Islais Creek Adaptation Strategy Army Corps Flood Study Public Meeting 1

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Islais Creek Adaptation Strategy Army Corps Flood Study Public Meeting 1 Photo: Lyrinda Snyderman PUBLIC MEETING 1 ISLAIS CREEK ADAPTATION STRATEGY ARMY CORPS FLOOD STUDY Thursday March 14, 2019 Bayview Opera House ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 MEETING AGENDA 1 Opening Remarks and Welcome 2 Climate Hazards & Citywide Resilience 3 Army Corps Flood Study 4 Islais Creek Adaptation Strategy 5 Workshop Exercise 6 Next Steps ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 TONIGHT’S OBJECTIVES COMMUNITY MEETING 1 INFORMATION PARTICIPATION DISCUSSION Learn about the Army Engagement exercise to Share outcomes of engagement Corps Flood Study, Islais better understand what exercise and what it means for Creek Adaptation Strategy, is important to Bayview equity, environment, economy, and related resilience community community, City and regional projects and efforts issues, priorities, and opportunities ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 FLOOD HAZARD Increasing flood risks San Francisco faces increasing from sea level rise (SLR) flood risk. Parts of the shoreline currently flood. Up to 3 feet by 2050 Up to 6–10 feet by 2100 ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 EARTHQUAKE HAZARD 72% likelihood San Andreas The likelihood of a Historically of a major & Hayward major earthquake is high quiet period earthquake by Faults are and the consequences are since 1906 significant 2043 highest risk ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 CITYWIDE RESILIENCE EFFORTS ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 PORT RESILIENCE EFFORTS ISLAIS CREEK/ PORT WIDE EMBARCADERO MISSION BAY BAYVIEW Flood Proof USACE/Port USACE/Port USACE/Port Piers Flood Study Flood Study Flood Study Portwide Islais Creek Seawall Program Southern Resilience Waterfront Adaptation Assessment Strategy Adaptive Southern RFI Framework Waterfront Assessment Utilities Projects Project Adaptations ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 PORT RESILIENCE FRAMEWORK Objective: Objective: Objective: Immediately implement highest Identify policies and projects that will Develop visions that can respond to priority disaster response and life result in a Port that is resilient to seismic remaining seismic risk and STRENGTHEN safety projects along the ADAPT and increasing flood risks and that can ENVISION increasing flood risks and have an ELEMENT Embarcadero Seawall ELEMENT respond to changing priorities. Projects ELEMENT ongoing public conversation about will be integrated into city, regional, and the trade-offs of different options. Planning and Implementation private actions, resulting in coordinated Horizon: actions to increase waterfront resilience. Planning and Implementation STRENGTEN 2018 – 2026 ADAPT TO ENVISION Horizon: THE MID- Planning and Implementation THE 2018 – 2100, Vision Element Priorities: Horizon: updated every 10 years SEAWALL Current Seismic & Flood Risk CENTURY 2018 – 2050, Plan updated every five WATERFRONT FOR PUBLIC RISKS years IN 2100 Priorities: SAFETY Geographic Focus: Seismic Risk and Future Flood Risk Embarcadero Seawall Priorities: Seismic Risk and Future Flood Risk Geographic Focus: Entire Port Jurisdiction Geographic Focus: Entire Port Jurisdiction RESILIENCE PROJECTS SCOPE AND SCALE EXAMPLE Asset: 3rd Street Bridge System: Muni Metro Hazard Reach: U.S. Army Corps Flood Study Citywide: SLR and HCR PROJECT RESILIENCE PIER 70 • Mixed use development with 3000 homes, nine acres of parks • Accommodates up to six feet of sea level rise • Generates an estimated $88 million to be used for adaptation Projects are not able to address access, utilities and surrounding assets and services ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 PROJECT RESILIENCE HERON’S HEAD LIVING SHORELINE • Stabilize the southern shoreline of the park against ongoing erosion and subsidence • Enhance biodiversity and ecological function of the site • Enable the wetlands and park to adapt to a moderate amount of sea level rise through approximately 2050 ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 PORT RESILIENCE FRAMEWORK RESILIENCE EFFORTS AT ISLAIS CREEK Army Corps Flood Southern Waterfront Islais Creek Study Assessment Adaptation Strategy Focus: Flood Risk, Protecting assets in the Federal Interest and Focus: All hazards, broad Focus: Reliable Transportation Identifying local priorities, resilience (Equity, Systems, Social Equity Potential to qualify for Federal Environment, Economy) Construction $ Implementation: Short, Medium Implementation: Short, Medium and Long-Term Implementation: Short, Medium and Long-Term and Long-Term ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 ARMY CORPS FLOOD STUDY PLANNING & ENGAGEMENT 2018 2019 2020 Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter/Spring Introduction Goals, Priorities, Evaluating the and Community Visions and Alternatives Input Tradeoffs 1 2 3 4 5 Refinement of the * Note: Each USACE/Port Flood Study Hazards and meeting to happen in both the Mission Creek and Islais Creek locations Assessing Alternatives Introduction and Analyze Risk and Evaluate and Compare Scoping Consequence Alternatives Existing Conditions Identify, Discuss and Select Preferred & Hazard Scenarios Analyze Alternatives Alternative NEPA/CEQA and Permit Scoping ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 FLOOD STUDY PUBLIC ENGAGMENT Public engagement and participation is how we get to a plan and a project. Opportunities for participation will include • FLOOD RISK REDUCTION for community meetings held in adjacent community assets, resources, neighborhoods, online engagement, and and critical infrastructure. other activities throughout the study • INVESTMENT in flood risk period. management and approaches Communities, businesses, and interested that also achieve benefits for parties will be asked to help identify top community, environment, and priorities for: economy. ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 FLOOD STUDY AREA Approximately 7½ miles of waterfront between Aquatic Park (to the North) and Heron’s Head Park (to the South)* Aquatic Park • Area based on preliminary assessment of coastal flood risk • Significant cultural, historic and maritime assets • Critical public infrastructure, including local and regional Preliminary estimate of value transit (above ground, of structures and contents in below ground, and ferries) floodplain: $22B and wastewater treatment • Dense residential, commercial, and industrial land use Heron’s Head Park Other areas outside of study area should be a focus of future studies ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 FLOOD STUDY OVERVIEW Approximately three to five year study (2018-2022) of flood risk along the San Francisco Bay shoreline which includes • Army Corps experience and expertise • Funding for the assessment of flood risk and the identification of a preferred alternative that becomes eligible for Federal funding • A requirement to identify risks to Federal interest, which drives the project that can be funded ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 FLOOD STUDY GOALS Understand and develop solutions to lower flood risk Identify community, stakeholder and resource agency priorities/issues Flood management alternatives designed to: • Meaningfully reduce current and future flood risks to 2080 • Consider future conditions to 2130 • Identify critical assets and services in the Federal interest • Identify local priorities ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 UNDERSTANDING THE HAZARDS AT ISLAIS EARTHQUAKE RISK Evaluate existing information to develop an understanding of the seismic risk, including ground shaking and liquefaction in the project area. FLOOD RISK Evaluate extent of coastal flood hazard to estimate damage to exposed The Islais Creek area was once open assets. bay and marshlands that were filled into create lands for industrial functions. ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 UNDERSTANDING ASSETS & SERVICES AT ISLAIS The Port and the Army Corps are collecting information on existing assets with City agencies, partners and community stakeholders. INFRASTRUCTURE URBAN AND CULTURAL PARKS AND ECOSYSTEMS MARITIME DISASTER RESPONSE ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 FLOOD STUDY FUNDING COST OF STUDY DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION Locally preferred plan OF FEDERAL PLAN can be selected, City/Port pays extra cost Port SF Local 50% 35% Army Corps Federal 50% 65% Recommendations for funding the selected alternative will be made in the final Army Corps recommendation to Congress in 2022 or later. ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 FLOOD STUDY OUTCOMES • A refined understanding • Education and outreach of the hazards • Identification of risk • A refined understanding reduction alternatives of the assets and services at risk and the • Selection of a preferred consequences of alternative disruption and damage • Federal expertise and • Engagement with possible funding for that stakeholders to define preferred alternative goals, priorities and issues ISLAIS CREEK BAYVIEW COMMUNITY WATERFRONT RESILIENCE THURSDAY MARCH 14 2019 FLOOD STUDY PUBLIC ENGAGMENT MEETING 1 MEETING 2 MEETING 3 Let’s build this Shape
Recommended publications
  • Bay Fill in San Francisco: a History of Change
    SDMS DOCID# 1137835 BAY FILL IN SAN FRANCISCO: A HISTORY OF CHANGE A thesis submitted to the faculty of California State University, San Francisco in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Master of Arts By Gerald Robert Dow Department of Geography July 1973 Permission is granted for the material in this thesis to be reproduced in part or whole for the purpose of education and/or research. It may not be edited, altered, or otherwise modified, except with the express permission of the author. - ii - - ii - TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Maps . vi INTRODUCTION . .1 CHAPTER I: JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES OF SAN FRANCISCO’S TIDELANDS . .4 Definition of Tidelands . .5 Evolution of Tideland Ownership . .5 Federal Land . .5 State Land . .6 City Land . .6 Sale of State Owned Tidelands . .9 Tideland Grants to Railroads . 12 Settlement of Water Lot Claims . 13 San Francisco Loses Jurisdiction over Its Waterfront . 14 San Francisco Regains Jurisdiction over Its Waterfront . 15 The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission and the Port of San Francisco . 18 CHAPTER II: YERBA BUENA COVE . 22 Introduction . 22 Yerba Buena, the Beginning of San Francisco . 22 Yerba Buena Cove in 1846 . 26 San Francisco’s First Waterfront . 26 Filling of Yerba Buena Cove Begins . 29 The Board of State Harbor Commissioners and the First Seawall . 33 The New Seawall . 37 The Northward Expansion of San Francisco’s Waterfront . 40 North Beach . 41 Fisherman’s Wharf . 43 Aquatic Park . 45 - iii - Pier 45 . 47 Fort Mason . 48 South Beach . 49 The Southward Extension of the Great Seawall .
    [Show full text]
  • February 2019 Port Commission Staff Report on the Seawall Program and Flood Study
    MEMORANDUM February 12, 2019 TO: MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION Hon. Kimberly Brandon, President Hon. Willie Adams, Vice President Hon. Gail Gilman Hon. Victor Makras Hon. Doreen Woo Ho FROM: Elaine Forbes Executive Director SUBJECT: Informational update on the San Francisco Seawall Earthquake Safety and Disaster Prevention Program (Seawall Program) DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: No action – Informational Only EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is an informational update to the Port Commission on the progress of the San Francisco Seawall Earthquake Safety and Disaster Prevention Program (Seawall Program). The last Commission update was on July 10, 2018. Highlights during this period include: • The $425 million Embarcadero Seawall Earthquake Safety General Obligation Bond Measure passed on November 6, 2018 with 82.7% yes vote. • The Port was awarded a $5M grant for the Seawall Program from the California Natural Resources Agency, included in the California 2018-19 Budget Act. • The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Port commenced the San Francisco Waterfront Storm Risk Management Study General Investigation (GI) on September 5, 2018, and successfully completed the first study milestone, Alternatives Milestone Meeting, on December 3, 2018. • USACE and the Port came to a formal decision to suspend work on the USACE CAP 103 Study and devote resources to the larger USACE General Investigation. THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 13A PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO TEL 415 274 0400 TTY 415 274 0587 ADDRESS Pier 1 FAX 415 274 0528 WEB sfport.com San Francisco, CA 94111 • Field work for the geotechnical investigation was completed on time at the end of November and lab work is now under way.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 3-‐1 Historic Resources Evaluation
    Appendix 3-1 Historic Resources Evaluation HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATION SEAWALL LOT 337 & Pier 48 Mixed-Use Development Project San Francisco, California April 11, 2016 Prepared by San Francisco, California Historic Resource Evaluation Seawall Lot 337 & Pier 48 Mixed-Use Project, San Francisco, CA TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 II. Methods ................................................................................................................................... 1 III. Regulatory Framework ....................................................................................................... 3 IV. Property Description ................................................................................................... ….....6 V. Historical Context ....................................................................................................... ….....24 VI. Determination of Eligibility.................................................................................... ……....44 VII. Evaluation of the Project for Compliance with the Standards ............................. 45 VIII. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 58 IX. Bibliography ........................................................................................................................ 59 April 11, 2016 Historic Resource Evaluation Seawall
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3: Environmental Setting and Consequences
    CHAPTER 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES CHAPTER 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES This chapter presents information on the environmental setting in the project area as well as the environmental consequences of the No-Electrification and Electrification Program Alternatives. Environmental issue categories are organized in alphabetical order, consistent with the CEQA checklist presented in Appendix A. The project study area encompasses the geographic area potentially most affected by the project. For most issues involving physical effects this is the project “footprint,” or the area that would be disturbed for or replaced by the new project facilities. This area focuses on the Caltrain corridor from the San Francisco Fourth and King Station in the City and County of San Francisco to the Gilroy Station in downtown Gilroy in Santa Clara County and also includes the various locations proposed for traction power facilities and power connections. Air quality effects may be felt over a wider area. 3.1 AESTHETICS 3.1.1 VISUAL OR AESTHETIC SETTING The visual or aesthetic environment in the Caltrain corridor is described to establish the baseline against which to compare changes resulting from construction of project facilities and the demolition or alteration of existing structures. This discussion focuses on representative locations along the railroad corridor, including existing stations (both modern and historic), tunnel portals, railroad overpasses, locations of the proposed traction power facilities and other areas where the Electrification Program would physically change above-ground features, affecting the visual appearance of the area and views enjoyed by area residents and users. For purposes of this analysis, sensitive visual receptors are defined as corridor residents and business occupants, recreational users of parks and preserved natural areas, and students of schools in the vicinity of the proposed project.
    [Show full text]
  • DISTRICT RECORD Trinomial
    State of California & The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # DISTRICT RECORD Trinomial Page 1 of 32 *NRHP Status Code *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) Potrero Point Historic District D1. Historic Name Potrero Point/Lower Potrero D2. Common Name: Central Waterfront *D3. Detailed Description (Discuss coherence of the district, its setting, visual characteristics, and minor features. List all elements of district.): The Potrero Point Historic District (also referred to as the Central Waterfront) is located in the Potrero Hill district of San Francisco on the western side of San Francisco Bay in the City of San Francisco between Mission Creek on the north and Islais Creek to the south. The approximately 500-acre area is more precisely described as a roughly rectangular district bounded by Sixteenth Street to the north, San Francisco Bay to the east, Islais Creek to the south, and U.S. Interstate 280 to the west. The area measures approximately 1.3 miles from north to south, and approximately 0.6 miles wide from east to west. (See Continuation Sheet, Pg. 2) *D4. Boundary Description (Describe limits of district and attach map showing boundary and district elements.): The Potrero Point (Central Waterfront) area is enclosed within a rectangle formed by the following streets and natural features: Beginning at the northwest corner of Pennsylvania and Sixteenth streets, the northern boundary of the area extends east along Sixteenth Street into San Francisco Bay. The boundary turns ninety degrees and heads south through the bay encompassing the entirety of Piers 70 and 80. At Islais Creek Channel, the boundary makes a ninety degree turn and heads west along the southern shore of the channel.
    [Show full text]
  • Resilience San Francisco
    PROJECT TIMELINES 2018 2019 2020 2021 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1. Islais Creek Adaptation Strategy 2. Army Corps Flood Study 3. Southern Waterfront Assessment 5. Seawall Program 4. San Francisco Sea Level Rise Action Plan 6. BART SLR Vulnerabilty Assessment 7. ConnectSF 8. Bayview Community-Based Transportation Plan 9. District 10 Mobility Study Resiliency projects that are a key component 10. Southeast Muni Expansion of the Islais Creek Adaptation Strategy MARIN COUNTY ALCATRAZ Adaptation to GOLDEN GATE San Francisco TREASURE rising sea level BRIDGE ISLAND Bay Fisherman’s Wharf Crissy Field BAY ST Resilience San Francisco COLUMBUS AVE 101 80 LOMBARD ST A changing climate will have profound impacts on San Francisco’s communities PRESIDIO 0 Miles 1 BROADWAY and its shoreline. To minimize climate impacts, we need to simultaneously reduce 1 6 5 BAY BRIDGE greenhouse gas emissions while preparing for future climate impacts such as sea CALIFORNIA ST LINCOLN BLVD I Sustainable level rise and coastal flooding. VAN NESS AVE ARGUELLO BLVD and resilient GEARY BLVD 4TH ST 25TH AVE transportation Over the next several decades, sea level rise and coastal flood events are projected MARKET ST MASONIC AVE to increase in frequency and extent. Addressing this climate risk requires urgent China Basin action now and will ultimately help to build a more resilient city. FELL ST STANYAN ST FULTON ST OAK ST 4 2 Sea level rise poses a threat to San Francisco’s neighborhoods and communities, GOLDEN GATE PARK CASTRO ST critical shoreline infrastructure and the transportation system.
    [Show full text]
  • Islais Creek Reinterpreted: an Exploration of Restoration Designs in the Urbanized Context of San Francisco
    UC Berkeley Restoration of Rivers and Streams (LA 227) Title Islais Creek reinterpreted: An exploration of restoration designs in the urbanized context of San Francisco Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/679901bn Author Griffith, Lucas A Publication Date 2006-12-17 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California I S L A I S C R E E K R E I N T E R P R E T E D An Exploration of Restoration Design in the Urbanized Context of San Francisco By Lucas A. Griffith December 17, 2006 Fall 2006 LA 227 Restoration of Rivers and Streams ISLAIS CREEK REINTERPRETED An Exploration of Restoration Design in the Urbanized Context of San Francisco Abstract In my initial inquiry into the environmental history of the Alemany Farmers’ Market in San Francisco, I learnt of a creek – Islais Creek, the largest watershed in the city. I measured and analyzed an 1869 U.S. Coast Survey to establish a representative baseline for the historical character of Islais Creek. Historically water accumulated on the shallow soils of the San Bruno Mountains and flowed into Islais Creek I used additional maps and surveys from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to document the cultural settlement of the watershed and further discuss land use impacts on the creek. For the past one-hundred and fifty years urban expansion and development have severely altered the original character of the creek and disallowed natural fluvial dynamics to persist. Currently the creek serves as the infrastructural backbone to a combined sewer system located underground in concrete pipes and culverts.
    [Show full text]
  • Message from the Director
    • R EPORT• TO• THE• C OMMUNITY•••••F ISCAL• Y EARS• 2002• & • 2003• MESSAGE FROM THE DIRECTOR The Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is proud to present this report detailing the District’s many activities for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003. We want you, the community we serve, to know about all the work we do District to protect Alameda County from flooding and the efforts • taken to protect and enhance our natural resources. Preparing and distributing a report like this allows us to reach people in the most meaningful way—by sharing the stories and images of design, construction, and maintenance projects completed in each flood control zone. In addition, a summary of District responsibilities and finances is provided for public review. Conservation Donald J. LaBelle, Director • D ISTRICT GOALS ater When the Flood Control District was established in 1949, its first concern was to reduce regional W flooding. Early in the District’s history, engineers and planners realized that • flood control infrastructure could, in some instances, provide recreation opportunities. Today, Alameda Creek Trail, Lake Elizabeth, and other trails, and parks, and lakes are a testament to the District’s forethought. • The District has continued to maintain and repair infrastructure built as long as 50 years ago while responding to flood control needs created by new development throughout the area. Over the last 20 years, the District has turned even greater attention to environmental concerns. This includes repairing local creeks Control • damaged by stormwater flows, returning channelized waterways to more natural settings, adding parks and learning centers in watershed areas, working to prevent stormwater pollution, and educating the public about individual and collective roles we can all take to create a healthier environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Sewer System Improvement Program Bayside Drainage Basin Urban Watershed Characterization Final Draft Technical Memorandum
    SEWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BAYSIDE DRAINAGE BASIN URBAN WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION FINAL DRAFT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Prepared for: San Francisco Public Utilities Commission SSIP PMC Program Team 525 Golden Gate Avenue, 9th Floor San Francisco, California 94102 Prepared by: Urban Watershed Assessment Team 525 Golden Gate Avenue, 9th Floor San Francisco, California 94103 July 2013 GREY. GREEN. CLEAN. Form No. PI12-06 This page intentionally left blank Form No. PI12-06 GREY. GREEN. CLEAN. PROGRAM QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW: Reviewers listed in the table below have completed an internal quality review check and approval process that is consistent with procedures and directives previously identified by the PMC. The table below outlines the corresponding reviewers for each deliveerable document. Table 1: Identification of Technical and Administrative Reviewers Deliverable Bayside Drainage Basin Technical Administrative PCTA Reviewer Urban Watershed Characterization Reviewer Reviewer Subtask Subtask Complete Complete Complete FINAL DRAFT Karen Kubick x Kara Bakker x Dan Donahue x Rosey Jencks Scott Lowry John Roddy David Wood Don Walker Geoff Grant FINAL DRAFT Karen Kubick x Kara Bakker x Dan Donahue x Manfred Wong Lewis Harrison John Roddy Rosey Jencks Rachel Kraai Raphael Garcia Marty Dorward David Wood Quality Assurance and Quality Control Review Complete: David M. Wood - Task Order Manager SSIP PMC Page | iii SEWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Form No. PI12-06 GREY. GREEN. CLEAN. This page intentionally left blank SSIP PMC Page | v SEWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BAYSIDE DRAINAGE BASIN URBAN WATERSHED TABLE OF CONTENTS CHARACTERIZATION TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Bayside Drainage Basin Characterization Summary .................................................. 1-1 1.1 Purpose and Background ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Final Bayview Hunters Point Context Statement
    BAYVIEW-HUNTERS POINT AREA B SURVEY TOWN CENTER ACTIVITY NODE SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA FINAL PREPARED BY KELLEY & VERPLANCK FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY February 11, 2010 KELLEY & VERPLANCK HISTORICAL RESOURCES CONSULTING 2912 DIAMOND STREET #330, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94131 415.337.5824 // WWW.KVPCONSULTING.COM Historic Context Statement Bayview-Hunters Point: Area B Survey San Francisco, California TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 1 A. PURPOSE ......................................................................................................................... 3 B. DEFINITION OF GEOGRAPHICAL AREA ................................................................................... 4 C. IDENTIFICATION OF HISTORIC CONTEXTS AND PERIODS OF SIGNIFICANCE................................... 6 II. METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................... 11 III. IDENTIFICATION OF EXISTING HISTORIC STATUS .................................................... 14 A. HERE TODAY .................................................................................................................. 14 B. 1976 CITYWIDE ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ........................................................................... 14 C. SAN FRANCISCO ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE ....................................................................... 15 D. ARTICLE 10 OF THE SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING CODE
    [Show full text]
  • Showplace Square, Potrero Hill and Central Waterfront
    materials from warehouses and manufacturing facilities to and Showplace Square, from the piers. However, after World War II and as port facilities changed worldwide, the Port of San Francisco became Potrero Hill and less competitive and maritime activity declined substantially. Central Waterfront Since the renovation of the warehouses to provide furniture showroom space, Showplace Square has provided space for a Showplace Square, Potrero Hill and the Central Waterfront are well-defined cluster of furniture makers, designers and contrac- grouped into one district for the purpose of this report. However, tors. The current land use in the area remains predominantly each area is a distinct neighborhood characterized by very PDR. (Figure 6.3.5) different uses and development pressures. Each neighborhood has a distinct scale, population and types of business. Addition- Until the 1970s, Jackson Square, a historic district just north of ally, the neighborhoods are going through separate planning the downtown, was the primary location for the City's furniture processes at this time. Central Waterfront is currently in the showrooms. Many of these businesses were housed in historic Better Neighborhoods 2002 planning process. It is being consid- structures with small footprints and limited net floor area. As the ered with Showplace Square and Potrero Hill in this report in Jackson Square commercial vacancy rates dropped and rents order to provide a comprehensive picture of the entire Commu- nity Plan Area. The South of Market and Mission Bay bound these neighbor- L A 0 N 7 T G H T O hoods on the North and Northeast, San Francisco Bay bounds N N A them on the East, Islais Creek and the Bayshore bound them on N 0 N 8 A T R H B the South and the Mission District bounds them on the West.
    [Show full text]
  • The Emergence of Mission Bay
    CONTEXT 02 Context 02 CONTEXT Seawall Lot & Pier 48 occupy an important and highly visible corner of San Francisco’s waterfront. The development plan for this site must respect its context as a waterfront property, a part of the Mission Bay community, and a neighbor of the ballpark. Our proposed plan for Mission Rock is designed to accomplish these necessary goals. 26 MISSION ROCK Context 27 28 MISSION ROCK A HISTORY OF SUCCESS WORKING TOGETHER Complicated projects along the waterfront take time and require dedication and teamwork. Our team has worked effectively in partnership with the Port of San Francisco before, achieving great success together and making lasting positive contributions to our City. The ballpark is a good example. In 1995, the Giants were a financially struggling baseball franchise, playing in one of the worst sports facilities in the country. In March of 1996, however, the voters of San Francisco overwhelmingly approved the idea of constructing a new ballpark at China Basin. The vote, however, was only the beginning of the journey. Before any construction could begin, the Giants and the Port had to conduct a comprehensive environmental assessment of the project, assemble different parcels of land, negotiate a complicated real estate transaction, and gain local, regional and state regulatory approvals. Together, the Giants and the Port successfully and efficiently navigated the complicated process required of waterfront development projects. As the project approached final approval, proceeded through construction and opened with celebration, it became more and more popular. One of the hallmarks of our success was involving local residents, businesses and stakeholders in the process, giving them a seat at the table and a voice in the development and operation of the ballpark.
    [Show full text]