Why does there need to be an extension of the streetcar?
Who are the "key players" in the environmental process?
Why is NPS involved in this project?
Will the streetcar line be extended to the Presidio?
Will this proposed extension be linked to the F-line or to the proposed E-line?
Would the project eliminate parking?
Would the project remove a lane of traffic from the street?
Will there be bicycle or pedestrian access through the Fort Mason tunnel?
Will the line be double-tracked?
Are any of the parks on the route affected?
Why is MTA working on an expansion project when some of its other routes can be improved?
What will the total cost of the project be? What are the funding sources?
How can I submit my comments on the project?
When will the environmental process be complete?
Hasn’t a decision already been made to proceed with the project? Why would NPS and MTA do an environmental review if the decision had not been made?

Why does there need to be an extension of the streetcar?
San Francisco’s northern waterfront is emerging as a key recreational and cultural corridor. Annually, millions of visitors come to the area’s many facilities, including the Ferry Building, tourist attractions at Pier 39, Fisherman’s Wharf, San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park (NHP), Municipal Pier, Golden Gate National Recreation Area’s (GGNRA) headquarters, and Fort Mason, where the Fort Mason Center is located. The streetcar extension will provide an attractive, non-polluting transit alternative to the 3.5 million visitors per year to the San Francisco Maritime NHP and to the 1.8 million visitors who attend events at the Fort Mason Center. This will help reduce auto trips and parking in historic and environmentally sensitive areas. The streetcar extension will also help improve the mobility of low-income residents who would like to use the National Park Service’s (NPS) parklands, recreational facilities, and other northern waterfront attractions, and will provide increased transit options for Marina District residents who want to visit the San Francisco Maritime NHP, Fisherman’s Wharf, or other downtown attractions. NPS desires to accommodate the increasing number of visitors to this area through improved transit services, rather than through increased automobile access, which would lead to greater traffic and spillover parking impacts on the adjacent neighborhoods.

Who are the "key players" in the environmental process?
There is a core team of four cooperating agencies working on this project: GGNRA and the San Francisco Maritime NHP, both part of the NPS; San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA)/San Francisco Municipal Railway (Muni); and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

The environmental review process incorporates input from numerous agencies, stakeholders, interest groups, and the public. Although NPS is the lead agency in the preparation of the EIS, the review and approval of the EIS will be a joint effort of all four cooperating agencies. The environmental review process will conclude with a Record of Decision by the regional director of NPS.

Why is NPS involved in this project?
The Federal Highway Administration funds a limited number of planning studies each year for projects that propose transit links to National Parks. GGNRA nominated the historic streetcar extension for this program in 2003 and funds were authorized at the end of 2005. GGNRA is managing the contract for the EIS in collaboration with the San Francisco Maritime NHP, MTA, and FTA. As the agency that would operate the service, MTA has a major role in the study.

What will be the main considerations when the alignment options are chosen for the streetcar extension?
In addition to the primary goal of increasing transit access to the city’s northern waterfront area, the project team will look at engineering criteria (gradients, curve radii); impacts to vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle traffic; operational issues for transit service; ridership demand; and cultural resource protection issues.

Will the streetcar line be extended to the Presidio?
A feasibility study was conducted in 2004 that identified three segments for a possible future streetcar extension, including one to the Presidio. The project partners determined that the Fort Mason segment had merit as an independent project and would serve existing needs for additional transit services. An extension on the Fort Mason segment was also supported throughout the alignment by many residents and businesses. Consequently, NPS and the project partners decided to initiate a public process to conduct environmental review on the Fort Mason extension only, in line with the extensive planning history that already exists for the Fort Mason extension. Possible future extensions beyond Fort Mason are not the subject of this review.

Will this proposed extension be linked to the F-line or to the proposed E-line?
The extension will provide the opportunity to operate either the existing F-line and/or a future E-line to lower Fort Mason.

Would the project eliminate parking?
Curb parking would be eliminated where station platforms are located or if the tracks are placed next to the curb. Parking north of the tracks on Van Ness Avenue within San Francisco Maritime NHP may be eliminated or restricted. On some block faces, there will be trade-off decisions to make between retaining parking, sidewalk widths, and the number of traffic lanes. Depending on the option chosen, parking may also be restricted or eliminated in the vicinity of the Yacht Harbor to accommodate a turnaround loop. Potential parking impacts will be analyzed in the EIS.

Would the project remove a lane of traffic from the street?
The project will analyze at least three alternatives for the alignment, and in each alternative, there will be options for the how the streetcar right-of-way is configured within the alignment. As with other locations in the city, the streetcar could travel in either a dedicated right-of-way for the streetcar only, or in a shared right-of-way (i.e., for both streetcars and automobiles). Streetcars operate more effectively and reliably when dedicated rights-of-way are provided; however in most cases, this would require removing a lane from automobile use. During this process, trade-off decisions will be required between providing a dedicated lane for the streetcar, removing a lane of automobile traffic, retaining parking, and sidewalk width. Potential removal of traffic lanes and the subsequent impacts will be analyzed in the EIS.

Will there be bicycle or pedestrian access through the Fort Mason tunnel?
The tunnel’s current configuration would only allow for one streetcar track to be installed. The tunnel is only 16 feet wide. For the streetcar vehicles in the MTA fleet, a minimum envelope of 15 feet is required in the tunnel for single-track operation, which would not leave enough room for a bicycle or pedestrian path, because a two-way pedestrian/bicycle path would require a minimum of 10 feet in width. A combined streetcar and pedestrian/bicycle path would require at least 25 feet of tunnel width.

Will the line be double-tracked?
Yes, except within the tunnel, which only has room for one track.

Are any of the parks on the route affected?
No alignment was found in the feasibility study that completely avoids impacting Aquatic Park, a significant cultural landscape and a designated National Historic Landmark (NHL) District. In order to use the Fort Mason tunnel for the alignment, there will be an impact on the park, as the rail line needs to access the tunnel through the park. The portion of Van Ness Avenue between the alignment of Beach Street and the Bay contributes to the cultural landscape, meaning that all possible alignments, even alignments within the Van Ness Avenue right-of-way, would affect the NHL District. One alignment would have a significant impact on Victorian Park, which is located directly to the east of Aquatic Park. In addition, the bocce ball courts at Beach and Van Ness would be affected and may need to be relocated.

Why is MTA working on an expansion project when some of its other routes can be improved?
San Francisco is an active, growing city. Its transit system needs to keep pace with the city as it changes and evolves. New neighborhoods and uses will appear or expand in different places, and the transit network needs to anticipate and be ready to serve these new communities. The city’s northern waterfront and Fort Mason are two emerging areas in the city, with increasing numbers of residents, employees, and tourists using its recreational and cultural facilities, and requiring transportation access that was not needed previously. Visitors will continue to come in increasing numbers to this area, whether this project is built or not. NPS desires to serve this increasing demand for transportation with improved public transit access, rather than relying on continued automobile access, with the accompanying increases in traffic volumes and impacts on neighborhood parking. NPS and MTA are partners in this project to plan for better future transit access to this area as a responsible way to manage the growing transportation demand in the area.

At the same time, the rest of the MTA system is not being ignored. MTA is also working in parallel to improve service on other routes and to other neighborhoods of the city. MTA initiated a study in early 2006 to look at the effectiveness of the current transit network and to look at improving service on lines serving other portions of the city. It is important to have future potential projects in development, even if the current funding environment does not appear that there is money available today to build or operate the expansion project. When funds do come available, projects such as this have such a long lead time that it is incumbent on MTA and NPS to have done some of the basic background feasibility and environmental clearance work, so that a desired project can be put into service in a reasonable amount of time.

What will the total cost of the project be? What are the funding sources?
The cost for each alternative, as well as a funding plan, will be developed as part of the EIS. The estimated costs will be outlined in the Draft EIS, which is tentatively scheduled for completion in Summer 2007. A funding plan will also be developed as part of the Draft EIS process. An operating funding plan will also need to be developed for the project.

How can I submit my comments on the project?
Public comments on issues to be considered in the scope of the environmental analysis are welcome until May 29, 2006. Interested individuals, organizations, and agencies can submit comments online at www.historicstreetcarextension.org; by fax to (415) 561-4854; or by mail to: Historic Streetcar Extension, GGNRA, Fort Mason, Building 201, San Francisco, CA 94123, Attn: Rick Foster.

After May 29, 2006, there will be at least two other opportunities to submit your comments on the project. There will be a workshop for a preliminary review of alternatives, tentatively scheduled for September 2006, which will be open to the public. Additionally, the public is welcome to submit comments to the Draft EIS when it is released in Summer 2007. Please check the project’s website for updates (www.historicstreetcarextension.org).

When will the environmental process be complete?
Once the EIS and the Record of Decision are published, the environmental process will conclude.

Hasn’t a decision already been made to proceed with the project? Why would NPS and MTA do an environmental review if the decision had not been made?
Environmental review is one step in project development, but it by no means indicates that a decision has been made to proceed with a project. Environmental review gathers facts and information to inform decision-making and incorporates significant input from the public and local business owners about impacts from the proposed project. Once environmental review is completed, a project can only proceed if there is local consensus on the project, if capital funding is identified to design and build the project, and if operating funds are identified to operate it after it is built. At the current time, neither capital funds nor operating funds have been identified for this project. Any decisions to proceed past the environmental stage will be made through public processes.

If you have additional questions, please contact:
Rick Foster, GGNRA, Fort Mason, Building 201, San Francisco, CA 94123 E-mail: rick_foster@nps.gov, Fax: (415) 561-4854.