San Francisco Waterfront
Abstract
San Francisco is a state that is endowed with waterfronts located to the east and western harbors. The harbors serve as tourist sites and recreation points hence attracts many people who flock to enjoy the waters and sunlight. The Marina is however in need of major renovations so as to appeal to tourists that flock the place in large numbers. This report will focus on the project and the impact it will have an impact on sustainability, public and cost. From this, a recommendation will be acquired on the most appropriate project.
San Francisco Marina Renovation Development
Introduction
The San Francisco Marina is located in the Marina District on the state’s northern waterfront. This Marina is under the management of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission. The marina comprises of two harbors; West Harbor and the East Harbor.
The West Harbor is sealed by Marina Boulevard with the Yacht Road to the north, harbor entrance to the east and Yacht to the west. The Harbor is about 1,100,000 in square feet of water comprising of two basins; the inner and outer basin. The land of the harbor comprises of sidewalks, gangways and parking of about 19 acres while its facilities comprise of Harbor office (restrooms and rental showers), refreshment area, parking area and slips for 326 boats (Blake, Graymer, and Jones, 2000). Close to the West Harbor is the St. Francis and Golden Gate Yacht Clubs.
The East Harbor comprises of about 600,000 square feet of water and is covered by Beach Street to the south, San Francisco Bay on the northern end, Lower Fort Mason on the eastern end and Marina Boulevard Streets on the western end (Lipsky, 2004, 106). The harbor comprises of marina facilities with slips accommodating 342 boats, yacht sales and fuel points, rest room for tourists, vehicle parking points and a single parking for trailer boats (CNU, 2011). The two harbors comprise of wooden floating docks and gangways. The slips can access water and electricity service while the docks are visible due to lights at night.
The marina is been busy for the whole year as a recreational point for tourists in the boating area. Berths in this part are highly desired by several boat owners. The two harbors are in poor condition due to maintenance that has been constantly pushed, damage is due to wave activities and storm and constant use (California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and California Coastal Commission (CCC), 2000). There have been certain facilities that have been removed because of the cost to repair them and a number of docks and facilities are non-existent or insecure for use by tourists.
Project Characteristics
The San Francisco Marina Renovation Project comprises of renovation to selected facilities. The project is focused in development of the waterside over the 39 acre part of the marina, with renovations to the 700 square foot of the Navy Station for the Harbor Office.
The waterside developments comprises of installation of new breakwater sections (a floating breakwater for the eastern harbor and two rock-filled breakwaters for the western Harbor. The western harbor comprises of the removal of the two breakwaters based on the Scott Street, repair of parts the slopes in the shore lines for the two harbors as well as the floating docks and slips, removal of the wooden piles for concrete piles for rigid ground, there is a proposal to create hand boat launches for the Western part and repair for the dredging (87,000 yards cubic for the eastern end and 94,000 for western harbor). Other developments would involve replacing the gates and sewage facility for the two harbors (California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and California Coastal Commission (CCC), 2000). The east harbor would involve an increase of capacity to accommodate the rise in tourists by about 30% while the western side would involve an increase of about 35%. However, the parking spaces for cars would remain the same as most of the tourists use boats while the parking slots for boats would involve an installation of access control restrictions (Yap, X. 2013, 393). This would help boat owners to go for certain spaces only and control the time spent in parking. As for the East harbor parking point would be developed for the boat hoist to be used for launching and trailer storage. Presently it is not in use but can acquire a huge number of trailer boats (24 in total).
Public access development is proposed for the public restrooms for the East Harbor breakwater while the disabled area would be included for the two harbors. The project time length is set to be 36 months for the Western harbor and 16 months for the Eastern harbor.
Sustainability, Cost and Public Acceptance
The project would not affect recreational use of the Marina. The development to the eastern harbor would develop the site with no impact on the physical nature or displacement of businesses and residence. While the western harbor is bound to lead to some residents and businesses to be moved to accommodate the huge development (National Weather and Atmospheric Administration, 2004). The projects is bound to lead to attraction of more tourists hence more revenue.
The slips on the western harbor that is compatible with the project area would not affect the land to a great extent (Blake, Graymer, and Jones, 2000). Moreover, the loss of the north-south mole at the Scott Street, popular with the public for viewing, and relaxing, would not go down well with the public. The eastern harbor development is set to take place in phases making the harbor to be in continued use.
The project would involve construction of rigid structures that shifts from the wooden piles to concrete that would be much more rigid and easy to maintain. The structures propose for development in the western harbor calls for more staff to be employed to keep the facility working properly. This is due to the huge facility that would be created that would be bigger than it is currently. The eastern harbor would require a small addition of staff to handle the new developments, though a little less than the western harbor (Giusto, 2007, 32). This all adds to the cost of about $19,500,000 to develop the Western harbor while $16,500,000 for the eastern harbor. The added cost to the western harbor is set to be funded by the San Francisco Board Supervisors with the rest being catered for by the DBW. This is however subject to approval by the Recreation and Park Commission and the Board of Supervisors.
Conclusion
The proposed development projects for San Francisco Marina for the two harbors; East and West involves a lot of developments that would lead to creation of more revenue for the tourists. The Marina developments looks to accommodate additional tourists through renovations of existing facilities while adding other facilities. This aims to appeal to more tourists who have Yachts and vehicles as well. The paper has been able to focus on the several development projects proposed for the Marina in San Francisco. The impact that would felt for the harbors are varied hence having an impact on the recommendation.
Recommendation
The Eastern harbor development is the most appropriate development with regard to a number of factors. The harbor makes use of its limited land, though slight expansion to improve its facility. Additionally, this development does not affect the public and their comfort, actually it aims to renovate old facilities for public benefit. On the other hand, the western harbor incorporates great developments that aim to appeal to more tourists. However, it does this at the expense of the locals and at a high cost. The financing of the project is not fully sorted and would be a burden to the locals. The eastern harbor is therefore, the most appropriate project on the basis of its proposed renovations and developments.
Bibliography
Blake, M. C., Graymer, R. W., and Jones, D. L., 2000. Geologic map and map database of parts of Marin, San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, and Sonoma counties, California, USGS Miscellaneous Field Studies MF 2337, Online Version 1.0. Acquired on 11th December 2013 from http://geopubs.wr.usgs.gov/mapmf/mf2337/
California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and California Coastal Commission (CCC), 2000. Plan for California’s Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. Acquired on 11th December 2013 from http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/nps/prtecting.html
CNU, 2011. San Francisco’s Embarcadero. Acquired on 11th December 2013 from http://www.cnu.org/highways/sfembarcadero
Giusto, B 2007. Edgewater: The Power of Public-Private Partnerships. The IEDC ECONOMIC Development Journal, vol 6 No. 1. P. 30-34.
Lipsky, W 2004. San Francisco’s Marina District. San Francisco: Arcadia Publishing.
National Weather and Atmospheric Administration, 2004. NOAA Climate at a Glance for San Francisco. Acquired on 11th December 2013 from http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/cag3.html. November 1, 2004.
Yap, X. 2013. The Transnational Assembling of Marin Bay, Singapore. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, Volume 34, Issue 3, pages 390–406.
