WE OPPOSE THE EXTENSION THROUGH THE TUNNEL UNDER FORT MASON

Government and business interests are lining up behind a plan to extend the historic streetcar line from Fisherman’s Wharf to the Marina. The current historic streetcar line is Muni’s F-Line, a very popular service which runs from the Castro via Market and the Embarcadero to Jones Street in Fisherman’s Wharf. The E-Line, a new service planned to begin operating shortly, will extend the use of the historic streetcars by running them along the Embarcadero between CalTrain/AT&T Park and the existing Jones Street terminus in Fisherman’s Wharf. (The E-Line and the F-Line will overlap along part of their routes.) The next part of the plan is to extend the tracks westward from the Jones Street terminus across Aquatic Park and through the old railroad tunnel under Fort Mason. The formal work necessary to create and publish an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has begun. This means that the proponents are mounting a strong push and this plan is no longer in the ‘wish’ category.

The overall goal of the interests behind this project is to extend the historic streetcar line through the Marina and into the Presidio. However, the EIS underway now is only for that part of the project which would extend the tracks from Jones Street to a new terminus in the vicinity of lower Fort Mason. The specific location for the terminus is undecided but all of the options are near the intersection of Laguna and Marina Blvd.

The project was open to public comment during the initial scoping stage of the EIS study and individuals and organizations, including MCA, provided input [ MCA Historic Streetcar Letter 2006_05_27 ]. According to a July 2007 schedule, an alternative analysis will be conducted in August of 2007 and the draft EIS will be released for public comment in January of 2008. This will be followed by a public meeting in February of 2008.  The final EIS publication is expected in August of 2008 and the record of decision in November of 2008. There is greater opportunity for Marina residents to influence what happens before, rather than after, the final EIS is published.

• First phase. The interests behind this project [ Who is behind the Historic Streetcar Extension? ] want the public to separate the current project from their long term goal of extending the historic streetcars to the Presidio [ Will the streetcar line be extended to the Presidio? ]. Regardless of whether a person is leaning toward or leaning against the goal of bringing the historic streetcars to the Presidio, this is a difficult mental exercise the purpose of which is questionable. Clearly, if the current project is successful it paves the way for the run to the Presidio. Equally clearly, if the current project is unsuccessful the long term goal of reaching the Presidio becomes more difficult.
• Parking impact. Because the historic streetcars are public transportation, proponents like to point to a reduction in vehicle use as a major benefit of the project. However, exactly the opposite will be true for the Marina Green and nearby neighborhoods. There is free parking in the Marina Green. On weekends, there are no parking restrictions in the residential neighborhoods. Given the availability of parking, a streetcar terminal west of the hill at Fort Mason would be a magnet for people from throughout the bay area. The historic streetcars - not to mention their routes and destinations - are an “attraction.” This project would create an “attractive nuisance” that encourages people to drive into the Marina to start their San Francisco outings. There would be an estimated one-thousand additional cars trying to find parking spaces near the Marina Green if this project is built [ Rough Estimate ]. Arguably, those cars driving in and parking at the Marina Green to take the historic streetcar and visit the Ferry Building or Fisherman's Wharf would not replace other vehicle uses; they would be part of the overall increase in visitation expected at those destinations if this project is built - - if you build it they will come. So, this is not a matter of shifting use from one place to another with an overall reduction in car usage; rather, it is sacrificing one neighborhood to accommodate people who want to drive in, park, and visit other San Francisco destinations.  The impact on parking in the Marina would be severe! And this is not a problem only for Marina residents. Sightseers, touch-football players, walkers, bikers, joggers, kite-fliers, soccer players, photographers, women with strollers and anyone else who currently uses the Marina green for leisurely recreation will find their access hindered by congestion in the streets and parking lots. The bottom line is that this proposal would sacrifice one San Francisco attraction (the non-commercial Marina Green and neighborhood) to facilitate greater visitation to other San Francisco destinations.  
• Foregone conclusion. The EIS now underway mentions a series of requirements for extending the historic streetcars and a number of alternative routings being studied. However, the official document authorizing the work, the Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement, clearly states: “It is anticipated that under all alternatives the railway line would extend through the tunnel and end in the area of lower Fort Mason [emphasis added].” Thus, no matter how diligently this EIS study might be conducted, there is no scenario in which the historic streetcars do not come into the area impacting the Marina Green and its parking lots. No consideration is being given to other, non railway-through-the-tunnel, alternatives which might equally or better meet the stated requirements. In addition, the Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement talks about the large number of visitors to the National Historic Park at aquatic park and to the Fort Mason Center, implying that there is an underlying demand for historic streetcar service to these locations. But nowhere is there any discussion of why it is assumed that the historic streetcar line is the best alternative to satisfy this demand. In fact, the EIS is studying no alternatives except extending the historic streetcar line. So while the agencies doing the EIS work appear to be objectively studying options and their impact on the environment, this is simply a case where the final answer has been determined by how the study was set-up.    

MCA Values input from its members. Please send any comments or questions on this to info@sfmca.org