Re: Survey comments on El Camino/Downtown/Railroad and GRCC

Hon. Mayor and councilmembers, et al:

Knowledge of environmental hazards is necessary for determination of
desirable development along El Camino Real, the Railroad and downtown.

For example:

1. What has been, or would be, the cost of such investigation,
including mold, at the old, dilapidated Park Theater, Derry Project,
auto repair/dealers' sites, asbestos from brake linings, pulverized
rubber from tires, diesel locomotive and other vehicle exhausts along El
Camino Real?

2. Ideally, should housing be kept above ground, all play areas paved
over or children banned, with people closed in high density units with
wasteful air conditioning/cleaners around the clock?
(see a similar problem at Santana Row attached.)

3 The area of toxic El Camino backing up to the polluting railroad from
the creek north is the property of Stanford, whose officials have stated
that they have plans for its use. A stone's throw from present homes
have been extensive auto repair/ lead painting processes intermingled
with cancer-causing diesel exhausts. Testing by independent experts is
essential.

4. Responsible land use adjacent to El Camino and the railroad tracks
would be zoned only commercial with appropriate set-backs so that fewer
humans are exposed to toxins and noise pollution around the clock;

5. Downtown parking lots are a disaster with inherent dangers of
damaged pavement and falling monster trees. All of the wrong trees in
the wrong places and their roots should be removed promptly.
There is no room in Menlo Park for an urban forest together with people,
safe places and homes on small lots. One or the other should be the
rule. People, safety, property rights versus trees.

6. Pedestrian paths should be free of blasting horns, skateboards,
bicycles, errant balls, dogs and other obstacles. If it is desired that
people walk they should feel safe. This is not the case at present.

In short, El Camino Real and the Railroad Corridor are polluted. Added
housing should not be part of the "Vision". In any case acoustical
experts and toxics studies should precede all the "green" gurus'
recommendations.
   
The vision of Railroad Transit Oriented housing, bicycle underpasses
etc. is myopic until the Caltrain plans are completed. For instance,
the Derry project allows for 15' for extra rail. Electrification is on
the books with or without high speed rail and this will require overhead
catenaries in, as yet, unknown areas. With high speed rail will come
compulsory grade separations with extensive construction activity;

It is impossible to envision the extra congestion from Stanford's plans.
They should be required to build a skytrain or monorail from the middle
of their campus over to 280 and 101. While Palo Alto derives all the
sales taxes from the shopping center, Menlo Park suffers most of
Stanford's traffic. Sometimes it takes three lights to move cars from
intersections.

It is questionable whether a survey is valuable at this time. Menlo
Park is at the mercy of powerful outside forces that no action can
combat.

Like the little old lady who lived in a shoe Menlo Park just doesn't
know what to do
Until the planning and housing staffmembers and commissions get down to
basics we are doomed. Apparently they, with their power, have no
guidelines for combating air and noise pollution to our sorrow.

The new city manager and councilmembers are poised at the brink of a
precipice which they, only, can address and attempt to combat with
outside help.
The abatement of public health hazards are not open to vote by the
general public.

I couldn't get all of this on that little card you sent in the mail
probably at great expense and I've said it many times before. I'm glad
you asked, but are you listening?

Margaret Petitjean, Menlo Park.

cc: Delivered with survey card

attached mail follows:

http://www.mercurynews.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?articleId=7217811&siteId=568
Received on Sun Oct 21 15:59:46 2007