Dick Spotswood: Some Marin transportation myths need to be busted
Everyday myths are usually a harmless part of life. While often untrue, they add a colorful dimension when discussing local affairs.
One prevalent myth is why BART, the Bay Area Rapid Transit District commuter train service, doesn’t include Marin County. That concept, once seriously considered, is the topic of a talk I’ll be giving this summer at the Mill Valley Historical Society.
The hard-to-kill myth is that Marinites pulled the plug on BART, fearing that high speed electric commuter trains would propel unwanted growth. The truth is that Marin voters and their elected leaders very much wanted to have BART carry North Bay commuters to San Francisco jobs.
Three construction aspects made the project prohibitively expensive: building a second deck on the Golden Gate Bridge for trains; the need for an electric railway up the steep Waldo Grade from Marin City; and creating underground tracks through San Francisco’s Richmond District to the downtown connection with BART’s mainline.
It would have cost far more than could be funded by Marin sales tax dollars. Marin was forced out of BART kicking and screaming.
Another myth that I’ve heard is that a substantial number of North Bay auto commuters travel to and from downtown San Francisco by traversing the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge to Interstate 80 and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. From Larkspur’s Ferry Terminal to Montgomery Street in the city’s Financial District is 16 miles via the Golden Gate Bridge versus 26 miles by Interstate 580 and the Bay Bridge. Try it yourself during peak periods to see how poorly it works absent an accident on the Golden Gate.
The Transportation Authority of Marin’s study on origins and destinations adopted in 2018 looked at pass-through traffic in the county and the associated origin and destinations of those trips. The study notes that “2% of total trips on I-580 at the Contra Costa/Marin County Line are traveling from San Francisco, San Mateo, or Santa Clara via the East Bay during the PM Peak Period (3 PM to 7 PM).” In my book, a number that low is a myth buster.
***
In years past, those with a passion for history along with an interest in the law enjoyed the proceedings of the San Francisco Court of Historic Review and Appeal. For decades, its mock retrials were convened in a city hall courtroom with a retired San Francisco Superior Court judge presiding to retry “questions of historical curiosity.”
Marin is reviving the tradition. On Monday, the Court of Historic Review will be back in session at the Marin County Civic Center. Retired Marin Superior Court Judge Lynn O’Malley Taylor will preside.
The mock retrial is, “In Re the Estate of Bruno Richard Hauptmann Order to Show Cause Hearing is so-called ‘Case of the (20th) Century.’” It involves the kidnaping and murder of the 20-month-old son of Charles and Anne Morrow Lindbergh.
The mock retrial is sponsored by the Criminal Law & Justice Center at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law.
Documents explain that, on Feb. 13, 1935, “defendant Bruno Richard Hauptmann was convicted and sentenced to die for the felony/murder of Charles Lindbergh Jr. Hauptmann proclaimed his innocence even as he was walked to the electric chair on April 3, 1936.”
The Lindbergh trial was a national press sensation rivaling O.J. Simpson’s murder trial. Even after the jury’s unanimous verdict, some contended that Hauptmann was innocent.
The public is invited to attend. Taylor’s opening gavel will come down at 3 p.m. at Marin’s Civic Center in the courtroom of Judge Sheila Lichtblau, Room H. The mock trial concludes at 5 p.m.
Playing the roles of prosecuting and defense attorney are lawyers from the Marin and San Francisco District Attorney’s Office and the Marin Public Defender’s Office. Local lawyers are involved, including Tiburon’s Noah Griffin, one of the mock retrial’s organizers.
Columnist Dick Spotswood of Mill Valley writes on local issues Sundays and Wednesdays. Email him at spotswood@comcast.net.