Hon. Mayor, councilmembers, et al:

Comment on Project Priority List - old business.

Regarding the proposed feasibility study for a bicycle tunnel under the
railroad tracks, all reason will be cast to the winds if this money is
wasted at this time for the following reasons:

1. Electrification of the Caltrain Rail Corridor is rapidly going
forward. This will, according to present and published plans, entail
the erection of catenaries and other construction all along the line;

2. In addition, this corridor route for high speed rail was preferred,
is listed on the map and, if finalized, will result in complete grade
separation to meet up with the Trans Bay Terminal in San Francisco and
paid for by HSR bonds and possibly private funding;

3. Any crossings of the railroad tracks comes under the purview of the
Public Utilities Commission with permission and technical assistance
provided by them and the Caltrain staff (free);

4. None of the property owners along El Camino Real between Ravenswood
and the Palo Alto border at the creek was agreeable to having a critical
mass of bicycles going through their property. This included the
shopping strip owner and the Stanford Park Hotel manager who went before
the council opposing a bicycle tunnel adjacent to or through their
Stanford -leased property. No one yet knows what kind of development
will be taking place between these two properties unless the city is
proposing to purchase or lease the land itself or use eminent domain to
take it in order to satisfy a chosen few.

5. Many activists are opting for a feasibility study of a trench for
trains which would not allow such a tunnel.
This has brought up the question of the hetch-hetchy water line in the
vicinity and of drainage problems.

6. While the effort to appease the supporters of certain councilmembers
is apparent it should be clear that it would be irresponsible to waste
any amount of Menlo Park's resources to study tunnelling under the
tracks (and especially under El Camino Real which was suggested by one
speaker at last Tuesday's council meeting.) This would undoubtedly be
shelved with all the other feasibility studies at great cost.

This begs the question as to where and how would safe access be made
across the Grand Boulevard (the King's Highway) ostensibly for school
children. Live Oak and Middle where there are lights would lead to some
of the worst traffic conditions existing in the city and this will not
go away no matter how vehemently bicyclists resent motorists and parents
want safe routes to school. It is very dangerous to send children out
on bicycles. Even the most experienced riders venure out with great
trepidation.

The truth is that the radical activist high- speed regional bicyclists
are miffed because they didn't get their bicycle hub in Linfield Oaks
where they lobbied and cried for a tunnel a few feet away from an
existing bridge which serves the same purpose. Let's not pretend the
ongoing persistence for a tunnel to meet up with El Camino is for the
benefit of school children, mom-and-pop outings and pedestrians.

Moreover, when my son was bicycling to school from Linfield Oaks to
Encinal behind a school bus he was made seriously ill from a lung-full
of exhaust fumes which necessitated the nurse calling me to leave a busy
legal office with deadlines
.
In London, my home town, bicyclists are wearing face masks to protect
them from vehicle exhaust. It is ironic that bicyclists want to slow or
stop vehicle traffic to operate at its least efficiency, spewing more
poison into the air and lungs of all of us which results in added lethal
pollution and congestion which they think is to their advantage. If the
city is intent on attempting to stop car trips let it start at city
hall, staff and the council. Why does the city manager have a $300 car
allowance? In the meantime we urge that you direct staff to concentrate
on free-flowing traffic to help with global warming, with bicyclists
obeying all the rules, including stop signs and lights.

At a city meeting my argument with a long-time bicycle commissioner (now
on the transportation commission) resulted in his vituperative verbal
attack on me with a menacing manner which caused the police chief and a
commander who witnessed the encounter to ask me if I was alright
afterward. I was sorry to learn that this zealot (whose name escapes me
and who was involved with Steve Schmidt and wife in the Santa Cruz Ave.
traffic calming debacle at a cost of $250,000 which went down the drain)
who is single, without family, who does all of his shopping by bicycle,
was appointed to the transportation commission to continue unreasonable
demands.

Now they want to disrupt traffic for a bicycle day. Let's have a
motorists' day when all bicycles stay off the road and/or a pedestrian
day when all bicyclists stay off the sidewalks. We even heard a
suggestion to shut down Santa Cruz Avenue to vehicles permanently at a
recent council meeting. Would this include bicycles?

Most of my life in England was spent on bicycles and I know that here
bicyclists do not follow the rules of the road as they are required to
do in Europe and elsewhere. Here they are a menace to the whole
community. If they want to share the road and have tunnels built just
for them, let them share the costs and not pretend that they care about
children and little old ladies. Let us not forget the statistics of
pedestrian deaths and injuries by bicyclists. A large group of racing
bicyclists almost collided with me on my one attempt to enter the Homer
tunnel on foot in Palo Alto. This controversial tunnel, paid for with
our taxpayer money, a short distance from another, was promoted by a
councilwoman whose husband runs the bicycle program at Stanford! Should
Stanford pay for railroad crossings of every kind since its traffic has
a major impact on all of us? Yesterday a bicyclist was actually riding
on El Camino facing the oncoming traffic. I had to swerve to avoid him.
Seeing my consternation he raced on to the sidewalk. Another raced
across Santa Cruz against the stop light to the narrow sidewalk at
Peet's and yelled at me for being in his way. Former mayor, Steve
Schmidt, swerved around my car so suddenly at high speed to cut in front
of me on Menlo Ave. that I almost drove on to the curb and hit a tree to
avoid him. Horror stories abound.

It would be more productive if the bicycle commission members, if
continuing to exist, spent their time and taxpayers' money on educating
the bicyclists and recognizing that they should be trained, tested for
knowledge of the vehicle code, licensed and cited for their illegal
acts, just like the rest of us, and pay their share of costs for their
entitlements. In fact, should there be a bicycle commission without a
pedestrian or motorist commission? Most of the traffic woes in the
state have been caused by bicycle lobbyists who throw their weight
around and block crucial expansion for vehicles. There are literally
thousands of organizations threatening and lobbying to get motorists off
the road, but it will never happen. It is impractical and the waste of
time will cause the economy to crash. Consider, also, that there are
thousands of residents who can no longer ride bicycles or walk anywhere.
These people would be willing to pay nominal sums for more shuttles or
must drive their cars if able to do so.

Speaking of shuttles, the free mid-day shuttle of Menlo Park that goes
from Belle Haven to Stanford (mostly empty) still avoids its published
route and rides down Waverley St., instead of Willow west of
Middlefield. to avoid the speed bumps. Waverley is becoming an
expressway, with traffic circumventing arterial roads a condition that
should be included and corrected in all traffic studies. Our former city
manager contradicted me in the press when I said that traffic was
diverted to other streets when traffic-calming devices were installed.

 Menlo Park should, at least, confer with Caltrain and the P.U.C. before
spending money from city coffers to do yet another study of railroad
crossings of any kind, undoubtedly by out-of-towners.
This is once again putting the cart before the horse under the present
circumstances of grandiose plans for the railroad (attached).

I take this opportunity to reiterate that the Railroad Division of the
P.U.C's comments are attached to the environmental impact reports for
all new development in Menlo Park, including the Derry Project (which
states that residents will be exposed to rail-related pollution and that
traffic cannot be mitigated.) If staff has not furnished these letters
to the council I would be glad to copy them to all members. Most of our
problems are caused by poor planning and ignorance of, or refusal to,
abide by the seven elements of the state-mandated general plan and by
non-disclosure of true impacts, especially that of ever-increasing,
polluting trains. As a starter, the Housing Commissioners and the
Planning Commissioners should recognize inappropriate locations for
developments to save time and money.
Why should the citizens pay out of their pockets to correct the mistakes
of appointed representatives?

It was not lost upon us that councilman Robinson at a recent
councilmeeting echoed my previous comments about overriding
considerations. What is the point of having committees, commissions,
task forces, staff, surveys, workshops, etc. and then approving every
ill-conceived project brought to the council, pretending that it is for
the public's good, when we all know this is a lie, borne out by
expensive environmental studies. Other cities are finding this out and
it is not wise to copy them. It is certainly not smart to ignore the
existence of the railroad which is planning for monster trains every ten
minutes whether or not high speed rail plans continue.

As to the Dumbarton rail route, the presentation of the noise study by a
resident who moved away from Ravenswood due to train pollution,
underscores the abuse and assault on the main line residents who have 96
daily commuter trains starting at 5 a.m and continuing into the
following night, intermingling with thundering, vibrating freights, all
with injurious blasting horns, compared with their six trains.

Incidentally, Southern Pacific, mentioned in his report, no longer
operates through Menlo Park It is Amtrak under contract to Caltrain and
Union Pacific freights. Negotiations should be started with them to
address the air/noise pollution and congestion at the crossings. The
Joint Powers Board of Caltrain is at long last acknowledging their
negligence of the railside residents. Adding housing stock alongside
the tracks will result in additional canaries in the cages and be the
responsibility of this council.

All of this ties in with the study of El Camino and cannot be separated
from the serious problems inherent in adding more housing and traffic
where adequate mitigation is impossible under present conditions.

 Margaret Petitjean

attached mail follows:

http://www.bayarearailplan.info/Content/10001/facts.html
Received on Thu Mar 8 17:30:49 2007