Has SFMTA been a disservice to public transportation?
Let’s Walk Through the L-Taraval Misadventure
• • • • • • • • December 2025 • • • • • • • •
In 1999, voters approved a merger of San Francisco Municipal Railway, Department of Parking and Traffic, and Taxi Commission. The idea was to unify multiple transit-related agencies into a single agency to eliminate redundancy and consolidate services. But over a quarter of a century later, many are questioning if this was a good idea.
One of the most egregious examples of SFMTA mismanagement has been the L Taraval Improvement project. It was meant to replace the rails of the L line, which had surpassed their useful life, as well as make stops safer and expedite light rail service. The project began in 2019 and was completed in 2024. It took over five years to replace two miles of track from Forest Side Avenue and Ulloa Street to 46th Avenue and Taraval Street. For perspective, the entire L Taraval line (from West Portal to its original terminus at Great Highway and Taraval) was completed in 1923, in about the same time.
The L Taraval Improvement project is an example of a simple project made complex. As the tracks were replaced, streets remained unfinished for years, impacting businesses and residents. Parking was eliminated, and access was reduced. The project was poorly coordinated among the involved departments, requiring the redo of several portions and lengthening construction time. Routine track replacement is necessary and happens every 40-50 years. Light rail track replacement methods have advanced over the last three decades to be faster and less disruptive. With such advanced methods, the replacement of the 2-mile segment should have taken one year. Instead, it took five years.
The 2.3-mile J Church extension from 30th Street to Balboa Park Station, for comparison, was completed in 1991 and took 2 years. This track was entirely new and built using an older method, which, by comparison, was over-engineered, slower, and more disruptive. The J Church extension was built by excavating a 4-foot-deep trench, building a reinforced concrete culvert in the trench, filling it with ballast, laying two tracks with railroad ties, and then covering it with concrete. For 2 years, construction of the J Church extension disrupted neighbors and drivers, but was completed more quickly than the L Taraval Improvement Project. The J-Church extension project was a successful collaboration between MUNI, the Department of Parking and Traffic, and the Department of Public Works, and it happened despite SFMTA not existing at the time.
It is time to call out this rogue agency and demand that it refocus on its mission: providing clean, safe, reliable public transportation to the people of San Francisco.”
One of the most difficult decisions a transit agency must make is to balance speed and efficiency against distance between stops. Most light rail systems around the country have stops spaced relatively far apart. Extreme examples include Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) Orange line, in which the section between Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) Airport and the University of Dallas averages two miles between stops. The Ocean Ave and Eucalyptus Drive bus stops on the M Ocean View line are less than 160 feet apart, which is the length of a two-car train. Consolidating these two stops could save nearly a minute. Transit planners generally plan for light rail stops about a quarter mile apart in urbanized areas. However, when the L Taraval was rebuilt, it retained the same 1/8-mile stop spacing as when it was first built as a streetcar line. The new Siemens S200 light rail vehicles (LRVs) are much faster than the early 1900s electric streetcars. Running high-performance light rail vehicles on track layouts designed for an early 1900s streetcar line never allows the Siemens S200 LRV to reach its full potential.
Furthermore, many of the redesigned stops have separate disabled access platforms,
which effectively inserts another stop between the regular stops. Not every stop on Taraval Street was made American Disability Act (ADA) compliant, which means SFMTA missed an opportunity to make the L Taraval fully accessible. For comparison, the T Third Street line, which was completed in 2007, is fully ADA compliant with efficient platform-level boarding. That shows the lack of common sense and vision that SFMTA had for this project.
A disadvantage of having closer stops is the loss of more parking spaces. The L Taraval Improvement project made the parking situation worse by not only remaining true to the old streetcar standard of 1/8 mile stop spacing (which is a stop for every two blocks), but placing additional ADA stops between those stops when they could have been consolidated. In total, 81 parking spaces were removed on Taraval Street between 15th and 46th Avenues to accommodate the redesigned stops. Parking removal affects younger people less. However, senior citizens, disabled persons, and families with children are more impacted, and they will be more likely to patronize businesses outside of San Francisco if it is more convenient and easier to access.
The L Taraval Improvement project was meant to improve passenger safety, but it has not
fulfilled this promise. Although the project created raised concrete boarding islands, these islands are only slightly above street level and are not hardened against traffic. For comparison, the Stonestown station on the M Ocean View line is platform level and isolated from traffic. The L Taraval could have incorporated a similar design, which would have provided more passenger safety and faster passenger loading. Driveway accessibility for residents could have been preserved by creating a center-island loading platform, which shifts tracks outward on the street, creating more space for residents using their driveways.
Finally, the construction time requirements for additional stops delay project completion.
Building more stops requires more time, labor, and materials to complete, which compounds costs. Consolidating stops reduces both time wasted and money spent.
Proper planning for the L Taraval Improvement should have started with the passenger experience in mind. It was possible to redesign L Taraval into a modern, efficient light rail line while saving money and minimizing impacts on residents and business owners. Instead, SFMTA opted for a disruptive, lengthy, and costly renovation project.
The SFMTA repeatedly demonstrates an inability to manage essential transit projects while pursuing vanity projects such as Kirkham Street neckdown and West Portal Safety Project. Such projects are done in the name of Vision Zero, an SFMTA program that has failed in its singular mission — improving traffic safety. Rather than stop and re-evaluate, SFMTA chose to double down and spend money at a time when it is facing an unprecedented budget deficit.
As San Franciscans, we need to ask ourselves whether SFMTA has been an asset to public transportation and traffic management, or a liability. It is time to call out this rogue agency and demand that it refocus on its mission: providing clean, safe, reliable public transportation to the people of San Francisco.
Stephen Martin-Pinto is a firefighter for San Francisco, he has served on the board of West of Twin Peaks Central Council, Sunnyside Neighborhood Association, the Veteran Affairs Commission, and was a candidate for District 7 Supervisor.
December 2025
