A major step forward along this path has now been taken, with work begun in May on an Environment Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed extension. The environmental document’s lead sponsor is the National Park Service (NPS), joined by Muni and the Federal Transit Administration. This came on the heels of a less complex analysis called a Technical Feasibility Study, which determined that there were several feasible streetcar routings from the Wharf through Aquatic Park to Fort Mason, as well as beyond to the Presidio. However, only the segment to Fort Mason is currently going forward to the EIS level. This is largely due to widespread consensus from stakeholders of the positive potential value in the Fort Mason extension.

At a public scoping meeting on May 9, more than 100 San Franciscans turned out to hear presentations and offer comments. The history of the rail corridor was briefly recounted: freight tracks extended from The Embarcadero through a new tunnel under Fort Mason in 1914 to help build the Panama-Pacific International Exposition—then, for decades, carrying freight and troops to and from Fort Mason and the Presidio; in 1979, Muni first proposing vintage rail service along The Embarcadero to Fort Mason; the NPS reserving the Fort Mason tunnel for such a service the following year.

Other presentations outlined NPS goals promoting alternative transportation to federal parklands, particularly in urban areas. Specifically mentioned: NPS’ desire to increase visitation to San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park, including Aquatic Park, the National Maritime Museum, and the Hyde Street Pier’s famous historic ship collection. The growing popularity of Fort Mason Center, part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, was also described—its dozens of nonprofit tenants, museums, galleries, and exhibitions now attract 1.8 million visitors per year, increasingly straining Marina neighborhood traffic and parking. Fort Mason Center attendance will substantially increase in the future when the complex, under its new 60-year lease from the NPS, restores another historic pier for exhibition use.

The overwhelming majority of speakers at the scoping meeting were wholly in favor of the extension. Even most of those who expressed specific concerns—such as whether the western terminal should be located inside the Fort Mason gates, or just outside (across from the Marina Safeway)—supported the concept of the extension. A few Marina District residents stated that they would strongly oppose a further extension to the Presidio, but they were outnumbered by those stating that they favored such an extension. All who brought up the Presidio were reminded by the Park Service conveners that no study of a Presidio extension is scheduled at this time.

The EIS will evaluate the three routings from Fisherman’s Wharf to Fort Mason that were identified as alternatives in the Technical Feasibility Study. All three use the 1914 single-track historic Fort Mason rail tunnel, reserved for rail transit in the 1980 Golden Gate National Recreation Area master plan. A separate seismic study of the tunnel, commissioned by the NPS, was recently completed, finding the tunnel in generally good condition, requiring an estimated $7 million in seismic upgrades, including a 35% contingency, but excluding track and overhead. The overall extension project is estimated to cost around $50 million in current dollars.

The alternatives all call for double track throughout the extension, except for the tunnel, which will be protected by interlock, allowing streetcars through in only one direction at a time. From the tunnel’s east portal at the foot of Van Ness Avenue, all three eastbound alignments would swing up through a corner of Aquatic Park, next to the bocce ball court area, which would probably be relocated nearby. The eastbound track would continue along Beach Street until it joined the current F-line track at Jones Street.

Westbound, each alternative starts at Jefferson & Jones Streets, where the F-line currently terminates. One alternative follows the historic freight rail track along Jefferson Street and the Aquatic Park promenade to reach the tunnel. A second follows Jefferson as far as Hyde Street, then swings up through Victorian Park, around the base of the Hyde Street cable car terminal area, to join Beach Street at Ghirardelli Square near Larkin Street, then parallels the eastbound track through west Aquatic Park to the tunnel. The third alternative takes Jefferson Street one block, then south one block on Leavenworth Street, then west on Beach Street parallel to the eastbound track all the way to the tunnel. Because a key consideration is minimizing impact to parkland and cultural resources, this last alternative seems to be the likeliest to emerge from the process.

West of the tunnel portal, at least two terminal configurations are to be considered: one, a loop inside the Fort Mason gate immediately after exiting the tunnel; the second, a loop in the yacht harbor parking lot and Marina Boulevard in the block between Laguna and Buchanan Streets. Other terminal alternatives are likely to be introduced, and additional route alternatives could be reconsidered as well.

Operational and ridership analyses will also be performed as part of the EIS. The current schedule calls for the draft EIS to be completed in late 2007, followed by a period of public comment before a final version is adopted. If the project comes through this process favorably, funding can then be sought for its completion. It now appears the earliest an extension could be operational is 2012 (fittingly enough, Muni’s centennial year).

Inside Track will provide updates on the public process associated with the EIS as they are available and will alert its readers in plenty of time to participate in the public comment period.