Dear Menlo Park City Council members,
I wanted to share my frustration with the entire process of this project, more so in the past month, and suggest that the county and city fund another study and survey to evaluate all possible options and provide more details on objectives, success criteria, and measurement methods. This was actually the recommendation of the SMC Sustainability Director during the 9/17 BPAC committee meeting [first paragraph on page 7].
Although there were procedural challenges throughout this project, what has transpired since the 9/17 BPAC meeting is deeply concerning:
• BPAC was not fully aware that a survey had been conducted in December 2023, reaching 265 community members. Of these, 45% supported the closure of Coleman.
• At the 9/17 meeting, BPAC agreed that there was no consensus on which option to pursue. However, in the letter they presented on 10/17, they claimed that 23 of the 26 people physically present during the 9/17 meeting supported the one-way option, completely disregarding the people who spoke on Zoom, who had far more diverging opinions, and the community members who had expressed support for the closure option in the December survey.
• Your letter misrepresents the truth. No other survey was conducted after the December 2023 survey to indicate support for the one-way option [first paragraph under ‘Analysis’ on page 3].
• Most of the examples community members cited during the 9/17 BPAC meeting involved close calls at the city side of Coleman, given the lack of a dedicated bike line and double-parked vehicles. So, even if the one-way closure is implemented, it will not alleviate any potential safety issues unless parking is also removed on the city side of Coleman [action 2 of your letter].
This is not how democracy works. You cannot simply override a formal survey with 23 voices who happened to attend the 9/17 BPAC meeting in person. If you do not like the survey results, then the city and county need to commission a new study.
Sincerely,
Ted Sapountzis
