Port outlines early projects, funding and timeline for Embarcadero Seawall earthquake-safety program

Carlos Colon, Waterfront Resilience Program administrator for the Port of San Francisco, told the Citizens' General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee that the Port has identified 23 potential early projects under the 2018 Embarcadero Seawall Earthquake Safety Bond and is advancing six projects through preliminary design.

“Because our first bond sale was 2020, this may be our first in-person presentation to discuss the progress of our Seawall bond,” Colon said. He introduced Stephen Reel, deputy program manager for project delivery and engineering, and Skyler Poe, an analyst working on funding for the program.

Reel described the set of early projects and the engineering challenges they address, including a resilient-shoreline replacement near Fisherman’s Wharf (Wharf J9) and a bulkhead retrofit and substructure project at Pier 15, where the Exploratorium is located. He said alternatives under study include retrofits to limit collapse risk, seismic-joint widening, and an adaptable “spider frame” wharf that can be raised in the future.

“We’ve identified 23 potential early projects,” Reel said. “We’ve moved forward with six of the projects; they’re in predesign. We’ve completed needs-assessment reports on those.” He said the program’s aims are to reduce life-safety risk, improve disaster-response capability (including accessible berths for emergency vessels), and address near-term flood risk for critical transit infrastructure.

Colon reviewed the program’s funding picture. He said the original bond authorization was $425,000,000; the first bond sale provided roughly $50,000,000 and the Port completed a second bond sale in the last 30 days for nearly $40,000,000. Other sources cited included a $5,000,000 state grant (via the California Natural Resources agency), roughly $9.9 million in American Rescue Plan Act funds already being used, and a $50,000,000 FEMA BRIC grant application submitted through Cal OES as lead applicant.

“We’re hopeful we will get that BRIC funding and combine it with general obligation bond funds to deliver this project,” Reel said. Staff warned that program scope has grown from an initial plan of two or three projects to as many as 23 project candidates, and that expansion will likely require an amendment to the program management contract with CH2M.

The Port said it expects predesign for early projects to continue through mid‑2024, to initiate detailed design and environmental approvals later in that year and to bid an initial construction contract by mid‑2024 with construction starting before the end of 2024, subject to funding. Presenters described ongoing coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which is conducting a waterfront‑wide general investigation; that study will evaluate adaptation alternatives and perform benefit‑cost analyses that could make the projects eligible for large federal cost shares. Presenters estimated the Corps’ schedule could move toward a tentatively selected plan by the end of the year and an earliest congressional recommendation in 2025, but said the timetable remained uncertain.

Committee members asked staff to explain how the early projects interrelate (for example, ferry‑building reliability work and downtown coastal flood protection), to clarify the Army Corps’ role and timeline, and to describe fiscal risks tied to pending federal grants. Skyler Poe said the BRIC application has been reviewed by Cal OES and forwarded to FEMA but that FEMA’s internal review process often includes multiple requests for information and an uncertain schedule.

Members of the public who called in urged an independent needs assessment and the involvement of local structural engineering experts; one caller raised concerns about political influence and called for more resident outreach and scrutiny of homeless program spending unrelated to the seawall presentation.

Next steps the Port cited include completing predesign for the six early projects, continuing alternatives analyses to align early work with longer-term adaptation strategies developed through the Army Corps’ study, seeking additional funding, and negotiating a contract amendment to continue program management work.

The Port’s presentation and committee Q&A did not include final approvals or new contract awards; staff asked the committee to note progress and return with updated budgets, scopes and schedules as predesign concludes.