I rode the T-Third a week or two ago (whichever week was the first one of regular service). It was so slow; I couldn’t believe how long it took to get back on to King Street after passing the Fourth Street Bridge. I read the next day in the paper that the delays were caused by an automatic safety system that would stop the T if the J was at the other platform across the street. The article went on to say that further problems were caused by people running from one platform to the other — across the street — since they had no way to know if the next train would be a T at one platform or a J at the other.

Oh, this is so Muni.

So, first of all, why are there two platforms? One platform is on the T line and the other is basically a one block spur that the J stops at. Why not have all trains stop at the platform which is on the active track? The other platform should have been removed when the T was built to avoid this very issue. It seems like such a simple thing for the transit engineers (Muni does have some, right?) to have thought about.

Secondly, why would the safety device stop trains that are passing through on what is essentially a mainline when there is a train pulled in to the aforementioned one block spur? How about having the parked J trains be “automatically stopped” — which they are anyway — when a T train is making its way through, mid-route?

I rode it again over the weekend. Once a T arrived (25 minutes waiting) it was not bad. It sort of just meanders out to Sunnydale at a moderate pace. It’s interesting to see the areas served. I suspect the next round of redevelopment and gentrification will really heat up from Mission Bay to Cesar Chavez. I’m not sure about the immediate prospects for the more “industrial” areas between Cesar Chavez and the end of the line.

Personally, I’d like to see new Muni rail lines serving denser parts of The City, such as the Geary corridor and the Van Ness/Polk Gulch corridor.