Hon. Mayor and Council Members, et al:

On December 19, '07 the High Speed Rail Commission will undoubtedly announce the final decision to bring High Speed Rail along the Caltrain Corridor from the Pacheco Pass to San Francisco.

Then in January, 2008 the Federal Transportation Policy Commission intends to present its final report to significantly expand intercity passenger rail service by 2050, providing $8.1 billion a year for a total of $357 billion by the year 2050.

The report calls for funding of 80% of the cost with states paying 20% - the same ratio as for highway funding.

The plan is broken down into three phases. By 2015 existing service would be upgraded and new service that is already in the pipeline could be added. That would include parts of the High Speed Rail Corridor in California. Estimated cost of the first phase is $66.3 billion. By 2030 the High Speed Rail Corridor would be completed.

If approved, this probably means that the California High Speed Rail Bond would not be necessary in 2008 or, if it is put forward, it might pay for the state's share of the costs.

This points out that it was short-sighted of the Transportation Commission on Wednesday during its Project Priority Setting to give a lower ranking to grade separations at the railroad crossings.

This city's callous disregard for the residents who have endured decades of air and noise pollution with congestion has not gone unnoticed by top transportation officials and I would urge you to make safety and quiet with elimination of the toxic environment your number one priority for the coming year and, above all, refrain from adding more housing close to the railroad until this has been accomplished.

The role of the Commissions might be to first consider sites for new housing, traffic and activities away from the railroad tracks. The construction will be significant and last for many years before relief is achieved.

To this end "quiet zones" are necessary and all efforts should be made to accomplish this with the co-operation of the railroads who are the polluters. Our measure A sales tax money should pay for whatever supplementary safety measures are necessary for the short term.

Once again, this dire need was ignored by the Transportation Commission despite previous attempts to include "Quiet Zones" in project priority setting.

It is up the council to ensure that this matter take priority with less emphasis on aesthetics, increased service, etc. and a resolve to find funding for mitigation for the existing residents.

I spoke to the speaker on "The Economics of Mixed-Use Development", Denise Conley, of the Conley Consulting Group after the meeting last Wednesday. She said that there was significant turn-over of housing near railroads and that extraordinary noise-reduction measures were needed.

This means that the only people to benefit from TOD housing alongside the tracks are the developers (who then take off with their profits) and the real estate agents (who get commissions every time there is a move - without full disclosure I might add.)

To those debating the referendum and cost-benefits of the Derry project I would say "What price human health"? That developer told me that he was erecting the sound wall on the property line and that if Caltrain wanted its dedicated 15' for extra rail the wall would have to come down. This may be sooner than expected. I would opt for no housing at the Derry project or, at least, no change of present zoning. Careful consideration should be given to adding any housing backing up to the toxic railroad and the toxic traffic which includes El Camino.

Margaret Petitjean, Menlo Park Received on Sat Dec 15 22:41:31 2007