SAN FRANCISCO:Study of three toll tunnelways

(1) Fell/Oak Couplet, 800m (0.5mi) Laguna St to Divisadero St, a modest three block westward extension underground of the Central Skyway or US-101. The Skyway is a spur ending at Laguna St that comes off the complex James Lick Skyway, an elevated city motorway that starts at the interchange of I-280 (Southern Fwy) and US-101 (Bayshore Fwy) and provides numerous on/off ramps to city streets before becoming the major approach route to the Bay Bridge to Oakland.

(2) Van Ness Avenue, a 3km (c2mi) tunnelway from near the same point where the Skyway touches down at Fell and Oak but north 26 blocks through the Nob Hill and Russian Hill sections of the city as far as Lombard St. There would be on/off ramps at Geary St and Broadway, making it about 1,000m between interchanges. Van Ness Ave is already designated US-101. It, together with parallel Franklin and Gough sts, carry heavy local traffic around the western fringe of the downtown business district. This is also one of two major routes between the freeways on the west Bay Peninsula and the Golden Gate Bridge with its link to Marin and Sonoma counties. This would provide urban motorway conditions in three-quarters of the missing gap of US-101.

(3) 19th Avenue, an 8km (5mi) tunnelway heading north from the Juniperro Sierra ramps of I-280 near Daly City to Lake St near Presidio park on the southern approaches to the Golden Gate bridge. Five intermediate interchanges at Brotherhood Way, Ocean Av, Quintara St, Lincoln Way and Geary Blvd are proposed.

Toll-financed

The tunnelways would be “funded by user fees (tolls)” using electronic toll transponders and other non-stop toll technologies, the report suggests and charges could be adjusted to prevent congestion occurring. (pA73)

“These facilities would not compete with other San Francisco transport needs, as their funding would come from the toll. It is anticipated that they would be built and operated by private companies under franchise to the city,” says the draft plan.

It says that the major rationale for the three tunnel ‘supercorridors’ is to “improve neighborhood livability” by removing much surface traffic and to help speed ‘Muni’ bus and trolley service on the surface with dedicated or transit-preference lanes. The report envisages the tunnelways as allowing the widening of sidewalks, and more resident curbside parking. Local cross traffic, pedestrians and cyclists could be given more signal greentime. The tunnelways scheme would “reclaim our streets” for residents by burying the heavy flows of through traffic, says the draft plan.

The report says it expects the proposal to be “controversial” but says San Francisco “must consider new ideas for solving transportation problems,” since: “The status quo cannot meet current or projected demand.”

Andy Nash, manager of planning at the San Francisco County Transportation Authority (SFCTA) says the three corridors were chosen because in each case a tunnel is “natural” in that the surface topography rises. Also, the three corridors represent three different lengths of tunnelway: a shortish local relief road in the case of the Oak/Fell Couplet corridor, a medium length project by the central business district in the case of Van Ness, and a longer more strategic tunnelway in the case of 19th Avenue.

“A study of these three could throw up some of the issues of three different lengths and types of underground roadway, that might be applicable elsewhere. It might turn out we end up building something like this along another route, though these seem the most promising.”

There is heavy through-traffic on all three corridors that hinders bus transit and limits the amount of traffic calming and local neighborhood-friendly measures that can be applied. Two of the three (Van Ness Av and 19th Av) are already state highways and the construction of tunnelways might see the state route put underground, and the surface revert to city jurisdiction. The Oak/Fell one-way street couplet would be a short tunnel similar to the Broadway Tunnel under Russian Hill between Hyde and Mason sts, and would simply serve to distribute Central Skyway traffic westward. (Other tunnels in the Bay area include a short tunnel for CA-1 traffic in the Presidio, a tunnel on US-101 north of the Golden Gate bridge near Sausalito, and the Caldicott tubes of the CA-24 Fwy just east of Berkeley. All are quite old and none are tolled.

The draft plan recommends “a very basic feasibility study” of the toll tunnelway concept based on the three corridors. It notes that similar projects are under way in Paris, Singapore and Norway (Sydney, Melbourne, Tokyo, Stockholm, Berlin, Lyons and Madrid also have somewhat similar projects. So does Boston, but shooosh, that’s up in the cost stratosphere.)

The tunnelways are included in the planning document under the heading of the Local Streets Program. They are “designed to link parts of the city and regional gateways.” It says the descriptions are only intended to suggest the concept to be debated and studied, and specific details should be developed in the planning process with full community participation. Many critical design and engineering details including portal design ventilation, traffic capacity and local impacts need to be addressed.

Just one page

The tunnelways only take about one page out of a 94-page document, but they have generated strong interest in San Francisco and opinion for and against. Some immediately denounced the underground roads as “freeways” a boo-word. Supervisor Tom Ammiano said he was against any major new roads, and that the plans for San Francisco have long been based on no new highway capacity. He cited the Boston Big Dig was evidence of how costs can spiral out of control.

But a number of elected officials favor studies including the chairman of the SFCTA, Michael Yagi. Supervisor Barbara Kaufman, the chair of the plans and programs committee, is the most enthusiastic. She calls the scheme “very creative” and “brilliant” in that it should help local neighborhoods and merchants as well as motorists. She says she has no idea whether it is financially feasible, but says she will work to make sure the studies proceed. She thinks it will come for a vote this summer.

Kaufman said she was impressed by the Wacker Drive sub-surface roads in central Chicago. She says she especially likes the idea of a tunnel under 19th Avenue, a road lined with homes that is also the main thoroughfare between San Mateo County and the Golden Gate Bridge as part of CA-1.

“Lots of people using it (19th Av) now would go underground,” Kaufman told us. “It would help to unclog the streets.”

Her only reservation was that maybe planners want too many on/off ramps, and this would cause too much disruption. But the tunnelway idea, she loves.

“It seems to me this makes so much sense. These are horribly congested streets with a lot of traffic that doesn’t want to be traveling there through these neighborhoods. And the neighborhoods don’t need the traffic. Of course we have people here who will denounce absolutely anything that smacks of helping motorists, so I am not sure if we’ll see it in my lifetime. But I think it is a brilliant idea.”

The SFCTA board of directors comprises the 14 elected members of the board of supervisors of San Francisco county (San Francisco has combined city/county government.) It administers the proceeds of a half cent sales tax established to support transport. San Francisco is traditionally one of the most leftist parts of the country. Liberals are regarded as rightwingers. That proposals for tunneled toll highways could emerge here suggests the idea has diverse political appeal.

Bay Area

In the broader Bay area, the state governor wants various modest highway projects pushed forward including:

• a fourth 3-lane tube on the Caldecott tunnel which presently has a double lane drop (8-lanes contract to 3x2-lane tubes)

• extra lanes on US-101 (Bayshore Fwy) through San Jose

• widening of US-101 through the Novato Narrows in Marin Co

• extra lanes on CA-4

• HOV for I-680 between the east Bay and Santa Clara Co (‘Silicon Valley’)

• feasibility studies for a Southern Crossing transbay bridge or extra BART (rail) line

The most expensive state projects are transit, especially the plan to extend BART from Union City all the way to San Jose - a route already served by commuter rail. (Contact Andrew Nash SFCTA 415 522 4803 andrew_nash@ci.sf.ca.us)