[PRCo] Re: OT: E Line to Fort Mason

[Jim Holland]

"ricklaubscher" <ricklaubscher at ...> wrote:

Matt and Robert are right. The project is going to Fort Mason only 
because this is a manageable, fundable project with a clear set of 
issues. Going beyond that is an entirely different set of issues and 
different jurisdictions to deal with.

As far as the idea of claming prior use of this corridor, remember it 
was never used for public passenger travel (only a few troop trains in 
WWII) and hasn't been used at all in more than 30 years. Use of National 
Park land, which the promenade with the old freight track between the 
Maritime Museum and the Bay is, is governed by very rigorous laws, which 
basically say if there is a feasible and prudent alternative to building 
transportation through dedicated park land -- UNLESS the parkland in 
question is CURRENTLY in a highway or transit use -- you must follow the 
alternative route...hence double-track on Beach and the minimum linear 
right-of-way through the park to reach the tunnel. Them's the law, folks.

We spent more than a year fighting for Promenade westbound, Beach 
eastbound, didn't take the Park Service's word for what the law said, 
consulted our own experts, and came away convinced that trying to force 
that issue would 1) not succeed as a matter of law and 2) kill the 
project. We even tried to argue that crossing the cable car tracks was 
infeasible, but that didn't pass muster either (um, Powell and Geary for 
starters in my own lifetime).

So good arguments, all, but all tried, all pushed, all failed. We're 
past that phase now, so those who want to see the E-line extended to 
Fort Mason should line up to testify and comment on the draft 
Environmental Impact Statement when it's issued next year. I'll let the 
list know when hearings/written comments are scheduled.


--- In SFMuniHistory at yahoogroups.com, Matt Lee valkyriemlee@ wrote:
> >
> > Not in SF and not in the Marina.
> >
> > THere are those who b@#$%^& a lot and the supervisor will take up 
> their cause for brownie points. and because the SF Board of 
> Supervisors sit on the San Francisco County Transportaton Authority, 
> if they do not like it or their constituents make enough noise, the 
> commissioner will withhold local sales tax money to fund the project.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Connor Hochleutner metroliner@
> > To: SFMuniHistory at yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 3:28:19 PM
> > Subject: Re: [SFMuniHistory] When Hyde & Beach Was Quiet
> >
> > Peaking of this whole Marina NIMBYism...
> >
> >
> > Hasn't the case been made for a railroad who reactivates their lines 
> that have long been abandoned, that the railroad was there FIRST and 
> it was too bad that you bought a house with a line in the 
> backyard?     With the sprawl in this country, I have heard from many 
> people that are upset that there is a freight/passenger line now 
> running through their neighborhood, but there is little they can do. 
> The tracks were there when they bought the house and they knew about it.
>
> > Can't Muni just 'reactivate' the line and avoid all the mess that 
> NIMBYs create?
>
> > On Nov 13, 2007, at 3:22 PM, Aleksandr Prodan wrote:
> >
> > On Nov 13, 2007 2:02 PM, Robert Parks rparks at lvhot. org> wrote:
> >
> > Alan Fishel wrote:
>> > > This brings up three additional questions.
>> > >
>> > > 1. Why trackage on Leavenworth and Jones a block apart?
> >
> >
> > Operational flexibility, and practicalities of passenger boarding.
> >
> >
> > IMO, they should run the line along the Jefferson/waterfron t,. 
> paralleling the existing disused tracks, going WB and on Beach going EB.
> >
> >
>> > > 3. Why end at the west end of the tunnel? Should there be service 
>> if not at first but in the future along Marana, Mission and Mason to 
>> serve Ft Mason, the two Marinas the Marina district and end the west 
>> of Chrissy Field area as new development is completed?
> >
> > There is bound to be objections to building westward from Fort Mason
> > from the NIMBYs in the Marina. Better to build a section that has less
> > opposition and get it established and running, before taking up the
> > fight to get across the Marina.
> >
> >
> > If Muni was less bureaucratic, they could pull a stunt, where they 
> would come in one weekend, put up the overhead and re-use the existing 
> tracks that are there. Yes, there is only a single track, but you 
> could have some cars turn back at Fort Mason and still maintain enough 
> service along the single-track portion to serve the Presidio. Muni 
> could then call it a re-tracking project, where they'd "replace" the 
> track by laying another one next to it, essentially double-tracking 
> the line.
> >
> > Dallas has good success using old 1920s-era tracks for their historic 
> ops and their track is in worse condition than what we have in the Marina.
> >
> > AFAIK the Ft. Mason EIR is finally getting started.
> >
> > Certainly, the long term plan for the Presidio NP involves the E/F > 
> extended to the long dreamed of multimodal transit center near Chrissy 
> > Field and the Main Post.
> >
>> > > Is the Golden Gate Line off of the N line still under consideration?
> >
> > I think that was dropped as soon as they got the go ahead for the garage.
> >
> > It would still be pretty easy to implement if enough public interest 
> is generated. It would be nice to have this line connect the Sunset 
> and the Richmond, and possibly through the Presidio to GGB, connecting 
> to the E line, forming a loop. (Only in my dreams, of course).
> >
> > Another cool line would be to go parallel JFK Drive out to the beach. 
> That line could be single track with double tracks at stations.  The 
> ridership would be pretty low on weekdays however.
> >
> > --
> > -Aleksandr Prodan
> > alexprodan at gmail. com
> > 

--- End forwarded message ---


^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
.
.
Jim  Holland
.
Studying Pittsburgh Railways Company (PRCo)
.
..............................From 1930 -- 1950
.
Pennsylvania  Trolley  Museum  (PTM)
.
http://www.pa-trolley.org/
.
N.M.R.A.
.
http://www.nmra.org/