Dear Council Members, Please consider my words below. The third plan is a seriously good one. And I live next to the train station. Cheers, David Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: David Wilkinson > Date: September 10, 2017 at 3:57:27 PM PDT > To: menlofuture_at_(domainremoved) > Cc: Menlo Park's Future > Subject: Re: Critical Issue: Caltrain Railroad Tracks > > Lee and all, > The more I read this letter, the more I like the raised tracks for Menlo Park. I have ridden trains in many cities and countries and they are quieter (electric). And the tracks are smoother and no horns blowing at crossings. > Let's look seriously at the raised tracks. To me and many friends, that is the smarter and more sophisticated approach. > Let's approach this issue with intelligence. > David > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Sep 10, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Menlo Park's Future >> >> Critical Issue: Caltrain Railroad Tracks >> >> Fellow Residents >> >> What we do with the Caltrain tracks is critical for Menlo Park’s future--to our traffic during and after construction, to our ability to get around. >> >> The City Council and Planning Commission is being asked to choose between two alternatives. One bad. One terrible. >> >> The first, alternative A, would force all east-west traffic onto Ravenswood, and block traffic, foot bike and auto, from crossing at Oak Grove and Glenwood. This is terrible. >> >> The second would grade separate Ravenswood, Oak Grove and Glenwood, would create a solid 10- foot high wall along the tracks, and would tie up traffic in the city for years. This is bad. >> >> I beg you to beg the city council to at least reconsider a third alternative: >> · One that would not snarl the city in construction for years, negatively impacting traffic and retailers. >> · Would not create a solid wall along the tracks. >> · Would not create up and down hills under the tracks that would be difficult to bike. >> · One that would open up—improve-- the city, hooray!!, and allow us to have vendors, or bike lockers, or parking, and to freely bike and walk where the tracks are now. >> · One that could look attractive, >> · And that could overcome neighbor fear of train noise by being noise mitigated with buffers and privacy by using glass that can be coated on demand. >> The third alternative is raising the tracks—in an open and attractive way. >> >> Beg the City Council to have Caltrain recalibrate the grades, so this third alternative is feasible. The cost savings could justify the savings of a new calibration study--in spades. Do not sacrifice our city to what we believe is a Caltrain mistake. >> >> You can email the Planning Commission, which hears the issue Monday, at Planning.Commission_at_(domainremoved) >> You can email the City Council at City.Council_at_(domainremoved) >> >> I will let you know how each Commission and Council member votes—and how they rank their preferences. >> >> Thanks as always, Lee Duboc (menlofuture_at_(domainremoved) >> >> Staff Report showing alternatives: http://menlopark.org/DocumentCenter/View/15466 >> >> >> >> --- >> You are currently subscribed to menlofuture as: davidswil_at_(domainremoved) >> To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-menlofuture-11323545L_at_(domainremoved) Received on Sun Sep 10 2017 - 16:17:37 PDT
