Logo


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: domainremoved <Jessica>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 16:55:38 -0800

Hi Manfred,

It was nice to meet you as well. I appreciate you sending your comments and I will be sure to share this with the project team.

I would also like to share with you an update on the project status, which is currently posted on our webpage and titled “A message from the SFCJPA: Upstream of Hwy. 101 projects going forward.”

http://www.valleywater.org/PopeChaucerBridge.aspx

Thank you again for your interest in the project.


[cid:image001.png_at_(domainremoved)

JESSICA COLLINS, J.D.
Public Information Representative
District Communications Unit
Office of the CEO
Santa Clara Valley Water District
(408) 630-2200
jcollins_at_(domainremoved)o:jcollins_at_(domainremoved)






From: manfred_at_(domainremoved)pisch.com [mailto:manfred_at_(domainremoved)
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 5:07 PM
To: Jessica Collins
Cc: city.council_at_(domainremoved)
Subject: Pope/Chaucer Bridge


Hi Jessica,



It was nice to meet you in person during the meeting on January 29 in Menlo Park. I'm not sure whether it is necessary to repeat my comments from the meeting in writing to make sure they are heard.



Just in case here they are:



1) You explained in detail that the process has to start from the Bay to make sure nothing that is done upstream creates any problems further downstream. Since you were not able to provide a plan for the replacement of the University Bridge it is clearly too early to discuss a replacement of the Pope/Chaucer Bridge. We don't know yet what the capacity downstream will be. That needs to be clarified first and I'm still puzzled by this oversight.



2) Your engineer stated during the meeting that a replacement of University Bridge is highly unlikely since it is basically an on-ramp of 101 and the traffic impact of replacing it would be too high. He continued to state that instead of replacing it, an underground culvert is way more likely. I wonder whether we can give the same consideration to 100s of trees along our natural creek that we are giving to cars on University. An under-the-street culvert that doesn't require any removal of trees should be considered.



3) Your team talked a lot about getting people out of the flood zone and saving them flood insurance payments. It was barely mentioned that the cost for the complete project beyond the bridge replacement - floodwalls or culverts - would have to be paid through a Special Flood Assessment District. Please put the complete numbers on the table, so we can make an educated decision. How much additional property tax would that mean? How much less would it be compared to flood insurance? Who would pay? Only people who are paying flood insurance right now? Or would people all of the sudden find themselves being taxed although they are otherwise not required to pay flood insurance?



As stated in the meeting. It is too early to make a decision as not all necessary facts are known. First we need to know the complete list of all projects downstream of Pope/Chaucer, then we need to know all facts about all alternatives - How many trees would have to be removed for each alternative? (It is not enough to say "Every tree within 5 feet of the wall" - We need to know how many 100 that will be). How much additional property tax would be necessary to pay for each of the alternatives? Who will have to pay the assessed fee? Once we have the complete picture we can make an educated decision. Until then there is no other alternative then no alternative.



Sincerely,



Manfred Kopisch





image001.png
(image/png attachment: image001.png)

Received on Thu Feb 13 2014 - 16:55:17 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)