Road corridor. there are no houses along this street and it will not endanger our children or decrease our values in our houses. Please have ComEd put these lines in the best interests of everyone.
    Robert Merritt
  • April 22, 2014

    As a resident of River Ridge Subdivision for the past 12 years, I am asking that you please DO NOT allow Com Ed to contruct additional power lines in our backyards!

    Recently, we experienced the extention of Sterns Road coming thru, we weren't happy about it but understood the necessity. With the possible construction of the large power lines being built literally just feet from our homes, this will absolutely destroy our property values, not to mention the health risks as well. As a very recent cancer survivor, myself, I am extremely concerned.

    Please, stay clear of our homes!!!

    Sue Drews
  • April 22, 2014

    People make decisions for all kinds of reasons. The decision my wife and I made to locate to the Bowe's Creek subdivision one year ago was greatly influenced by the natural setting of the area. There are wetlands, a golf course and a fantastic tree line that borders the northern border of the area. It is the tree line that will be destroyed forevermore not only changing the natural appearance of the area but disrupting the wildlife that live there.

    My wife and I are opposed to the plan as is is currently designed.

    Charles Boland

    Charles Boland
  • April 22, 2014

    Please make Comm Ed build the new power lines on the south side of the New Sterns road were it will have minimal impact on the River Ridge and Sugar Ridge subdivisions. Otherwise it will dramatically effect home values and take away a good portion of the River Ridge Park with our kids play sports.

    Thanks for your consideration.

    James Baratta

    James Baratta
  • April 22, 2014

    I'm am absolutely opposed to the proposal to put new power lines on the north side of Stearns road, along the borders of the River Ridge and Sugar Ridge subdivisions. The number of homes and families that would be negatively impacted in these two neighborhoods alone far outweighs the convenience of Commonwealth Edison. An alternative solution MUST be found.
    Chris Beytes
  • April 22, 2014

    I am a resident of River Ridge in South Elgin. The ComEd lines would be in my back yard and I am NOT ok with this. My kids and my dogs play back there. It is an eye-sore, a potential health risk and pure and simple it is in our way of our land that we pay taxes to take care of and have for our children and families to enjoy. We enjoy the appearance of the land and the wildlife that live back there. We do not need our property values to be lowered by this act. Our properties have suffered enough as it is.
    Brett Simon
  • April 22, 2014

    I am opposed to the proposed route for ComEd's proposed 345,000 volt power lines along the south edge of the Mulberry Grove subdivision. These lines would go along a park used year round by not only families and children in the area, but also soccer and baseball teams. It would negatively effect my property values as well as our neighbors. It would also cause undo stress related to the possible health risks for my wife and our children as well as all the other children in this area.

    Please do not approve this proposal and consider alternate routes that would not effect our homes, schools and parks.

    I also want to express my displeasure with not receiving information about this proposal in the past. I am a property owner who did not receive any post cards that others have referred to in the comments. I find the lack of information to be unfortunate, especially since I am listed in http://www.icc.illinois.gov/downloads/public/edocket/365434.pdf as a potentially affected landowner.

    Charles Lasky
  • April 22, 2014

    What is the true purpose of the Grand Prairie powerline project? Is it mostly just about facilitating ComEd's wheeling of their cheap variable cost nuclear electric power into the PJM grid for ultimate sale on the East Coast? Or is it stabilizing the grid to meet a changing electric demand structure locally? If it is the latter; are there outside the box alternatives such as a test bed installing solar panels on all the roof tops of the Brewser Creek Business Center buildings and feeding the electricity directly into the Wayne substation, correlating to peak demand times? This might solve a two fold purpose to grid stabilty and meeting renewable mandates. Are there other options to be considered by the ICC that meet the utility's need?
    Tim Fossa
  • April 18, 2014

    Com Ed filed under an expedited manner on 12/022013 to construct 345,000 volt power lines through our development, Bowes Creek.
    It was stated that this 250,000,000 dollar project would save the consumers money.
    Then yesterday they file with the ICC to raise rates on every household to upgrade their power Grid which will cost 275,000,000 dollars? REALLY.
    The Gateway Project if approved was said will save consumers 1/4 of a billion dollars in 5 years.
    Now they want to raise our rates by 275 million dollars a year which in 5 years will cost us 1.1 billion dollars.
    So tell the consumers again how the Gateway project will save us money??
    Please ICC you must turn down the request of ComEd to construct these 345,000 volt lines that will destroy property values, put us at health risk, which is unproven that these lines are safe.
    If Com Ed can raise rates to the tune of 275,000,000 dollars to improve a power grid, then they can also find money to bury lines where people & wildlife exist.
    Deny their request & make them prove the need, not just for greed at the expense of the people who are making them billionaires, but listen to the people who are begging to be heard.

    Sue McMahon
  • April 16, 2014

    ComEd has taken the position that property values are not adversely impacted by the proximity of high voltage towers. I would like to direct the Commission's attention to a recent ruling by the Cook County Board of Review. The ruling reduced the tax on homes in several Northwest suburbs by up to 12%. It was due to those homes being adversely affected by noise from O'Hare's new runway. The point here is that public projects due impact property values. For ComEd to assert that 165 ft. high-voltage towers would not impact homeowners is absurd and defies common sense.

    Second, please note the money ComEd has spent attempting to discredit Mr. Zuraski's original testimony where he opined that ComEd did not meet the cost vs. benefit of their project. I quote from his testimony "Based on my analysis, the Project’s expected benefits do not appear to exceed its costs." This is the ICC's own economist. Frankly, I've lost count of the number of "experts" ComEd paraded before the Commission to discredit the Commission's own expert.

    Third, please consider the unknown health risks. These power lines are adjacent to residences. I realize that ComEd presented their expert refuting health risks. Please recall that the tobacco industry used the same approach. How long did they say that tobacco use is not harmful? While I realize the health issue is a gray area, please err on the side of the residents.

    Finally, ComEd has not fully disclosed all routing implications. Take for example the fact they plan on leveling the berm and tree line along the CNN line adjacent to Bowes Creek. Besides the industrial appearance this will give the community, it destroys a sound barrier to the Bowes Creek community.

    This is a classic David and Goliath battle. You have ComEd and their deep pockets against homeowners and small suburbs. They have attempted to discredit many of the intervenors' experts and qualify their high-priced experts as the only knowledgeable individuals capable of offering opinions against the intervenors' objections. The intervenors suffer because they don't have the resources to refute the obvious problems of this project, and this goes to the heart of the whole matter before the Commission. It's about money. ComEd cares not one bit about the residents of Illinois with regards to this project. They care about transmission revenue.

    I respectfully request the ICC deny ComEd's request.

    Robert Avants
  • April 15, 2014

    I oppose the Illinois Gateway Power Line Project. Our new home is directly adjacent to the proposed power line route. This power line project will cause a decrease in our property value, exposure to these type of power lines has been linked to childhood leukemia , other cancers and pacemaker issues. And now at the 11 th hour we are informed that the tree line behind our home will be removed to accommodate these lines. Comed has been less than open and honest about the effects this project will have on our property and our lives. These lines need to be buried and our trees need to remain!!
    Jane Armato
  • April 15, 2014

    Please do not negatively impact the lives of folks along the route of the proposed power lines. Instead of using dangerous power towers, please bury the lines. There is no reason to prioritize profits over people.
    Jenna Perucco
  • April 15, 2014

    If ComEd believes that there are no other options than to run these lines through residential and rural Kane County, then ICC should consider the documentation, research, and examples of other underground electrical transmission systems found in resources such as "Responsible Electricity Transmission for Albertans (RETA). See: http://retasite.wordpress.com/burying-high-voltage-lines/
    As cited by the Askon Consulting Group (2008):
    - Underground cables are much safer; are more beneficial to the environment,land use, visual impact, property valuation, and tourism; will enhance power grid security and reliability; and are more efficient in terms of transmission losses. The cost of TRANSMISSION LOSS (electricity to heat) was determine to be around $220 million in one year in Alberta which "over the 60 year life of a line can add up substantially." Based on these factors, Askon further concludes that:
    "Underground cables are affordable compared to overhead lines. There is a higher initial capital cost, but this difference is cancelled out by the much higher and costly electricity losses from overhead lines over the life of the line. When this is taken into account, plus the lengthy planning delays, property devaluation, impacts on tourism and higher maintenance costs associate with overhead lines, costs of underground and overhead lines are almost equal."
    While Com Ed has presented 'expert testimony' to claim that there is no property devaluation in regards to overhead power lines, common sense would indicate that these monstrous power lines, which can be seen for miles, will deface the landscape and will degrade the value of the surrounding property. Other documentation and research supports this common sense knowledge as found in court cases Kansas Power & Light Co.; Crisuola v. Power Authority of the State of New York; and a study done by David Bolton, Real Estate Property Appraisers in Austin, Texas and others.) ComEd really loses all credibility with this argument an brings into question the reliability of any of their numbers or studies. One can imagine ComEd also proclaiming that an adjacent junkyard or garbage landfill would have no effect on the value of affected property.
    ComEd has totally diffused the call to bury their power lines by proposing alternative routes which successfully pit one neighbor against another. The main consideration should be the cost to society of these overhead lines. The cost to society which includes risk to health and safety, lack of efficiency, reduction of property values, reduced reliability,and risk to security is greater than the cost of the construction of underground lines.
    ICC should consider the precedent of other large-scale underground high voltage power line projects that have been constructed since 1980 in a total of 17 countries. These countries, including Australia, Finland,Germany, Belgium, UK,France, Denmark, Portugal, Japan, Ireland, Italy, and Sweden have obviously decided not to deface their landscape; not to expose their citizens, livestock,and wildlife to harmful electric and magnetic fields; and to provide electric service with enhanced grid security, reliability, and efficiency.
    The Grand Prairie Gateway Project will deface sixty (60) miles of prairie, farmland, and residential areas in Kane County, Dekalb County, and Ogle County. The solution is to bury these power lines.

    Katherine Cahow
  • April 15, 2014

    As a resident of the Sugar Ridge subdivision, I am opposed to ComEd constructing these towers. The lines will add noise pollution to an area already impacted by noise from trains, automobile traffic on Stearns Road, and industrial noise from a quarry. Not to mention the health concerns the lines present and the impact they will have on the native wildlife in the area. So many trees were removed to build Stearns Rd. If the towers are built, the few remaining trees will be removed as well. Our wild life will be gone! Please consider relocating them to the south side of Stearns Rd or bury them in our area. We are also concerned about this project adversely impacting our property values! ComEd needs to bury the cables.

    What would happen if the cables went down in a storm and started a huge fire and burned homes and people inside of them?

    Would you want these towers in your backyard?

    Leslie Gustafson
  • April 15, 2014

    Given that there is a need to add high voltage power lines, the placement could not be worse. The decision to place the lines right off of the property lines lowers the value of our property, as well as endangers our residents. There are simple solutions that are better for the community like moving the proposed lines to the other side of the railroad tracks, move the lines across sterns road, or best burry the line. There may be an additional initial cost to burying the line, but long term the cost of maintenance is lower.

    Then there is the issue of how we were not notified as to where they had decided to put the lines. The "public documents" say nothing about putting the line near the easements, and the maps have a very poor resolution. When one tries to "zoom in" to see more details on the map, the picture only gets blurrier. After we received a simple post card (that was not sent to everyone in the neighborhood), there was a "public meeting" where the plan was presented as being farther away from the property lines - nearer the railroad tracks. There was another rounds of post cards (which we did not receive), and at no time was it made clear that they had chosen to move the lines closer to the residences.

    Finally, in order to put in the electrical lines closer to the property lines, it would require that they remove trees that help block the noise from the railroad tracks and Stearns road. These trees are old and very tall and would be a terrible loss - not only to the neighborhood for the role they have in reducing outside noise, but in the loss of habitat for many wild animals that live there. The choice to remove these trees would not just reduce the value of the homes nearest to the electrical lines, but would reduce the property values for the entire neighborhood.

    James Montgomery
  • April 15, 2014

    Kane County Forest Preserve has struck a deal with Com Ed to permit high power lines to run through the Muirhead Springs Forest Preserve. On the Kane County Forest Preserve District website, the following is given as ...
    "Our Mission ... To acquire, hold and maintain lands within Kane County that contribute to the preservation, of natural and historic resources, habitats, fllora, and fauna; and to restore, restock, protect and preserve such lands for the education, recreation, and pleasure of all of its citizens. Our Goal ... To preserve and restore the nature of Kane County."
    Is it not contrary, then, to the mission and goals of the Kane County Forest Preserve to permit these monstrous electrical transmission power lines on or near their land? How is it ethical to have any financial dealings, trades, or arrangements with any interest which promotes the exact opposite of maintaining, preserving, or restoring the nature of Kane County? Did the citizens of Kane County approve a referendum to permit the Forest Preserve to purchase land like Muirhead Springs to allow the erection of high power lines within its boundaries?

    It defies any common sense that Com Ed can only find this route(s) which cuts through farmland, forest preserves, schools, and residential development in all of Northern Illinois. Aren't there any industrialized areas where these transmission lines can run? Or is it really necessary to destroy the nature of Kane County?

    Katherine Cahow
  • April 11, 2014

    It is very disappointing to hear that this is even being considered. I picked this lot to build my home because of the mature trees and park like setting. Not to mention how many health concerns we have and how negatively this will impact the values of our homes, and the values of the homes in this and surrounding subdivisions. Instead of beautiful trees there will be towers and power lines. There has to be an alternative, like running them along Sterns road, away from peoples homes. This is just wrong and we will not give up without a fight. Everyone understands the need for progress, but there has to be an even balance. We are talking about a communities health, happiness, well being, property values and where we want our kids to continue to grow up.
    Anthony Marzullo
  • April 10, 2014

    I wish to strongly voice my complete astonishment that this project is being pushed through with the deception of being a help to the community and against the publics wishes. Clearly Com Ed's lobby is strong seeing that with little formal notice they are permitted to destroy communities home values and health to save on their project. I live in the Sugar Ridge sub division in South Elgin very close to power lines already. The new power lines proposed would bring these towers even closer necessitating the removal of thousands of trees. There is NO reason these power lines can't be routed between the current power lines and Stearns Road. The drawings that are posted on the Com Ed site are absolutely laughable, it is impossible to determine the exact route of the project and I only found out that the new towers would be considerably closer to my property through word of mouth through members of my community. We don't want this. We are the citizens, the customers and the tax payers. Only a bloated, bureaucratic, monopoly like Com Ed can push citizens around in this manner. I urge the ICC to step in on behalf of the thousands of voices of opposition to this project. Com Ed can afford to route this "project" out of my and thousands of other back yards. Do the right thing ICC!! Do your job ICC!!
    Jason Levin
  • April 9, 2014

    There are already enough power lines through this area! We have families with young children along the corridor who do not need the exposure!!!
    Jennifer Hulse
  • April 9, 2014

    I cannot understand how this got by so many people in the Sugar Ridge subdivision and therefore not much outcry. I feel like we are being deceived by Com Ed into complacency until we see the towers going up. Not one person would like to see the power lines go up in our neighborhood. I believe if there is a lack of outcry it is because not much information is being given to us. I know some neighbors got a small postcard a while back while others didn't. Why would they run through our yards and not down Sterns road or better yet put them underground? They will have to tear down the few trees left back there. My 11 boy and myself were just looking at the first Bald Eagle I have ever seen in the area flying circles over the wooded area and we have lived here 12 years. It just soared and now it may be killed by lack of habitat or flying into more power lines. I know the need for stable power for the safety and security of this area. I myself am a IBEW local 134 electrical worked and have been for 30 years. Please Please ICC do what you would do if it was your own backyard getting trampled upon. We all know there are better ways to bring power to the people, and we are the people too!! Money should not be the complete issue when quality of life, EMF Health affects and the wildlife, that is there home too. I am not arguing the need for the power lines but the low cost solution is the wrong way to go about this!! Please stop Com Ed from running unchecked through our homes.

    Thank you

    Thomas Redmond
  • April 4, 2014

    I am a homeowner in the Bowes Creek Country Club Master's Collection. I chose this location in Elgin to build my home because of the golf course, the wildlife and the open areas where I can actually see the stars at night. To hear the Grand Prairie Gateway Project (such a majestic name for such an abomination against citizens and the natural environment) will cut a swarth for miles and miles in my back yard is still in the plans makes me doubt the intentions of all related government entities. How dare you say this will be for the good of all when it will impact quite negatively the health and well being of the citizens. We are imploring of those decision makers to not continue down this path. When other 'gateway' projects in Illinois and the US have come to fruition it has been proven that the incidence of cancer and other health issues have risen, the quality of life has plummeted and property values in those areas gravely diminished. DO NOT impact the community of Bowes Creek Country Club and do not continue with your above ground plan to scar the earth for generations to come.
    Diann L. Corvino
  • April 3, 2014

    ICC PLEASE LISTEN TO ALL THESE CONCERNED HOMEOWNERS, ITS YOUR JOB!!!
    I own a home on Middleton Road in Burlington township, the alternate route would put these transmission lines 1000 ft behind my house. I was NEVER contacted by com ed through US mail to notify me of these transmission lines, HOW IN THE WORLD IS THAT LEGAL. Why should thousands of home owners in Ogle, Dekalb, & Kane counties pay the price by seeing there property values decrease & be exposed to unhealthy EMF signals just so people in Dupage county can get better service. What are we getting out of this for all of the negative impacts that we will incur? Absolutely nothing, we are getting screwed! If this transmission line does move forward it should be buried number one, if that is not possible it should be run where current transmission lines are located, along railroad tracks, along major road or highways, through cities where there are industrial and commercial areas, that scenario would have the least amount of impact on thousands of concerned home & land owners. That being said the alternate route should not be considered not only will it effect more farmer land & homeowners especially in far west Kane county by it will also cost more money to construct which we all know will eventually be passed down to us through higher electricity rates in the future. Remember nothing is free. So in conclusion we are all going to get a raw deal because in reality we will be paying to have our homes and land values decrease while being exposed to unhealthy emf signals & noise. Thanks a lot COM ED!!!

    Greg Damolaris
  • March 24, 2014

    I wonder how much ComEd is spending on attorney's fees for this project the will destroy its customer's home values and enjoyment of their investment? Do any of ComEd's corporate executives live by high tension power lines? If the answer is no, then why not?
    ComEd should do the right thing and bury the power lines.

    Elise Nodurft
  • March 12, 2014

    As a longtime resident of Elgin, and a fairly new resident of the Bowes Creek community, it is beyond emotionally distressful for me to learn of this project. When faced with a problem, solutions are what should be driving this decision making process – there is a solution. Bury the lines. It is unfair and unreasonable to impose such a significant financial burden on the homeowners; decreased property values and inability to sell our home at a fair and equitable price. I oppose this project and as a resident of Elgin, Kane County and the State of Illinois, our voice should be heard and a solution agreed upon. With the risks far outweighing ANY benefit to those of us along the route it should be an obvious decision. As stated in a previous comment – do not reduce the quality of life for all residents along its route! These line will have a significant negative impact on our health, our environment and our property values!
    Karin Wittich
  • March 7, 2014

    ComEd has not contacted residents along the entirety that would be affected by the alternate route of the Prairie Gateway Project. This is a direct violation of law. The alternate route should not be considered a viable alternate since it hasn't been properly vetted through the citizens of Illinois directly affected.
    Brandon Ballard
  • March 3, 2014

    The COMED lines should be underground rather than on the poles carrying the loads with compromised safety to families, schools and children.
    K Reddy
  • March 3, 2014

    I am strongly opposed to these high tension power lines running through our community, near homes where children reside, and where schools are located. My home and the local elementary school are close to the proposed line A. I am concerned about my young daughter growing up near these lines and all the children who attend Eswood C.C.S.D. 269. There are many health concerns associated with living near high tension power lines that are outlined in the Bioinitiative Report 2012 and other scientific studies such as higher instances of childhood leukemia, breast cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, and autism just to name a few. It is unacceptable to put the health of the residents along the proposed lines in jeopardy. These lines will also be an eyesore to anyone living near them and decrease property values. Please require ComEd to bury the lines or find an alternative solution.
    Renee Miller
  • February 27, 2014

    Please no more price hike for Comed Case #13-0318. and for Nicor Case # 02-0067. I live on a fix income makimg 7.25hr with the cost odf food, rent It hard. I pay my own ComEd and Nicor. Please no rate hike. when the winter is not as cold you increase rate hike. I can't afford it.
    Valerie Ross
  • February 24, 2014

    (Please remove my comment on February 6th and replace with the following:)

    We respectfully oppose the proposed route of the power lines. Com Ed needs to bury all the cables that run through any neighborhood.

    The manner of providing information and obtaining facts has been a frustrating process. The notification of the project to the impacted residents has been unfair. We reside in Oak Ridge Farm and have lived here for over 16 years. Our family received a post card just before the Christmas holiday. When I called the number on the post card, the individual could not give me significant information. I was advised it was a formality and I did not need to attend. I understand all the open meetings (not held in our immediate area) have already been held. How is the voice of the impacted residents heard?

    This Grand Prairie Gateway project would reduce the QUALITY OF LIFE for ALL the residents along its route! This will have a significant, negative impact on our health, our environment, and our property values!

    I understand that these high tower power lines that will generate 690 thousand volts in the future. There are safety issues with that kind of voltage. Downed power lines in the east resulting from the recent ice storms demonstrate how expensive and dangerous they are to repair. Our residential areas have been established for a long time. We are already dealing with the noise and late night schedules resulting from the Canadian National Railroad. Now the power lines too! This is unfair.

    PLEASE consider the concerns of all the residents you are impacting. If the route cannot be changed from going through residential areas, at least bury them! Would you do this to your own your family? Would you want 165 foot towers next to your home?

    Reevaluate the plan,
    Vicky Sanko-Perucco

    Victoria Sanko-Perucco
  • February 19, 2014

    The alternate route would run alongside my backyard and up Thomas street would put 345 kilovolt electromagnetic power lines 500 feet from my children's beds. I purchased this house February 2013, if notification regarding this went out after this date, it was never received by me. Furthermore, none of my neighbors indicate they have any knowledge of the possibility that the alternate route would be 1500 feet from their homes on Middleton Road. You need to review the required notifications that were to have been sent to those individuals affected by the alternate route, as I suspect improprieties may have occurred on ComEd's part.
    Brandon Ballard
  • February 14, 2014

    One of ComEd's reasons for filing a CPCN involves Auction Revenue Rights. As Judge Hilliard noted in an early memo, this is the first time a utility has sought to build a transmission line for this reason. He states this is novel idea since ARR's are a hedging mechanism for the utility. Hedges can be profitable or not. This clearly does not appear to be a project undertaken for rate reductions in Illinois.

    I live in Bowes Creek. This project as proposed may not reduce rates, will certainly reduce property values and cause emotional distress for many residential communities adjacent to the lines. Why should ComEd receive approval for this project? If you add in that Stage 1A ARR's are one reason they proposed this project and that this is a "novel" reason, please deny their petition. By their own admission within the petition, this no longer is for Public Convenience and Necessity.

    Respectfully,
    Robert Avants

    Robert Avants
  • February 14, 2014

    As ComEd only has these two plans for the power lines we believe that there is another way that would make a lot of people happier. As business owners we feel that doing the right thing for your customers is Key! ComEd should bury the lines which would have more positive effects. Money should not be a reason for not doing something the right way! My Family is going to be affected by these lines. Our family's home and livestock farm is going to be within 500ft. of these lines and even closer with the second lines to come. We have no control of this decision because it will not be on our land, according to the layout. We really are having a hard time dealing with the way that ComEd has pushed us in a corner. We were going to intervene with only to hear from the experts that our options would only be to push them a little farther from us and there was no guarantee. As the importance of the well being for our family and livestock being so close to the lines, we have to take the RISK! NOT COMED! Burying these lines takes these risks away from our family. We think that ComEd has over looked a very key point of doing business Morally and respectably! Not only for my family but for several who have homes near these lines. With the changing of times, Things sometimes need to be looked at differently. What's the most important Money or the safety of people around these lines?
    Not only are we taking a risk with our families health we are going to lose property value. How is it that we have to stand for our property to decrease in value for a company to come in and make money?? Where is the law to protect Landowners? In our county the law protects others from putting hog buildings within so many feet away from another home, But, I have nothing to protect my family from these lines. HUH, what's wrong with this picture? We are counting on the ICC to take these statements from the general public seriously.
    We also feel that comed could of been proactive with adjacent land owners. We filled out and sent in the questioner and never heard back from anyone. We feel that comed is not concerned with adjacent landowners with homes and livestock within 500ft of the purposed lines. We are counting on you (the ICC) to take into consideration of the well being of families and livestock farms being within 500 ft. of these power lines, The loss of property Value and the way ComEd has pushed people back into a corner with no option! We feel we are being bullied into what ComEd wants! In our opinion the lines should be buried.

    Dan and Jennifer Hoffman
  • February 13, 2014

    We moved out this way for the natural beauty - the trees, the rolling farmlands. Please, please- don't let ComEd put up God-awful power lines in our beautiful community! There has to be a way they can bury the lines instead!
    Vicki Randolph
  • February 11, 2014

    Against expansion without taking all residential into consideration by burying the cable.
    Jill Wisniewski
  • February 10, 2014

    As a 9 month resident of Bowes Creek Active Adult Community, I am very upset by the fact that Com. Ed. may be allowed to construct these transmission lines so close to my home and many other in the community. We are just a small group of people trying to fight a giant. It is sad to think that our voices mean so little. We are not opposed to the lines but ask only that Com. Ed. bury them. Com. Ed. claims that it would be too costly for them to do so. In proportion to the money these lines will generate, I think the cost to bury these lines would be repaid for many times over. However, proportionately the loss in property value would have a much greater impact on me and the other property owners affected. Then there are the issues of noise, health issues and the unsightly appeance of these towers practically in our back yards. We have worked hard to save and purchase our homes for our retirement years and it is very upsetting to think that Com. Ed. can do whatever they like regardless of who they may affect. Please do not allow Com. Ed. to construct these towers above ground and require them to be bury the lines underground.
    Arlene Andreozzi
  • February 10, 2014

    Please change this plan to utilize underground cable for the safety of our children and all residents, along with the desire to maintain the aesthetics of our neighborhood.

    Thank you.

    Daniel Gilroy
  • February 10, 2014

    I recently learned about the proposal to install a high voltage transmission line. I have a six year old child that is attending one of the schools that could be potentially affected by this plan.
    The areas that will be affected by this proposal contain farms, schools, residencies and more. While there is not sufficient evidence to verify that a high voltage transmission line cause a negative impact on health, there have been various studies suggesting this. I understand that the evidence is not concrete enough; however, as cancer is becoming more and more prominent in our population, placing these transmission lines poses unnecessary health risks to the residents, school children, and farm life. The only ones that would benefit from this action would be ComEd. I urge to find an alternate solution to this proposal. Perhaps burying the lines or placing the lines in an area that does not impact innocent people.

    Erica Hernandez
  • February 10, 2014

    I am a resident of the Oak Ridge Farm Homeowners Association (ORFHA) in Unincorporated Plato Township. ORFHA is filing a "Petition For Leave to Intervene" with the ICC.

    My husband, President of ORFHA, and I attended the Elgin Community College meeting with ComEd and governing reps on February 1, 2014. A neighbor had forwarded me a notice that was sent to surrounding subdivisions yet not ours. State Senator McCaunnaughy could not impress enough that Feb. 14 was the deadline for filing the petition. It appears that ComEd was trying to sneak their project by us so we could not meet the deadline.

    There is no reason these lines should not be buried given today's technology. We do not accept that ComEd cannot afford to bury the lines. Given the history of damage to power lines that are not buried (tornados, ice storms, hurricanes) and the threats to the nation's power grids by snipers to electrical substations (as reported last April in California), one would think that burying lines would be the most appropriate and practical solution.

    I also do not feel that Illinois residents should bear the burden of 93% of the cost of this project and rather should be spread equally amongst those states, etc., that will benefit.

    ComEd should do the right thing and bury the transmission lines.
    Respectfully,
    Elise

    Elise Nodurft
  • February 10, 2014

    Please do not allow ComEd to do the high wires through our county. I feel underground wires would be better for our community.
    RGD4T

    Ron Reuter
  • February 10, 2014

    This project will negatively affect us as property owners and tax payers. Com Ed should bury these lines. Home values will decline resulting in significant negative financial impact to long time home owners. No one want to buy a house under massive power lines. they sit on the market longer and are sold under value.

    Com Ed has the resources to bury these lines. It is in the interest of the homeowners, and the townships and Kane county. BURY THESE LINES. It is of benefit to no one, but Com Ed (to save $$$) to construct these massive power lines thru a country rural residential are. I submit my protest to this project. please feel free to contact me directly for any further response.
    Susan Parker

    Susan Parker
  • February 10, 2014

    ComEd needs to bury the cables wherever there is residential impact. It is better than destroying the homes and lives we have worked so hard to build. We have built our homes where we did to enjoy the beauty of the land and have plenty of room for our children and animals to run around without the hassles of the city. This is huge economic, environmental and health issue. What would happen if the cables went down in a storm and started a huge fire and burned homes and people inside of them? Com Ed needs to step up and do the right thing. They are destroying our lives.
    Jacquelyn Schrank
  • February 10, 2014

    Comm ed is proposing to erect these poles with wire. The alternative way using cables underground is not only cleaner,but more helpful to the environement. We purchased real estate in this subdivision many years back,just for the reason it had open space and a country like setting. Wildlife in the area and a huge family environement. Please do not allow this to happen.
    David Loperena
  • February 10, 2014

    I strictly oppose this project as it will destroy our community. This tower will physically be in my backyard which is not acceptable to me our any of my neighbors. I understand the need for upgrades, but with the technology available and the landscape and safety of our community at stake, if this line is essential, which I have seen no research to back up, this line needs to be buried no matter what the additional cost. I have received NO communication of this project by the ICC or ComEd. How can you, in good faith to those who live in this community, not appraise me or my neighbors on this project. Information and communication are essential with a project of this magnitude, and you are failing to do either.
    Joanne Zasada

    Joanne Zasada
  • February 10, 2014

    We have lived on the West side of Elgin for over 20 years. Most development always took into consideration the saving of open spaces for the enjoyment of the public. How can you give authorization to Commonwealth Edison to put above ground high tension wires which will cause health concerns, livestock and pet issues and the erosion of our property values. We pay considerable real estate taxes. Please keep our communities desirable!
    Kathy Crudele
  • February 10, 2014

    We are residents of the Bowes Creek Active Adult community. We are against the current plans for the high-voltage power lines along the rail right-of-way parallel to Bowes Road. These lines will literally be in our front yard, right along the line of our development. This will negatively impact our property values and would be a potential health hazard to the residents (we are an over 55 community). Who benefits from this high-voltage line? Certainly not us, only the potential Com Edison profits are stake here. ZThe least they could do is offer to bury the line as it passes the short distance in which 80% of the citizens that will be adversely affected reside.
    Robert & Denise Tayler
  • February 10, 2014

    This project is going to ruin the seclusion and isolation my family has sought for the location for our home. We have been in our home in Plato Center for sixteen years now and have enjoyed living away from the city life. We all appreciate and love the nature in our area and we do not want that to be ruined by huge electric poles. Currently, I work for a crop insurance company and the thought of an electric company building on farm land is egregious. Farmers make their living on their land and have to insure their crops to protect their livelihood from season to season. These poles will raise their rates of insurance and destroy part of their land. This will severely impact their way of life and might substantially impact their annual income and the yield from their crops. The warning and announcement of this project was not adequate for those who will be affected by the consequences of installing the huge electric towers. We do not want these towers built near our homes.
    Lauren Perucco
  • February 10, 2014

    This will absolutely ruin our lovely environment, pose health hazards and impact all homeowners negatively. Property values also will be adversely affected.

    PUT THESE HIGH TENSION WIRES UNDERGROUND!!!! THERE IS NO REASON TO DO THIS WHEN ALTERNATIVES ARE AVAILABLE!!!

    Mally & Joseph Miceli
  • February 10, 2014

    We live in a small community near Plato Center that backs up to the railroad tracks where you are planning on building these huge electric structures. We are asking you to please consider using buried cables by all subdivisions because of lowering our home values immensely and being a blight to our wonderful country views and most of all a threat to the health of our children.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    Janie Grabowy

    Janie Grabowy
  • February 10, 2014

    As a resident of the community of Plato Center, I am asking that Com Ed be required to run the power lines underground in the vicinity (closer than 1/2 mile) of incorporated residential areas. This may be more costly but it is more than offset by the cost to homeowners whose houses are in the vicinity of 165 foot tall power line towers. We are a community struggling with growth after the bursting of the housing bubble and this would make that a permanent struggle. Our community collects the majority of its tax dollars through property taxes and a project like this that hurts property values can destroy our community and our chance for growth as our school districts fall further behind due to lack of funding. If this is allowed to go through, Com Ed should be required to pay a certain percentage of our local budget to make up for this loss of tax dollars.
    Tim Brennan
  • February 10, 2014

    Please consider our community and communities of the future and do NOT install above ground towers and wiring. Please bury them!
    Ronald E Roller
  • February 10, 2014

    In this day and age it is hard to believe that above ground lines are still being considered when many studies indicate a potential link to illness in humans and animals. The recent NPR report on this is quite a compeling argument against above ground lines. As a Exelon shareholder I do not believe an above ground project is in the best interest of the company or the comunities affected.
    Biff Behr
  • February 10, 2014

    I vehemently oppose the installation of above-ground power lines in our community. Not only would they be an eyesore, but they would have a detrimental effect on our environment, our property values, and potentially our health.

    ComEd should not be allowed to proceed with this plan.

    Lisa Miceli-Brennan
  • February 10, 2014

    Put the cables underground. If not for safety issues but for the lost value on the homes in the area. The economy is bad enough without losing more value on the real estate on the area.
    Mary Jane Smith
  • February 10, 2014

    Dear Commissioners:
    I live at 47W598 Chapman Rd., Hampshire, IL 60140. My house is approximately a quarter mile south of Commonwealth Edison's ("ComEd") proposed Grand Prairie Gateway transmission line (docket number 13-0657). Based on the maps presented at the public information meetings this past summer/fall the original proposed primary route followed existing ComEd easements along the railroad tracks that run through the town of Burlington in Burlington Township, Kane County. I am curious why the primary route was shifted further south only to turn back north a few miles to the west? This route is several miles longer and involves several additional turns which require larger structures and more concrete, all of which costs significantly more money. Section 8-406.1 of the Public Utilities Act requires that a proposed project, such as the Grand Prairie Gateway transmission line, represents the "least cost means" of meeting its objective. In addition, rather than following an existing corridor along the railroad, the primary route cuts through currently non-impacted farmland and requires the acquisition of new easements. In all, the longer length, larger structures and new easements seem to be counter to the mandate of "least cost means" codified in Section 8-406.1 of the Public Utilities Act.
    Finally, the proposed primary route will impact an old-growth forested area located on parcel number 04-10-400-006 in Burlington Township, in Kane County. This forested area is known habitat for the Swainson's Hawk (Buteo swainsoni), an Illinois State listed Endangered Species. Reading through the filings I did not see mention on this species. What consideration has been given to potential impact on this species?

    Sincerely,
    Tim Polz

    Timothy Polz
  • February 10, 2014

    ICC

    Clearly Com ED does not care about people,and there rights as hard working american TAX PAYING home owners. Are feelings, worries and families are not there concern. In the name of progress , this project is only business for them.
    So my home community and family is a business, and we have a price. So since my business was here first I believe we should have options #1,2 or 3

    #1 Since home value is effected , more closer you are to the project, there should be compensation scaled to the proximity to the project.
    A. 0' to 500' 35% of home value compensated.
    B. 500' to 1500' 25% of home value compensated.
    c. 1500' to 3000' 15% of home value compensated.
    #2 ComEd should purchase effected properties for market value and then sell them with full disclosure of the project , thus removing any grandfather rights to complain.
    #3 The State of Illinois should provide ,Home owners / business, with a legal fund to sue Com ED for lost of equity .

    I am not out to stop progress ,i just want what is right. Are homes are in most cases are biggest investment and for someone or something to effect its value without compensation is illegal .
    This is my proposal that that took about as much time to write as ComED Took time to consider me.

    illegal action falling on deaf ears!!!!

    Arnold Moeller
    41w 048 chippewa pass
    Plato Center il 60124
    (630)488-8778

    Arnold Moeller
  • February 10, 2014

    We oppose the Gateway project. The home value is the least of the problem this presents. It's confirmed that it is a health hazard. Please consider moving this tower to a less populated area or bury the lines.
    Martha Carroll
  • February 10, 2014

    In regards to the proposed Grand Prairie Gateway Project, I have only recently been aware of the large invasive plan by Exelon/ComEd Incorporate. I live with my family in the Oak Ridge Farm subdivision in Plate Township, IL. These towers will be within 100's of yards of my house and right next to my neighbor’s homes. Our neighborhood is very active in the outdoors enjoying nature. These towers will destroy that nature. This project will impact our lives and this community in multiple ways, starting with the harmful high energy that will radiate from these lines, to the destroyed environment from the foot print of the 14 story tall towers to the ruined landscape of trees and open sky. Our health will be in jeopardy with 345 Kilo-watts of energy humming through these lines and well as the huge financial impact that will be the results of our homes decreasing in value and staying depressed. There are alternatives for this proposed project, bury the lines so as to minimize the impact on people and nature.
    John A Perucco
  • February 10, 2014

    Please do not do this! Please take the time and bury the lines. These power lines are unhealthy and shouldn't be in our neighborhood. You're going to destroy our homes.
    cyndi carroll
  • February 7, 2014

    Commonwealth Edison should not be allowed to go forward with the Grand Prairie Gateway plan without burying all cables that run through all residential neighborhoods. These high wire cables will have an impact on our environment, health and property values of our communities.
    Donna Rubino
  • February 6, 2014

    The cables need to be buried wherever there is residential impact. Understandably this is an expensive alternative but it is better than destroying the homes and lives we have worked so hard to build. This is huge economic, environmental and health issue. Com Ed needs to step up and do the right thing. They are destroying our lives. Please don't allow this to happen.
    Michele Fears
  • February 6, 2014

    My name is Alana Bergeson, and I am a concerned mother of two young boys, dedicated wife, and Spanish teacher who resides in the path of the proposed power lines and teaches in the same community.
    I strongly oppose the construction of ComEd’s Grand Prairie Gateway Project of high tension power lines from the nuclear power plant in Byron to Chicago. Current proposal A has these power lines running up to our backyard and curving around our property in order to head east towards Chicago. While I do not own this property, my husband, David Bergeson, and I rent our home from my parents, Kenneth and Lynn Burch. My family has farmed this land for 4 generations over the last 100 years. My sister and I will inherit this land. As a mother of a two young boys (both under the age of 3), and a teacher in the community, I am very concerned about the construction of high tension power lines so close to our home and our children’s school. After looking into the health risks associated with living near high tension power lines that emit EMFs, I have decided to comment with the intent of persuading you to chose the alternate route proposal or bury the lines near our home and school.
    Our concerns are not without solid reason. We are especially concerned because of the increased risks cited in the Bioinitiative Report 2012 which states “the balance of evidence suggests that childhood leukemia is associated with exposure to power frequency EMFs either during early life or pregnancy” (Section 12, pg. 18 ). We are not only concerned about the health of our two young sons, but the health of all the elementary children who attend Eswood C.C.S.D #269 which is located less than a mile from the proposed route of lines. The Bioinitiative Report 2012 also states “ELF limits should be set below those exposure levels that have been linked in childhood leukemia studies to increased risk of disease, plus an additional safety factor. It is no longer acceptable to build new power lines and electrical facilities that place people in EMF environments that have been determined to be risky (Section 1; pg. 26). I believe placing these power lines so close to homes where children reside and public schools exist is irresponsible when the expected childhood leukemia risk more than doubles in close proximity to these lines. For what can be more important than the safety and well-being of children?
    We are additionally concerned about other health concerns outlined in this study and numerous other scientific sources including increased rate of miscarriage, increased risk of fertility problems, increased risk of severe depression, increased risk of female breast cancer, increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease, and increased risk of Autism, just to name a few. My husband and I have struggled with fertility problems and miscarriage already. I personally struggle with depression, my maternal grandmother died of Alzheimer’s disease, and my paternal grandmother died of breast cancer. As you can see, we do not need any additional risk to our health in our family. My family has taken steps to avoid these diseases, such as changing our diets and using all-natural products in our home. We would appreciate the consideration of an alternate route or a decision to protect our health as well as the numerous other families this power line project will affect.

    Additionally, we believe this route is not the most logical route to be used. There is a private airport directly in the path of the proposed power line. I presume it would be quite difficult to navigate a plane around these power lines in order to take off and land from this airport. While we do not live in a highly populated area, we do live in America’s heartland, and agriculture is our livelihood. We are concerned about aerial crop spraying, compaction of prime farm land,disturbance of fieldwork patterns that hamper efficient farming operations, and safety hazards to the men in our family who operate farm machinery.

    We hope that you will support our efforts and ask ComEd to use the alternate route found on their website or request that they bury the lines that will be close to Eswood C.C.S.D. #269 and the private airport. There are many benefits to the burial of lines. Buried lines reduce the negative health impacts of overhead line electromagnet fields (EMFs) to almost zero. They are also safer because they can't electrocute people, they don't fall over in tornadoes, other high windstorms or ice storms, and helicopters, airplanes and hot air balloons can't crash into them. Additionally, buried lines do not lower adjacent property values,are not an eyesore, do not buzz or hum, do not negatively affect the environment, and are more reliable.

    As you can understand, this is important to me and my family. Thank you so much for your willingness to review my comments and concerns.

    Sincerely,
    Alana Bergeson

    Alana Bergeson
  • February 6, 2014

    RE: 4785 N Wendorf Environmental Finding Specifics (Page 3)

    LEEVIR 7 Leersia virginica -3 FACW Nt P-Grass WHITE GRASS
    LONPRO 7 Lonicera prolifera 5 UPL Nt W-Vine YELLOW HONEYSUCKLE
    LONBEL 0 LONICERA X BELLA 4 FACU- Ad Shrub SHOWY FLY HONEYSUCKLE
    MENCAN 6 Menispermum canadense -1 FAC+ Nt W-Vine MOONSEED
    MUHMEX 5 Muhlenbergia mexicana -3 FACW Nt P-Grass LEAFY SATIN GRASS
    OSMCLO 3 Osmorhiza claytonii 4 FACU- Nt P-Forb HAIRY SWEET CICELY
    PARQUI 2 Parthenocissus quinquefolia 1 FAC- Nt W-Vine VIRGINIA CREEPER
    PHAARU 0 PHALARIS ARUNDINACEA -4 FACW+ Ad P-Grass REED CANARY GRASS
    PHLDIV 5 Phlox divaricata 3 FACU Nt P-Forb WOODLAND PHLOX
    PHYAME 1 Phytolacca americana 1 FAC- Nt P-Forb POKEWEED
    PILPUM 5 Pilea pumila -3 FACW Nt A-Forb CLEARWEED
    POAPRA 0 POA PRATENSIS 1 FAC- Ad P-Grass KENTUCKY BLUE GRASS
    PODPEL 4 Podophyllum peltatum 3 FACU Nt P-Forb MAY APPLE
    POLREP 5 Polemonium reptans 0 FAC Nt P-Forb JACOB'S LADDER
    POLLAP 0 Polygonum lapathifolium -4 FACW+ Nt A-Forb HEARTSEASE
    POLGVI 2 Polygonum virginianum 0 FAC Nt P-Forb WOODLAND KNOTWEED
    POTSIS 4 Potentilla simplex 4 FACU- Nt P-Forb COMMON CINQUEFOIL
    PRUSER 1 Prunus serotina 3 FACU Nt Tree WILD BLACK CHERRY
    PRUVIR 3 Prunus virginiana 3 FACU Nt Shrub CHOKE CHERRY
    QUEALB 5 Quercus alba 0 FAC Nt Tree WHITE OAK
    QUEMAC 5 Quercus macrocarpa 1 FAC- Nt Tree BUR OAK
    QUERUB 7 Quercus rubra 3 FACU Nt Tree RED OAK
    RHACAT 0 RHAMNUS CATHARTICA 3 FACU Ad Shrub COMMON BUCKTHORN
    RHURAD 2 Rhus radicans -1 FAC+ Nt W-Vine POISON IVY
    RIBMIS 5 Ribes missouriense 5 UPL Nt Shrub WILD GOOSEBERRY
    RUBALL 3 Rubus allegheniensis 2 FACU+ Nt Shrub COMMON BLACKBERRY
    RUBIDS 3 Rubus idaeus strigosus 4 FACU- Nt Shrub RED RASPBERRY
    SAMCAN 1 Sambucus canadensis -2 FACW- Nt Shrub ELDERBERRY
    SANCAD 6 Sanguinaria canadensis 4 FACU- Nt P-Forb BLOODROOT
    SCRMAR 4 Scrophularia marilandica 4 FACU- Nt P-Forb LATE FIGWORT
    SMIRAC 3 Smilacina racemosa 3 FACU Nt P-Forb FEATHERY FALSE SOLOMON'S SEAL
    SMISTE 5 Smilacina stellata 1 FAC- Nt P-Forb STARRY FALSE SOLOMON'S SEAL
    SOLALT 1 Solidago altissima 3 FACU Nt P-Forb TALL GOLDENROD
    SOLCAN 1 Solidago canadensis 3 FACU Nt P-Forb CANADA GOLDENROD
    SYMFOE 8 Symplocarpus foetidus -5 OBL Nt P-Forb SKUNK CABBAGE
    TILAME 5 Tilia americana 3 FACU Nt Tree AMERICAN LINDEN
    TRIHYB 0 TRIFOLIUM HYBRIDUM 1 FAC- Ad P-Forb ALSIKE CLOVER
    TRIREP 0 TRIFOLIUM REPENS 2 FACU+ Ad P-Forb WHITE CLOVER
    TRIREC 5 Trillium recurvatum 4 FACU- Nt P-Forb RED TRILLIUM
    TRIPER 5 Triosteum perfoliatum 5 UPL Nt P-Forb LATE HORSE GENTIAN
    ULMAME 3 Ulmus americana -2 FACW- Nt Tree AMERICAN ELM
    ULMRUB 4 Ulmus rubra 0 FAC Nt Tree SLIPPERY ELM
    URTDIO 0 URTICA DIOICA -1 FAC+ Ad P-Forb STINGING NETTLE
    VERURU 5 Verbena urticifolia 5 UPL Nt P-Forb HAIRY WHITE VERVAIN
    VIBLEN 5 Viburnum lentago -1 FAC+ Nt Shrub NANNYBERRY
    VIBPRU 5 Viburnum prunifolium 3 FACU Nt Shrub BLACK HAW
    VIBTRI 10 Viburnum trilobum -3 FACW Nt Shrub HIGHBUSH CRANBERRY
    VIOPUB 5 Viola pubescens 4 FACU- Nt P-Forb YELLOW VIOLET
    VITRIP 2 Vitis riparia -2 FACW- Nt W-Vine RIVERBANK GRAPE

    Denise Hubbard
  • February 6, 2014

    RE: 4785 N Wendorf Environmental Finding Specifics (Page 2)

    CXGRAV 4 Carex gravida 3 FACU Nt P-Sedge LONG-AWNED BRACTED SEDGE
    CXJAME 5 Carex jamesii 5 UPL Nt P-Sedge GRASS SEDGE
    CXMUSK 8 Carex muskingumensis -5 OBL Nt P-Sedge SWAMP OVAL SEDGE
    CXPELL 4 Carex pellita -5 OBL Nt P-Sedge BROAD-LEAVED WOOLLY SEDGE
    CXPENS 5 Carex pensylvanica 5 UPL Nt P-Sedge COMMON OAK SEDGE
    CXRADI 6 Carex radiata 1 FAC- Nt P-Sedge STRAIGHT-STYLED WOOD SEDGE
    CXRICH 10 Carex richardsonii 5 UPL Nt P-Sedge PRAIRIE HUMMOCK SEDGE
    CXROSE 4 Carex rosea 5 UPL Nt P-Sedge CURLY-STYLED WOOD SEDGE
    CXSPAR 3 Carex sparganioides 0 FAC Nt P-Sedge LOOSE-HEADED BRACTED SEDGE
    CXTRIC 7 Carex trichocarpa -5 OBL Nt P-Sedge HAIRY-FRUITED LAKE SEDGE
    CARCOR 7 Carya cordiformis 3 FACU Nt Tree BITTERNUT HICKORY
    CAROVT 5 Carya ovata 3 FACU Nt Tree SHAGBARK HICKORY
    CAUTHA 8 Caulophyllum thalictroides 5 UPL Nt P-Forb BLUE COHOSH
    CELOCC 3 Celtis occidentalis 1 FAC- Nt Tree HACKBERRY
    CHEALB 0 CHENOPODIUM ALBUM 1 FAC- Ad A-Forb LAMB'S QUARTERS
    CIRLUC 1 Circaea lutetiana canadensis 3 FACU Nt P-Forb ENCHANTER'S NIGHTSHADE
    CIRARV 0 CIRSIUM ARVENSE 5 UPL Ad P-Forb FIELD THISTLE
    CORRAC 1 Cornus racemosa -2 FACW- Nt Shrub GRAY DOGWOOD
    CORAME 5 Corylus americana 4 FACU- Nt Shrub AMERICAN HAZELNUT
    CRAMOL 2 Crataegus mollis 4 FACU- Nt Tree DOWNY HAWTHORN
    CRYCAN 2 Cryptotaenia canadensis 0 FAC Nt P-Forb HONEWORT
    DAUCAR 0 DAUCUS CAROTA 5 UPL Ad B-Forb QUEEN ANNE'S LACE
    DESGLU 5 Desmodium glutinosum 5 UPL Nt P-Forb POINTED TICK TREFOIL
    DIAAME 10 Diarrhena americana 3 FACU Nt P-Grass BEAK GRASS
    DODMEA 6 Dodecatheon meadia 3 FACU Nt P-Forb SHOOTING STAR
    ELYVIL 5 Elymus villosus 3 FACU Nt P-Grass SILKY WILD RYE
    ELYVIR 4 Elymus virginicus -2 FACW- Nt P-Grass VIRGINIA WILD RYE
    ERIPHI 4 Erigeron philadelphicus -3 FACW Nt P-Forb MARSH FLEABANE
    ERYALB 5 Erythronium albidum 5 UPL Nt P-Forb WHITE TROUT LILY
    EUOATR 8 Euonymus atropurpureus 1 FAC- Nt Shrub WAHOO
    EUPPUR 7 Eupatorium purpureum 5 UPL Nt P-Forb PURPLE JOE PYE WEED
    EUPRUG 4 Eupatorium rugosum 5 UPL Nt P-Forb WHITE SNAKEROOT
    FRAPEP 5 Fraxinus pennsylvanica -3 FACW Nt Tree RED ASH
    GALAPA 1 Galium aparine 3 FACU Nt A-Forb ANNUAL BEDSTRAW
    GALCON 5 Galium concinnum 5 UPL Nt P-Forb SHINING BEDSTRAW
    GERMAC 4 Geranium maculatum 5 UPL Nt P-Forb WILD GERANIUM
    GEUCAN 1 Geum canadense 0 FAC Nt P-Forb WOOD AVENS
    GLEHED 0 GLECHOMA HEDERACEA 3 FACU Ad P-Forb CREEPING CHARLIE
    GLYSTR 4 Glyceria striata -3 FACW Nt P-Grass FOWL MANNA GRASS
    HACVIR 0 Hackelia virginiana 1 FAC- Nt B-Forb STICKSEED
    HYDVIR 5 Hydrophyllum virginianum 0 FAC Nt P-Forb VIRGINIA WATERLEAF
    HYSPAT 5 Hystrix patula 5 UPL Nt P-Grass BOTTLEBRUSH GRASS
    ISOBIT 8 Isopyrum biternatum 5 UPL Nt P-Forb FALSE RUE ANEMONE
    JUGNIG 5 Juglans nigra 3 FACU Nt Tree BLACK WALNUT
    JUNTEN 0 Juncus tenuis 2 FACU+ Nt P-Forb PATH RUSH
    LAPCAN 3 Laportea canadensis -3 FACW Nt P-Forb WOOD NETTLE

    Denise Hubbard
  • February 6, 2014

    RE: 4785 N Wendorf Environmental Finding Specifics (Page 1)

    FLORISTIC QUALITY DATA
    Site: Feltes
    Locale: Monroe Center
    By: Jack Pizzo
    121 Total Species Native 106 87.60% Adventive 15 12.40%
    106 NATIVE SPECIES Tree 15 12.40% Tree 0 0.00%
    4.5 NATIVE MEAN C Shrub 11 9.10% Shrub 3 2.50%
    3.9 W/Adventives W-Vine 5 4.10% W-Vine 0 0.00%
    46.1 NATIVE FQI H-Vine 0 0.00% H-Vine 0 0.00%
    43.2 W/Adventives P-Forb 48 39.70% P-Forb 5 4.10%
    1.4 NATIVE MEAN W B-Forb 2 1.70% B-Forb 3 2.50%
    1.5 W/Adventives A-Forb 4 3.30% A-Forb 1 0.80%
    AVG: Faculative (-) P-Grass 7 5.80% P-Grass 3 2.50%
    A-Grass 0 0.00% A-Grass 0 0.00%
    P-Sedge 13 10.70% P-Sedge 0 0.00%
    A-Sedge 0 0.00% A-Sedge 0 0.00%
    Cryptogam 1 0.80%
    ACRONYM C SCIENTIFIC NAME W WETNESS PHYSIOGNOMY COMMON NAME
    ACENEG 0 Acer negundo -2 FACW- Nt Tree BOX ELDER
    ACESAI 0 Acer saccharinum -3 FACW Nt Tree SILVER MAPLE
    ACTPAC 7 Actaea pachypoda 5 UPL Nt P-Forb WHITE BANEBERRY
    ACTALT 5 Actinomeris alternifolia -3 FACW Nt P-Forb WINGSTEM
    AGANEP 5 Agastache nepetoides 3 FACU Nt P-Forb YELLOW GIANT HYSSOP
    AGRGRY 2 Agrimonia gryposepala 2 FACU+ Nt P-Forb TALL AGRIMONY
    AGRREP 0 AGROPYRON REPENS 3 FACU Ad P-Grass QUACK GRASS
    ALLPET 0 ALLIARIA PETIOLATA 0 FAC Ad B-Forb GARLIC MUSTARD
    ALLCAN 2 Allium canadense 3 FACU Nt P-Forb WILD ONION
    AMPBRB 4 Amphicarpaea bracteata 0 FAC Nt P-Forb UPLAND HOG PEANUT
    ANEVIR 5 Anemone virginiana 5 UPL Nt P-Forb TALL ANEMONE
    ARACAN 10 Arabis canadensis 5 UPL Nt B-Forb SICKLE POD
    ARCMIN 0 ARCTIUM MINUS 5 UPL Ad B-Forb COMMON BURDOCK
    ARIDRA 7 Arisaema dracontium -3 FACW Nt P-Forb GREEN DRAGON
    ARITRI 4 Arisaema triphyllum -2 FACW- Nt P-Forb JACK-IN-THE-PULPIT
    ASACAN 7 Asarum canadense 5 UPL Nt P-Forb WILD GINGER
    ASCSYR 0 Asclepias syriaca 5 UPL Nt P-Forb COMMON MILKWEED
    ASTFUR 10 Aster furcatus 0 FAC Nt P-Forb FORKED ASTER
    ASTPUP 8 Aster puniceus -5 OBL Nt P-Forb BRISTLY ASTER
    ASTSAS 5 Aster sagittifolius 5 UPL Nt P-Forb ARROW-LEAVED ASTER
    ATHFIM 8 Athyrium filix-femina michauxii 0 FAC Cryptogam LADY FERN
    BERTHU 0 BERBERIS THUNBERGII 4 FACU- Ad Shrub JAPANESE BARBERRY
    CAMAME 3 Campanula americana 0 FAC Nt A-Forb TALL BELLFLOWER
    CXANNA 5 Carex annectens -3 FACW Nt P-Sedge LARGE YELLOW FOX SEDGE
    CXBLAN 1 Carex blanda 0 FAC Nt P-Sedge COMMON WOOD SEDGE
    CXGRAE 10 Carex gracilescens 5 UPL Nt P-Sedge SLENDER WOOD SEDGE

    Denise Hubbard
  • February 6, 2014

    I am requesting that consideration be made to install the transmission line south of the canadian national railroad line to minimize the impact to the various communities along the route. The impact on the communities would include devaluation of property and health, and this would eventually affect the entire community, not just the homes directly impacted by the lines.

    Also, the homes in South Elgin that are just north of the railroad tracks are already affected adversely by the railroad, LaFarge quarry, Stearns road traffic and noise, as well as the existing power lines and telephone lines. Adding this additional, high kilovolt transmission line would result in undue hardship to the families that reside along the route.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    Michael Frankowski Jr
  • February 6, 2014

    RE: 4785 N Wendorf Environmental Findings

    Site Description Memo
    4785 N. Wendorf, Monroe Center, IL 61052
    This +/- 46.5 Acre total property is made up of two parcels. The first parcel (12-30-200-020) is +/- 5 Acres and contains the residential home of the property. The second parcel (12-30-200-208) is +/- 41.5 Acres and is partially split by the Kilbuck Creek. The main portion of the second parcel is an undulating remnant Oak-Hickory savanna that has a drainage channel/streambed that cuts through the middle of the property.
    Over the past several years, the understory of the savanna has significantly improved with the cutting, stump treatment and subsequent removal of all Buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica). After successfully removing this highly aggressive and invasive species, the upper canopy had the benefit of having a significant number of large caliper weed and non-native shade trees cut down and removed from the site including Silver Maple (Acer saccharinum) and Box Elder (Acer negundo).
    During the initial visit to the site, a meander survey was performed to determine the existing floristic quality of the property. The results of the survey are attached and show the high quality nature of the property. 4785 N. Wendorf, Monroe Center, IL 61052 (Site Description Memo) Page 2 of 2
    Overall, 121 plant and tree species were recorded. Of those 121 found, 106 are native to the area resulting in a Native Mean C value of 4.5. In addition, the Native FQI is an extremely high 46.1. Of note, the following species with the highest Native Mean C value of 10 were found on site:
    • Sickle Pod (Arabis canadensis)
    • Forked Aster (Aster furcatus)
    • Slender Wood Sedge (Carex gracilescens)
    • Prairie Hummock Sedge (Carex richardsonii)
    • Beak Grass (Diarrhena americana)
    • Highbush Cranberry (Viburnum trilobum)

    Denise Hubbard
  • February 6, 2014

    Judge Hilliard & Judge Jorgenson:
    My name is Denise Hubbard and my property is located in Monroe Center Township, Ogle County and in the path of the alternative to the proposed route of the Com Ed transmission lines. I was chagrined to learn of this on Dec 28th, a scant 2 days before the hearings began, but I have nonetheless pulled together as much relevant information I'm able to on short notice.
    Since 2005 when I bought the property, my husband and I have spent thousands of man-hours and upwards of $50,000 de-thatching, eliminating invasives (manually, never chemicals) and restoring the 40+ acres of old-growth oak savannah that exist on the parcel. Personnel from the University of Northern Illinois have been in to study the plethora of native plants, birds & insects (many of them endangered and/or rarely found) that exist on the property and posited that it is one of the most pristine examples of oak savannah they've seen here in Northern Illinois. Clear cutting a 150 - 220 foot swath through this parcel for electric towers would have dire environmental consequences for this eco-system as well as the surrounding areas. If the alternate route IS ultimately chosen and the requisite environmental studies done, I am confident that yet another alternative would need be found upon their completion.
    Please find attached some preliminary notes that were taken during another groups' initial visit in order to demonstrate some of the findings. These particular notes were compiled by Jack Pizzo, RLA, ASLA, ICN--a Senior Ecologist whose firm holds over 80 awards from various state and national departments and organizations including the US Environmental Protection Agency. I will happily supply you with originals of all the documents that are copied here if need be.
    Thank you very much in advance for your time and thoughtful consideration of the aforementioned facts,
    Denise Hubbard
    4785 N Wendorf Rd, Monroe Center, IL 61052

    PS The documents will be posted in separate comments as they overrun the allotted # of characters

    Denise Hubbard
  • February 6, 2014

    I would like to request that a preference be
    given to the alternate route through St. Charles Township. The line
    should run parallel to the rr tracks as far south as possible to
    minimize impacts to the residential subdivisions north of the tracks.

    If placed north of the tracks, the impact to the community may be drastic. There is no doubt that property values would be affected negatively, which would eventually impact the values of the entire neighborhood.

    Furthermore, the homes located on the north side of the RR tracks are currently affected by the LaFarge Quarry noise and dust, the addition of Stearns road a few years ago, as well as existing large power and telephone lines. It would be a true hardship to add any additional transmission lines.

    Julie Frankowski
  • February 5, 2014

    13-0657 Commonwealth Edison Company has not shown any type of consideration to the population density and the impact to home values and quality of life in the area that will be impacted by these 165 tall lines. I believe that this creates a an undo burden for the homeowners-both financially and physically. While it may cost Com Ed some additional dollars to put in underground lines, it is a necessity for the well being of the residents of the areas effected.
    Gail Mosher
  • February 3, 2014

    As a resident of the Bowes Creek Retirement Community I am vehemently opposed to ComEd's proposal to erect high power tension towers very near to our community. We have invested our hard earned money in a retirement community which stands to lose property value if said towers are erected. Furthermore, not the least of which, these towers pose a health risk.
    PLEASE, PLEASE do not let this happen. It has been proposed to either
    bury these lines or relocate them. I beg you to consider either one of those proposals verses erecting the towers. Thank You
    Bonita Dombrowski

    Bonita Dombrowski
  • February 3, 2014

    Please move or bury the proposed section of cable that will run along Bowes Road in front of Bowes Creek Country Club Subdivision. We do not want our property values to plummet while other states benefit and ComEd profits increase. to bury this small section of cable will not effect the overall out come to Comed comparative to the outcome of the resident's property and possible health issues.
    Munson Anderson
  • February 3, 2014

    Please move or bury the proposed section of cable that will run along Bowes Road in front of Bowes Creek Country Club Subdivision. We do not want our property values to plummet while other states benefit and ComEd profits increase. to bury this small section of cable will not effect the overall out come to Comed comparative to the outcome of the resident's property and possible health issues.
    Christine Mazzullo
  • February 3, 2014

    We own an architecturally significant home that has been designated a Kane County Historic Landmark. The home was designed by renowned architect Frank Lloyd Wright and is the only Usonian style home in Kane County.

    We have operated the home as a Bed and Breakfast inn and currently provide tours to the visiting public and those interested in Wright's work.

    We feel the home's value and appeal to the public would be greatly diminished by the addition of large power lines and towers so close to the property. The home is located on Rohrsen Road in Plato Township near the intersection of the CNN railroad line.

    We are opposed to the placement of the towers and lines along the CNN rail line as this would not only place the lines close to our home but also because it would route the lines directly over the homes, businesses, youth baseball park and daycare center in Plato Center.

    Michael Petersdorf
  • February 3, 2014

    I oppose ComEd's Grand Prairie Parkway plan to construct steel towers adjacent to my Bowes Creek Active Adult Community along Bowes Road in Elgin IL. The power lines should be buried. It's a solution to the economic, health, safety and aesthetic impact these 160-170 foot towers would cause.
    Bonnie Symon
  • January 31, 2014

    I currently live in the Bowes Creek community that lies adjacent to the proposed Great Prairie Gateway project path for high tower power lines. I strongly object to the proposal that ComEd has brought forward and do not believe the proposal considers the true impact to those that live along the proposed path. This proposal for high tower power lines is going to have a great impact on property values for the Bowes Creek neighborhood in Elgin. This is a premier neighborhood in the community that has already been impacted by 40%-60% property value declines since 2008 with the recession. With the proposed power lines, we expect to see even increased impact on property values. I believe that this creates a an undo burden for the homeowners. I know there is no perfect solution when trying to improve infrastructure, but as currently proposed the solution creates an unfair burden for the Bowes Creek residents. We would like to see ComEd come back with practical solutions to avoid these burdens for the Bowes Creek residents. I would like ComEd to evaluate other paths for the project, propose options for putting the lines underground, or canceling the project all together.
    Tony Barton
  • January 31, 2014

    As a current resident of Elgin, IL in the Bowes Creek Country Club housing development, I vehemently oppose this proposition. The Grand Prairie Gateway project of 80 miles through Illinois runs DIRECTLY into our neighborhood for approximately 1 mile. I would ask the ICC to demand that Com Ed either bury the lines in our community or redirect them away from such a populated area. There are numerous health issues that would/could affect residents and families. In addition, and of genuine concern - the proposed towers would greatly reduce the values of our homes.

    I ask a simple question ... would YOU want these towers / power lines in YOUR neighborhood? Wo

    PLEASE…do not put these high voltage power towers in our back yards!!

    Sean Nolan

    Sean Nolan
  • January 31, 2014

    1. WE WERE LANDOWNERS AFFECTED BY THE "ALTERNATE ROUTE" PROPOSED BY COM-ED. WE WERE NOT SERVED WITH NOTICE OF THIS FILING! WE DID NOT LEARN OF THE FILING UNTIL JANUARY 20, 2014 through a third party. We see ComEd did NOT use taxpayers of record for notice, and the recorder's information instead. Recorder information is NOT SUFFICIENT AND IS INADEQUATE!!! Our property is in a LAND TRUST. WITHOUT THE LAND TRUST NUMBER, AND EVEN WITH A "PIN", THE TRUSTEE'S TASK IN FIGURING OUT WHO THE PROPER PARTIES ARE, IS MADE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT. COM-ED KNOWS THIS AND THIS WAS A STRATEGY TO DELAY AND DEFEAT NOTICE. This petition should not proceed.

    2. We submitted comment to ComEd via email on October 8, 2013, to "grandprairiegateway@comed.com". Our understanding was that ComEd was supposed to SUBMIT any comments received prior to filing, WITH the filing. WE DO NOT SEE OUR COMMENTS! This petition should not proceed.

    3. This is the text of our comments submitted to ComEd on October 8, 2013, OBJECTING to the Alternate Route which would CUT OUR FARM IN HALF:

    Dear “ComEd”:

    Re: Grand Prairie Gateway Project

    I am writing on behalf of the members and managers of Kane County Farms LLC, owner of the 212 acre “Nagel” farm lying on the northeasterly side of Burlington Road just north of McDonald Road, in Plato Township, Illinois.

    According to your map of “proposed” new high voltage transmission line corridors for this project, one proposed corridor would literally cut our farm in two east-to-west. This is totally unacceptable when Com Ed has existing easement rights along the Canadian National Railway route to the northeast, and along 47 to the east, together with the fact that there is already a new substation in Plato near the rail line. We respectfully request that you abandon the proposed corridor through our farm and concentrate on the existing railway right of way and Route 47.

    Here are some of our objections to any corridor through our farm, and particularly through the heart of it:

    • This has been and is today a working grain farm. At this very moment the tenant farmer is in the midst of this year’s harvest.
    • Locating transmission lines across the entire farm will increase farming costs which will drive the farmers away or require permanent reductions in farm rents.
    • Depending on the kind of installations that would go into the proposed right-of-way as well as the right-of-way width itself, field operations, irrigation, wind breaks and future land uses are at stake.
    • Aerial seeding and/or spraying will be made extremely difficult if not impossible, driving up farming operation costs.
    • Fieldwork patterns will be disturbed that hamper efficient farming operations.
    • Increased erosion will result from removal of windbreaks.
    • Increased opportunity for weed and other pest encroachment.
    • Compaction of soils and loss of arable, productive land.
    • Safety hazards to farm equipment operators.
    • Interfering with moveable irrigation equipment.
    • Hindering future consolidation of farm fields or subdividing the land for residential or other development.

    Even if you were to propose a corridor that would “skirt” the edge of the farm, you know that many of the above conditions would still apply, and there would still be an immediate and permanent loss of value for any purposes other than farming. Up until 2008 this area grew dramatically, and while future electric service needs should be addressed, this proposal takes unfair advantage of the current negative economic climate. You also would be placing lines altogether too close to all of the area schools, as well as the Olson Airport.

    If the corridor were to go where shown through our farm, that would literally divide and conquer it for any future development; layout of roads and utilities may become impossible or grossly cost ineffective.

    To reiterate, we respectfully request that you abandon the proposed corridor through our farm and concentrate on the existing CN Railway right of way to the north and east, and the existing Route 47 right of way to the east.

    Thank you.

    Stephen S. Messutta, General Counsel
    KANE COUNTY FARMS LLC
    7458 N. Harlem Avenue
    Chicago, IL 60631
    T.847.655.7716 (Direct)
    F.847-655.7701
    @. smessutta@norwoodbuilders.com
    C. 847.606.2782

    This email and any attachments to it are deemed strictly confidential and may be subject to one or more legally enforceable privileges against disclosure including but not limited to the attorney-client privilege and attorney work product privilege. If you are not the intended recipient of the email and/or attachment you are requested to notify the sender and to delete any and all copies including electronic versions. We would do the same for you. Thank you.

    Kane County Farms LLC
  • January 31, 2014

    Commissioners:

    My parents moved to the Bowes Creek Active Adult Community. Their townhome is located approximately 1/4 mile south of Bowes Road. Recently, they said ComEd was erecting 160 ft. high voltage towers adjacent to their property. Thinking they were mistaken, I researched this online. I cannot believe ComEd is thinking of constructing overhead high voltage lines so close to the Bowes Creek subdivision. My parents also said that ComEd did not plan on burying any part of that cable. If you walk out my parents front door and look up, the lines will be overhead!

    It is so irresponsible that a company can plan such a harmful project and that they be allowed to do this. If the ICC has the authority to direct ComEd to alter their plans, I trust you will carefully review this project and deny the plan as it presently exists. Besides being an eyesore, they will have such a detrimental affect on my parent's home value as well as others in their area.

    Sincerely,

    Cathleen Propati

    Cathleen Propati
  • January 31, 2014

    Dear Illinois Commerce Commission:

    I strongly oppose the construction of the 345 kV towers along Bowes Road in Elgin. These towers in this community embody the concept of visual pollution. Their construction will lower property values and halt or greatly reduce the building of new homes near these poles. No sooner do we come out of a terrible recession (if we have come out of it entirely) than we have ComEd trying to erect electrical towers to give residential areas that "industrial look." What hubris!

    We in the Bowes Creek Community cannot determine ComEd's motivation in placing towers almost on top of residences. What alternative route did they provide? Probably none that "they" thought was reasonable. Did they offer to bury any portion of the line? None that I recall. They use the language in the Public Utility Act citing "least cost" verbiage. Using that approach, they would be erecting them everywhere which we know is not the case. You don't see them around Woodfield. We are not requesting they bury every foot of cable. We do not want around Bowes Creek.

    While various medical research is inconclusive regarding the ill effects of living near or under high power lines, they do state it's difficult to prove a negative.

    If one of your missions is to strike a balance between utilities and the interests of the Illinois citizen, I urge you to deny ComEd's current proposal. I respectfully request that the ICC direct ComEd to bury the cable near and adjacent to the Bowes Creek Community or instruct them to find an alternate route which allows for the quiet enjoyment of the residents.

    Sincerely,

    Susan Dowd
    Bowes Creek Community

    Susan Dowd
  • January 31, 2014

    Three years ago we moved to Bowes Creek to live in our "forever home", which we now find is one of the homes that is abutting the proposed route line. Like almost everyone, we lost some of our home value in the recent recession, but now we stand to lose even more value due to ComEd's decision to install a 345KV line right outside our front door. We cannot understand how ComEd is allowed to be a bad neighbor. If we erected a large eyesore, we would be ordered to remove it. If we put outside speakers in our yard and played constant low level noise, we would be ordered to stop. If we wantonly devalued our neighbors property, we would be ordered to rectify that. But besides these aesthetics, the anxiety and worry of living next to something so powerful that could come down in bad weather and cause serious harm is so upsetting to us, that we will no longer enjoy our home, our yard, or our beautiful neighborhood. We love Bowes Creek, and we have rallied as a unified taskforce, using our own (often fixed income) dollars, to try to convince the ICC and ComEd to listen to us and to bury this transmission line in the less than 1 mile path that touches our densely populated neighborhood. It is the right thing to do for the environment, to prevent large tax losses to Elgin due to decreased property values, and to keep us safe as we coexist with this project.
    Dan and Aileen Warren
  • January 31, 2014

    We are homeowners in the Bowes Creek Community in the city of Elgin. We are very concerned with the health and property value loss issues as a result of the proposed ComEd Grand Prairie Gateway Project proposal. The proposed 345 kV electric transmission lines will be in our back yard. As a two time cancer survivor my wife is very concerned with future health issues due to the strong electric field produced. The potential 30% loss in property values is also a concern, but the health issue is number one. These high voltage power lines must be buried to be safe to place that close to any residence.

    It should be a safety requirement that any high tension lines be buried when in close proximity of a residence. We request that the ICC require these high tension lines to be buried where they pass by our residence.

    Thank you for your consideration of our request.

    William Koves
  • January 31, 2014

    Dear Commissioners:

    I am a resident of the Bowes Creek Community (BCC). The subdivision is just south of the ComEd proposed high voltage tower construction. I strongly urge the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) to DENY ComEd’s project based upon the following:

    1) ComEd has never adequately explained the need for this project. Why would ComEd spend approximately $200 million for this project? Is it to sell electricity to other states? If that is even remotely possible, would Illinois be assisting ComEd to have other states lure Illinois companies to their state? I urge the ICC to carefully review the REAL need for this project.
    2) Why did ComEd decide to erect towers adjacent to BCC which is already a growing densely populated residential area? When asked why they chose this route, their response was they own the rights next to the train tracks. Their arrogance is astounding. What alternatives have they proposed? What modifications did they propose regarding tower construction adjacent to BCC? None! At a minimum the ICC should require ComEd to bury the cable or adopt an alternate route.
    3) Property values adjacent to the project would plummet. While governmental bodies would need to generate tax revenue from other non-adjacent homeowners, the answer to the potential lost revenue is simple. Bury the lines or develop an alternate route. As to ComEd’s objection that the cost would be too great and while I would concede the difficulty in estimating the cost, the residents of BCC are NOT asking for ComEd to bury the entire line. We are requesting the ICC rule on the BCC aspect of erecting towers in our front yard.
    4) While studies are vague as to whether living in proximity to high voltage towers represents a health hazard, no study is promoting the idea. In years to come, what information could be released stating that living near high voltage towers is dangerous to your health? (Cigarettes, asbestos, X-rays) If nothing else, the fear of the unknown is unsettling. Would you recommend a loved one purchase a home near these lines? I ask the ICC to relieve us from potential harm by ruling against the ComEd plan.

    While the project potentially affects many, BCC has the potential to be hurt the most for the above-cited reasons. The mechanism to correct ComEd’s plan is in the hands of the ICC. I am not asking to make others suffer this eyesore of a project. I am asking for either an alternate route or burying the cable adjacent to the BCC.

    Robert Avants
    Bowes Creek Community

    Robert Avants
  • January 28, 2014

    I am a citizen of Bowes Creek Community in Elgin which is a densely populated area of about 900 homes. The Grand Prairie Gateway project of 80 miles through Illinois runs DIRECTLY into our neighborhood for about 1 mile. I implore the ICC to demand that Com Ed either bury the lines in our community or redirect them away from this densely populated area. We have many health issue concerns for our families and also know these huge towers will greatly reduce the values of our homes. I happen to live in the Active Adult section of Bowes creek…and most of us are on fixed incomes and these unsightly towers will definitely devalue our homes. Also, many of our folks have pacemakers, etc and we are concerned about this, along with long term cancer concerns. PLEASE do not let this huge company run these towers through our community!! Our city and community have asked and asked Com Ed why these towers are even necessary? What do the citizens of Illinois benefit from these towers? There is an understanding that Com Ed will make billions of $ in the future from selling this power to neighboring states!!! While squishing the little guy who has worked all his life to have a nice home in a nice community to live out our days!! Is this what Illinois stands for??
    Cindy Anast
  • January 28, 2014

    I am a resident of the Bowes Creek subdivision in Elgin, Illinois and emphatically request the Illinois Commerce Commission deny Commonwealth Edison's (ComEd) Petition in docket number 13-0657. I live in the Eastern 20% of the proposed project where ComEd has never proposed an alternate route, nor has shown good cause for not doing so, especially considering it is the MOST densely populated portion of the proposed route. I am concerned for the following reasons:

    1.) ComEd proposes to build these 345kV Power Lines on steel towers that will be 165 feet tall and have four steel cross arms with a maximum width of 52 feet, just to the south of the Canadian National railroad and immediately north of the Bowes Creek subdivision. These power lines will literally be in the backyard of the “Active Adult” (55+ community) portion of the subdivision.

    2.) High-voltage power lines decrease property value. Various articles state that the average decrease in property value is 21% with a high of 30% and a low of 12%. It is unlikely my subdivision will be able to recover from the loss in value if these power lines are installed.

    3.) The National Institute of Health (NIH) has declared these power lines dangerous to people with pacemakers. Since the towers will border the active adult community’s 55 year old and older residents, the probability of someone living near these power lines with a pacemaker is significant.

    4.) There is a correlation between living near high-voltage power lines and incidents of childhood leukemia. Young children who live in the single family homes and town homes will also be exposed to these power lines.

    5.) ComEd never proposed an “alternate route” through densely populated areas, although much of the area ComEd studied to the West received proposed and alternate routes. Once the power lines enter Plato Township, there was no alternate route proposed meaning that ComEd has not listened to the concerns of the residents nor followed the intent of the law. ComEd has not shown “good cause” to be excused from complying with 220 ILCS 8-406.1(a)(1)(B)(viii) requiring an alternate route proposal – especially considering the population density and the impact to home values and quality of life. If necessary this plan could be accomplished by placing underground lines at the entrances to the Bowes Creek subdivision, the local schools in the Otter Creek area, and where feasible for the other high density areas within this heavily populated route.

    6.) This proposed ComEd project will not benefit Bowes Creek and it's residents whatsoever. Somewhere far east of Elgin and Bowes Creek someone will benefit from this project with access to more power. So why should our community have to take a 1, 2, 3 punch (lost home values, possible health issues & an aesthetic nightmare) so that ComEd can make billions of dollars over the next few decades?

    Once again, I urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to use its authority to deny ComEd’s petition and to require ComEd to meet the letter of the law by having them propose an alternate route for Plato Township, including provisions for burying the cables in high density
    areas.

    Very Respectfully,

    Lorraine L Dillon

    Lorraine L Dillon
  • January 28, 2014

    Dear Distinguished Commissioners,

    Com Ed is currently planning to install high-voltage lines on 165 foot support towers in very close proximity to our retirement community (Bose Creek). Our request is that Com Ed bury the high-voltage lines which run adjacent to our property. We realize that burying the lines will increase the cost, but the impacted area is only .7 of a mile. Furthermore, according to RETA, some of the benefits of underground lines are:
    1. Reduce the negative health impacts of overhead line electromagnet fields (EMFs) to almost zero.
    2. Are safer because they can't electrocute people or animals.
    3. Are safer because buried lines don't fall over in tornadoes, other high windstorms or ice storms.
    4. Are not affected by solar storms.
    5. Do not start wildfires nor are they affected by fires.
    6. Are safer because helicopters, airplanes and hot air balloons can't crash into them.
    7. Do not lower adjacent property values.
    8. Are not an eyesore.
    9. Do not buzz or hum.
    10. Do not negatively affect the environment.
    11. Do not kill thousands of birds annually through collision.
    12. Are more reliable.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    Dr.and Mrs. Larry Brandes
    3850 Kingsmill Drive
    Elgin, IL 60124

    Sincerely,

    Dr. Larry Brandes
  • January 28, 2014

    We moved to a lovely townhouse in the Bowes Creek Community this January. After losing money in real estate during the Great Recession as well as losing money in the stock market, it was our hope to spend our retirement years in this delightful active-adult community. Shortly after moving in, we learned about the ComEd Gateway project. The massive towers would transform this neighborhood. Our property values will greatly suffer. (We certainly would not have bought this place had we known what ComEd was planning for this area.) In addition, we would not have chosen to live in such close proximity to these powerful electrical lines because of the potential health hazards. There is enough written about this issue that it is concerning. I would have to ask whether you would choose to reside so near these electrical towers. Would you want to take a chance with your loved ones?

    Bowes Creek is turning out to be a very large subdivision with many, many families who will be impacted by these power lines. Why can’t the power lines be buried like ComEd would do for other population-dense areas?

    Please require ComEd to bury these lines or move them further from the Bowes Creek property lines. We listened last night from the Mayor of Elgin, and he certainly supported our efforts.

    Respectfully submitted,

    Patricia A. Avants,
    Bowes Creek Community

    Patricia Avants
  • January 28, 2014

    As residents of the Bowes Creek Country Club community in Elgin, we would like to request that the ICC consider denying ComEd approval to install high power towers very near to our community. Possible options would be to relocate them or bury them in our area. We are concerned about this project adversely impacting our property values, as well as the serious health concerns that could be posed to the residents.
    Rose Engle
  • January 28, 2014

    We all understand that electrical power is essential to our lives, however, Con-Edison continues their arrogant ways in pursuit of greed at the cost of others.

    We live in the Bowes Creek subdivision in Elgin, Il. Edison is planning on running towers and overhead lines over our schools and right next to our homes.

    Basically we are an over 55 senior citizen community who have invested our money and time into living in a safe and pleasant environment. The plans that Edison has put forth will destroy all that we have worked for.

    They will not consider an alternate route, ( lower density ) and lie about the cost to bury their lines. Please stop them.

    WILLIAM TALUC
  • January 28, 2014

    I am a resident of Bowes Creek Community in Elgin. Our community vehemently opposes the Grand Prairie Gateway Project that will run right along our beautiful community! We have MANY concerns about this project in our community including health issues due to these high powered electrical lines, our homes devaluation due to these ugly, huge towers at the entrance and along our community. Our community is about one mile of this 80 mile project and is DENSELY populated! We believe that Com Ed should either bury the lines along our community or redirect them to a more unpopulated area. This is ONE MILE of 80…a small portion of this project so WHY DOES IT HAVE TO EFFECT SO MANY PEOPLE? I also question why this project is even needed? Who benefits? Com Ed..I'm sure.

    PLEASE…do not put these high voltage power towers in our back yards!!

    Cindy Anast
  • January 28, 2014

    Responsible ComEd Policy

    As the Gateway Project moves forward the ICC should insure Illinois Citizen's concerns about this project. ComEd has thus far has not adequately explained the reason the project is necessary. As is typical, ComEd depicts the benefits Illinois Citizens will enjoy as a result of their progress. Please address the following concerns:

    1. Does this project in anyway support Iowa Wind Farm electrical generation and /or enhance the transmission of power to Indiana. If so, my will this commission support such a project where Illinois citizens are adversely affected and the opportunity for our bordering states to benefit economically?

    2. It is obvious ComEd has an economic benefit for expanding their electrical grid. Yes, it benefits their customers. However, that benefit does create a profit opportunity for ComEd. As a homeowner in the Bowes Creek Country Club development concern is rising as to the likely decline in home values such power lines have on homes. If this project proceeds as proposed by ComEd, why shouldn't home owners be compensated for the direct impact in home values this project will have?

    3. To date, it is obvious that utility companies have failed to provide what impact on health living in such close proximity to such high voltage lines. Understandably, neither did the asbestos industry, the cigarette industry, the alcohol industry, the auto industry, or numerous other industry proactively investigate adverse health issue their products have on the beneficiaries of products, their customers. It's not until it is too late for those adversely affected when regulation finally mandates a change of behavior by industry where consumers "benefits" are significantly less than the conditions such products created for the profit of the industry.

    4. Alternative installations are possible by ComEd where such above ground projects can and do adversely affect consumers. ComEd thus far maintain that Illinois law require utilities to use the least expensive route available. Now, why would any public official responsible for such, endorse the least expensive alternative in lieu of doing what is in the best interest of adversely affected. Campaign contributions by corporations are designed to do just one thing; create legislative bridges to benefit the profit motives of the industry. The alternative to install underground cables is too expensive according to ComEd. However, since ComEd has not explicitly indicated what the actual cost are, a decision to leave such off the table in your decision making is irresponsible. The benefit of such a project is significant, ComEd reaps profit and their customers receive better delivery. The "benefits" greatly out way the cost burying cable where it is a preferred alternative. When the economics are understood, whatever increase in cost is insignificant to the overall economic benefit. Therefore, the ICC should require ComEd to bury cable where it is prudent to do so.

    Thank you,

    Rick Koscher
    1015 Broadmoor Drive
    Elgin, IL 60124

    Rick Koscher
  • January 28, 2014

    My back windows face the proposed powerline towers at about 100 yards. Much like the strip mining that left mountains scarred and unsightly, these proposed towers would remain forever and destroy our property values, the aesthetics of an area that was developed to enhance beauty and nature, and put the burden of someone else's profit upon the backs of our neighborhood. The power may be going out-of-state, and it is definitely being distributed to a very large number of homes. Their benefit and the company's profits cannot be at the expense of our neighborhood. The cables need to be buried along Bose Creek subdivision.
    Randall Burggraf
  • January 28, 2014

    I strongly oppose the installation of high power voltage lines along the Bowes Creek community as proposed in ComEd’s Grand Prairie Gateway Project.

    Common sense should dictate. Installing high power voltage lines along a retirement community adjacent to an even larger section of homes where a majority of residents include children under the age of 10, all in a suburb that prides itself on its outdoor quality of life and recreation, is counterproductive and exploiting one’s power of eminent domain.

    Bowes Creek is a large and relatively new subdivision as of 2006. My family was one of its first residents. It has been 8 years and this community is still struggling to sell, build, develop and recover from the housing crash of 2008. ComEd’s high power lines will surely bring our community to its knees for good with residents dumping their homes and further construction coming to a halt. Long term results will include a community eyesore for the City of Elgin and outlying areas, all of which will have a negative economic impact. There are options on the table to bury the lines or utilize the alternative route. Both of these options should be explored.

    ICC, please veto this proposal as it stands.

    Respectfully submitted,
    Anne Ferguson

    Anne Ferguson
  • January 27, 2014

    We, the undersigned residents of South Elgin Illinois, are opposed to the route that has been proposed to the Illinois Commerce Commission for the placement of high voltage power lines in our community. We oppose the proposal to place them in an easement north of the railroad tracks within 20 feet of our property lines. The proposed route cuts through two subdivisions in South Elgin. We respectfully petition the court to approve an alternate route south of Stearns Road; or, to have them installed below ground. Our opposition is based upon the following:
    1. The resulting decrease in our property values will create a significant and disparate financial burden for the 43 homeowners adjacent to the easement. An additional 1000 more homes in the two subdivisions has the potential to reduce tax valuations by nearly $50,000,000, creating a negative economic impact on the entire community of South Elgin.

    2. Harmful electromagnetic field (EMF) emissions from the lines would be detrimental to our health; especially to the 40 homes that will be within 20 feet of the lines.

    3. At present, there are two sets of lines running through the easement; additional lines would increase the level of EMF emissions.

    4. One community park is located adjacent to the proposed installation, and three additional parks are located nearby, which would impact all residents and children of our community who frequent the parks.

    5. The addition of the lines will add noise pollution to an area already impacted by noise generated by trains, automobile traffic on Stearns Road and industrial noise from a quarry.
    We appreciate your consideration of the above.

    Myra A. Dela Merced
  • January 27, 2014

    We oppose this petition on several grounds.
    First, as ComEd customers for almost fifty years and therefore in their billing database, why have we never been directly notified by ComEd about this pending Gateway Project? Only when they petitioned to the ICC to speed up the approval process did we receive a mailing about an upcoming hearing date, and that came from the ICC.
    Second, we went to several community meetings and referendums that we became aware of through other sources about this project and continually came away shaking our heads trying to digest all of the "non-answers" received to any of our questions or concerns from ComEd representatives.
    Third, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that these overhead power lines are an eyesore and they will negatively impact property values and the environment and will pose possible health risks.
    Last, why is it that in every new residential development I have been to during the last thirty years or so all the utility lines are placed underground?

    Peter & Nancy Leicht
  • January 27, 2014

    I am strongly opposed to the current plan. The addition of an eye-sore on or near my property would serve to lower property value as well as create a less than pleasant appearance to my property. My purchase of the present property I decided on was in part generated by the exterior landscape and surrounding grounds. Your plan will deteriorate the beauty of the area.

    Please consider alternate plans to achieve the end result you seek.

    charles dickerson
  • January 27, 2014

    When we were looking to purchase a home in the Chicago area we automatically excluded any properties in close proximity to huge power lines and towers. We chose Bowes Creek for many reasons, including the beautiful tranquil surroundings. Now we find that Com-Ed towers may infringe on the quiet and beauty of our neighborhood. We also understand that our property value will decrease if the towers are built. We've heard that questions of impact on health will not be considered but we do have concerns about possible health hazards. We encourage Com-Ed to put these power lines underground, which would be beneficial to us and our neighbors and would cost less to repair, if repairs would be needed.

    Jeanne Tolzmann

    Jeanne Tolzmann
  • January 27, 2014

    I live in the active adult section of the Bowes Creek Subdivision. I am strongly opposed to Commonwealth Edison's Grand Prairie Gateway Project. These tall steel monstrosities are dangerous, ugly, and they will reduce my property value. I ask you members of the ICC and executives of Commonwealth Edison....would YOU want YOUR family living with these 345 Kilovolt towers in their backyards???? I think not!Please bury the lines!!
    Beth Theriault
  • January 27, 2014

    I am resident of the Bowes Creek Active Adult Community, mainly a seniors community. I understand that ComEd in proposing to construct high power lines, which will go adjacent to our homes. Our entire community is so upset about the ComED decision.

    This will affect all of our home values dramatically, and comprise the aesthetics of our development. Also, several of our residents maintain pacemakers and have been told by Medical advisers that the amount electrical power that these line will produce, will have an adverse effect on these devices, ultimately producing compromising conditions for these residents.

    ComED had told us they have the ability to put these power lines underground to avoid any logistic and medical complications. Our community is begging them to consider this option, even if it means we would incur higher electrical rates.

    If they refuse maybe they call choose an alternate route for these towers, which would not affect so many Senior Citizens. We prevail on you to make the right decision for our community, to eliminate the stress we currently are all feeling. Thank you in advance for your consideration.

    Glenn Markunas
    PH: 224-238-7961

    Glenn Markunas
  • January 27, 2014

    I want to state my opposition to the Gateway Power Line Project which ia next to Bowes Creek Cuntry Club. My parents and my brother and his family live there and it will lower their property values, have shown a link to health concerns in adults and has shown a link to childhood leukemia. There has not been an alternate route proposed for this project. I think these lines should be moved so they are not next to houses or buried underground.

    Kate Fricano

    Kate Fricano
  • January 27, 2014

    I am greatly opposed to ComEd installing high voltage transmission towers along the corridor that includes the Bowes Creek Subdivision.
    ComEd never proposed an "alternate route" through densely populated areas, although much of the area ComEd studied to the West received proposed and alternate routes. Once the power lines enter Plato Township, there was no alternate route proposed meaning that ComEd has not listened to the concerns of the residents nor followed the intent of the law. ComEd has not shown "good cause" to be excused from complying with 220 IL-CS 8-406 1 (a) 1 (B) (viii) requiring an alternate route proposal-especially considering the population density and the impact to home values and quality of life.
    This plan could be accomplished by placing underground lines at the entrances to the Bowes Creek subdivision, the local schools in the Otter Creek area, and where feasible for the other high density areas within this heavily populated route.

    Nick Pearl
    Bowes Creek Active Adult Community

    Nick Pearl
  • January 24, 2014

    I oppose the Gatewa project. My inlaws live next to the proposed site. This will cause noise pollution and will cause their property value to decrease.

    Please find an alternate rite for these high voltage,power lines or bury them.

    Frank Fricano
  • January 24, 2014

    My wife and I moved to Elgin four years ago from Colorado and chose to live at Bowes Creek because of it's beauty and relative quiet.
    Had the proposed transmission lines already existed back then, we would never have bought a townhome here. The last thing we want is those monstrous behemouths near our development. In one state we previously lived in we saw such lines and felt sorry for the homes about one half mile away (no homes were as close as the proposed line). I cannot imagine what this will do to a whole host of citizens. There has to be another way!

    Sincerely,
    The Rev. Arlyn L. Tolzmann
    1040 Broadmoor Drive
    Elgin, IL 60124

    Rev. Arlyn L. Tolzmann
  • January 24, 2014

    I am opposed to the construction of the towers along my property. This will significantly decrease the value of the property. I hope that you are able to find an alternate solution. Thank you, Sandra Gochnour
    Sandra Gochnour
  • January 24, 2014

    We live in the Bowes Creek Active Adult community in Elgin. We have serious concerns about the placement of the 345kV transmission lines so near our property. The result will cause a significant decrease in our property value, one as senior citizens on fixed incomes we can ill afford. And while the final verdict may be out, one cannot deny that there is considerable doubt as to the negative health impact because of this type of high voltage power. With all the concern about rising health care costs and the need for seniors to be less dependent on government, these two factors alone should be cause for reflection by you, our appointed and elected officials. As such, we strongly urge the ICC to direct ComEd to either re-route the lines that are planned to go through our immediate area, and if that is not possible, then choose a viable alternative, which is to direct that these cables be buried for the less than one mile that runs adjacent to our property. Thanks you for your consideration.
    Ed and Vicki Graf

    Ed abd Vicki Graf
  • January 24, 2014

    I am opposed to the prposed route that ComEd has submitted.
    I see no documentation that an alternate route has ever been proposed.
    The health risk is undocumented & is of deep concern.
    Pkease deny the request of ComEd & take time to review all options that have not been done.

    William McMahon
  • January 24, 2014

    I am a resident of the Bowes Creek Subdivision and I urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to "Deny" Commonwealth Edison's Petition in Docket 13-0657. It is apparent from the beginning of this process that ComEd has intentionally ignored the feedback and concerns from residents of our area. I feel the Petition should be denied for the following reasons:

    1. ComEd has never proposed an "alternate route" through densely populated areas. This is one indication that ComEd has not listened to the feedback or concerns of the residents nor have they followed the intent of the Law. ComEd has not shown good cause as to be exempted from complying with 220 ILCS 8-406(a)(1)(B)(viii) requiring an alternate route proposal - especially considering the population density and the impact to home values and the quality of life.

    2. High Voltage power lines decrease property values from 12% to 30%. There is no provision to compensate homeowners for the loss in home equity or property value and it is unlikely that my subdivision will ever recover the loss in value if these power lines are installed.

    3. The National Institute of Health has declared these power lines dangerous to people with pacemakers. Since the towers will border the active adult community's 55 year old and older residents, the probability of someone living near these power lines with a pacemaker is quite high.

    4. There is a correlation between living near high-voltage power lines and incidents of childhood leukemia. Young children who live in the single family homes and town homes will also be exposed to these power lines.

    5. There are also the Health Issues that everyone wants to ignore since studies have not come up with definitive data as to cause and effect!

    6. Noise pollution is also an issue as it has been agree upon that humming, crackling and popping noises are quite common as a result of these lines. It has also been proven that the noise is worse during rain showers and high periods of humidity. When you add the road noise from Bowes Road, the noise generated by Train Traffic on the railroad and the noise generated by these lines - no one will be able to get any rest.

    If these lines must follow the only proposed route - this plan should allow the use of underground lines at the entrance to Bowes Creek subdivision, the local schools in the Otter Creek area and where feasible for the other high density areas within the heavily populated route. If Schaumburg and the City of Chicago are able to have these high voltage lines buried, it should also be allowed in other high density areas within this heavily populated route.

    I again urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to use its authority to deny ComEd's petition and to require ComEd to meet the letter of the law by having them propose an alternate route for Plato Township, including provisions for burying the cables in high density areas.

    Regards,

    Charles Traugott
    1106 Pine Valley Court
    Elgin, Illinois

    Charles Traugott
  • January 24, 2014

    https://www.icc.illinois.gov/docket/comment/comment.aspx?id=14670&is=-32373200&cd=924185748&cs=-813574366&gd=d6e4fd91-c7a7-4953-bdca-cff689863cca&gs=1268168904&vs=-2127232604
    Alyssa Armato
  • January 24, 2014

    The impact of visual power lines on Bowes Creek Community will
    Be large. The decrease in home values due to the gateway
    Project will be great. I live in Bowes Creek & I can tell you
    It will hurt the community. Why not put lines below ground it's a higher cost at
    First but in the long run it becomes cost effective. Below ground less
    Risk of wind or weather damage & any type of damage from a storm (ie lighting), plus
    Better for the community.

    Michelle Sturr Barton
  • January 24, 2014

    My husband and I are residents in Bowes Creek Regency Active Adult Community. We live at 3882 Valhalla Drive, which is directly south of the railroad tracks where ComEd is proposing the large, industrial type steel towers. The proposed towers would actually be located in our back yard since our home is at the far north end of our subdivision.

    This type of steel tower would greatly decrease the value of our home and look very offensive. It is the type of power line that should be constructed in a commercial or industrial area vs. a residential community.

    ComEd did not offer an alternative route nor propose burying these lines in the ground, which with the law as detailed in 220 ILCS 8-406.1
    (a)(1)(B)(viii). The lines would not only run through the Bowes Creek community, but very close to a grade school. Both the population density and the impact to home values and quality of life have been totally disregarded by ComEd.

    ComEd could place the lines underground to avoid the decrease of home values and protect the health of Bowes Creek residents as well as the local school children in the Otter Creek area.

    I urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to use its authority to deny ComEd's petition and to require ComEd to meet the letter of the law by having them propose an alternate, safer route for Plato Township, including provisions for burying the cables in high density areas.

    Respectfully,

    Dale and Teresa Root
    3882 Valhalla Drive
    Elgin, IL 60124

    Teresa Root
  • January 24, 2014

    I strongly oppose the Grand Prairie Gateway Project. The new powerlines are proposed to go in directly across the street from my residence. This plan will seriously affect one of South Elgin's better areas and subdivisons - River Ridge. Their is no reason the lines can't be buried as they come through our subdivision at the very least. The neighbors are coming together and will fight this plan along with our village until an alternate plan is proposed !!!!!!
    Ralph
  • January 24, 2014

    I am opposed to the Gateway project as it is presented. I live in the Bowes Creek Masters subdivision adjacent to the proposed power line. The power line project will greatly reduce the value of our home. These huge power line towers pollute the environment with noise and dangerous EMF's. We have two small children who would live very close to,these proposed lines. There is a correlation which links these types of power lines to childhood leukemia. There are many small children wholive in this area.

    I respectfully request Com Ed to propose an alternate route for these power lines adjacent to the Bowes Creek subdivision or to bury these lines in the area. This may be somewhat more,of an expense for Com Ed but I doubt if it would be more of an expense that the amount we as homeowners will lose in property value.

    Anthony Armato

    Anthony Armato
  • January 24, 2014

    This comment refers to the Gran Prairie Gateway Project and the transmission lines. I received notification of the hearing, but was newly discharged from the hospital and read it on 12-21-12. I would like to leave a comment about the effect on my property in Burlington Township, Kane County. I purchased the 95 acres 45W section 25, which is part of the alternative transmission line, for farming. The lines on my property would reduce the value of the property as well as reduce farming revenues. We bought and developed our farm without a railroad track while others built next to a track that that already had ComEd easments. Please do not use my property for transmission lines.
    Judith C Hines
  • January 24, 2014

    I am a resident of the Bowes Creek subdivision in Elgin, Illinois and emphatically request the Illinois Commerce Commission deny Commonwealth Edison's (ComEd) Petition in docket number 13-0657. I live in the Eastern 20% of the proposed project where ComEd has never proposed an alternate route, nor has shown good cause for not doing so, especially considering it is the most densely populated portion of the proposed route. I am concerned for the following reasons:

    1.) ComEd proposes to build these 345kV Power Lines on steel towers that will be 165 feet tall and have four steel cross arms with a maximum width of 52 feet, just to the south of the Canadian National railroad and immediately north of the Bowes Creek subdivision. These power lines will literally be in the backyard of the “Active Adult” (55+ community) portion of the subdivision.

    2.) High-voltage power lines decrease property value. Various articles state that the average decrease in property value is 21% with a high of 30% and a low of 12%. It is unlikely my subdivision will be able to recover from the loss in value if these power lines are installed.

    3.) The National Institute of Health (NIH) has declared these power lines dangerous to people with pacemakers. Since the towers will border the active adult community’s 55 year old and older residents, the probability of someone living near these power lines with a pacemaker is significant.

    4.) There is a correlation between living near high-voltage power lines and incidents of childhood leukemia. Young children who live in the single family homes and town homes will also be exposed to these power lines.

    5.) ComEd never proposed an “alternate route” through densely populated areas, although much of the area ComEd studied to the West received proposed and alternate routes. Once the power lines enter Plato Township, there was no alternate route proposed meaning that ComEd has not listened to the concerns of the residents nor followed the intent of the law. ComEd has not shown “good cause” to be excused from complying with 220 ILCS 8-406.1(a)(1)(B)(viii) requiring an alternate route proposal – especially considering the population density and the impact to home values and quality of life.
    This plan could be accomplished by placing underground lines at the entrances to the Bowes Creek subdivision, the local schools in the Otter Creek area, and where feasible for the other high density areas within this heavily populated route.

    Once again, I urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to use its authority to deny ComEd’s petition and to require ComEd to meet the letter of the law by having them propose an alternate route for Plato Township, including provisions for burying the cables in high density
    areas.

    Michael Yerly
  • January 24, 2014

    Our single family home, in the Bowes Creek Community, backs up to the existing railroad tracks. The proposed ComEd poles would be located directly behind our small backyard.

    This is a huge health concern as my wife and I already suffer from a chronic form of leukemia, and hoped to live out a long life here.
    The poles would be a most obnoxious eye sore directly out our back windows, and lower our property value considerably, if our home was able to be sold in the future. We selected this prime lot for the view out back, and pay elevated real estate taxes for this pleasure.

    There must be another location where so many homeowners would not have to be subject to these poles.
    On the east side of the Community bridge, where single family homes are located, small children play outdoors. Would ComId like their children/grandchildren to be exposed to these dangerous poles?

    iWilliam Johnson
  • January 22, 2014

    I am concerned about the negative impact this transmission line will have on Muirhead Springs Forest Preserve owned by the Kane County Forest Preserve. Muirhead Springs is supposed to be preserved not used for the convenience of a large corporation. If the line must go through the preserve then it would be less of an impact if it could be buried. If that is not possible then Commonwealth Edison should provide a way to compensate for the lose of habitat, visual impact and other negative effects of such an intrusion such as purchasing additional land adjacent to the preserve to add to the preserve.
    Mary Ochsenschlager
  • January 22, 2014

    We oppose the Gateway project as it has been presented. Our property is quite close to the proposed towers. Not only would these towers negatively affect our property values, it would present a health hazard for my husband who is dependent on a pacemaker/defibrillator. We have been warned that he should have no contact with high voltage lines. We feel that where residential properties are impacted, the lines should be buried.
    Joan and Alan Colby
  • January 21, 2014

    I am opposed to the proposed route for the placement of high voltage power lines in our community. The current proposal places these lines in an easement north of the railroad tracks and within 20 fee to for our property lines an adjacent park designed for young children, including a baseball field. I understand there is an alternate route being considered and respectfully request that the ICC chose the alternative route. It is time to do the right thing, even if it means a little more work and cooperation required for the parties involved.

    I am opposed to the potential decreased property values, harmful electromagnetic field emissions, and added noise pollution to our community.

    There is a reasonable alternative on the table.

    Sincerely,

    Jennifer L. McClure, PhD

    Jennifer McClure
  • January 21, 2014

    I am opposed to the route that has been proposed to the ICC for the placement of high voltage power lines in our community. I oppose the proposal to place them in an easement north of the railroad tracks within 20 feet of our property lines. The proposed route cuts through two subdivisions in South Elgin. I respectfully petition the court to approve and alternate route south of Stearns Road; or to have the lines installed below ground.

    My opposition is based on the following:
    1. The resulting decrease in property values.
    2. Harmful electromagnetic field (EMF) emissions from the lines - there are already two sets of lines running through the easement - additional lines would increase the level of EMF emissions.
    3. One community park is located adjacent to the proposed installation, which would impact residents and children in the community who frequent the park.
    4. The addition of the lines will add noise pollution to an area already impacted by noise from trains, automobile traffic on Stearns Road, and industrial noise from a quarry.

    I appreciate your consideration of the above.

    Lon Meltesen
    South Elgin Resident

    Lon Meltesen
  • January 21, 2014

    I am opposed to the placement of these high power lines running through our subdivision, Bowes Creek Country Club. Not only are they an eyesore and pose potential unknown health concerns, but they will definitely put a blemish on a golf course community, damaging our already struggling property values. I would like to see an alternate route that doesn't run right next to some of our homes and literally through our backyards or see the lines buried.
    Jessica
  • January 21, 2014

    I am opposed to the path that ComEd has proposed for these power lines. They would run right through our subdivision, Bowes Creek Country Club. High voltage power lines are a health issue for many residents of this community. Burying these power lines below ground as they approach our community is a viable alternative and a small price to pay for delivering energy sources to customers. I urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to use its authority to deny ComEd's petition and make them come back to the table once they have proposed an alternate route. City of Elgin has unanimously adopted a resolution opposing this Gateway Project for health concerns and property value decline as it is adjacent to three subdivisions and the Otter Creek elementary school.
    James Milano
  • January 21, 2014

    I live in Bowes Creek and I oppose the Gateway Project. The Gateway Project will lessen the property value of my home,
    Pollute our environment with noise, and interfere with tv and phone reception. The health risks of these towers need to be explored.

    I would like to see an alternate route be proposed for the project or bury the power lines adjacent to the Bowes Creek Country Club.

    Gerald Armato

    Gerald Armato
  • January 21, 2014

    I oppose the Gateway Project for because the existence of huge power line towers causes a 10 to 20% loss in property value of our new home in Bowes Creek. Living adjacent to a huge power line project is one of the very few things which can cause such a devastating loss in property value that the we as homeowners have no control over.

    The 150 feet power poles proposed to have 345,000 volts are also a source of noise pollution, cause problems with tv and phone reception per Com Ed.

    The most important reason however that I oppose the Gateway Project is health risk to my family and my neighbors. My husband has had 2 cancers in 2 years and we need to know the actual effects of EMF's on individuals with compromised immune systems. My son and his family with 2 small children live in Bowes Creek also adjacent to the Gateway proposed site. There is also a link between EMF's and childhood leukemia. There are over 2 dozen small children who live in the family section of Bowes Creek who could be exposed to these EMF's every day and more impoprtantly every night while sleep- extended expopsure. The National Institute of Health states that EMF's interfere with the function of pacemakers . In a 55 and older neighnorhood there are pacemakers.The studies in Com Ed's information are from the 90's. There are more recent studies which show a greater cause for concern. These links to EMF's and cancer and other health risks should be taken into consideration when looking at these health risks.

    For these reason I oppose the Gateway project. I would like to see the project moved to the tollway location or buried
    underground .
    Jane Armato

    Jane Armato
  • January 21, 2014

    The Bioinitiative Report 2012, confirms previously-reported health risks of overhead power line electromagnetic fields (EMFs). The report, prepared by 29 authors from 10 countries, includes the review of approximately 1,800 new studies on the biological effects and adverse health effects from EMFs. The report indicates the existing public safety limits for EMFs and radio frequency radiation are not adequate to protect public health. Children, pregnant women, and people with autism, in particular, should minimize EMF and wireless exposures. EMF exposure negatively affects behavior, growth, reproduction and melatonin production. Oxidative stress, caused by EMF exposure, contributes to cancer, neurodegenerative diseases and immune disorders. DNA integrity in human cells is negatively affected by EMF exposure. To protect living cells from stress and DNA strand breakdown, EMF safety limits must be changed from the current thermal standard based on energy, to a standard based on negative biological responses that occur long before the threshold for thermal changes. The report cites many more health impacts of EMF exposure. One of the co-editors of the Bioinitiative Report 2012 said, “There is now much more evidence of risks to health affecting billions of people world-wide. The status quo is not acceptable in light of evidence for harm.” New safety standards are urgently needed for protection against EMF and wireless exposures present everywhere in daily life. When it comes to assessing what is acceptable in terms of risk we need to evaluate more than just the chances of it happening, we need to evaluate the consequences. Overhead high voltage power lines ionize the air, emitting trillions of corona ions into the air per second. These ions attach to aerosol-sized particles of many types of carcinogenic air pollution, like diesel exhaust. The charged pollutant particles are then carried by the wind up to 7 kilometers downwind of the power lines, and deposit in the lungs at a significantly greater rate than uncharged pollutant particles. We are not willing to risk our children and our loved ones when the expected leukemia risk of 6 in 100,000 becomes 30 in 100,000 and the scientific community indicates that the increased risks of cancers and so many other diseases from exposure to EMFs can no longer be ignored. Since 1988, evidence that power line EMFs are a serious health risk has been increasing, not decreasing. Scientific and medical studies reported in peer-reviewed publications indicate 11.8 times the risk of nervous system cancer, 10. 3 times the risk of brain cancer, 6 times the risk of male breast cancer, 3.3 times the risk of connective tissue cancer, 3.2 times the risk of female breast cancer, 3 times the risk of intestinal cancer, and 2.2 times the risk of lymph cancer due to prolonged exposure to EMFs. Many studies show that higher risks of childhood leukemia are found among children living near overhead high voltage power lines; risks vary from 2 to 5 times the expected rate for the general population. The incidence of leukemia in utility workers exposed to EMFs is 4.3 to 5.5 times the expected, with risk increasing as the exposure increases. The risk of Alzheimer’s disease increases up to 4.9 times the expected rate due to prolonged EMF exposure, and to 2.5 times the expected rate for dementia. Women who live or work near overhead high voltage power lines have up to the following increased birth risks: miscarriage 5.7 times the expected rate; throat birth defects 2.5 times the expected; hydrocephalous 1.7 times the expected; heart birth defects 1.5 times the expected. The risk of severe depression increases by up to 4.7 times the expected rate for people living or working near overhead high voltage power lines, and suicide mortality among people who work or live near high voltage lines is up to 3.6 times the expected rate. Common sense says if the scientific community is warning us about overhead power lines, and if governments and power companies don’t know for sure they are safe, then don’t build the ComEd Gateway Project 345kV transmission power lines so close to our houses, schools and daycares. Other jurisdictions have come up with common sense solutions to this dilemma; they don’t build new above ground high voltage power lines near people. Burying high voltage power lines totally eliminates the electric field component of EMFs through shielding, and thereby eliminates any health impacts caused by electric fields and significantly reduces the magnetic field component of EMFs through phase cancellation, and thereby essentially eliminates negative health effects caused by magnetic fields other than immediately above a buried line.
    Dolores and James Chmill
  • January 21, 2014

    To Whom It May Concern,

    The River Ridge Community in South Elgin, IL, would sincerely appreciate it if the secondary routing can be chosen so that the new lines do not come closer to our housing/parks and infringe upon our lifestyle. The land that would be used for this is currently public park land and the addition of these lines would stop children from playing, dogs from walking and the freedom to enjoy the park outside of our homes.

    Yes, we realize the treeline and foliage may be a bit more difficult for Com*Ed to deal with on the other side of the RR tracks, but we have already been subjected to new 4 lane high speed (high sound) road (Stearns extension) a busy railroad (Canadian National) with increased traffic and the current power lines along our subdivision. Please grant us a break.
    This is not what we signed up for when we bought our homes here.

    Approving the routing alongside our subdivision is going to potentially cause many of us to move, the housing market/value to decrease in our subdivision as well as decrease much used park district land.

    Any consideration given to this matter is great appreciated.

    Susan Keldani
  • January 21, 2014

    I am a resident of the Bowes Creek Active Adult (over 55 years of age)subdivision in Elgin, IL. I emphatically request the Illinois Commerce Commission deny Commonwealth Edison's (ComEd) Petition in docket number 13-0657. This proposed route is the most densely populated portion of the route. I am very concerned for the following reasons:

    1.The National Institute of Health has declared these power lines dangerous to people with pacemakers. Since the towers of this project would border this community of 55 years of age and older, the probability of residents living near these power lines with a pacemaker is high.

    2. High-voltage power lines decrease property values.

    3. ComEd never proposed an "alternate route" through densely populated areas, although much of the area ComEd studied to the West received proposed and alternate routes. ComEd has not shown "good cause" to be excused from complying with 220 ILCS 8-406.1(a)(1)(B)(viii) requiring an alternate route proposal--especially considering the population density and the impact to home values and quality of life.

    This plan could be accomplished by placing underground lines along the Bowes Creek subdivision, the local schools in the Otter Creek area and, where feasible for the other high density areas within thisc heavily populated route.

    Once again, I urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to use its authority to deny ComEd's petition.

    Thank you for your attention to my request.

    Michael V. Kronk

    Michael V. Kronk
  • January 21, 2014

    I am opposed to the route that has been proposed to the ICC for theplacement of hight voltage power lines in our community. I oppose the proposal to place them in an easement north of the railroad tracks within 20 feet of our property lines. The proposed route cuts through two subdivisions in South Elgin. I respectfully petition the court to approve and alternate route south of Stearns Road; or to have the lines installed below ground.

    My oppostition is based on the following:
    1. The resulting decrease in property values.
    2. Harmful electromagnetic field (EMF) emissions from the lines - there are already two sets of lines running through the easement - additional lines would increase the level of EMF emissions.
    3. One community park is located adjacent to the proposed installation, which would impact residents and children in the community who frequent the park.
    4. The addition of the lines will add noise pollutionto an area already impacted by noise from trains, automobile traffic on Stearns Road, and industrial noise from a quarry.

    I appreciate your consideration of the above.

    Bridget Meltesen
    South Elgin Resident

    Bridget Meltesen
  • January 21, 2014

    I am a homeowner located at 1044 Riviera Drive in the active adult Regency subdivision of Bowes Creek Country Club in Elgin and wish to express my extreme displeasure in Commonwealth Edison's proposed project to build 345kV power lines on 165' tall towers with 52' cross arms to the south of the Canadian National railroad and immediately north of my home.

    My main objection to ComEd's proposal is that they have never offered an "alternate route" through this densely populated area. This plan could be amicably accomplished by placing UNDERGROUND LINES to the Bowes Creek Country Club subdivision, the local schools in the Otter Creek area and where feasible for the other high density areas within this heavily populated route.

    PLEASE deny ComEd's petition in docket #13-0657 as it is currently proposed.

    Judy L. Wrigley
  • January 21, 2014

    We respectfully oppose the location selected for the power lines passing the River Ridge subdivision in South Elgin. The addition of these lines will further decrease the value of my property (already decreased by the addition of Stearns Road) and increase the environmental impact already presented by the existing power lines. It would be just as easy to move them south of the railroad tracks or even across Stearns road, where there is far less population and more open land.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    Sincerely,
    Scott Paulsen

    Scott Paulsen
  • January 21, 2014

    I am a resident of the Bowes Creek subdivision in Elgin, Illinois and emphatically request the Illinois Commerce Commission deny Commonwealth Edison's (ComEd) Petition in docket number 13-0657. I live in the Eastern 20% of the proposed project where ComEd has never proposed an alternate route, nor has shown good cause for not doing so, especially considering it is the most densely populated portion of the proposed route.
    Ken Burg
  • January 21, 2014

    I am strongly opposed to this Com Ed Project. I live in the River Ridge Subdivision and the construction of these power lines would further devalue my home resale value. I already have the stearns road project causing vehicle noise I can hear every day from my house. I live in close proximity to where this Com Ed project is planned and another reason is the park located right off Hancock St. The power lines are not safe children are always present and these power lines would be too close.
    Vincent Bruett
  • January 17, 2014

    I am strongly opposed to the tower construction adjacent to the Bowes Creek subdivision. It presents a potential health hazard and will adversely affect propert values. It is adjacent to a highly populated area. Alternative routes or below ground construction should be considered.
    Robert Avants
  • January 17, 2014

    I just had surgery for a pacemaker. The doctors gave many warnings about
    high voltage transmission lines.
    I have worked in electronics for 40 years. I know about high voltage.
    With over a third of a million volts there is definite damage to humans.
    Why can't you run these lines along the tollway.

    Thank you for your attention

    Roger Dombrowski

    Roger Dombrowski
  • January 17, 2014

    I live in the Bowes Creek 55 Adult Townhomes. We have been told that ComED wants to install very high power lines, 165 ft. tall on the very edge of our property. They will be just a few yards from the homes. They will be an aesthetic nightmare and will cause noise pollution.We will more than likely experience interference with our TV, telephone and data transmission. My ten year old grandson lives in the same community and I do not want his health compromised since incidents of childhood leukemia have occurred as a result of this. We moved here to be close to our grandson since his father, our son, died 8 years ago. The thought of these ugly and dangerous towers makes my heart sick. Please help us. Make ComEd install underground lines at the entrance of our subdivision.
    Shari Voltz
  • January 17, 2014

    Although I am a new resident in an "over 55" community, I had heard about the meetings ComEd conducted to supposedly inform us of the 345kV lines. I attended this local meeting and found the "experts" could answer no questions which went off script. I oppose these lines for health reasons. People with pace makers will be at risk. From personal experience, I know of cancer clusters which occur around these high tension wires. I feel you have a MORAL resposibility to safeguard the citizens and especially the seniors. We have all heard the same story of how expensive it is to bury these lines...but the have been buried in Chicago. So am I to understand the taxpayers of Chicago are more important than the taxpayers of Elgin and surrounding areas?
    Caroline Wiener
  • January 17, 2014

    I am opposed to the path that ComEd has proposed for these power lines. They would run right through our subdivision, Bowes Creek Country Club.
    Everyone here is very concerned about the health effects to those of us living so close to these high voltage power lines.
    Our second concern is the impact to our property values. Not only will the value of our homes go down, but these lines will make it hard to sell our homes in the future.
    I urge you to consider alternate routes that will take these power lines further away from already established homes and schools. If this is the only possible route then I hope these lines will be buried to lessen the impact on the residents.

    Patricia Mangriotis
  • January 17, 2014

    We are another of the 200 plus families that live in Bowes Creek that oppose the ComEd power line project. We are paying ultra-high property taxes because we are told our property values are high. What will the values be after these huge power lines cut through our neighborhood?
    Will our taxes be reduced?
    Please demand that ComEd reconsider alternate routes.
    Give the citizens due consideration.
    Thank you.

    George Mangriotis
  • January 17, 2014

    I am opposed to this project coming so close to my home in the Bowes Creek Adult community. High voltage power lines are a health issue for many residents of this community including myself. Alternative routes for these transmission lines have not been explored or offered by ComEd. Burying these power lines below ground as they approach our community is a viable alternative and a small price to pay for delivering energy sources to customers. Many residents, the City of Elgin and nearby area's residents are in opposition to this intrusion.

    Please consider the concerns of all people opposed to this project.

    Thank you,

    Jim Rynott

    Jim Rynott
  • January 17, 2014

    I live about 600 ft from the current utility line. I was hesitant to buy because of what it is. Since Commonwealth Edison will not be willing to pay for my property depreciation because of the 345KV eyesore & potential health risks, I consider myself to be forced to sell my property.
    Please, can someone stop this American Creed within this Monoply? Let's see if Commonwealth can step up to the plate for the people & not for their own pocket books. And yes, I've been subject to listening to how great, safe & financially better for me it will be...Im in sales too...
    PLEASE DO NOT CONSTRUCT THIS TOWER...IT IS NOT FAIR TO THE ESTABLISHED HOUSEHOLDS...
    This 345KV should have been constructed before any residential developments are built.

    Karen Osswald
  • January 15, 2014

    I am a resident of the Bowes Creek subdivision in Elgin, IL. The Illinois Commerce Commission should deny ComEd's Petition for constructing new high voltage transmission lines. I would like the Commission to remember the residents involved in this massive project - particularly those in the eastern 20% of the proposed project where ComEd never proposed an alternate route and showed no good cause for not doing so - especially considering it is the most densely populated portion of the proposed route. This is a violation of 220 ILCS Subsection 8/406.1(a)(1)(B)(viii) which requires ComEd to consider alternate routes unless their is good cause. Although ComEd claims good cause and points to Ms. Murphy's testimony - I believe that this is in their best interest and not good cause. How could they not consider an alternate route in the most densely populated portion of their route.

    ComEd wants to build these 345kV Power Lines on steel towers that will be 165 feet tall and have four steel cross arms with a maximum width of 52 feet, just to the south of the Canadian National Railroad and immediately north of the Bowes Creek Subdivision. These power lines will literally be in the backyard of the “Active Adult” (55+ community) portion of the subdivision. I am concerned about this for the following reasons:

    1.) The National Institute of Health (NIH) has declared these power lines dangerous to people with pacemakers. Since that particular part of the community is 55 years old and older the probability of someone living near these power lines with a pacemaker is far higher.

    2.) There is a correlation between living near high voltage power lines and incidents of childhood leukemia. Even though it is correlative and not causative, as a father of an 1 year old son, this is a cause of concern for me. These power lines will come within 1000 feet of my house.

    3.) High voltage power lines have a tendency to decrease property value. Some articles state that the average decrease in property value is 21% with a high of 30% and a low of 12%. My subdivision will never be able to recover from the loss in value of the housing bubble burst if these power lines are installed.

    4.) As mentioned above, ComEd never gave us the option of an “alternate route” although much of the area ComEd studied to the west received proposed and alternate routes, once the power lines enter Plato Township, there was no alternate route proposed meaning that ComEd just intends to shove these power lines down our throats.

    Once again, I urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to use its authority to deny ComEd's petition and make them come back to the table once they have proposed an alternate route for the ENTIRE project.

    ComEd should consider routing these power lines along I-90 to the Hoffman Estates Substation and then south to the Wayne Substation. There are already high voltage transmission lines along I-90 - so the impact would be minimal. From the Hoffman Estates Substation to the Wayne Substation - high voltage towers already exist and they have existing capacity for 4 more lines - meaning that ComEd would not need to build towers for this portion because they are only proposing to string up 3 lines.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    Jacob Zimmerman
  • January 15, 2014

    As a resident of South Elgin IL in the River Ridge subdivision, we are opposed to the route that has been proposed to the ICC for the placement of high voltage power lines in our community. We oppose the proposal to place them in an easement north of the railroad tracks within 20 feet of our property lines. The proposed route cuts through two subdivisions in South Elgin, IL. We respectively petition the court to approve an alternative route south of Stearns Road were there are no homes or to have the installed below ground. Our opposition is based on the following:

    The resulting decrease in your property values will create a significant and disparate financial burden for the 43 homeowners adjacent to the easement. An additional 1000 more homes in the two subdivisions has the potential to reduce tax valuations by nearly $50MM creating a negative economic impact on the entire community of South Elgin.

    Harmful electromagnetic field (EMF) emissions from the lines would be detrimental to our health, especially to the 40 homes that will be within 20 feet of the lines.

    At present, there a two sets of lines running through the easement; additional lines would increase the levels of EMF emissions.

    One community park is located adjacent to the proposed installation and three additional parks are located nearby, which would impact all residents, children and pets of our community who frequent the parks.

    Jim Sherman
  • January 15, 2014

    Follow up on tracking number 16614. I have not heard any feedback??
    Richard Mott
  • January 14, 2014

    WE STRONGLY OBJECT TO THE PLAN WHICH WOULD RESULT IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED UTILITY FACILITY ON OUR PROPERTY. OUR CONCERNS ARE:
    1) SAFETY FOR LIVING ORGANISMS...ANIMAL, PLANT AND HUMAN
    2) LOSS OF AGRICULTURAL ZONING
    3) DECREASED PROPERTY VALUES
    PARCEL PIN NUMBERS: 09-02-253-004
    09-02-253-006
    09-02-253-007

    DIANA AND KENNETH CORNELISSEN
  • January 14, 2014

    I am opposed to the current routing through South Elgin as proposed by Com Ed. The installation of the lines would cut through 2 subdivisions with a direct impact on 43 homes that border the easement. There are 4 community parks in the area, along with 1000 homes. The current route would impact the area in the following manner:
    1. A decrease in property values would have a negative economic impact on the entire South Elgin community;
    2. There are already two sets of power lines going through the easement. The additional lines would bring the total to three, and would create EMF emissions harmful to our health.
    3. The additional lines would add to noise pollution already impacted by high automobile traffic, trains, and industrial noise generated by the quarry.
    While not opposed to the project, the placement of the lines is unacceptable. They should be installed south of Stearns Road or installed underground because of the proximity to our neighborhood.

    Constance Jones
  • January 14, 2014

    I would like to go on record and state my opposition to the current proposal to run a 3rd set of power lines across the River Ridge property in South Elgin, Illinois. My concerns stem from both a health concern and financial concerns.
    1. From a health and safety concern running such high voltage that close to where our children live and play is concerning. The area is used as recreation for all that live adjacent to it and others in the area, furthermore the parcel is adjacent to a Village park that used by many children and holds countless organized sports activities. Another concern is safety during construction of this type of project.
    2. From a financial concern, the immediate homes (43) in the River Ridge and Sugar Ridge community who's back yards would be directly impacted could suffer depreciation upwards of 40%. There are over 1000 other homes in these communities that will also see depreciation. This type of loss in property value will also have a negative impact on incoming property tax revenue. In what is already a depressed real estate market (current home sales are at or below 2003 prices) home owners in our community, most blue collar cannot afford this type of it.

    Please consider the alternate routes and underground options that are available to a large and multi-billion dollar organization that ComEd/Exelon is.

    Gus Konstantopoulos
  • January 14, 2014

    I own two pieces of property and both stand to be affected by this project, depending on which routes are selected. Needless to say, this has become a major source of stress/concern for me, like all other property owners. In light of the health concerns and pollution concerns, I think this area has become much too populated to allow the building of these power lines above ground. I urge that these power lines be buried.
    Carol Nightingale
  • January 10, 2014

    I oppose the current plan to run new power lines useing the Primary Route thru River Ridge Sub Division. I feel this will affect our Health and our property values. I whould request that the commission seriously consider the alternate plan to run these power lines south of Stearns Road where they will not impact the people of River Ridge Sub Division.

    Thank You for chance to show my concerns

    Thomas W Barker

    Thomas W Barker
  • January 9, 2014

    When we bought our home in the River Ridge subdivision in South Elgin, the builder informed us the the property directly behind us belonged to the South Elgin park district and nothing would be built there. We thought that this would be a great place to raise a family, plenty of space for the children to play. Then Stearns Road was built behind our subdivision, and the noise from the roadway is over whelming at times, that it detracts from family quality time. Then the railroad just North of Stearns Road increased the frequency of trains from one a day to one an hour carrying God knows what. Again the quality of life is degraded, people ask how can you put up with the noise and shaking of the house that can be felt for two city blocks away. In addition to the existing towers, Commonwealth Edison wants to add more towers and power lines, taking away a large portion of the park where the children of the subdivision run and have fun as well as practice and play Little League Baseball, Soccer, and Football. These towers would be taller and wider than the existing towers and be much closer to our homes. Commonwealth Edison's lawyer said in court on December 30, 2013 that they would double the power lines on the new towers from 345 thousand volts to 690 thousand volts in the future. This would double the health risks from the power lines. Placing these towers in the Proposed Primary location will cause the property values to plummet again. How much is one neighborhood asked to sacrifice before somebody finally intervenes on their behalf and says enough.
    I'm opposed to the Proposed Primary Route of the Grand Prairie Gateway Project. Commonwealth Edison should think about burying the power lines or go South of Stearns Road where it would be least objectionable.
    Mike Dublin

    Mike Dublin
  • January 9, 2014

    I oppose the current plan to run these power lines along the easement in the River Ridge subdivision.

    Firstly, the residents did not have proper notification of the project plan. We only received the notice of hearing about 5 days prior to the hearing. And our village has not responded to our letters requesting opposition.

    The plan to use the easement will negatively affect our property values by approximately 30%, property that most of us paid a premium for because of this attractive open space.

    Most importantly, the health effects of such lines are unknown, and they will basically hang right over our backyards where our children play. Within a one-block radius, we already have three young to middle-aged people that I personally know of suffering from various cancers (and I don't know all my neighbors). This alone makes one very suspicious of the effect of these lines, and it is frightening that now they are being doubled.

    Have studies been conducted that show the effects of having this many high-power lines in such a condensed area so close to residents is a huge question we have for Com Ed and the Commission which needs to be answered. This is a serious public health concern.

    This open space directly connects to a heavily-used park in our subdivision, and children often use this abutting land to play football and have organized football practices, flying kites and so forth. The neighbors who live along this easement have voluntarily maintained this land for the use of the residents here since 1997.

    We already have had to endure many other environmental impacts to this neighborhood such as the already-existing power lines that buzz often and cause enough health concern themselves, a quarry nearby that blasts and creates dust and noise, a railroad line that runs more often than ever before and now the Stearns Road extension which was forced upon us.

    I would request that the Commission seriously consider the alternate plan to run the lines along the opposite side of the railroad tracks or the south side of Stearns Road where there will be minimal impact to the citizens of this village, or optimally, to bury the lines underground.

    Thank you for your attention to our concerns.

    Brenda Tannehill

    Brenda Tannehill
  • January 3, 2014

    I oppose the ComEd gateway project as currently configured. I am a Board member of the Bowes Creek Active Adult Community, and virtually all 200+ families are very upset with the proximity of the transmission lines to our property.
    As you may be aware, the City of Elgin has unanimously adopted a resolution opposing this Gateway Project for health concerns and property value decline as it is adjacent to three subdivisions and the Otter Creek elementary school.
    We believe an underground option when close to heavily populated areas needs to be the option chosen. While Com Ed cites high cost for the underground line, I want to point out that only 7/10ths of a mile needs to buried along our subdivision. Our loss in property value at a 20% decline for the whole community is $26 million. (Various studies have shown property value declines ranging from 12% to 34%.)
    I am sure this $26 million far exceeds the cost to bury 7/10th of a mile of transmission line.

    Thank you for hearing our concerns, and ask that you require ComEd to modify their proposal.

    John Kavalunas
  • December 31, 2013

    I am opposed to the prposed ComEd Gateway project due to the impacts stated below.
    The health hazards to people living under or close to the prposed lines.
    Property values in Bowes Creek Regency & Bowes Creek Country Club would be in excess of 26 million dollars in property values & millions in lost tax revenue.
    The electric lines should be buried wherever they go through residential areas.
    The cost over time will be worth the upfront cost to bury these lines.
    As homes are becoming more energy efficient the need for electric power will decrease.
    Please do the right thing & insist that these lines if needed must be buried.

    Sue McMahon
  • December 31, 2013

    The primary path currently selected by Commonwealth Edison passes less than a half mile from the town of Lindenwood. Our property values stand to drop 5 to 10% once these lines are in place. Commonwealth Edison has several other routes that were considered that were well clear of our community. I'm respectfully requesting that you advise Commonwealth Edison to use the Plan B route in Ogle County to help mitigate the property value loss in our community. Thank You!
    Richard Mott
  • December 31, 2013

    As a resident around the proposed area directly affected with this plan I object 100% to this idea of building more lines close to any human contact. I am not the only one concerned about out health and safety of this project in the neighborhood and I will expose this to social media. There is plenty of land to use on the already noise and air polluting newly built Stearns Rd as well as the CNN Railway that is far away from human contact. Electrical activity of this nature will impact the community, the environment, and more importantly our kids. "The Stearns road was supposed to be quiet and no noise partition was needed" THAT was a lie. These new ComEd towers will make home values decrease more than what the market has caused already. There will be no impact on the surrounding area...well that is a complete LIE as well. The property values is a small concern as we can survive that but the health concern is not something we can survive. This will impact many lives and I fear my kids and the thousands of other kids that these lines will negatively radiate will also shorten their health. These lines will have a direct impact to all of our lives. ComEd is a big player in the area and to think this will pass is another mockery of the public community and shows that big corporations do not care about the community the only care is about the bottom line.

    Also to place it on farm land that is active is also saturating the soil, crops, livestock, etc will harmfull and unecessary pollutants to affect the long-term of once again - HUMAN HEALTH. PLEASE think about the long-term human impact this will cause on a negative factor.

    Lastly, This ICC letter was sent during the holidays and I like many people did not recieve this letter until after the public hearing date expired due to family vacation plans. Note, FAMILY is the key word as we already have enough pollutants contaminating our family --- This does not to be another. Plan better!!

    Raymond Eng
  • December 30, 2013

    This project will significantly and permanently negatively impact the property values of the areas where it is constructed. These properties are in most cases not only where we live, but also constitute the largest financial asset we have, which makes this project have a huge affect on my life, as well as many others whose property is in the path of this project.
    I recognize that improvements and enlargements of the utilities are a necessary thing, but it is careless at best, and possibly dishonest, when a court hearing on this matter will be held with only a few days notification to the people who will be affected most. I understand that Com Ed stands to make a huge amount of money from this project, for years to come; however this lack of notification creates an aura of chicanery to this project, which I find offensive.
    This project should be conducted with complete transparency and timely and adequate notification to the affected landowners.

    Jean W Churan
  • December 30, 2013

    As a co-titled owner of affected property(parcel #1126200002), I would oppose this entire proposal because of the speed this process is moving at. My mother did not receive this notification until the day before Christmas, and the mailing does not contain any description of how property is to be affected. The online map does not show any property definitions or a drawing of any usable detail. The mailing should have contained this info. in detail. The mailing also states that if we are not at the Monday 12/30/13 meeting, we will be unable to contest the route of these power lines.
    James Ferrand
  • December 30, 2013

    I have two comments: 1) about safety and 2) about property value.

    1)I have asked to get actual electric and magnetic field strength information from ComEd. I have requested the information multiple times but have only received the brochure which was interesting but not very useful. It talked about electric and magnetic fields and the average field strengths that typical products emit around the house; unfortunately all the examples given have very low duty cycles. The toaster for example is only used for a few minutes every day. However, the fields created by a high power lines are on 24 hours a day 7 days a week. There is a difference to the human body.

    Also, there was no actual data in the brochure about the size of the field strengths at any given distance from the power lines. So it is very difficult to tell if we have any cause for concern.

    So, can I please receive some information on the actual field strength (as a function of distance, both magnetic and electric) for the particular configuration being used in this project? This does not seem like an unreasonable request.

    2) I understand that there can be a need for additional power lines, however, the presence of high-voltage power lines near a property has long been a source lower property values. Not only are most power lines unsightly and sometimes noisy, but also they can raise a number of safety concerns among real estate buyers. These drawbacks have translated into consistently lower property values (average of 10%) for homes near power lines.

    Thanks
    Tom Pienkowski

    Tom Pienkowski
  • December 27, 2013

    First the proposed alternate route on open house 3 map will go over to of our dairy farm. Second we are the end of the line for our current electric. We dairy and have small amount of ground current coming back on com-ed neutral wire. Third if com-ed adds a high voltage line on the proposed alternate route stray voltage will increase and I will need to be compensated for loss production of milk.
    On com-ed proposed primary route, currently the line route turns south then east then north to the rail road tracks (property com-ed does not own). At the rail road tracks com-ed owns property for a proposed high line years ago when I was a teen. Com-ed currently owns property on west side of moose range road north to the rail road tracks. Why would com-ed not stay on their property and go north to the rail road tracks and then connect to their property along the rail road tracks they currently own? or if they want to stay on the south side of the tracks on our property it would be better to stay along the railroad tracks on one side or the other. This avoids interference of crop production because the high line stays on the edge of the field for airplane crop dusting and equipment hitting towers.

    Thank you for the opportunity to give my comments.

    Wiilliam Deutsch

    william Deutsch
  • December 27, 2013

    My home is in between the 2 proposed routes. My concern is my property value. My home is on 10.56 acres on a hill, if either route is used it will interfere with my homes appearance, value, etc.
    Why was all public meetings held in Kings, Illinois, or Rochelle, Illinois, and not in Davis junction Illinois, or Stillman Valley, Illinois where residents will be impacted the most from this project?
    I would like to have more public meetings held in these communities to be given further opportunity to assess the project in detail and to voice their concerns because this will impact this community directly.

    Phone 815-645-8123

    Thank you,
    Timothy & Carol Tice,
    12180 E Big Mound Rd,
    Davis Junction,
    Illinois. 61020

    Timothy Tice
  • December 26, 2013

    I am opposed to the docketed case 13-0657 until I find out what exact route they are proposing.
Entries: 307