>> * Third Street rail is partly being sold as a racial equity thing,
>> promising Bayview and Vis Valley a $450ish million choo choo line as an
>> urban renewal tool. The reality is that the line is a $300 million
>> gift to Catellus, and that only a tiny fraction of service will run
>> beyond the edge of the Mission Bay development at Mariposa Street.
>
First of all, I don't agree that the ridership is not sufficient to
justify the investment. If we assume only 25,000 boardings a day
for the 5 mile section from Caltrain to Bayshore, that is 5,000
boardings a mile. That is about 20% higher than the current ridership
density of the Muni light rail system as a whole. Even if we
add in the two miles of the MMX and assume a total of 25,000 boardings
a day, that's still about 3,500 boardings a mile.
This is still higher than any American light rail line built in the
last 30 years. Of all the "new generation" of American light rail lines,
the highest density has been achieved in Denver, at 3,000 boardings per mile.
The new Bergen-Hudson LRT in New Jersey is projected at about 4,000
(similar to the present Muni light rail density).
Moreover, transportation investment shouldn't be put into an isolated
box, but has to be viewed as integral with landuse planning. The idea
is to bolster landuse patterns that favor transit usage (and other
alternatives to car use). Physical transportation infrastructure like
an LRT line can have impact on landuse whereas bus service is unlikely to.
I personally think that much of the "rust belt" corridor served by the
3rd St. LRT line should be preserved as industrially zoned land, for
employment sites, not used for housing (which is most likely to continue
the trend to SF becoming a bedroom suburb for Silicon Valley), which
doesn't serve the interests of working class SF residents, who don't
commute to Santa Clara. If the rust belt can attract significant
employment sites, then people from other parts of SF will need to be
able to get there.
Also, class/race equity issues can't be simply dismissed with a wave of
the hand. As a lower income area, Bayview is likely to have a higher
proportion of carless households than some other parts of the city.
And if LRT can provide an enhanced service (an "if" given current state
of Muni Metro), that is part of the justification of the investment
even if not too many new riders are attracted.
Tom Wetzel