DOCSLIB.ORG

Adapting to Rising Tides (ART) Bay Area Working Group Meeting #7 January 23, 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Adapting to Rising Tides (ART) Bay Area Working Group Meeting #7 January 23, 2019 Adapting to Rising Tides (ART) Bay Area Working Group Meeting #7 January 23, 2019 San Mateo County Center 555 Marshall Street, Redwood City 94063 Meeting Goals: • Share profile sheets for South Bay/Peninsula/San Francisco OLUs • Vet vulnerability and consequence statements for each profile sheet • Introduce Define step • Workshop issue statements for each profile sheet 9:00-9:30 Welcome and Introduction: Presentation (Dana Brechwald) • Meeting objectives and agenda • Updates on relevant projects in the area • Introduce Define Step • Working Group Member Updates: o Jeremy Smith (Stanford University: Sustainable Urban Systems) § The Stanford SURF tool can be used to model annual average loss to homes in flood areas § Working in North Fair Oaks and East Palo Alto on identifying and defining in depth vulnerabilities to then work towards adaptation strategies o Tess Byler (San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority) § SFCJPA has developed strategies to advance sea level rise adaptation • SAFER Bay released in 2016 • SAFER Palo Alto to be released in the next month o Julie Weiss (City of Palo Alto) § City of Palo Alto has developed their sea level rise policy § To be released for public review in February and will go to City Council in April § This policy built out on existing vulnerability assessment that was performed by City Parks § Includes conceptual design for a horizontal levee at end of Embarcadero Road o Marcus Griswold (San Mateo County Office of Sustainability) § The SMC Office of Sustainability has been working to require capital one investment projects to address sea level rise § Currently testing this at Coyote Point with a sea level rise vulnerability assessment plan o Jasneet Sharma (San Mateo County Office of Sustainability) § Climate Ready San Mateo County to launch next Wednesday, January 30th o Heather Dennis (San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission) § In launch phase of East Palo Alto and Dumbarton Bridge Resilience Study SB1 with MTC, Coastal Conservancy, CalTrans, San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority, and BARC to identify adaptation strategies to protect the City of East Palo Alto and the Dumbarton Bridge west approach 1 Adapting to Rising Tides (ART) Bay Area Working Group Meeting #7 January 23, 2019 o Maggie Wenger (City and County of San Francisco) § City-wide vulnerability and consequence assessment to go to City review in March and will be public this Summer § In the process of consultant selection for SB1 project at Islais Creek and the first workshop will be in March SB1 o Michael Barber (Supervisor Pine) § In the process of reforming the San Mateo County Flood District to a Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency agency § Will be one of the first agencies in the state of its kind that is addressing sea level rise and flooding § Planned launch: July 1 o Mary Deschene (San Francisco Bay Wildlife Society) § Organization that partners with the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay Wildlife Refuge § Working to increase access points to the Refuge o Nixon Lam (San Francisco International Airport) § Have completed conceptual design for shoreline protection project § Plan to initiate the environmental review process and CEQA this summer • Questions on Presentation: o None 9:30-9:55 Shared Vulnerabilities, Consequences, and OLU Profile Sheets: Presentation • Review Vulnerability and Consequence Statements • Introduce OLU Profile Sheets and Engagement Exercise • Questions on Presentation: o Question: How and where in this project is critical infrastructure such as Waste Water Treatment Plants considered? § Answer If a critical infrastructure is within the boundaries of topic areas being explored in this project, then they are included as they are as part of our areas of interest. • Question: Are there Waste Water Treatment Plants within Priority Development Areas and Priority Conservation Areas? o Answer: In some cases. We also have addressed the functional relationship of critical infrastructure outside of, but serving, our areas of interest. § ART Comment: We know that this project has gaps and has not assessed every asset within the Bay Area. Please let us know what we are missing. We have tentative plans to expand this work following the conclusion of ART Bay Area to fill these gaps. We are trying to do the best we can with the topic areas within the scope of this project. 2 Adapting to Rising Tides (ART) Bay Area Working Group Meeting #7 January 23, 2019 9:55-10:45 Engagement Exercise: Drafting Issue Statements, Round 1 • Review Vulnerabilities and Consequences within OLUs and focus areas • Draft Issue Statements and identify Key Planning Issues • Debrief: o Yosemite-Visitacion (Focus Area: Oyster Point and Sierra Point) § Key Vulnerabilities: • Contamination, railroad, ferry service and Bay Trail § Key Consequences: • Public safety and public health due to unquantified contamination of environment and Bay, disruption of regional transit, disruption of localized transit and recreational opportunities, emergency evacuation and commuter issues, economic issues § Issue Statement: • Unknown/uncertainty of implications on closed landfills for public safety and ecological health. Impacts to ferry and Bay Trail limit local connectivity and recreation. Ingress and egress are important here. Disconnect between commercial areas and housing and commutes to work. o Mission-Islais (Focus Area: Islais Creek) § Key Vulnerabilities: • Combined creek and tidal flooding a potential problem here as Islais Creek drains a large watershed from Twin Peaks • The Port of SF Pier 80/96 is the primary receiving locations for most of the aggregate/concrete the city uses for numerous construction projects in SF, including within PDA. • 3rd St Bridge repairs are happening but don’t take into account SLR, due to regulatory restrictions from state historic preservation office. § Key Consequences: • Rapidly changing demographics of neighborhood, however cumulative contamination score remains high. • 3rd Street bridge and T Third represent key North/South linkage (which lack redundancy) within eastern SF (and vulnerable community at BayView), disruptions to this corridor will cut off emerging and existing neighborhoods from jobs, services, and regional transportation. • MUNI concentrating light rail maintenance operations in area, east maintenance yard experiencing flooding at 108” TWL. § Issue Statement: • Key north/south transportation corridor (MUNI/3rd St Bridge) will limit ability of vulnerable community and emerging neighborhoods to access job centers downtown. Coordination between City agencies (Planning/MTA/ Public Works) to integrate SLR planning into bridge repair is critical. 3 Adapting to Rising Tides (ART) Bay Area Working Group Meeting #7 January 23, 2019 o Santa Clara Valley (Focus Area: South Bay Shoreline and Baylands) § Key Issues: • Disruption of roads and rails in this area will impact many counties and the entire region while also causing immediate impacts to the community of Alviso and other areas, including emergency services. This will also impact all aspects of life for the communities. o San Francisquito (Focus Area: East Palo Alto) § Key Issues: • Complex multijurisdictional area with stacked issues throughout including language access, RVs parked at Bay Road out to Pulgas Road, wildlife, contamination, Ravenswood Health Clinic, below sea level rise, lack of natural drainage, limited access, vulnerable community o Belmont-Redwood (Focus Area: Downtown Redwood City) § Key Vulnerabilities: • Inherently low-lying area with wetlands and creeks, flooding already occurs during storms in Bayfront Canal where water backs up, severe flooding impacts may be felt sooner in this area due to this stormwater issue; • Port of Redwood City is exposed early and critical for the movement of goods both locally and regionally, and other transportation routes in this area (US-101, Caltrain station) are functional linkages for commuters and residents across Peninsula; • Critical emergency services and government hub for County of San Mateo and Redwood City (new County Office of Emergency Services, multiple medical facilities); and • Many communities in the area are low-income and have limited English proficiency, and flooding has affected community members and their evacuation centers, which is already a major concern for the health and wellbeing of people. § Key Consequences: • Current flooding from Bayfront Canal may make inland flooding impacts to communities and businesses more severe, earlier, if adaptation actions are not taken; • Disruptions to Port of Redwood City, which is a Port specializing in bulk materials for building and construction, will have impacts locally as the Port is a major economic contributor to Redwood City, as well as regionally as the Port provides building materials to businesses and communities in San Jose and Silicon Valley area; • Disruptions to the US-101, a designated emergency route, will impact people locally and regionally as it is a main arterial road along the Peninsula, and impacts to the Caltrain station will allow have regional impacts as it is among the busiest Caltrain station in the region and is a transfer station and connection hub (buses, shuttles, bicycles, etc.); § Key Issues: • Flooding to transportation infrastructure impacts critical sub-regional services, economic impacts to vulnerable communities in Redwood City and North Fair 4 Adapting to Rising Tides (ART) Bay Area Working Group Meeting #7 January 23, 2019 • Oaks, critical arteries and services center
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bair Island Restoration and Management Plan: Existing Hydrologic Conditions Assessment
    720 California Street, Suite 600, San Francisco, CA 94108-2404 tel: 415.262.2300 fax: 415.262.2303 email: sfo BAIR ISLAND RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN: EXISTING HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT Prepared for H.T. Harvey & Associates Prepared by Philip Williams & Associates, Ltd. Revised June 30, 2000 PWA Ref. # 1413, Task 3 P:\Projects\1413_Bair_orig\Task3 ExConds\1413 hydroEC revision v2.doc 02/05/04 Services provided pursuant to this Agreement are intended solely for the use and benefit of H.T. Harvey & Associates and the San Francisco Bay Wildlife Society. No other person or entity shall be entitled to rely on the services, opinions, recommendations, plans or specifications provided pursuant to this agreement without the express written consent of Philip Williams & Associates, Ltd., 770 Tamalpais Drive, Suite 401, Corte Madera, California 94925. P:\Projects\1413_Bair_orig\Task3 ExConds\1413 hydroEC revision v2.doc 02/05/04 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. HISTORIC SITE CONDITIONS 2 2.1 THE NATURAL LANDSCAPE 2 2.2 HUMAN INTERVENTION 2 3. EXISTING SITE CONFIGURATION AND GRADES 6 3.1 LAND USE AND INFRASTRUCTURE 6 3.2 TOPOGRAPHY 7 3.2.1 Marshplains 7 3.2.2 Levees 8 3.3 HYDROGRAPHY 9 4. WIND CLIMATE 11 5. TIDAL CHARACTERISTICS 12 5.1 AVERAGE AND EXTREME TIDE ELEVATIONS 12 6. EXISTING DRAINAGE 13 6.1 ON-SITE 13 6.2 OFF-SITE 14 6.2.1 Prior Studies 14 6.2.2 Drainage Mechanisms 14 6.2.3 Regional Drainage Overview 15 6.2.4 Redwood Creek 15 6.2.5 Cordilleras Creek 17 6.2.6 Pulgas Creek 17 6.2.7 Steinberger Slough and San Francisco Bay 17 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Port of San Francisco Maritime Cargo and Warehouse Market Analysis
    PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME CARGO AND WAREHOUSE MARKET ANALYSIS January 5, 2009 FINAL REPORT Prepared for: Port of San Francisco Prepared by: CBRE Consulting, Inc. Martin Associates EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................ 3 II. ASSESSEMENT OF EXISTING MARKETS............................................................................ 4 1 HISTORIC MARINE CARGO ACTIVITY AT WEST COAST PORTS............................................ 4 2 ASSESSMENT OF COMPETING BAY AREA PORTS ................................................................... 6 2.1 Port of Redwood City ........................................................................................................................ 6 2.2 Port of Richmond .............................................................................................................................. 7 2.3 Port of Stockton ................................................................................................................................ 7 2.4 Port of Sacramento........................................................................................................................... 8 2.5 Port of Benicia................................................................................................................................... 8 3 NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
    [Show full text]
  • 4.9 Land Use and Planning
    Redwood City New General Plan 4.9 Land Use and Planning 4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING This section describes existing land uses in and around the plan area, as well as applicable land use policies and regulations. Information in this section was derived from a technical land use background report, Redwood City General Plan Land Use Report, prepared in June 2008 by Hogle-Ireland, Inc., as well as CirclePoint’s reconnaissance of the plan area. 4.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The plan area covered by the New General Plan consists of the corporate City limits as well as lands within the City’s sphere of influence. The plan area comprises approximately 38 square miles within a diverse physical setting, with flat lands near the Bayfront area; hills in the western portion of the City; and the San Francisco Bay, stream corridors, and tidal marshes in the north and east. Current Land Use Patterns The current land use patterns reflect the diverse physical features within the plan area, with most office, commercial and residential uses south and west of U.S. 101 while most open space and industrial uses are north of U.S. 101 or in the southwestern foothill areas. The City consists of residential neighborhoods with varying densities and characters; a conventional downtown with retail, restaurant, office, and civic uses; active industrial areas, including research and development and heavy industrial uses associated with the Port of Redwood City; open space areas; and civic areas, including County offices, parks, schools, and community centers. These uses have been clustered within five distinct areas of the City reflecting their specific geographies and function, described below.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
    Redwood City New General Plan 4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section discusses surface waters, groundwater resources, storm water collection and transmission, and flooding characteristics in the plan area. Key sources of information for this section include the San Francisco Bay Basin Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) prepared by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (January 2007), the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) for the City of Redwood City (2005), and the Unified Stream Assessment in Seven Watersheds in San Mateo County, California by the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program (August 2008), Kennedy/Jenks/Chilton Consulting Engineers Water, Sewer Storm Drainage Master Plan dated 1986, and Winzler & Kelly’s Bayfront Canal Improvement Project Design Development Alternative Analysis, dated December 2003. 4.8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Hydrologic Conditions The regional climate of the plan area is typical of the San Francisco Bay Area and is characterized by dry, mild summers and moist, cool winters. Average annual precipitation in the plan area is about 20 inches. About 80 percent of local precipitation falls in the months of November through March. Over the last century for which precipitation records are available, annual precipitation has ranged from an historic low of 8.01 inches in 1976 to an historic high of 42.82 inches in 1983.1 Surface Waters Figure 4.4-1 (in Section 4.4, Biological Resources) depicts surface water bodies in the plan area, which include Redwood and Cordilleras Creeks and their tributaries. Also shown are bay channels, including Westpoint Slough, Corkscrew Slough, northerly reaches of Redwood Creek, Smith Slough and Steinberger Slough, the Atherton Channel (Marsh Creek), and the Bay Front Canal.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Scoping Report
    CORRIDOR PROJECT Environmental Scoping Report March 2007 Federal Transit Administration & Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board PREPARED BY: Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc. in cooperation with Parsons Transportation Group Dumbarton Rail Corridor Project Environmental Scoping Report Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................1 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................4 2. PURPOSE AND NOTIFICATION OF SCOPING.................................5 NEPA/CEQA Notices................................................................................................................5 Press Releases and Newspaper Notices.....................................................................................5 Direct Mail Notification...............................................................................................................6 Transit Rider Outreach.................................................................................................................6 Internet Outreach..........................................................................................................................6 3. SCOPING MEETINGS ..........................................................7 Meeting Format and Content......................................................................................................7 Summary of Meeting Comments (Verbal and Written) ..........................................................8 Newark Public Scoping Meeting November
    [Show full text]
  • Port of Redwood City
    Port of Redwood City Redwood City, California Basic Financial Statements and Independent Auditors’ Report For the years ended June 30, 2014 and 2013 Port of Redwood City Basic Financial Statements For the years ended June 30, 2014 and 2013 Table of Contents Page Independent Auditors’ Report ........................................................................................................ 1 Management’s Discussion and Analysis ......................................................................................... 3 Basic Financial Statements: Comparative Statements of Net Position ........................................................................................ 11 Comparative Statements of Activities and Changes in Net Position ................................................... 12 Comparative Statements of Cash Flows ......................................................................................... 13 Notes to Basic Financial Statements ............................................................................................... 15 Required Supplementary Information ............................................................................................ 33 Independent Auditors’ Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards .................................... 35 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT To the Board of Commissioners of the Port of Redwood City Redwood City, California
    [Show full text]
  • City of Redwood City
    City of Redwood City Proposal for Ferry Financial Feasibility Study & Cost-Benefit and Economic Impact Analyses October 11, 2018 Acknowledgments City of Redwood City Council Members Project Team Diane Howard, Mayor Christopher Dacumos, Management Analyst II, City of Redwood City Shelly Masur, Vice Mayor Jessica Manzi, Transportation Manager, City of Alicia C. Aguirre, Council Member Redwood City Ian Bain, Council Member Radha Mehta, Management Fellow, City of Janet Borgens, Council Member Redwood City Giselle Hale, Council Member Kristine A. Zortman, Executive Director, Port of Redwood City Diana Reddy, Council Member Kevin Connolly, Planning & Development Port of Redwood City Commission Manager, WETA Arthi Krubanandh, Transportation Planner, Ralph A. Garcia, Chair WETA Richard (Dick) Claire, Vice Chair Chad Mason, Senior Planner & Project R. Simms Duncan, Port Commissioner Manager, WETA Richard “Dick” Dodge, Port Commissioner James Connolly, Project Manager, COWI Jessica Rivas, Marine Engineer, COWI Lorianna Kastrop, Port Commissioner Ashleigh Kanat, Executive Vice President, EPS San Mateo County Transportation Jason Moody, Principal, EPS Authority Kate Traynor, Senior Associate, EPS Jennifer Williams, Analyst II, San Mateo County Lindsey Klein, Project Planner, PlaceWorks Transportation Authority Charlie Knox, Principal, PlaceWorks Peter Skinner, Director of Grants and Funding, Bill Hurrell, Vice President, CDM Smith San Mateo County Transportation Authority Piyali Chaudhuri, Project Manager, CDM Smith Peter Martin, Project Technical
    [Show full text]
  • Red and White Fleet
    CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO EDWIN M. LEE, MAYOR OFFICE OF SMALL BUSINESS REGINA DICK-ENDRIZZI, DIRECTOR Legacy Business Registry Staff Report HEARING DATE APRIL 10, 2017 RED AND WHITE FLEET Application No.: LBR-2016-17-070 Business Name: Red and White Fleet Business Address: Pier 43 ½, Fisherman’s Wharf District: District 3 Applicant: Thomas Crowley Escher, President Nomination Date: February 6, 2017 Nominated By: Supervisor Aaron Peskin Staff Contact: Richard Kurylo [email protected] BUSINESS DESCRIPTION Red and White Fleet is the city’s oldest and largest operator of sightseeing cruises of San Francisco Bay. Originally founded as a cargo company in 1892 by entrepreneur Thomas Crowley, the maritime business went on to become a global success, earning it the motto, “Anything, Anywhere, Anytime on Water.” During the 1906 Earthquake and Fire, Crowley’s boats ushered San Franciscans to safety across the bay; they supported war efforts during both WWI and WWII; and they provided free transportation to some 15,000 commuters following the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. Its maritime tours date to the 1915 World’s Fair, the Panama Pacific International Exposition, when the business offered its first sightseeing cruise of the San Francisco Bay. During the 1939 Golden State International Exposition held on Treasure Island, it again offered sightseeing tours, this time of the newly constructed Golden Gate and Bay bridges, launching the company’s signature Golden Gate Bay Cruise that is still popular today. Red and White Fleet’s sightseeing tours from Fisherman’s Wharf were in full swing by the 1940s. In 1973, Red and White Fleet provided ferry service to the newly debuted Alcatraz Island National Park.
    [Show full text]
  • NATURAL RESOURCES Introduction
    NATURAL RESOURCES Introduction Wildflowers on Bair Island Natural Resources Introduction Natural Habitat and Vision Open Space Water Resources Urban Forest Energy Conservation atural resources are all around us, whether it is the water running from our faucets or flowing through Redwood N Creek, the natural habitat where animals and birds forage for food, or the tall trees that shade our streets and cools us as we walk through a park. These resources contribute tremendously to the quality of life in Redwood City and allow residents to enjoy and experience features not found in many urban environments. We must take care as most natural resources are not replenishable. This Element focuses on preserving, protecting, conserving, re‐using, and efficiently using Redwood City’s natural resources. Redwood City General Plan Page NR-1 Introduction NATURAL RESOURCES Introduction Natural resources are the lands, minerals and fossil fuels, wildlife, plants and trees, air, water, groundwater, drinking water, and other resources Natural Resource Chapters: obtained from the Earth. Some resources are managed, such as trees Water Resources growing in a park or drinking water that is transferred via pipelines from Water Supply sources miles away. Other resources are meant to flourish through Water Conservation conservation, such as marine wildlife or the wetland grasses that thrive Recycled Water on Bair, Bird, and Greco Islands. Some resources are processed far away Water Demand to generate fuel to power our cars and homes. These resources share a common theme: they are meant to be conserved and protected, so that Energy Conservation future generations of Redwood City residents can continue enjoy the Renewable Energy Use high quality of life we know today.
    [Show full text]
  • Seaports and Marine Oil Terminals
    DRAFT Assessment Chapter Contra Costa County Adapting to Rising Tides Project Seaports and Marine Oil Terminals The Bay Area is home to a significant amount of critical maritime facilities, including San Francisco’s James R. Herman Cruise Ship Terminal, harbor services, commercial fishing, excursion vessels, ship repair, vessel berthing of science, military and other vessels, cargo services, dry docks, ferry terminals in a number of communities that support commuter movement, marine oil terminals and six seaports. The region was built on this kind of maritime activity and this sector, though a smaller component of the economy and society than it once was, is still vitally important to the Bay Area for the jobs, goods and services that the sector provides, the people and goods that are moved within and outside of the region and the opportunities that the sector gives to the region. This section focuses on seaports and the role they play in moving goods in and out of the region, as an employer and as an economic catalyst and incentive for industries to locate in the region. The six seaports in the region, listed in order of the number of calls they receive each year, are located at the Port of Oakland, Port of San Francisco, Port of Richmond, Port of Benicia and Port of Redwood City. Each seaport plays a different role within the region, with the Port of Oakland’s seaport being the fifth busiest container port in the United States and handling 99 percent of the container goods that move through Northern California. The Port of San Francisco has seen a significant shift away from its role in cargo movement and towards other types of maritime uses.
    [Show full text]
  • Pumpout Guide & Map Boaters
    SAN FRANCISCO BAY PUMPOUT GUIDE & MAP for BoaTERS 2011 - 2012 5c) best for onscreen (and JPGs, PPT, oce printers, etc) fonts as outlines SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY PARTNERSHIP 5c) black/white fonts as outlines SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY PARTNERSHIP Published by the California Department of Boating & Waterways and the San Francisco Estuary Partnership 5c) **true pantone colors! (for oset printing) 293 U & 2905 U fonts as outlines SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY PARTNERSHIP The Scuttlebutt Clean Boater's Captain your boat the clean way! Follow the tips in this Oath guide for running a tight ship, and you can avoid such indelicacies as flushing your head into a school of strip- ers or spilling bilge oil into the sparkling blue deep. With these tips in mind and this map in hand, you can help I will not use the Bay as a keep our waters clear and clean for everyone who boats, water closet. sails, surfs, skis, swims, and fishes in San Francisco Bay and the Delta. I will pump and dump at As of 2007, there were 964,881 registered boats* in California — enough to make a sizable impact on a convenient marina receiving water quality. station. While the amount of sewage pollution contributed by boaters isn't enormous, it does impact the health I will of human water users and the Bay-Delta ecosystem. use vim Swimmers, windsurfers, or boaters who come in contact with raw sewage can get stomach aches, diarrhea, skin and vinegar rashes, hepatitis, and even typhoid or cholera. Diners with a taste for raw clams, oysters, or mussels face some to swab of the same perils if the shellfish have been contaminated the decks.
    [Show full text]
  • SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA CLEAN BOATING MAP Environmental Services Call Ahead to Verify Services
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2012-2013 SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA MARINA DIRECTORY A A SAN FRANCISCO SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA CLEAN BOATING MAP ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Call Ahead to Verify Services BAY AREA NOT INTENDED FOR NAVIGATION Oil Absorbent D Oil Absorbent Emergency Distribution and Collection Distribution Only Services Only P F C Oil Absorbent CLEAN BOATING Collection Only T Tenants Only to Sonoma to Napa to Napa MAP 29 80 John F. ALAMEDA COUNTY GRID | NAME ADDRESS PHONE Includes Marina Directory 116 12 Kennedy FAIRFIELD N Park Suisun City Marina a H4 | Aeolian Yacht Club 980 Fernside Boulevard • Alameda • 94501 (510) 523-2586 S p Schell Petaluma Marina o a 12 29 n 12 o Solano Yacht Club I9 | Alameda Marina 1815 Clement Avenue • Alameda • 94501 (510) 521-1133 C m o Creek a Shollenberger u SUISUN CITY F n B Creek B Park H4 | Ballena Isle Marina 1150 Ballena Blvd, Suite 111 • Alameda • 94501 (510) 523-5528 N Grays t C PETALUMA 116 y Cuttings Suisun City Ranch o 121 CORDELIA Boat Ramp Hudeman u Wharf H7 | Barnhill Marina 2394 Mariner Square • Alameda • 94501 (510) 521-8387 Petaluma Thir n d N t P a y O T R pa 12 E R O 0 5 Miles Cordelia G4 | Berkeley Marine Center 1 Spinnaker Way • Berkeley • 94710 (510) 843-8195 Sl Slough ou Napa Valley Marina Rush H I L g L S Gilardi’s Lakeville Marina h Suisun Ranch 0 5 Kilometers F G4 | City of Berkeley Marina 201 University Avenue • Berkeley • 94710 (510) 981-6741 Marsh Preserve River lough H9 | Embarcadero Cove Marina 1 Embarcadero Cove • Oakland • 94606 (510) 532-6683 Napa S F Napa Slough 29 G4 | Emery Cove
    [Show full text]