Amtrak announced in August that it planned to build at the Union Pacific-owned site between 33rd and 35th streets. The facility would serve trains on routes that use Chicago for maintenance, work now done largely in the South Loop. Amtrak says 16 of its routes rely on Chicago-based maintenance facilities and staff.

The proposal comes as White Sox minority owner Justin Ishbia has said he intends to pursue mixed-use development, and possibly a new stadium, on the South Loop site where much of Amtrak’s work currently takes place.

Neighbors interviewed in the two communities expressed a range of views about redevelopment, but several said a 24-hour rail operation could impose new burdens on nearby residents. The yard has been inactive since 2019, residents say, and industrial activity in the area had already declined substantially by the 1980s.

“I do environmental justice work in McKinley Park, and we talk about Bridgeport being one of the less affected Southwest Side neighborhoods,” said Maya Jones, 30, who has lived in Bridgeport for five years. She said Amtrak’s assurances had not addressed residents’ questions about potential impacts.

Nancy Fong, 76, a Chinatown resident for 27 years, worries that nonstop operations would mean persistent noise and pollution. “This shouldn’t be in a residential neighborhood,” she said.

Other neighbors questioned comparisons with the site’s industrial past. Maria LaGiglio, 43, who was born and raised in Bridgeport and lives about 150 feet from the yard, said crane use there had largely dwindled decades ago and Union Pacific ended container operations in 2019. Past activity, she argued, does not show what daily operations near homes would be like now.

The area’s history is part of the debate. Bridgeport has faced lasting effects from industry, including lead-contaminated soil. In Chinatown, former rail-yard land was transformed into parks and retail areas after community leaders acquired it in the 1980s.

The U.S. Department of Transportation granted Amtrak a “categorical exclusion,” meaning the project is exempt from the environmental reviews typically required for federal construction projects. Community advocates have challenged the use of such exemptions, saying less oversight can leave residents without a clear account of potential effects. A neighborhood coalition has raised questions about noise and pollution from a facility expected to operate around the clock.

Olivia Esquivel, 21, who has lived in Bridgeport for four years after growing up in nearby Brighton Park, said residents’ concerns should not be dismissed as opposition to trains or development. She described the neighborhood’s diversity and community ties as among the reasons her family moved there.

Not every resident views the site only as a threat. Matt Malec, 32, a Bridgeport resident and third-generation White Sox fan, pointed to former industrial sites that became parks and community destinations, including Chinatown Square, Ping Tom Park and Palmisano Park. “It doesn’t mean that they have to stay” industrial, he said.

But other residents said the proposed facility conflicts with years of local efforts to reduce industrial activity. Jonathan Chen, who has lived in Bridgeport for eight years, said he supports modernizing Amtrak’s operations but believes the company should consider alternatives, including building around existing facilities.

For neighbors, the dispute is not simply about whether rail service or development belongs in the area. It is also about who bears the environmental and quality-of-life costs—and whether residents will get enough information to weigh those costs before plans move forward.