Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sea Level Seawall topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Port staff warns seawall faces significant sea-level rise and seismic risks; master plan work to begin
Summary
Port engineering staff told commissioners the historic seawall protects the eastern waterfront but faces growing flood and seismic threats; staff recommended short-term measures for projected 15-inch rise by 2050 while beginning a multi-year seismic evaluation and seawall master plan.
Port of San Francisco engineering staff told the Port Commission that the city’s historic seawall continues to provide flood protection but faces substantial challenges from projected sea-level rise and seismic‑induced liquefaction.
Interim Deputy Director and Chief Harbor Engineer Uday Prasad presented historical inspection findings and mapping, saying the seawall "has performed well in providing flood protection to the city's waterfront for more than 100 years. However, it does face challenges as sea level rises." He told commissioners that, on much of the waterfront, the present 100‑year flood elevation is about 12 to 15 inches below the top of the seawall.
Prasad said staff modeling shows a plausible scenario of about 15 inches of sea-level rise by 2050 and as much as 35 to 55 inches by 2100. "We can adapt to a sea level rise of 15 inches by 2050 by building short walls along the edges of the ports, piers and wharves," he said, but added that addressing a 2100 scenario would likely require constructing a new seawall further out in the bay — an approach that would create new fill and require regional and regulatory negotiation.
Structural engineer Joe Roget reviewed the seawall’s construction history and condition, noting that most of the reinforced concrete seawall between Aquatic Park and Pier 50 dates to the early 20th century and that annual inspections since 2007 have identified localized sections (including wooden seawall at Fisherman’s Wharf) that need strengthening.
Staff also emphasized seismic and liquefaction risk on filled lands behind the seawall. Prasad warned that "several feet of ground subsidence and sliding of seawall and adjoining land is expected during a major seismic event," and noted that rebuilding after such an event would be expensive and take years.
Commissioners asked about coordination and funding. Staff said they are working with city agencies (including the city capital planning division, the San Francisco Department of Environment, SFPUC and Muni) and regional regulators (citing BCDC) and that a strategic plan and a complete evaluation are scheduled over the next four to five years to inform a seawall master plan.
Commissioners asked staff to return with periodic updates and to evaluate how seawall needs should be folded into the city’s capital plan and lease terms for long‑duration waterfront projects.
Next steps: staff will proceed with the strategic evaluation and return with recommendations and regular updates to the commission.
