MP City CounciImembers
I am surprised to just learn this evaluation was underway, as a study of FEGS was approved over two years ago and I had not seen any progress reports since then. So I and many others have assumed it had been tabled. Has a rail committee been assisting this effort? Who are the members?
I have only briefly reviewed the staff report
https://menlopark.gov/files/sharedassets/public/agendas-and-minutes/city-council/2023-meetings/agendas/20230228-city-council-agenda-packet.pdf#page=5
.... but am pleased to see that many of the BIG concerns raised about hybrid grade separations have finally been acknowledged.
Some initial impressions:
1. The consultant and staff appear still wedded to the idea that Caltran would only approve a maximum grade of only a 1% grade. That is not how Palo Alto has viewed this standard, and I doubt it would make this assumption without credible Caltran input of some kind.
2. The value of using an open rail, bridge-like support structure between at least Ravenswood and Oak Grove, and hopefully to Glenwood, has not been acknowledged. A non-traditional Caltran design could provide superior east-west bike and pedestrian connectivity and a far more appealing aesthetic environment compared to the retaining wall examples in the staff report.
3. There is no information included about the next steps for this important study. I look forward to learning more about this planning activity soon.
Thank you for continuing to evaluate FEGS alternatives. Both you and our entire community need to better understand them.
Sincerely,
Dana Hendrickson
