Hon. Mayor and Council Members:

Re: Council Meeting Grade Separations/

       El Camino Real Visioning
       

Last Thursday, January 3, '08 a conceptual design video of the San Francisco Trans Bay Terminal was presented to the Joint Powers Board in San Carlos. Please consider the following:

1. Plans are going forward for a S.F. underground extension of Caltrain to the Trans Bay Terminal with facilities for High Speed Rail. All officials, staff, commissioners, committee appointees, etc. should read and understand the ramifications of these projects;
2. So far, there has been a serious failure to adequately assess the environmental aspects of the built and human environment, which neglect will be borne out by studying the attached environmental impact requirements.
3. It has been confirmed that the next phase of fencing for Caltrain will include a portion going through Menlo Park with additional safety measures at the railroad crossings. These need to be defined; i.e. medians? four-quadrant gates? cameras? meeting the requirements for
   "quiet zones"?, etc.
   
4. Electrification is scheduled for completion by 2014 and with or WITHOUT High Speed Rail the number of trains will be increasing to 110+ along the main line. Catenaries will be erected all along the corridor. Horns will increase. Grade separations are inevitable in the future. A bicycle tunnel location must be put on hold. It is wasteful of time and our money to pursue this now;
5. While the mayors of Menlo Park have written numerous letters regarding their concerns and the mitigation measures (including triple-paned windows) needed for residents for the six morning and evening trains along the proposed Dumbarton Rail (see attachments to the last Council Meeting Agenda of December 2007) there has been a callous disregard for those along the main line where service has increased to 98 diesel locomotives, plus freights, with blasting horns assaulting them day and night. An attorney for Dumbarton Neighbors has also made their demands for mitigation in writing;
6. The health and hearing hazards of the existing air and noise pollution upon human beings are well documented. Aside from strokes and heart attacks, lung disease and cancer, just this week a study showed that diabetes may be caused from the insulin effects of sleep-deprivation.
7. Vehicles are being trapped on the tracks at Ravenswood and this e-mail is to once again urge the council to make it a number one priority to write to Caltrain asking that the funded rail crossing safety measures on the main line start at this end of San Mateo County rather than add to the $1b+ funds going farther north. If negotiations are already under way this should be so stated and made public to allay further action;
8. There have been petitions, pleas and testimony for relief from train horn blasts from thousands of residents, and the recognition of Congress of its need. This is a simple request and would allow the city to apply for "quiet zones" as a short term solution to the hazards existing at the present time, lessening the future damages.
9. In its joint council meeting with Atherton this month perhaps it could be confirmed that there are to be four-quadrant gates erected at their station area for safety measures and that the city of Menlo Park deserves no less on its main line, especially at Ravenswood (a disaster waiting to happen) which was on a priority list years ago and Oak Grove where death has occurred.
10. A "quiet zone" must be at least one-half mile long and, if the city expects sustainability in its El Camino Real and Housing projects, supplementary safety measures will be required at all four crossings in Menlo Park with similar efforts by Palo Alto at the Alma crossing. This could create a very long "quiet zone" because Palo Alto already has grade separations farther south for a considerable distance.
11. However, funding sources for Palo Alto would have to be within Santa Clara County. Although Korve Engineering completed its feasibility study for a "quiet zone" at Alma/Stanford many years ago, a P.A. planning official at a Mayor's meeting previously stated that Palo Alto is waiting for high speed rail and grade separations. This is years away;
12. A primary responsibility of the government is to uphold the Constitution where the public is being denied its rights This is a public health and human rights issue not subject to vote by the general population. There is a decided lack of concern for neighbors along the Caltrain Corridor which discriminates against one segment of society while others are shown favoritism. Much solicitude is expressed for the Dumbarton neighbors for future impacts of a few trains and none for the main line residents who have suffered for decades from train related pollution with ever-increasing "extreme makeovers" without environmental studies and protection for residents.
13. The bribes of C/CAG, ABAG and others to add additional housing close to a known heavy rail polluted environment should be vigorously challenged and opposed. Spare us so-called "Smart Growth" with its toxic congestion;
14. Apparently there is no present authority to challenge the blackmail of the Federal Rail road Administration which forces cities, as the lead agencies, to find funding for their crossings before the abuse of injurious horn blasts will end, notwithstanding the doctrine that the
    "polluter pays." While the public owns Caltrain, the Union Pacific with
    its earthquake-like heavier freights causing structural damage makes a huge profit for its shareholders as it awakens the dead and destroys life and property. They have been fined hundreds of thousands of dollars for harassment as they demand their perceived entitlements;
15. The real question is who among us is qualified to take on the critical task of protecting the health and welfare of the railside residents and prevent adding to their numbers? Our former consultant, Dan Smith, wrote a report years ago stating that he thought we would have grade separations before supplementary safety measures at the railroad crossings. Are we to be denied either of these while the council, staff and commissioners spin their wheels? Planning personnel must address more than floor area ratios, environmental employees must consider more than garbage and trees and housing officials must pinpoint suitable healthy, quiet, non-toxic sites in their recommendations for housing units.
16. Instead of deciding to do another expensive study without commitment, please resolve to make 2008 the "Year of the Rail." Recognize it, embrace it, include it in all city planning, or challenge it once and for all. The press recently published the news that Menlo Park and Atherton had lobbied against High Speed Rail. Who, Where and When? Please disclose all information. Where are surveys of opinions, votes of all citizens, etc. The public has the right to know. There has been too much subterfuge in the past. Our lives and those of our neighbors and tenants are at stake, as is our property. Even if the city does not bite the bullet and spits it out, rapid rail is on the horizon. Accept it or fight it in the appropriate arenas where it now belongs - for our sake! Without the prerequisite of adequate mitigation for the railside stakeholders, demanded by the guardians of our health and the city fathers, the elephant in our midst will trample us without mercy.

We have reached the limits of tolerance and are tired of underhanded political game-playing at our expense.

A written response to this and my previous requests for the unearthing of our petition presented to the city and the JPB board by Jon Scott, attorney/transportation commissioner, which was not acted uon, is requested.

Respectfully, Margaret Petitjean, Menlo Park

attached mail follows:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transbay_Terminal Received on Sat Jan 5 19:49:54 2008