Port and planning staff brief commission on waterfront flood study, identify potential impacts to historic wharves

Port staff and Planning Department representatives returned to the Historic Preservation Commission March 20 to update commissioners on the San Francisco Coastal Waterfront Flood Study and the National Environmental Policy Act draft integrated feasibility report and EIS, prepared with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Kelly Capone, the Port’s project manager, explained the draft plan (the total net benefit plan), which is conceptual and divided into four reaches of the waterfront. Staff stressed that historic resources and district buildings — such as structures in the Union Iron Works/Pier 70 area and elements of the Embarcadero historic district — were identified as potentially affected by some defense alignments and that independent measures are under consideration to avoid demolition of specific historic buildings.

Port staff said the draft plan notes significant and unavoidable cultural‑resource impacts in the EIS at a conceptual level and that a programmatic Section 106 agreement and a programmatic historic properties treatment plan will be developed with consulting parties, SHPO and tribal representatives. Staff confirmed the Section 106 programmatic agreement process will continue in parallel with NEPA and is expected to conclude in late 2025.

Commissioners pressed staff on whether the plan could be adjusted to avoid demolition of Pier 70 buildings (including Buildings 6 and 111) and expand defensive alignments so historic wharves would be preserved. Port staff said city comments already asked the Army Corps to realign a defense so that demolition would not be required for those buildings, and staff encouraged continued engagement during the Section 106 process.

The Commission took the briefing as informational; public comment had been open as part of the EIS public comment period that runs through March 29. Staff and commissioners emphasized multiple subsequent review steps — programmatic agreement, design‑level environmental work, certificates of appropriateness and project‑level reviews — where more detailed mitigation and preservation strategies can be developed.