Menlo Watch: Rail crossing plans steam into Menlo council chambers Menlo Watch: Rail crossing plans steam into Menlo council chambers (October 20, 2004)

By Rebecca Wallace
Almanac Staff Writer

With more and faster trains headed up the Peninsula, what step should Menlo Park city officials take next?

That's the question facing the City Council on Tuesday, October 19, when council members are scheduled to discuss a study on rebuilding the city's four rail crossings. City staff members are recommending that the council choose two possible projects as preferred alternatives: a "split" approach of raising the tracks and depressing the roads at crossings, and an "underpass" approach of lowering the road.

The council may also decide to: ask the Caltrain board to prepare a more detailed study of Menlo Park's crossings; seek grant funding to prepare design concepts for the train-station area; and work with Palo Alto and Atherton to develop more concrete projects.

Over the next 10 years, rail traffic is anticipated to rise by 10 to 20 percent, city transportation manager Jamal Rahimi said.

The October 19 meeting begins at 7 p.m. in the council chambers at 801 Laurel St.

Dogs are hot topic at Parks and Rec

Residents with an opinion about off-leash dog activity in Menlo Park -- and there seem to be many of them -- can bring their comments to a city Parks and Recreation Commission meeting on Wednesday, October 20.

That night, the commission is scheduled to discuss having off-leash areas at one or more of the following city parks: Burgess, Willow Oaks, Nealon, Lyle, Stanford Hills and Sharon. An ad hoc committee, which held four public meetings, ruled out the other parks because of size, location or other concerns.

The meeting begins at 6 p.m. in the City Council chambers at 801 Laurel St. Following the meeting, commissioners will bring their recommendations to the council, which is set to discuss the matter on Tuesday, November 9. For more information, call 330-2245.

Council tables vote on new road fee

After concerns were raised about whether a proposed road impact fee for construction projects would be equitable, the Menlo Park City Council opted October 12 to table the matter.

The new fee would have been 0.66 percent of a construction project's total value. Heavy construction vehicles tend to cause more wear and tear on roads than regular cars, studies show.

Councilman Nicholas Jellins, though, said he'd rather see a more specific approach, because not all projects greatly affect roads. The council then voted 4-1 to have city staff members look into other ways of collecting funds for road maintenance, perhaps by looking at individual building permits to try to gauge which projects could more seriously hit the roads.

Paul Collacchi dissented, saying, "If we don't assess construction, we're asking people who aren't doing construction to pay for those who are."

The council has approved a program of spending $1.7 million annually over the next five years for street repairs; the new fee was estimated to bring in $393,000 each year.

Council puts off vote on city traffic plan

After 15 residents -- some for and some against -- addressed the City Council on a proposed Menlo Park neighborhood traffic management program on October 12, the council noted that the hour had grown late and decided to put off voting on the plan.

The matter has been tentatively rescheduled for Tuesday, October 26. The program would establish a set citywide process for neighborhoods to get traffic-calming measures approved. Some residents say it requires an unreasonable amount of support to get a project in, while others say a high threshold is needed to protect against unpopular "street furniture" such as speed humps.

For more information on the council's meeting agendas, call 330-6620 or go to www.menlopark.org and click on "City Council."

E-mail a friend a link to this story.