Should the bridge wait?

Pick up a copy of today's Daily Post, it's NOT on the internet. 
There were many flood comments at last night's Newell meeting. Staff said that Newell bridge capacity is rated 35-years (the same as the Middlefield and University Avenue bridges), and the natural creek channel capacity is 35-years, without floodwalls or significant widening. Jane Kerschner, who lives five houses from the bridge on Edgewood Drive, said she's hoping for the city to "recognize the complexity" of the project and work with the public to develop a unified set of screening criteria. Others compared the Newell bridge process to current talks underway to replace the nearby Pope/Chaucer Street Bridge. "I don't know there won't be a phase two down the road," she said, citing designs for Pope-Chaucer that include eventual tall floodwalls, retaining walls, and roadway elevations. One man who identified himself as a father with two children at Duveneck Elementary School concurred, saying he was "horrified" at some of the proposed design elements for Pope-Chaucer and warned they have "major ramifications."
Len Materman, executive director of the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority, which is a partner in the bridge-replacement project, took to the podium to dispel concerns over this comparison.
"We don't have the money for floodwalls; we're not getting into floodwalls," he said. "Please don't get sidetracked by potential future projects down the road that may or may not come to fruition that are not funded. ... Right now we have to focus on what we can do and what we have the money to do."
The next step is environmental-review preparation in March. Staff pegged final EIR certification for spring 2015 and construction to begin in summer 2016.
Source: Palo Alto Online

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Santa Clara County Water History

Stanford Favors a Flood-Control Fish-Passage for Searsville Dam

A Beautiful Concrete Arch Bridge