Hon. Mayor, councilmembers, staff:

The comment period on the high speed rail has been extended to October
26,'07
(see attached). A decision on the planned route is forthcoming shortly.

With regard to the study session on grade separations which was approved
at the council meeting last Tuesday the council is urged to request:

1. The petition of 2001 presented to the then council at the project
priority meeting for a short-term and long-term solution to routine
blasting train horns;

2, The letter from the City Attorney which was sent to the Federal
Railroad Administration Docket on train horn hearings in which he
advocated quiet zones but rejected grade separations on behalf of the
city; (Note that there is a question of conflict of interest here since
the owner of the building beside the train station which houses the
legal offices of the present and former city attorneys testified at a
council meeting against grade separation of the railroad.)

3. Consultation with Richard Napier of C/CAG regarding the refusal of
Menlo Park to accept grade separation which resulted in the funds being
returned to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, putting Menlo
Park at the bottom of the list while Ravenswood, at least, had been on
the state priority list for decades;

4. A perusal of the letter of then mayor Chuck Kinney who wrote to the
JPB rejecting grade separations in Menlo Park;

5. Reading the E.I.R. letters commenting on all developments, including
the Derry and Linfield Oaks Projects, by Kevin Boles of the California
Public Utilities Commission, relating to traffic, congestion and need
for grade separation in Menlo Park.

6. The study for all four rail crossings by BKF Engineering sent to
Caltrain. These included trenching and other recommendations not
considered feasible.
Transit officials confirm that non-standard designs or routes are too
expensive;

7. An explanation as to why the railroad has been ignored when the
decades-old state-mandated noise element of general plans includes
trains. In the case of Menlo Park, there were shelved recommendations
from Charles Salter, acoustical engineers.

With the scepter of ever-increasing train traffic, air and noise
pollution and toxic congestion which is already a public health hazard
it is the responsibility of the city officials to once and for all "bite
the bullet" and accept the newly offered funding for further study of
the four grade crossings in Menlo Park. In the meantime it is negligent
to add housing near the rail tracks. The Derry Project was required to
allow another 15' for extra rails. This would bring its living units
even closer to the tracks and within the 660 feet reported in a Federal
E.I.R. as a "severe" impact on residents from the blasting train horns.

Sincerely,

Margaret Petitjean, Menlo Park

attached mail follows:

http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/rail/high-speed.htm
Received on Thu Oct 4 16:48:00 2007