I see a double standard at work here.

Certainly it makes sense for our Menlo Park council, and Atherton's town council, to consider legal action at least as a negotiating tactic that must not be left untried. The usual "public comment" period game has been played. We know how that goes. But you don't know what the other guy's cards look like until he puts them on the table. That's called "filing an EIR". At that point, serious negotiations can begin.

All well and good. We all agree that electrification is overdue, we just want it done right! But why does our M.P. council take this approach to a basically benign Caltrain development and not to the potentially disastrous office developments that will exacerbate the already calamitous rush-hour traffic we experience five days a week? Could it be that Caltrain makes no contributions to anyone's campaign funds?

To reduce that traffic, we need housing-only development downtown, so that more people can commute to work on foot or by bicycle. Caltrain electrification should have little or no effect on automobile traffic, unless it increases the frequency of blockage of roadways that have level crossings with the Caltrain tracks. And the issue of grade separation is a whole other can of worms!

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?