Jump links
#1 Rationalized Railways: Re-route Caltrain/High-Speed Rail to Market & Van Ness, adding a stop at Mission Bay
#2 Reticulated Rides: Create a continuous network of protected bikeways
#3 Vehicular Verticality: Add tunnels and flyovers to reduce street traffic and make way for parks
#4 F is for Fort: Extend the F Streetcar to the Fort Mason docks
¯¯¯
#1 Rationalized Railways: Re-route Caltrain/HSR to Market & Van Ness, adding a stop at Mission Bay
Map layers: “Railways, Streetcars, & Ferries”, “High-Speed Rail Highlighting”
¯¯¯
I struggle to grasp the logic behind plowing through ten blocks of built-up neighborhoods to extend High-Speed Rail (HSR) and Caltrain to the Transbay Terminal, whose location is inconvenient for both sides of the Bay. For one thing, the terminal is anything but “Transbay”, since (a) its location virtually rules out future onward service under the Bay (due to several deep building foundations blocking the way), and (b) it fails to reach BART. The terminal is also inconvenient for residents of San Francisco itself, since it lies in the city’s far northeast and is hundreds of yards away from Market St’s four BART lines and six Muni rail lines (F, J, K, L, M, N). Not to mention that this dumb extension is now estimated to cost a staggering $8.25 billion!
San Francisco should learn from the wisdom of so many European and Asian cities that have opted to locate their HSR stations where they best permit onward transit and future growth—regardless of whether that happens to be the present center of business activity. In San Francisco’s case, I believe this wisdom would call for two main HSR/Caltrain stations: one at Market & Van Ness for maximum convenience and connectivity, and another at Mission Bay to facilitate future cross-bay service.
At Market & Van Ness, the map shows a San Francisco Central Station (in olive), meant to include an eponymous BART stop. Directly connecting with 10 local train lines (4 BART + 6 Muni), this station would serve both City and East Bay residents better than the Transbay Terminal ever could. Moreover, trains would reach it faster than they could reach the Transbay Terminal, covering a shorter distance and avoiding three 90-degree turns.
En route to SF Central, all trains should stop at a new Mission Bay Station on 7th Street under 280 (in olive). This station would link up with Muni’s N Line (lavender) and T Line (red) and be easily walkable from several populous neighborhoods. Unlike the Transbay Terminal, it would be reachable by ferry.
From Mission Bay Station, HSR/Caltrain could easily access a future Crossbay Tunnel (black) via the current depot at 4th & King (which could become a rail yard). With such a tunnel in place, northbound HSR/Caltrain trains could alternate between those that service SF Central and those that instead head across the bay to a new Oakland Harbor Station at the intersection of Amtrak, BART, and 7th Street (just one block from 880). From that new Oakland hub, riders could access the entire East Bay BART & railroad network without needing to make the slow detour through Downtown SF.
By continuing north from Oakland Harbor Station along the existing Capitol Corridor and San Joaquins Corridor, HSR and Caltrain would conveniently connect the Peninsula (including SFO) with the East Bay, North Bay, Sacramento Valley, and San Joaquin Valley (obviating today’s interminable journeys via Santa Clara or Daly City). The prospect of such an 80-101 Rail Corridor—finally linking all of Northern California’s key cities (Sacramento, Oakland, San Francisco, San Jose), research universities (Sac State, Davis, Cal, UCSF, SF State, Stanford, San Jose State), and air hub (SFO) in a single, fast train route—argues strongly against extending HSR and Caltrain to the dead-end Transbay Terminal.
More notes on the map’s “Railways, Streetcars, & Ferries” layer:
- SF Central Station (olive):
- The map proposes SF Central as a four-level station with HSR and Caltrain above ground, buses and streetcars at street level, Muni Metro below the street, and BART below that.
- The map shows the station footprint occupying the under-used block at the SW corner of Market & Van Ness. This block could accommodate the city’s main terminal for intra-city and inter-city buses, preferably within a high-rise development.
- The map shows two walkways in olive extending from SF Central: one going north to reach City Hall and two skyways (gondola-lift routes); the other going south to reach a hypothetical soccer stadium at 12th & Howard.
- The “Old 49 Neighborhoods” map suggests renaming the Market & Van Ness area “Central Crossing”, leaving “Civic Center” for the zone of public buildings north of Hayes.
- New BART stop at SF Central:
- BART runs under Market all the way to Van Ness before turning south. Ideally, the new BART stop would be located directly under the proposed HSR/Caltrain stop. But it could also be located further south, between 12th and 13th Sts. The latter location would leave one end of the BART platform sufficiently close to HSR and the other end close to a potential future Muni line on the Duboce-Division corridor.
- Elevated HSR/Caltrain tracks (orange):
- The map’s white-on-orange line shows the route from Mission Bay to SF Central, passing first along an unused right-of-way and then under the Central Freeway.
- Moving west from Mission Bay, trains could rise on low elevated tracks over Division St to pass just under the higher-elevated I-80, then be high enough to pass over the relatively low onramps that cross Division near Brannan. Rising just a little further, the trains would be fully over the Central Freeway by the point where northbound 101 joins it. Passenger trains should be able to manage these modest grades. But if it were important to make the tracks even flatter, they could also be built alongside the Central Freeway, level with it.
- Rail yard at 4th & King:
- The current station at 4th & King would be obviated by short extensions of the T and N lines to Mission Bay Station (which the N tracks already nearly reach). 4th & King could thus be converted to a rail yard (with platforms removed, it would accommodate over 20 separate tracks). For transit of empty trains between this yard and SF Central, a low elevated spur could be built over Townsend between 7th and Division. The map shows this spur in white-on-blue.
- Extending the N and T lines to Mission Bay Station:
- The lavender line shows how the N Streetcar could reach Mission Bay Station via a short extension (most of this half-mile track is already in place).
- The red line shows how the T could use the N’s tracks to reach Mission Bay Station, then continue along 16th St to rejoin its existing track on 3rd St.
- Crossbay Tunnel (black):
- Called “Crossbay” to prevent confusion with Transbay Terminal.
- Trains reaching SF via this tunnel would have about one mile in which to make the climb from an underwater tunnel (at Pier 40) to any place where they might need to pass over street traffic. Even at a mere 2% grade, a train would climb 100+ feet over this distance.
- A potential roadway through this tunnel could link directly with 280 (for traveling south and west) and the Buena Vista Tunnel (for traveling west and north; see Idea #3).
- Mission Bay Ferry Terminal (olive-colored boat icon):
- Whereas ferries could only get within a half-mile of the Transbay Terminal, they could get within a few hundred feet of Mission Bay Station.
- The two bridges over Mission Creek would need to be arched to accommodate ferry passage. This should be doable since the 4th St Bridge would no longer bear light rail in this scheme.
- Bikeways (described in Idea #2 below):
- The map suggests building an elevated Central Bikeway (up Division and Duboce, to reach the Duboce Bikeway) and an elevated South Van Ness Bikeway (connecting the Central Bikeway with SF Central).
- Hella-modal stations:
- SF Central (8-modal): BART, Muni light rail, Muni streetcar, Muni bus, HSR, Caltrain, Skyways, Bikeways.
- Mission Bay (7-modal): Ferry, Muni light rail, Muni bus, HSR, Caltrain, Skyway, Bikeways.
- Oakland Harbor (6-modal): BART, Amtrak, HSR, Caltrain, Bus, Bikeways.
This “Rationalized Railways” plan offers the following additional advantages:
- Besides being shorter than extending to the Transbay Terminal, extending to Market & Van Ness would (a) require far less taking and destroying of existing properties, (b) use up far less potential building space, (c) be far less disruptive to existing neighborhoods and traffic flows.
- The proposed elevated train route would flow smoothly over Division St, under I-80, over/alongside the Central Freeway, and over the three widest blocks of South Van Ness. By using these corridors, HSR/Caltrain would avoid creating new divisions between neighborhoods or marring the existing cityscape.
- The proposed plan would concentrate connectivity where there is opportunity to build. For example, a soccer stadium at 12th St and Howard could be built without removing much other than parking lots and auto shops. This stadium could connect directly with SF Central via an elevated walkway.
- Assuming any route to the Transbay Terminal would need to take advantage of the existing trackage to 4th & King, trains reaching this terminal would have to crawl around three sharp turns after crossing Division St. By contrast, trains could reach SF Central via two gradual (hence faster) turns.
- By way of the proposed South Van Ness Bikeway and Central Bikeway, SF Central could connect with the city’s central, western, and southern districts via protected bikeways.
Anticipating a few criticisms:
- “HSR/Caltrain needs to reach the Financial District, since that’s still the center of business activity”
- The city must plan for the future, not the present. In particular, it should locate its HSR/Caltrain stops where new growth is possible.
- Moreover, passengers would be able to reach the Financial District almost as quickly via the T or N from the proposed Mission Bay Station as they would via HSR/Caltrain to the Transbay Terminal. As noted above, even high-speed trains would have to crawl the last two miles to Transbay as they navigate three sharp turns.
- “If HSR/Caltrain doesn’t reach the Transbay Terminal, it will be hard for convention-goers to reach the Moscone Center area”
- By transferring to the T at Mission Bay Station, visitors would reach the convention center quickly and easily—likely faster than they would if forced to snake their way to the Transbay Terminal on HSR/Caltrain then backtrack three blocks on foot.
- “Market & Van Ness can’t be a rail terminus since there’s no room for a rail yard”
- Empty trains could be stored and serviced at the 4th & King yard, reachable by a low elevated access spur over Townsend St. This yard would also connect directly with Mission Bay Station, via existing track.
- “The HSR/Caltrain line could not cross Market St, due to all the tunnels”
- The map suggests building SF Central above ground. It shows the orange line crossing over Market in order to decrease transfer distances (including to the proposed skyway stop at Van Ness & Grove). But if it were preferable for this line to run underground, it could still reach the southern edge of Market St without having to go under existing transit tunnels.
¯¯¯
#2 Reticulated Rides: Create a continuous network of protected bikeways
Map layer: “Parks, Greenways, & Bikeways”
¯¯¯
The map suggests twenty or so new greenways, bikeways, foot/bike bridges, parks, and park expansions. Combined with the city’s existing parks, bikeways, and waterfront trails, these form a continuous city-wide network of routes for rapid and safe bicycling.
The suggested additions are easier to see if you de-select all layers except “Parks, Greenways, & Bikeways”. This layer is mostly self-explanatory, but a few points bear mentioning:
- Several key bikeways converge on the proposed Central Bikeway, which follows Duboce and Division Streets. The map envisions this bikeway—and the South Van Ness Bikeway—as elevated cycling “freeways” that could perhaps be built in tandem with the proposed HSR/Caltrain extension to Market & Van Ness.
- The map also proposes creating a Dolores St Greenway by converting that street’s island and fast lanes to a 40 ft-wide protected zone with separated southbound and northbound bike lanes. Timing the street’s lights to 25 mph would give cyclists a chance to string together a few greens before the speed differential catches up to them.
- The map also proposes a Wagon Road Bikeway following the old southeast wagon route, now 101. This route takes advantage of unused strips of land beside and under that freeway, as well as the proposed Victorian Village park at Hospital Curve.
- Zoom in on the Parkside/Lake Merced area to see how the numerous proposed greenways and park expansions network with each other and with the Southern Bikeway, which in turn links up with the Dolores St Greenway.
- The map proposes two foot/bike bridges, shown in red: one over Market St to link the Dolores St Greenway with the Central Bikeway and the Wiggle, and the other over Bayshore Blvd to link the Wagon Road Bikeway with the proposed Bayshore-Sunnydale Towers.
- The proposed Seal Green is meant to include a protected bicycle/pedestrian path linking Sutro Heights Park with the Golden Gate Park entrance at 47th & Fulton.
¯¯¯
#3 Vehicular Verticality: Add tunnels and flyovers to reduce street traffic and make way for parks
Map layer: “Freeway Tunnels & Connectors”
¯¯¯
Using thick black lines, the map suggests several expressway tunnels intended to smooth traffic flow, cut energy use, take cars off the street, and add park space.
First and foremost, the map suggests a tolled, three-ended tunnel complex connecting Park Presidio, 19th Avenue, and the Central Freeway.
- Stow Lake Tunnel: This tunnel would turn Park Presidio Bypass into park space and allow vehicles to flow between Park Presidio and 19th Avenue without having to stop at Fulton St, Lincoln Way, or the Bypass-Crossover intersection. This tunnel would cut the distance of Highway 1’s GGP crossing by one third, eliminate two dangerous high-speed hairpin turns, and allow smooth flow between the proposed Buena Vista Tunnel and 19th Avenue. It could start and finish as underpasses below Lincoln Way and Fulton St, if those streets were raised slightly. Crossover Drive would remain in place as a grade-level connection between 25th Avenue on the north and 19th Avenue on the south.
- Buena Vista Tunnel: This tunnel would allow rapid flow between Highway 1 and the Central Freeway, and in general between the western and eastern sides of town. It would take a massive number of vehicles off city streets†. Connecting directly to Fulton St, Lincoln Way, Park Presidio, and 19th Ave, this tunnel would offer not only a bypass for transiting vehicles, but also a massively time-saving link between the city’s western and eastern districts. It incorporates a 500-yard “South Branch” for vehicles traveling between Downtown and the Sunset.
- † Franklin, Gough, Hayes, Scott, Van Ness, Lombard, Octavia, Fell, Oak, Stanyan, Fulton, Kezar, Lincoln, Geary, Monterey, O’Shaughnessy, Laguna Honda, Duboce, 7th Ave, 9th St, etc.
Second, the map suggests a Richardson Avenue Tunnel connecting Lombard Street and Presidio Parkway. This tunnel would smooth the Marin-SF traffic flow and eliminate the de facto freeway separating the Marina District from several entrances to the Presidio. The map suggests a greenway that would allow easy passage between these districts for pedestrians and cyclists. It would also allow residents of Cow Hollow to walk to the Palace of Fine Arts park without having to cross 101.
Third, the map suggests a Potrero Hill Tunnel to eliminate the accident-plagued Hospital Curve and create space for a large park that would serve the Mission and Potrero Hill neighborhoods and heal the gash that separates them. This 3/4-mile tunnel would allow 101 traffic to flow smoothly between 17th and 23rd Streets without climbing or turning. It would pay for itself by saving lives, cutting energy use, reducing accident-caused traffic jams, and increasing property valuations in two densely settled neighborhoods.
With indigo lines, the map suggests a pair of flyovers to connect 80 and 280. Currently, drivers must use city streets to make this connection. GPS navigation often sends them on this detour due to backups on 101.
With dark purple lines, the map suggests a pair of bus ramps connecting Mission Bay Station with I-80. Making the train-to-bus transfer at Mission Bay would allow Eastbay-bound bus users to get home faster than they would by transferring at the Transbay Terminal, which would require an additional 2 miles of train travel at slow speed.
Finally, the map suggests various subterranean carparks to allow ground-level greens and promenades. These include the carparks under the proposed Midway Mall, Seal Green, Campo d’Assisi, and Legion of Honor/Ansel Adams Museum complex.
¯¯¯
#4 F is for Fort: Extend the F Streetcar to the Fort Mason docks
Map layer: “Railways, Streetcars, & Ferries” (show Transit layer to see existing F line)
¯¯¯
The idea has occasionally arisen to resurrect the tracks extending from Fisherman’s Wharf to the Marina, which pass by the Maritime Museum and through the old train tunnel under Fort Mason. The map shows this section of track in pink, with the tunnel overlaid in black.
What distinguishes the present proposal is that it also puts forth ideas for drawing more visitors to the area (Ideas 24, 28, and 34). Because ridership on the historic F Streetcar will inevitably depend on tourists, the success of extending the line depends on adding new attractions.
In addition to the proposed new attractions, sources of ridership for this hypothetical extension would include the Maritime Museum, Ghirardelli Square, Marina Green, and Fort Mason itself, not to mention ridership from local residents and workers.