DOCSLIB.ORG

Port of San Francisco Maritime Cargo and Warehouse Market Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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 MARKET OVERVIEW.......................................................................... 9 3.1 Northern California Container Market Overview.............................................................................. 9 3.2 Northern California General Cargo Market Overview .................................................................... 10 3.3 Northern California Log and Lumber Market Overview.................................................................. 11 3.4 Northern California Auto and Truck Market Overview................................................................... 11 3.5 Northern California Bulk Cargo Market Overview .......................................................................... 12 3.6 Northern California Cargo Summary .............................................................................................. 13 III. PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO EXISTING CARGO MARKETS............................................ 15 1 MARKET OVERVIEW........................................................................................................................ 15 2 CONTAINERS..................................................................................................................................... 17 2.1 Existing Situation ............................................................................................................................ 17 2.2 Container Market Outlook.............................................................................................................. 19 3 STEEL .................................................................................................................................................. 20 3.1 Existing Situation ............................................................................................................................ 20 3.2 Competitive Factors Affecting Port Selection ................................................................................. 22 3.3 Steel Market Outlook...................................................................................................................... 24 4 FOREST PRODUCTS ....................................................................................................................... 25 4.1 Existing Situation ............................................................................................................................ 25 4.2 Competitive Factors Influencing Port Routings............................................................................... 27 4.3 Breakbulk Forest Products Outlook ................................................................................................ 28 5 PROJECT CARGO............................................................................................................................. 29 6 BULK MARKETS ................................................................................................................................29 6.1 Existing Situation ............................................................................................................................ 29 6.2 Competitive Factors Affecting Growth ........................................................................................... 31 6.3 Bulk Market Outlook....................................................................................................................... 31 7 EXISTING CARGO MARKET FORECASTS .................................................................................. 32 8 CURRENT INDUSTRIAL AND WAREHOUSE ACTIVITY AT BAY AREA PORTS................... 33 8.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 34 8.2 Market Snapshot ............................................................................................................................ 35 8.3 Market Trends ................................................................................................................................ 36 8.4 Key City Trends................................................................................................................................ 39 8.5 Refrigerated Warehouse Space ...................................................................................................... 40 8.6 Bay Area Warehouse Market Conclusions...................................................................................... 40 9 FOREIGN TRADE ZONE OPERATIONS........................................................................................ 41 IV. POTENTIAL NEW CARGO MARKET OPPORTUNITIES ................................................... 42 1 AUTOS ................................................................................................................................................. 42 1.1 Existing Situation ............................................................................................................................ 42 1.2 Competitive Factors Influencing Port Selection .............................................................................. 43 1.3 Port of San Francisco’s Potential Opportunity................................................................................ 44 2 BREAKBULK AND CONTAINERIZED FRUIT................................................................................ 45 2.1 Existing Situation ............................................................................................................................ 45 2.2 Competitive Issues Influencing Port Selection ................................................................................ 47 2.3 Port of San Francisco Opportunity.................................................................................................. 49 3 WIND ENERGY PROJECT CARGO................................................................................................ 51 3.1 Existing Situation ............................................................................................................................ 51 3.2 Competitive Factors Influencing Port Selection .............................................................................. 52 3.3 Port of San Francisco Opportunity.................................................................................................. 52 4 OTHER BULK CARGOES................................................................................................................. 55 5 OTHER MARITIME OPPORTUNITIES ........................................................................................... 55 5.1 Layberthing..................................................................................................................................... 55 5.2 Potential for an Airfreight Ferry Service ......................................................................................... 57 V. IMPLICATIONS........................................................................................................................ 58 1 EXISTING MARKETS ........................................................................................................................ 58 2 POTENTIAL NEW CARGO OPPORTUNITIES.............................................................................. 59 3 FOCUS OF MARKETING EFFORTS............................................................................................... 60 VI. APPENDIX A............................................................................................................................ 62 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Port of San Francisco retained CBRE Consulting, Inc. and Martin Associates to update a 2001 market assessment entitled “Maritime Cargo and Industrial Land Use Study.” Since 2001, the Port of San Francisco’s primary and most stable cargo business has been in imported bulk aggregates. The Port’s 2001 strategic decision to pursue import bulk aggregates and concrete batch operations has proven to be a great success.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sausalito's Vision for 2040
    The introductory chapter provides an overview of the General Plan, describing the purpose of the plan and its role for the City of Sausalito. The Introduction includes Sausalito’s Vision for 2040, the Authority and Purpose, Organization of the Sausalito General Plan, Implementation of the Plan, Public Participation in Creating the Plan, Sausalito’s History, and Future Trends and Assumptions. SAUSALITO’S VISION FOR 2040 VISION STATEMENT Sausalito is a thriving, safe, and friendly community that sustainably cultivates its natural beauty, history, and its arts and waterfront culture. Due to sea level rise and the continuing effects of climate change, the city seeks to bridge the compelling features and attributes of the city’s past, particularly its unique shoreline neighborhoods, with the environmental inevitabilities of its future. Sausalito embraces environmental stewardship and is dedicated to climate leadership while it strives to conserve the cultural, historic, artistic, business and neighborhood diversity and character that make up the Sausalito community. OVERALL COMMUNITY GOALS The General Plan Update addresses the new and many continuing issues confronting the city since the General Plan was adopted in 1995. The General Plan Update also responds to the many changing conditions of the region, county, and city since the beginning of the 21st century. The following eleven broad goals serve as the basis for more specific policies and implementation strategies. 1. Maintain Sausalito’s small-scale residential neighborhoods, recognizing their geographical, architectural, and cultural diversity, while supporting a range of housing options. 2. Recognize and perpetuate the defining characteristics of Sausalito, including its aesthetic beauty, scenic features, natural and built environment, its history, and its diverse culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Port of San Diego
    Port of San Diego The Port of San Diego manages San Diego Bay and its 34 miles of beautiful, natural waterfront for the people of California. The Port was established in 1962 under the Port Act and is charged with implementing the Tidelands Trust Doctrine. For over fifty years, the Port’s five-member cities - Chula Vista, Coronado, Imperial Beach, National City and San Diego - have worked together to develop and promote LEGENDPort of commerce, navigation, recreation and fisheries on and BNSFSan Diego UP/SP Trackage Rights Handling Carrier LEGEND around San Diego Bay. Self-funded, the port contributes Haulage Agreement BNSF billions annually to San Diego’s economy, benefiting the UP/SP Trackage Rights Handling Carrier community, local businesses and employees. The port’s Haulage Agreement cargo maritime business includes two cargo terminals. TERMINAL CAPABILITIES • Harbor: One (San Diego Bay) • Berths: 15 • Cranes: 1 mobile harbor crane • Depth: 30 ft. - 43 ft. • Facilities: Two marine cargo terminals • Rail-Served: On-dock terminal rail • Cargo Handled: Breakbulk Project Cargo Refrigerated Ro-Ro (Roll-on/Roll-off) Alex Williamson Brian Johnston Connie Le Fevre Greg Borossay Sales Manager Sales Manager Sr Trade Representative Maritime Commercial BNSF Railway BNSF Railway Port of San Diego Port of San Diego [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Office: 612-380-8852 Office: 817-304-6425 619-756-1949 619-686-6242 Port of San Diego TERMINAL CAPABILITIES OVERVIEW TENTH AVENUE MARINE TERMINAL • Depth: 30 ft. – 43 ft. • Berth(s): Eight, equaling 4,347 ft. • Cargo Handling Capabilities: • Port owned - 100 Ton Gottwald Crane • Stevedore owned and operated - Reach stackers, rail pusher (leased), utility trucks, fork lifts and heavy lifts • Rail-Served: On-dock rail adjacent to BNSF yard • Main yard: Seven spurs, equaling 9000 ft.
    [Show full text]
  • From Ferries to Hornblower Cruises
    Getting Out on San Francisco Bay: From Ferries to Hornblower Cruises Author’s Note: This article “Getting Out on San Francisco Bay: From Ferries to Hornblower Cruises ” is a stand-alone article on my website. Further parallel articles on the Bay include chapters in my two main travel guidebooks/ebooks on California. They are Northern California History Travel Adventures: 35 Suggested Trips and Northern California Travel: The Best Options. All my travel guidebooks/ebooks on California can be seen on my Amazon Author Page. By Lee Foster Getting out on San Francisco Bay in a boat of some kind is a concept I recommend to all visitors and locals. San Francisco Bay is such an inviting body of water, especially if your boat trip takes you across the Bay or out beyond the Golden Gate Bridge. From a boat you can see the Bridges, especially the Bay Bridge and the Golden Gate Bridge, plus the skyline profile of the city of San Francisco. You can see the lovely green Marin hillsides and the profiles of the main Bay islands, such as Alcatraz and Angel Islands. The protected Bay waters are usually not too rough. Sometime you will encounter wildlife, such as sea lions and migrating birds. Occasionally, you may pass close to the immense container ships that come through the Golden Gate into the port of Oakland. Their cargo will likely come from China and Korea. The Ferry Option for San Francisco Bay The excursion boat California Hornblower ready to depart on San Francisco Bay There are many ways to get out on San Francisco Bay in a boat, and I have done most of them at one time or another.
    [Show full text]
  • Oakland Coliseum Industrial Center 5800 Coliseum Way | Oakland, CA
    Premier Urban Logistics Location Oakland Coliseum Industrial Center 5800 Coliseum Way | Oakland, CA ±336,680 SF Warehouse For Lease Jason Ovadia Patrick Metzger Greg Matter Jason Cranston Robert Bisnette +1 510 285 5360 +1 510 285 5362 650 480 2220 [email protected] +1 510 661 4011 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] +1 650 480 2100 [email protected] Lic # 01742912 Lic # 01888895 Lic #01380731 Lic # 01253892 Lic # 01474433 Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc. Real Estate License # 01856260 Unrivaled Access to Bay80 Area Urban Core 80 Vallejo Port of Benecia 80 Concord San Rafael Richmond Port of 101 Richmond 580 Walnut Creek Oakland 680 Port of Oakland Prologis Oakland Coliseum San Francisco Urban Logistics Center Port of San Francisco Oakland International Airport PROPERTY HIGHLIGHTS Hayward 580 Pleasanton San Francisco • Close proximity to Oakland Airport and International Airport Port of Oakland Fremont • Overweight accessible location San Mateo 880 • Great access to robust workforce 280 101 • Union Pacific Rail capabilities Driving distance Palo Alto • Heavy Power with Back Up Generator 3.5 mi Oakland International Airport 680 5.3 mi Port of Oakland San Jose • Divisible to ±168,340 SF International Airport • Available Q4 2020 16.2 mi SF Financial District San Jose 16.2 mi Port of San Francisco 27.5 mi SF International Airport 36.4 mi San Jose International Airport ±336,680 SF Current Building Configuration 80 Warehouse ±336,680 SF Office ±16,380 SF Site Size 9.93 acres Vallejo Column
    [Show full text]
  • PORT of OAKLAN D Executive Director FRANK KIANG BOARD of PORT COMMISSIONERS DAVID L
    JOHN PROTOPAPPAS TAY YOSHITANI President PORT OF OAKLAND Executive Director PATRICIA A. SCATES BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS DAVID L. ALEXANDER First Vice President 530 Water Street • Oakland, California 94607 Port Attorney KENNETH S. KATZOFF JOHN T. BETTERTON Second Vice President Telephone: (510) 627-1100 Secretary of the Board Facsimile: (510) 763.3562 DARLENE AYERS-JOHNSON TDD: (510) 763.5730 Commissioner ANTHONY A. BATARSE, JR. E-Mail: [email protected] Commissioner WEB: www.portofoakland.com FRANK KIANG Commissioner DAVID KRAMER MINUTES Commissioner Regular Meeting of the Board of Port Commissioners Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 3:00 PM ROLL CALL President Protopappas called the meeting to order at 3:08 p.m., and the following Commissioners were in attendance: Commissioners Ayers-Johnson, Commissioner Batarse, Second Vice-President Katzoff, Commissioner Kramer, First Vice-President Scates and President Protopappas. Commissioner Kiang was excused. CLOSED SESSION The Board entered into Closed Session at 3:10 p.m. to consider the following items: 1. Conference With Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9: (1 Matter) 2. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation. Pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9. Names of Cases: Socorro Salizar v. Port of Oakland, Workers Compensation Appeals Board Case No. OAK 0280204. REGULAR MEETING January 20, 2004 3. Conference With Real Property Negotiator. Government Code Section 54956.8. Property: Oakland Army Base Negotiating Parties: Port of Oakland, Oakland Base Reuse Authority, Oakland Redevelopment Agency and City Council Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Tay Yoshitani Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment OPEN SESSION President Protopappas reconvened the Board in Open Session at 4:11 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • March 19, 2012 by SDPTA Chair Jim Unger
    March 19, 2012 By SDPTA C hair Jim Unger Overview– Jim Unger Overview– Jim Unger Port of San Diego Facts: Port includes Five Member Cities: Chula Vista, Coronado, Imperial Beach, National City, San Diego Board of 7 Port Commissioners: Chairman Lou Smith, Coronado Commissioner Vice Chair Ann Moore, Chula Vista Commissioner Secretary Lee Burdick, San Diego Commissioner Commissioner Dan Malcolm, Imperial Beach Commissioner Bob Nelson, San Diego Commissioner Dukie Valderrama, National City Commissioner Scott Peters, San Diego Overview The San Diego Unified Port District a nd Tidelands businesses contributes 30% of Gross Regional Product 77,000 Jobs Partnership with the Port and its tenants Overview The Port is self-sustaining from revenues collected from the Port Tenants with NO TAX DOLLARS FROM CITIZENS Overview Partnership with the Port of San Diego – Participation on the Following Port/Tenant Committees: Maritime, Marketing, Real Estate, Cruise Ship, Public Art, Environmental, Accessibility, Port with no Borders Scholarship & Tidelands Forestry. Downsizing of Port - new President/CEO Wayne Darbeau 13 departments down to 6 & decreased employee headcount by 100 without lay-offs. Background California Statelands Commission Public Trust Policy (2 excerpts below t aken from Public Trust Policy) Lands are owned by t he public and held in trust for the people by t he State of California. Uses of trust lands are generally l imited to those that are water dependent or related, and include commerce, fisheries, and navigation, environmental
    [Show full text]
  • Port of Oakland Maritime Facilities
    Port of Oakland Maritime Facilities 0 1/2 1 nautical mile 80 Berths Terminal Union Pacific Tides in San Francisco Bay BNSF Railway N MAGNETIC Railroad San Francisco Bay Area 80 0 1/2 1 mile Mean Mean Mean 14° 11' 20–26 Ports America high low range Sacramento 0 1/2 1 kilometer +5.6 ft -1.3 ft +6.9 ft E Outer Harbor Terminal +1.7m -0.4m +1.3m N 505 50 Operator: Ports America W 580 Santa Rosa Terminal Gates / Berth Numbers 101 Carriers Petaluma UPRR CCNI Maersk S Napa r ive o R Hamburg Süd MSC nt Major Warehouse / Transload Facility Faireld e m ra Hapag-Lloyd Polynesia c 37 80 a S City Development Area Horizon Yang Ming 32nd St. K-Line 80 Vallejo 5 Trade and Logistics Complex San Rafael Richmond 30–32 TraPac Terminal 80 99 Public Truck Scales 101 Operator: TraPac Inc. Concord Carriers Permitted Heavy Weight Container Routes BNSF Toll Plaza BNSF MOL Hyundai For info visit www.portofoakland.com (westbound only) 24 Intermodal San Francisco Facility APL Northport City Truck Telegraph Av. Freeways City Parking San Oakland Stockton Beach Development Francisco Port of 580 UPRR Bay Oakland 680 UPRR 35–38 Ben E. Nutter Terminal Intermodal Rail Facilities Area Alaska St. PCC Logistics SF Int’l Int’l Airport Intermodal OT411 Facility AMNAV Maritime Africa St. West Grand Av. Oakland Airport (OAK) Crowley 808 Operator: Seaside Transportation Corregidor Av. (SFO) Tug Services Tug Service Bataan Av. UPRR 580 Lathrop Services (STS)/Evergreen Burma Rd. S Container Cranes (Port Owned) UPRR a 9 807 n J o 8 Buna St.
    [Show full text]
  • San Diego Unified Port District San Diego, CA 92101
    Page 1 of 215 3165 Pacific Hwy. San Diego Unified Port District San Diego, CA 92101 Special Meeting Minutes Board of Port Commissioners Wednesday,January16,2019 9:30 AM Don L. Nay Port Administration Boardroom Closed Session A. Roll Call. Present: 7 - Commissioner Bonelli, Chairperson Castellanos, Commissioner Malcolm, Commissioner Merrifield, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Valderrama, and Commissioner Zucchet Excused: 0 Absent: 0 Commissioner Moore was excused until she arrived at 9:36 am. Officers Present: Coniglio, DeAngelis, Monson, Morales, and Russell B. Public Communications. The following member(s) of the public addressed the Board with non agenda-related comments: None CLOSED SESSION Thomas A. Russell, General Counsel, announced the Closed Session items as follows: 1. Closed Session Item No. 1 PERSONNEL EVALUATION: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Government Code Section 54957 No reportable action was taken on this item. San Diego Unified Port District Page 1 Page 2 of 215 Board of Port Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes January 16, 2019 2. 2019-0020 Closed Session Item No. 2 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR Government Code Section 54956.8 Property: SDUPD - Chula Vista Bayfront parcel consisting of approximately 74.7 acres of land at H Street and Marina Parkway, Chula Vista Negotiating Parties: RIDA Chula Vista, LLC,- Ira Mitzner and Luke Charlton; City of Chula Vista - Gary Halbert; SDUPD - Shaun Sumner, Tony Gordon, Adam Meyer, Stephanie Shook and Sean Jones. Under Negotiations: Price and Terms
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Park Report Part 1
    Alcatraz Island Golden Gate National Recreation Area Physical History PRE-EUROPEAN (Pre-1776) Before Europeans settled in San Francisco, the area was inhabited by Native American groups including the Miwok, in the area north of San Francisco Bay (today’s Marin County), and the Ohlone, in the area south of San Francisco Bay (today’s San Francisco peninsula). Then, as today, Alcatraz had a harsh environment –strong winds, fog, a lack of a fresh water source (other than rain or fog), rocky terrain –and there was only sparse vegetation, mainly grasses. These conditions were not conducive to living on the island. These groups may have used the island for a fishing station or they may have visited it to gather seabird eggs since the island did provide a suitable habitat for colonies of seabirds. However, the Miwok and Ohlone do not appear to have lived on Alcatraz or to have visibly altered its landscape, and no prehistoric archeological sites have been identified on the island. (Thomson 1979: 2, Delgado et al. 1991: 8, and Hart 1996: 4). SPANISH AND MEXICAN PERIOD (1776-1846) Early Spanish explorers into Alta California encountered the San Francisco Bay and its islands. (Jose Francisco Ortega saw the bay during his scouting for Gaspar de Portola’s 1769 expedition, and Pedro Fages described the three major islands –Angel, Alcatraz, and Yerba Buena –in his journal from the subsequent 1772 expedition.) However, the first Europeans to record their visit to Alcatraz were aboard the Spanish ship San Carlos, commanded by Juan Manuel de Ayala that sailed through the Golden Gate and anchored off Angel Island in August 1775.
    [Show full text]
  • 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 Shoreside Power Project Press Release
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wednesday, October 6, 2010 Contact: Mayor’s Office of Communications, 415-554-6131 Renée Dunn Martin, Port of San Francisco, 415-274-0488 *** PRESS RELEASE *** MAYOR NEWSOM AND THE PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO INAUGURATE CRUISE SHIP USING SHORESIDE POWER San Francisco is first California city where cruise ships can plug in for clean power San Francisco, CA— Mayor Gavin Newsom and the Port of San Francisco today joined Princess Cruises and state and federal agency partners to officially inaugurate shoreside power at Pier 27, allowing Island Princess to shut down her engines and receive clean power from the City’s electrical grid. The Port of San Francisco became the first California port, and one of only a handful of ports in the world, to provide shoreside electrical power for cruise ships while at berth. “Once again we are demonstrating that doing right by the environment doesn’t come at the expense of jobs and economic growth,” said Mayor Newsom. “With shoreside power, we can welcome a growing number of cruise ships and the tourist dollars they bring to San Francisco while protecting the Bay and our local air quality.” Shoreside power results in zero air emissions while a ship is connected in port. This new system is not only the first in the state, but just the fourth in the world. The other cruise ports with shoreside power are Juneau (Alaska), Seattle (Washington), and Vancouver (Canada). The ports of Los Angeles and San Diego also plan to implement this system. Island Princess is operated by Princess Cruises, who developed the shore power technology in Juneau in 2001.
    [Show full text]