Jose Luis Moscovich: Geary BRT Plan Moves Forward

At a Dec. 10 Richmond District workshop, the SF County Transportation Authority (TA), working with city departments, will present several alternative designs for a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line on Geary Boulevard.

Let's consider some facts about this voter-approved project and about the Geary BRT study.

BRT is a quick and relatively inexpensive way to speed up buses and make service more reliable and comfortable. Buses will use dedicated lanes, get priority at traffic lights and stop at well-lighted mini stations equipped with electronic information displays announcing bus arrival times.

Mobility on Geary has deteriorated. Bus service has become slower, more unreliable and crowded. As a result, there's more driving and more congestion. BRT systems, which have been operating around the world for decades, can address these problems.

One option for Geary is for a center lane BRT, similar to the boarding islands used on the N-Judah. Other options are possible. With BRT, seniors will finally be able to board buses that pull right up to the curb at boarding islands. Pedestrian safety, efficiency and the landscaping of the street will improve dramatically.

At a cost of $150 to $200 million, 15 times less than a subway, we can definitely afford BRT. The Prop. K transportation sales tax plan, approved overwhelmingly by San Francisco voters in 2003, calls for a citywide BRT network, including lines on Geary Boulevard and Van Ness and Potrero avenues. It also provides at least $50 million for Geary (for a light rail project),which could be matched by larger amounts of federal funds because the Geary BRT will be a prime candidate for funding because of its expected high ridership and cost effectiveness.

BRT will minimize construction impacts. The stations rise only six inches above the pavement, like a sidewalk. Creating dedicated bus lanes is more like resurfacing a street than like building a rail line. Unlike light rail, BRT can be built a few blocks at a time, maintaining traffic flow and minimizing disruptions to parking and commercial activity. Construction duration is expressed in months, not years.

Predictions of massive parking loss are inaccurate. Some rearranging of parking spaces will occur under any alternative - whether replacement spaces are provided right on the corridor or by re-striping side streets. Parking changes depend on the alternative chosen. For example, having all buses operate in the center may actually increase parking by allowing conversion of current curbside bus stops into parking spaces. We will discuss initial indications of parking impacts for each alternative at the December workshops, as part of the Alternatives Definition stage.

More detailed estimates will be available at the Evaluation stage, in spring 2006, when we'll address the costs and benefits of each alternative and recommend one for implementation at the completion of the study, in summer 2006. Near-term improvements could happen by 2007 and full BRT within five years.

Mayor Gavin Newsom and the TA board are committed to ensuring that all stakeholders have a voice in the planning process and that their concerns are addressed. A board-appointed 20-member CAC, including nine representatives from the Richmond, provides guidance on the study and serves as a bridge to the community. Communities along the corridor need to understand how each alternative would look and function before they can express their preferences. Whatever the choice, it will be an informed decision, made on the basis of facts, supported by a transparent process and in full consultation with the community. Your input will help us design a successful BRT and keep Geary Boulevard vibrant. That is our goal.

Jose Luis Moscovich is the executive director of the SF County Transportation Authority.