Menlo Park City Council Email Log

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

Re: Pope-Chaucer bridge

From: Keith, Kirsten <"Keith,>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 11:12:44 -0800

Dear Mr. Filman,

Thank you for your email. I wholeheartedly agree with you that there are many other options to look at besides the two options the Santa Clara Valley Water District recently proposed. Fortunately, they agree with us, too.

The SFCJPA EIR will analyze all options. We look forward to a continuing analysis and discussion with everyone to reach a solution that protects the sensitive, wonderful habitat of the creek that we all know and love, while providing increased flood protection. Thank you for writing to us.

Kirsten Keith
Council Member & Former Mayor
City of Menlo Park
701 Laurel Street
Menlo Park, CA 94025

> On Feb 3, 2014, at 9:58 AM, "Robert Filman" <refilman_at_(domainremoved)
> Dear Council,
> There is currently considerable discussion about the replacement of the Pope-Chaucer bridge. I'd like to add my voice to the opposition to the oak killing, wetland destroying and flood-wall building currently being proposed by the Joint Powers Authority.
> We have a lovely San Francisquito creek. I would hate to see anything (like floodwalls) that would hurt that creek or kill the surrounding oaks. The joint powers authority, in its quest to tame the last natural creek on the peninsula, seems intent on doing those things. They want to limit discussion of the bridge replacement to plans that segue into 100-year flood protection at the cost of high bridge walls and dead oaks.
> I believe this would be a terrible idea. We're in a period of global climate change, bringing a drier California without "100 year" floods, as measured against the wetest century in the last two millenia. A bridge an inch over the creek banks would provide sufficient flood protection---35 years, and the city could hardly be blamed for increasing the flood risk with a bridge over the banks. If greater protection is needed, I'd much rather see an underground floodwater conduit down Hamilton Avenue.
> It would be fine with me to completely eliminate the flood risk of the bridge by eliminating the bridge---it's too much of a trajectory for traffic seeking to avoid University by going through the Willows.
> The Joint Powers Authority is seeking to restrict the discussion to bridges that can be upgraded to FEMA 100-year flood level. This measure seems to be pushed most by the Santa Clara water district, striving to keep its large workforce employed, and by homeowners in the flood plan, who, having bought riskier properties, seek to increase the value of those properties at the expense of the rest of us---both in the cost of destroying the creek, changing the views of some residents to flood walls and hubcaps (the people to be submerged below street level on the raised bridge alternative), and, of course, the taxes to pay for all this. This should not happen.
> Thank you for your attention.
> Robert Filman
> 1293 Woodland Avenue
> Menlo Park
Received on Mon Feb 03 2014 - 11:12:41 PST

[ 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)