Menlo Park City Council Email Log

[ Home ] [ City Council ] [ Search ] [ 05/06 Archive ] [ 07/08 Archive ] [ 09/10 Archive ] [ 2011 Archive ] [ 12/13 Archive ] [ Watch City Council Meetings ]

Fwd: Critical Issue: Caltrain Railroad Tracks

From: domainremoved <David>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 16:11:54 -0700

Dear Council Members,
Please consider my words below. The third plan is a seriously good one.
And I live next to the train station.

Cheers, David

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

> From: David Wilkinson <davidswil_at_(domainremoved)
> Date: September 10, 2017 at 3:57:27 PM PDT
> To: menlofuture_at_(domainremoved)
> Cc: Menlo Park's Future <menlofuture_at_(domainremoved)
> Subject: Re: Critical Issue: Caltrain Railroad Tracks
> Lee and all,
> The more I read this letter, the more I like the raised tracks for Menlo Park. I have ridden trains in many cities and countries and they are quieter (electric). And the tracks are smoother and no horns blowing at crossings.
> Let's look seriously at the raised tracks. To me and many friends, that is the smarter and more sophisticated approach.
> Let's approach this issue with intelligence.
> David
> Sent from my iPhone
>> On Sep 10, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Menlo Park's Future <menlofuture_at_(domainremoved)
>> Critical Issue: Caltrain Railroad Tracks
>> Fellow Residents
>> What we do with the Caltrain tracks is critical for Menlo Park’s future--to our traffic during and after construction, to our ability to get around.
>> The City Council and Planning Commission is being asked to choose between two alternatives. One bad. One terrible.
>> The first, alternative A, would force all east-west traffic onto Ravenswood, and block traffic, foot bike and auto, from crossing at Oak Grove and Glenwood. This is terrible.
>> The second would grade separate Ravenswood, Oak Grove and Glenwood, would create a solid 10- foot high wall along the tracks, and would tie up traffic in the city for years. This is bad.
>> I beg you to beg the city council to at least reconsider a third alternative:
>> · One that would not snarl the city in construction for years, negatively impacting traffic and retailers.
>> · Would not create a solid wall along the tracks.
>> · Would not create up and down hills under the tracks that would be difficult to bike.
>> · One that would open up—improve-- the city, hooray!!, and allow us to have vendors, or bike lockers, or parking, and to freely bike and walk where the tracks are now.
>> · One that could look attractive,
>> · And that could overcome neighbor fear of train noise by being noise mitigated with buffers and privacy by using glass that can be coated on demand.
>> The third alternative is raising the tracks—in an open and attractive way.
>> Beg the City Council to have Caltrain recalibrate the grades, so this third alternative is feasible. The cost savings could justify the savings of a new calibration study--in spades. Do not sacrifice our city to what we believe is a Caltrain mistake.
>> You can email the Planning Commission, which hears the issue Monday, at Planning.Commission_at_(domainremoved)
>> You can email the City Council at City.Council_at_(domainremoved)
>> I will let you know how each Commission and Council member votes—and how they rank their preferences.
>> Thanks as always, Lee Duboc (menlofuture_at_(domainremoved)
>> Staff Report showing alternatives: http://menlopark.org/DocumentCenter/View/15466
>> ---
>> You are currently subscribed to menlofuture as: davidswil_at_(domainremoved)
>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-menlofuture-11323545L_at_(domainremoved)
Received on Sun Sep 10 2017 - 16:17:37 PDT

[ Search ] [ By Date ] [ By Message ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]

Email communications sent to the City Council are public records. This site is an archive of emails received by the City Council at its city.council_at_(domainremoved)