By Stephanie Lim
Decades after pulling the plug on the original light rail running through Third Street in the Bayview, construction workers are once again kicking up dust in the present-day, version of the Third Street Light Rail Project. After almost 13 years of bureaucratic funding and feasibility studies, construction finally began in the spring of this year, ushering in a new set of conflict between city planners and local residents.
"It'll accelerate the economic development in the area," said Dennis Tsai, the project manager overseeing construction. In a community plagued with rising unemployment and high pollution, Tsai says that the light rail will make for a quieter, street with less vehicle emissions, increased consumer traffic, and a more attractive commercial avenue in a much-overlooked neighborhood. "However," he continued, "Many residents fear that the urbanization will drive them out with higher land values."
Small business owners are especially worried about competing with the construction, which will be on-going through 2005.
"We don't understand the whole Third Street Light Rail," said Vince Lorenzo, co-owner of a hardware store on Third Street. Lorenzo and his business partner, Ed Mazzei, worry that the project will drive them out of business before they can reap its benefits. The two have noticed people buying up property on the strip but holding up actually developing the properties until construction ends. "We can't tell if they're buying to sell or buying to hold, "Lorenzo said, speculating that the properties will be sold off once the land value goes up. Until then, the empty storefronts, coupled with the' construction, are not encouraging more traffic through the area.
"If we can survive the construction, it'll be all right," he said.
Lorenzo gritted his teeth silently when preliminary utility work began last spring. Although his store - like most others on the same street - maintained regular hours of operation, construction obstacles reduced business significantly.
"We really bank on the fact that people don't want to be waiting at Home Depot," said Lorenzo. "They'd put up 'No Parking or Stopping At Any Time' signs from the first to the thirtieth of the month, even when they'd wouldn't be working right in front of the store," he said. "I'd say, 'Can't you guys move these signs at least when you're up the street?' They'd say, 'People can park there; they won't get ticketed.' But people don't know that. The signs say 'No Parking.' "
Tsai says that parking has always been a problem on the Third Street corridor. "The merchants have always complained that there's insufficient parking, even before construction" he said. Workers are in the process of adding temporary parking on cross streets and converting parallel spots into perpendicular spots to accommodate more vehicles.
A few doors north, at Pittman's BBQ #2, Henry Coleman said that the constant construction right at the sidewalks has made it hard for customers to get in the door, and that many won't stop to grab takeout because the utility trucks are parked in front.
"There's no consideration for the businesses here," Coleman said. "In other areas there I would've been more consideration."
Gathered around construction sites with blue trucks, PG&E crews have been attracting the brunt of neighborhood hostility. Contracted by the city of San Francisco and the California Pubic Utilities Commission to do most of the underground utility work, PG&E workers have been a fixture along Third Street since early spring 2002, relocating gas lines and moving above-ground utility cables underground to make room for the system of electric wires that will run overhead.
AT&T and Pacific Bell are doing smaller fractions of the work as well. "Certainly PG&E is the most visible presence," said PG&E spokesman Paul Moreno. "We held onto our promise that there would be full pedestrian access, including handicapped access, to businesses."
As for the parking, the city mandated that because Third Street is such a busy thoroughfare, two lanes of traffic in either direction must be kept open. To do this, they must sometimes use parking lanes as traffic lanes.
Lorenzo says that a few weeks of construction wouldn't be to bad but the construction has been "never-ending" since the spring, alternating between PG&E, the phone companies, and the water department. "They're not in sync," he said. "They rip up the sidewalk, fill it, then rip it up again."
Tsai maintains this is not true, that once a part of the sidewalk is filled up, the city does not allow for re-opening for another five years to bar against unnecessary construction and ensure a timely closure. In the Bayview, construction crews get around this mandate by leaving trenches open and marked with orange-and-white signs for weeks or even months at a time.
Kenneth DeMello estimates that during months of especially heavy construction, business at his furniture store just north of the hardware store dropped as much as 80 percent from $7,500 a month to just $1,500. DeMello blames the bulk of it on construction headed up by PG&E inches away from his front door.
"If PG&E was in and out in a month's time it wouldn't be such a big deal, but it's been almost a year. With business as bad as it is, every sale counts."
Although Moreno says that PG&E and Muni have been circulating leaflets to update residents on construction, DeMello, who lives behind the store with his son, said there was no forewarning to when the construction would begin. They were first alerted to the construction when they woke up to the sounds of crews digging up the sidewalk in the spring. For a month, DeMello said, dust filled the air and coated the walls and merchandise of his business, making it difficult for him to breathe.
"It really killed our business," said DeMello. "They had these big jackhammers going for eight hours a day." Last month, the construction crews hit a sewer main, creating a nasty stink that lingered in his home and store. DeMello filed a claim against PG&E to hold them responsible for the prolonged obstruction of his business but the claim was denied.
The claim process infuriated him. Although a response is due within 30 days, DeMello's claim went unanswered for almost six months. DeMello feels that PG&E workers misled him into thinking that he would be compensated for his losses. While they never told him to close down his business, he said that there were a few times when "They'd tell me that I wouldn't be able to open that day, so they'd give me a form and tell me to fill it out. Now why do they give you these things, make you think you're going to get something back, and then just leave you out there?"
According the PG&E website, between 10,000-15,000 claims' are filed with the company annually. "We do get a lot of claims and we treat each claim individually," Moreno said. "We do pay plenty of claims. When there's no fault with us, we can't expect our ratepayers to pay these claims."
Tsai mentioned that business-owners along the N-Judah line filed similar claims against the city, but the city has a policy of reimbursing only if there is an assured loss. "They do not reimburse for public projects," Tsai said.
One day DeMello said he was so angry that he almost got into a physical fight with a PG&E worker after asking him to move his truck. He is angry about all the damages his property will continue to suffer but feels powerless to stop it. "It's like David and Goliath," he said. "You've got no chance with PG&E...you'd rather bet with the mafia."
PG&E community consultant Jim Martin says PG&E responds to these claims about unfair treatment as deftly as possible, adding that the workers digging the trenches for the Third Street Light Rail Project are doing their best to work around the existing businesses.
"We're the company that people love to hate," Martin said. "Too many of the good things [that the company does] are done in the dark...we are very aware of the impact we have on the community..." Martin went on to recall a complaint that they'd received over the summer concerning the potholes left in the streets in the Bayview. "They said, 'We don't think you're doing as good a job as you do in other communities when it comes to patching up the street. We think that you don't care because we've got old cars anyway over here.' That was something that PG&E needed to hear."
Upon investigation, "We did find some areas that hadn't been done as well, but immediately we sent crews out to take care of them."
The merchants on Third Street have echoed these concerns that PG&E and other corporations hired by the city of San Francisco can get away with more disruptive treatment in low-income neighborhoods. Ross Mirkarimi, who led this fall's campaign for public power, Prop D, would like to see a PG&E-free San Francisco. He calls the company an "irresponsible corporate citizen" that has "a total disregard for San Francisco."
Part of an ambitious four-phase project that will continue over the next 25 years, the Third Street Light Rail composes two of the phases. This first phase will connect the present Muni terminal at Fourth and King streets with the Bayshore Caltrain Station in Visitacion Valley at an estimated cost of$557.9 million. The $763.9 million second phase plans for a new Central Subway line running up through Chinatown. The last two phases consist of a streetcar running up Geary Street and a subway line connecting Chinatown to Fisherman's Wharf.
"If they really wanted to develop the neighborhood, they'd subsidize the businesses that are already here," said DeMello, bringing up a successful program once implemented by the Boston Redevelopment Association. Members of the San Francisco Redevelopment Association declined to comment.
"[The merchants] were well aware of the impacts, that there were going to be times of inconveniences," Moreno said. "To make an omelette, you've got to crack a few eggs."