LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1-1:  POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS 2000 AND 2030 1-6

TABLE 1-2:  COMPARISON OF 2000 AND 2030 DAILY PERSON TRIPS 1-8

TABLE 1-3  GOALS AND OBJECTIVES SUMMARY 1-13

TABLE 2-1:  ALternative 2 - Enhanced eis/eir alignment STATION LOCATIONS 2-21

TABLE 2-2:  ANNUAL OPERATING STATISTICS ALTERNATIVE 2 -  enhanced EIS/EIR Alignment 2-23

TABLE 2-3:  CENTRAL SUBWAY fourth/STOCKTON alignment option A STATIONS 2-33

TABLE 2-4:  ANNUAL OPERATING STATISTICS ALTERNATIVE 3 –fourth/stockton Alignment option a  2-35

TABLE 2-5:  CENTRAL SUBWAY fourth/stockton alignment option B STATION LOCATIONS 2-47

TABLE 2-6:  ANNUAL OPERATING STATISTICS FOR ALTERNATIVE 3 – fourth/stockton Alignment option B  2-48

TABLE 2-7:  CAPITAL COST SUMMARY (in $Millions) 2-50

TABLE 2-8:  OPEARATING AND MAINTENANCE COST SUMMARY (millions $ / year of operating expenses)  2-51

Table 2-9:  Agency approvals 2-64

table 3-1:  2007 muni Equipment demand by Mode 3-2

TABLE 3-2:  GUIDE TO FREQUENCY OF SERVICE (Average Time in Minutes) 3-3

TABLE 3-3:  existing WEEKDAY TRAFFIC VOLUMES IN THE CORRIDOR 3-21

TABLE 3-4:  existing INTERSECTIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE CONDITIONS 3-22

TABLE 3-5:  EXISTING TRAFFIC TRAVEL SPEEDS 3-23

TABLE 3-6:  EXISTING on-street PARKING CONDITIONS IN CORRIDOR 3-25

TABLE 3-7:  EXISTING PEDESTRIAN LEVEL OF SERVICE AT PROPOSED  STATION entrances  3-30

TABLE 3-8:  ESTIMATED WEEKDAY TRANSIT RIDERSHIP EXISTING AND  2030 CONDITIONS  3-37

TABLE 3-9:  ESTIMATED WEEKDAY RIDERSHIP BY CENTRAL SUBWAY STATION 2030 CONDITIONS 2030 ESTIMATED P.M. PEAK PERIOD RIDERSHIP 3-39

TABLE 3-11:  IN-VEHICLE TRAVEL TIMES FOR SELECTED TRANSIT TRIPS existing  and 2030 conditions  3-39

TABLE 3-12:  PROJECTED 2030 WEEKDAY TRAFFIC INCREASES under the  NO PROJECT/TSM ALTERNATIVE 3-46

TABLE 3-13:  2030 a.m. INTERSECTION los / average seconds of delay 3-47

TABLE 3-14:  2030 p.m. INTERSECTION LOS 3-48

TABLE 3-15:  TRAFFIC P.M. PEAK PERIOD TRAVEL SPEED COMPARISON 3-49

TABLE 3-16:  2030 PARKING CONDITIONS IN CORRIDOR 3-60

TABLE 3-17:  EXISTING AND PROJECTED PEDESTRIAN LEVEL OF SERVICE AT  PROPOSED STATION ENTRANCES 3-66

TABLE 4-1:  POPULATION, RACE, HISPANIC ORIGIN AND AGE: 2000 4-26

TABLE 4-2:  HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS:  2000 4-26

TABLE 4-3:  RESIDENT EMPLOYMENT CHARACTERISTICS BY SEGMENT:  2000 4-27

TABLE 4-4:  ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS BY SEGMENT:  2000 4-28

TABLE 4-5:  population and race/ethnicity characteristics, 2000 4-32

TABLE 4-6:  Income Characteristics, 2000 4-33

TABLE 4-7:  PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES WITHIN THE CORRIDOR 4-37

Table 4-8:  Known Archaeological Resources within or adjacent  to the APE  4-43

TABLE 4-9:  HISTORIC AND CONSERVATION DISTRICTS IN THE APE BY ALTERNATIVE 4-53

TABLE 4-10:  NATIONAL REGISTER-LISTED OR -ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE  area of potential effect (APE) IN THE SOUTH END HISTORIC DISTRICT  AND THE RINCON POINT/SOUTH BEACH HISTORIC INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE DISTRICT 4-56

TABLE 4-11:  NATIONAL REGISTER-LISTED OR -ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE  APE IN THE proposed SOUTH PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT 4-57

TABLE 4-12:  NATIONAL REGISTER-LISTED OR -ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES WITHIN  THE APE KEARNY-MARKET-MASON-SUTTER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 4-58

TABLE 4-13:  NATIONAL REGISTER-LISTED OR -ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE  APE LOWER NOB HILL APARTMENT HOTEL DISTRICT 4-64

TABLE 4-14:  NATIONAL REGISTER-LISTED OR -ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE APE CHINATOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT 4-66

TABLE 4-15:  NATIONAL REGISTER-LISTED OR -ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE  APE North beach, WASHINGTON SQUARE, AND powell street  HISTORIC DISTRICTS 4-71

TABLE 4-16:  CATEGORY RATED BUILDINGS WITHIN THE PROJECT APE NOT ASSOCIATED  WITH A HISTORIC DISTRICT OR A CONSERVATION DISTRICT 4-73

TABLE 4-17:  SAN FRANCISCO LANDMARKS IN THE study AREA 4-73

TABLE 4-18:  CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL LANDMARKS IN THE study AREA 4-74

TABLE 4-19:  HISTORIC RESOURCES LISTED IN THE CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 4-74

TABLE 4-20:  NATIONAL REGISTER-LISTED HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN THE study AREA 4-75

Table 4-21:  HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES WITHIN THE APE IN ADDITION  TO THOSE EVALUATED IN CORBETT ET AL. (1997) 4-77

TABLE 4-22:  APPROXIMATE SURFACE ELEVATIONS ALONG CENTRAL SUBWAY  ALIGNMENTS 4-86

TABLE 4-23:  MAJOR SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA EARTHQUAKE FAULTS AND  THEIR MAXIMUM MOMENT MAGNITUDE 4-90

TABLE 4-24:  CALIFORNIA AND NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS 4-113

TABLE 4-25:  SAN FRANCISCO AIR POLLUTANT SUMMARY, 2002-2006 4-116

TABLE 4-26:  ESTIMATED 2006 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS IN THE STUDY AREA  (in pounds/day)  4-119

TABLE 4-27:  FTA GUIDELINES FOR IMPACT FROM CONSTRUCTION NOISE 4-124

Table 4-28:  Damage Risk Vibration Criteria 4-127

Table 4-29:  FTA Noise Impact Criteria 4-129

Table 4-30:  Ground-Borne Vibration (GBV) and GROUND-BORNE Noise (GBN)  Impact CriteriA  4-130

Table 4-31:  Interpretation of Detailed Vibration Analysis Criteria 4-132

Table 4-32:  Summary of Noise Monitoring Results 4-136

Table 4-33:  Traffic Counts During Short-Term Measurements 4-136

Table 4-34:  Ambient Vibration Monitoring Results 4-138

Table 4-35:  Vibration Propagation Test Locations 4-138

TABLE 5-1:  CONSTRUCTION and EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS (costs in $millions) 5-7

TABLE 5-2:  ESTIMATED CHANGE IN 2030 REGIONAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION  BETWEEN THE NO PROJECT/TSM ALTERNATIVE AND THE CENTRAL  SUBWAY ALTERNATIVES 5-46

TABLE 5-3:  GENERAL THRESHOLDS of SIGNIFICANCE FOR PROJECT OPERATIONS 5-67

TABLE 5-4:  ESTIMATED 2030 REGIONAL EMISSIONS GENERATED FROM VEHICULAR  TRAFFIC (pounds per day) 5-68

TABLE 5-5:  2030 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR STUDY INTERSECTIONS 5-69

table 5-6:  estimated carbon dioxide emissions for existing conditons (2006)  and 2030 generated by vehicular traffic (pounds per day) 5-73

Table 5-7:  PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS 5-78

Table 5-8:  Project Noise Levels at Building Structures along the AT-GRADE Alignment 5-80

Table 5-9:  SUMMARY OF INTERIOR GROUND VIBRATION ESTIMATES –  ALTERNATIVE 2 5-80

Table 5-10:  Summary of Interior Ground-borne Noise Estimates –  Alternative 2 5-82

Table 5-11:  Operational Mitigation Measures 5-83

Table 5-12:  SUMMARY OF INTERIOR GROUND VIBRATION ESTIMATES –  Alternative 3 5-84

Table 5-13:  Summary of Interior Ground-borne Noise Estimates –  Alternative 3 5-86

Table 6-1  Summary of Guideway Construction Methods 6-9

TABLE 6-2  ACQUISITION AND RELOCATION REQUIREMENTS 6-50

TABLE 6-3  ESTIMATED PEAK HOUR CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS 6-115

Table 6-4  Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment 6-116

Table 7-1:  CEQA Significance Criteria 7-3

TABLE 7-2:  SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 7-9

Table 8-1  CENTRAL SUBWAY CAPITAL COSTS (IN $MILLIONS) 8-5

Table 8-2  CENTRAL SUBWAY Incremental Operating Costs (in YOE$ MillionS) 8-7

Table 8-3  Central Subway Capital Funding Plan (in SMillions) 8-8

Table 8-4  Twenty-Year Capital Plan - State of Good Repair Expenditures  (in YOE $millions)  8-10

Table 8-5  Twenty-Year Capital Plan - State of Good Repair funding  projections (in $millions Year of occurrence) 8-11

Table 8-6  CAPTIAL FUNDING ESTIMATES BASED ON CURRENT FUNDING LEVELS  (in $millions Year of Occurrence) 8-11

TABLE 8-7  2030 Central Subway Operating Revenues (Nominal$) 8-12

TABLE 8-8  MTA 20-Year Financial Plan Including Central Subway  Alternative 3A (YOE $Millions)  8-13

TABLE 9-1  CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING MOBILITY IMPROVEMENTS 9-4

TABLE 9-2  SUMMARY OF MOBILITY IMPROVEMENTS EVALUATION 9-4

TABLE 9-3  CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS 9-6

TABLE 9-4  SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS EVALUATION 9-7

TABLE 9-5  CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING OPERATING EFFICIENCIES 9-9

TABLE 9-6  OPERATING EFFICIENCIES - 2030 9-10

TABLE 9-7  SUMMARY OF OPERATING EFFICIENCIES 9-10

TABLE 9-8  CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING COST EFFECTIVENESS 9-11

TABLE 9-9  SUMMARY OF COST EFFECTIVENESS 9-12

TABLE 9-10  CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE LAND USE AND  FUTURE PATTERNS  9-14

Table 9-11  SUMMARY OF TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE LAND USE AND FUTURE PATTERNS 9-14

TABLE 9-12  CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING OTHER FACTORS 9-16

TABLE 9-13  SUMMARY OF OTHER LOCAL EVALUATION FACTORS 9-16

TABLE 9-14  CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING LOCAL FINANCIAL COMMITMENT 9-18

TABLE 9-15  SUMMARY OF LOCAL FINANCIAL COMMITMENT 9-18

Table 10-1  Permitted Events at Project Area Parks in 2006 10-21

TABLE 10-2  HISTORIC DISTRICTS IN THE APE CROSSED BY ALTERNATIVE  ALIGNMENTS 10-26

Table 10-3  HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES WITHIN THE APE IN  ADDITION TO THOSE EVALUATED IN CORBETT ET AL. (1997) 10-27

Table 10-4  Section 4(f) park Properties 10-28

Table 10-5  Summary of Impacts by Build Alternative 10-43

Table 10-6  Evaluation of Avoidance Alternatives 10-48

TABLE 11-1  SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE  2005 SCOPING PROCESS  11-1

TABLE 11-2  SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE  2006 NOP  PROCESS  11-4

Table 11-3  Community Outreach Presentations & Briefings 11-6