Out of Context

A recent letter to the editor took me to task for referring to a future Elburn pedestrian overpass as "a set of stairs up, and a set of stairs down." At the meeting, I was actually attempting to describe a particular pedestrian overpass that I had seen up in Canada.

I took a picture of it on a recent trip just to show it to the board. Unfortunately, the quote in the original newspaper article was taken "out of context," and now the letter writer is confused.

When our village board looked at the total number of steps required to cross our tracks at the Metra station, we were initially concerned. We didn't think that people would climb that many stairs just to get across the tracks.

So, then we looked at the option of building a tunnel under the tracks. However, we quickly found that a tunnel was cost prohibitive to build. There were also security and unfavorable soil testing issues associated with this configuration.

That brought us back to reconsidering possible overpass designs. And, our village board specifically talked about using ramps, switchbacks and landings to make the overpass easier for people to climb. For whatever reason, most of the newspapers left that part of our discussion out of their stories.

Throughout this "feasibility" study process, the village board has consistently expressed a concern about the eventual height of the overpass, the total number of steps, and the ultimate "user friendliness" of the anticipated design.

All this is a moot point, because we have been informed that the county has lost interest in the Elburn pedestrian overpass. Supposedly, there has been too much "public conversation about this thing."

I guess "loose lips" can sink a pedestrian overpass, too. Except, I always thought I was in the "public conversation" business. I guess not?