May 29, 2024
Mr. Tumlin:
I live on Taraval between 44th and 45th Avenues. From 2019 to 2022, my neighbors and I were subject to and forced to endure the deafening noise, constant shaking, endless dust, and major disruption caused by the L Taraval Improvement Project.
The NTK crew was on our block the entire time of the stay-at-home order, sometimes digging up the west side of the street, which they did at least eight times, and sometimes the east side, which they did at least 10 times (and I have videos and photos taken over that entire period of time to prove it).
I called MTA several times to complain, only to be directed to an 18-year-old “project manager” who was as ill-informed as I. No one on the NTK crew would discuss this with me (in fact, they would turn and walk away rather abruptly when they saw me). Finally, the laborer who held up the Stop/Slow sign took pity on me, and against the directive of the crew chief, told me the reason they were on our block for so long was because “certain miscalculations were made.” (I can’t help but wonder how much these “miscalculations’ cost the taxpayer.)
As you can imagine, I was less than delighted to see the NTK crew once again on lower Taraval, this time between 45th and 46th, pulling up and replacing tracks (some of which had already been replaced). According to the MTA website, this is the result of a “Requested Action” for additional $4.7 MILLION to “(e)xpand scope of work to include special track work on 46th Avenue and Taraval” which includes “replace(ing) curve, cross-over, and straight rail.”
This begs two questions:
First of all, as this curve is essential to the operation of the full route of the L-Taraval, why was this not included in the original “improvement” plans?
Secondly, if the contractor did not include this in the original plans, then the contractor, as well as MTA, are responsible for this error and should be held accountable. Why are the taxpayers being asked to foot the bill for an additional $4.7 million for what was obviously an oversight/error on the part of both the contractor and MTA?
Please don’t waste your time and my time by singing the praises of the project to me. Instead, I would appreciate a direct answer to these two above-stated questions as soon as possible. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Alyse Ceirante
Ms. Ceirante,
Thank you for reaching out, and for bearing with the impacts of this critical project. Construction is difficult and disruptive, there’s no question about it, and we know it’s especially frustrating to see work return to an area we said was completed.
Though it sounds counterintuitive, the added track work between 45th and 46th is an example of how we have learned from past mistakes to improve our project delivery. In recent years, we’ve taken hard-won lessons to reform how we deliver major projects from top to bottom.
One reform is that we continuously monitor the project scope as circumstances evolve to prevent future delays or cost increases. When the L-Taraval Project was scoped out a decade ago, this special trackwork was not included because at the time it wasn’t considered necessary. Another reform we have made is to regularly inspect our infrastructure throughout construction. This proactive approach allows us to identify potential repairs or upgrades while projects are still underway, minimizing future disruptions.
While performing these routine inspections our engineers determined the rails at Taraval Street and 46th avenues would need to be replaced in the next 3- 5 years. They showed visible wear they didn’t show a decade ago when the project was scoped, and while this this work wasn’t necessary then, it is necessary now.
We could have waited a few years and done this later as a separate project. But that would’ve required another rail shutdown, another construction contract, and a lot more money. We’re doing it now, during Segment B construction, to reduce costs and construction impacts, save taxpayer money, and work more efficiently. It also allows the contractors to use the existing equipment staging areas east of Sunset Blvd – if we did this later, they would also be staging more equipment near 45th and 46th.
I’m sharing this not to say that we’re perfect, but that we’re committed to keep improving. And we are systematically documenting lessons learned from all projects and conducting workshops to share insights to improve our delivery of every project the SFMTA is involved with.
We’ll keep listening, learning, and making changes until we get it right—to be a better partner for our neighbors and small businesses, to be a better SFMTA, and to build a better city and transit system.
Your feedback helps us do that – and I’m grateful for it.
Sincerely,
Jeff Tumlin
Mr. Tumlin,
Thank you so much for your timely response. I really do appreciate it; however, I’m not buying it. Do you really expect me to believe that when this project was “scoped out a decade ago”, it was determined that every single foot of the rail needed to be replaced except that tiny corner at 46th and Taraval? That’s just plain crazy, so I’m afraid I’m going to have to beg a few more questions here:
Look, I’m no mechanical engineer, but even I know curved rails are subject to far more stress than straight ones. It didn’t occur to those doing the “scoping” that, given this fact, these rails might as well be replaced at the same time as everything else? Seriously, doesn’t that make more sense than waiting? I know you want to treat this as a “welp, I guess we learned something” moment, but at what cost?
Additionally, in your own words, the infrastructure was inspected “throughout construction” (emphasis added). I know from painful personal experience that the crew spent a very, very, very long time on that corner (some crazy things happened down there) allowing plenty of time for inspection. So why wasn’t that corner inspected while the crew was still there; or, at the very least, shortly after they left? And if it was inspected at or around that time, why was it not determined then to replace the rails? If these inspections occurred as regularly as you suggest, shouldn’t there be records? What did the inspector say at that time?
Why did the contractor not mention the fact the rails needed replacement while they were there? Surely, they could see this was an oversight on the part of those who planned this project. With all their experience in this area, why did they not take it upon themselves to do everything they could to rectify this glaring error? They owe that to both the city and the taxpayer. They really fell down on the job there (and in many, many, many other places – did you hear about the time they busted a gas line? That was a real blast, almost literally.)
(Just as an aside: the crew was more than two years on my particular block. I saw an inspector only once, and then only to be told everything was hunky-dory (not his words, but you get the drift). Other than that, he dodged all my questions. I have an inquisitive mind, so that did not sit well.)
Lastly, not one single streetcar has been on that part of the track since this project began in 2019. What was it that put so much stress on that corner that it suddenly needed to be replaced? Was it not anticipated that the project would take several years? Was that not factored in when calculating how long the track would last? Again, I’m no mechanical engineer (far from it), but even I know all of this needs to be taken into account when creating a project of this magnitude.
Call me a cynic, but I can’t help but believe that the failure to include this corner in the original plans; the failure of whomever it was doing the inspecting to inspect and recommend in a timely manner; and the decision to bring the crew back now instead of earlier reeks of incompetence (or worse) on the part of both MTA and NTK. Where is the accountability?
Sadly, it is the taxpayer who must bear the brunt of these costly errors. And the cynic in me keeps shaking her head, knowing that the problems are just starting, that is going to get far, far worse once the streetcars start running (I think we are going to be seeing a lot of “welp, I guess we learned something” moments). NTK will continue to line their pockets at the cost of the taxpayers.
And just in general, I wish we, the above-mentioned taxpayers, had more say in all of MTA’s projects. It has been observed by many that MTA holds “open houses” and cursory meetings only to do what it wants no matter how much public input it receives to the contrary. I don’t know of one instance where public opinion was respected. Almost everything MTA does seems to cater to one, and only one, special interest group. This is not an ideal way to run an agency. You seem like a nice guy. Why on earth do you want to alienate so many people?
Thank you again for your response.
Sincerely,
Alyse Ceirante
Categories: From a Reader
Richmond Review/Sunset Beacon 
I have never lived in this part of the city but do see some problems that have affected all MUNI projects. Firstly, community outreach has been a charade for the most part. The MTA outreach teams give the false impression of listening but this is simply acting. Why isn’t the affected community in on the ground floor of planning instead of being greeted with a fait accompli? While many project and MTA managers have advanced degrees from elite universities, you could fool me. The flawed planning has been endured by too many people and we can only wonder if this was taught to these project managers at their elite universities. 45 and 46 aren’t the only areas of flawed planning in the Taraval project; the whole project is flawed. One has difficulty finding parking on this corridor. So many spaces have been eliminated. One must walk a longer distance to the bus stop to the detriment of passengers, notably seniors and the disabled. These improvements have been made on grounds of making the M line run faster, But there has been no net addition of coaches to this line. The twisted logic is that the coaches will run faster with the elimination and consolidation of lines. But, with elimination and consolidation, wouldn’t boarding be more concentrated and longer with this planning? The logic underlying this planning is the saving in cost. But, with the reconstruction of bus stops and the overall labor of the project, aren’t the costs the same as that of having more coaches and more drivers? Now, MTA is hellbent in their pursuit of this flawed planning in the same manner that we conducted the war in Vietnam where we kept doing the wrong thing without considering a different course. MTA has made up its mind and is supported by the Bicycle Coalition, Transit Riders Union and Walk San Francisco, the author of Vision Zero–to date a failure in eliminating passenger deaths. MTA is on a collision course. But the difference between MTA and the Titanic is that the latter sank in more than two hours. MTA keeps sinking slowly to greater depths. Herbert J. WeinerImpaled Stakeholder of MTA
LikeLike
To HW:
I agree with your comments about MTA’s twisted logic. Sometimes I wonder if there’s a MUNI project checklist with an item to just check off that public outreach occurred but no checklist items about handling substantive public comments that need consideration and research for ensuring successful project outcomes.
As you said: when MUNI eliminates stops, one must walk a longer distance to the bus stop to the detriment of passengers, notably seniors and the disabled. In my opinion, the north-south MUNI routes #28 Park Presidio and #29 Sunset should reinstate the every-other-stops that were removed some years ago because one north-south block in western San Francisco is the equivalent length of three west-east blocks in western San Francisco. It’s insincere to say to riders that eliminating the Anza stop, for example, is just bypassing one former stop between Geary and Balboa when the passenger has to now walk the equivalent of three extra blocks (e.g., to Anza) when that wasn’t necessary under the old way.
Because small businesses need support, the traditional Clement MUNI route should be reinstated; why was this bus service for the Clement commercial business district between Arguello and 25th Avenue eliminated some years ago? It’s insincere to say to riders that it’s just one block away from other existing parallel west-east routes when one north-south block in western San Francisco is the equivalent length of three west-east blocks in western San Francisco. The passenger has to now walk the equivalent of three extra blocks (e.g., from Geary) when that wasn’t necessary under the old way. On the western side, the Clement and Irving business districts should get MUNI service. Furthermore, other commercial business districts did not lose MUNI service: Union #45 (Polk–Steiner), Fillmore #22 (Fulton–Jackson), Noreiga #7 (19th Ave–33rd Ave), Taraval #L Funston–36th Ave).
Regarding the completed Central Subway Project: It gets my A+ for all the installed lovely artwork, but it’s a transportation project!! Because the way that the 1000 steps were finally addressed and executed, the transportation side of the project doesn’t get an A in my opinion.
LikeLike
To AC:
Although I don’t use L Taraval, I feel for the neighborhood being in the midst of the construction. Every time we go to the bakery on Taraval, we always wonder when will all the construction ever get finished?!
I have also been surprised in the past by MUNI project scoped out a decade ago. The Richmond Review article titled “Outer Balboa St. project a disaster, neighbors complain” dated APRIL 2, 2014 at
https://richmondsunsetnews.com/2014/04/02/outer-balboa-st-project-a-disaster-neighbors-complain/ talks about the Balboa Streetscape Improvement Project which was concerned about safety along the section of Balboa that needed improvement with traffic-calming measures.
I attended the early 2014 public meeting at the Cabrillo Playground Clubhouse that’s described in the article. I was stunned to hear about the project timeline. I asked why was the project scoped a decade ago (per project spokesman) but we’re only seeing the final drawings now for the work that’s going to be done now? The project spokesman explained that it takes that long to get the project’s funding to arrive from Washington, D.C. The typical reaction from the meeting audience was negative because the neighborhood population had turned over much during the years; today’s preferences and needs would differ from residents of 10 years ago. The article describes various feedback from the meeting audience.
Jan Hom
LikeLike
Wow, Alyse, great initial comment, but especially your comprehensive reply to Tumlin’s attempt to smooth things over and “apologize”. You’re right, the SFMTA IS incompetent, not to mention the City seems to hire subcontractors that are not the best or brightest. We deserve better! Thank you for shedding some much needed light on this sore subject!
LikeLike
Remember when Tumlin lied about the sub-contractors being responsible for sub-standard rail being procured for the MUNI tunnel? He lied and was caught.
Fire every single Breed-appointed liar, they’re all unaccountable and openly corrupt. And they have to be – because she’s got their resignation letters preemptively.
Fire the Breed Grifters!
LikeLike
”Construction for the L Taraval Improvement Project started in 2019. To reduce the impacts on the community, the project was split into two segments A and B.
Segment A started in 2019 and was completed in the summer of 2021, completed on time and on budget. Segment B began in January 2022 and is expected to be completed in the fall of 2024. Once completed, the corridor will boast new transit priority traffic signals, bulbouts to make pedestrian crossing safer, new trees, high visibility crosswalks, safety boarding islands and increased accessibility. All of these changes will make Taraval more inviting for everyone that uses it.
Project Benefits
LikeLike
What kind of comment is THAT? Are you an SFMTA board member, because it sounds like SFMTA Boiler Plate type of comment.
You totally skipped addressing Alyse’s comments about the track replacement that SHOULD have happened during the initial phase but has just started.
And what about the people who drive to businesses on Taraval? Screw them and those businesses that rely on them as customers??
LikeLike
“BetterTaraval” = just another sockpuppet carpet-bagger like “Grow SF” weasels.
The name gives it away before you even read the canned spam.
LikeLike
WoW!! Was an awesome letter Alyse! So clearly and very well articulated. I feel very strongly that we need to get rid of City leaders that approach everything in such a polarizing manner. That includes Breed, Melgar, Tumlin & Ginsburg (RPD). I feel it is possible to improve pedestrian safety & bicycle infrastructure without making driving difficult & frustrating.
LikeLike
I couldn’t agree with the both of you more. The payola must come to an end.
The Willie Brown / Ed Lee / Breed / Nuru / Tumlin / City Family grift must end.
Multi-Billion real estate and tech corporations are now completely emboldened in stealing our government in plain sight, and what’s to stop them if clueless techie transplants “believe” the BS promises all over again, as packaged by those slick “Together SF” “Grow SF” “Milk SF” groups that pretend to be unaffiliated – as we’ve seen the “grassroots” are surface deep and over-watered with dirty dark money.
Fire Breed and everyone who backs her BS “moderate corruption” spin.
Every single one of her hires needs a top to bottom audit and investigation.
No more “non-profit” Super PAC BS. It has to end, we have to change it.
Vote the bums out.
LikeLike
Don’t forget this is how the Great Highway issue is playing out. Incompetence so far and more to be expected. There is no foresight. There is no real planning or procedure. And people still cheer them on and attack those asking for accountability and for it to be done well and properly.
LikeLike
From jagspaints: Alyse has articulated the frustrations most everyone living in or trying to get around the Outer Sunset have been enduring for years. The consequences we suffer from SFMTA’s expensive ongoing unfinished projects are serious and inexcusable. It is devastating to have so many streets and avenues simultaneously and perpetually torn up, to have so many parking spaces removed, and to witness the economic impact it has to our small business owners who are our friends and neighbors. At Taraval and 26th Avenue a hair stylist has seen his clientele steadily decrease because of the construction noise and difficulty driving and parking to the point where he’s now working one day a week instead of 5 or 6. It has gone on nonstop in front of his shop for 2 years. We’re not alone in being fed up with the MTA leadership operating without oversight or accountability to the taxpaying community funding them. To date there are over 1,200 signatures on this petition demanding change.
https://www.change.org/p/sfmta-director-jeff-tumlin-must-resign
LikeLike
After seeing many SF government problems, this shows one: City agencies do not regularly hold contractors accountable to do a good job and bring it in on time. This has a lot to do with the coziness of oversight employees and agency with contractors that they work with frequently and will in the future. If a contract states work, time and penalty, and all city contracts should, then the contractor needs to be held accountable. If contractors are held accountable, then future work will be done better. Falling into this coziness is an inherited problem of the privatization of government. There is public taxpayer money of which no one is guarding because it is not theirs and because contractors are capitalist who want to limit their losses, liability and maximize their profits. This is not a comment of good or bad, it is the nature of the beast.
LikeLike