Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bond Parks Waterfront topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Port Commission reviews proposed $185 million parks and waterfront bond
Summary
Port staff outlined a proposed $185 million parks and open-space general-obligation bond for the November ballot and said the Port could receive $35 million for waterfront parks, including proposals for Crane Cove Park and a new Northeast Wharf Plaza.
Get email alerts on the Bond Parks Waterfront topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dan Hodap, a planner in the Port’s Planning and Development Division, told the Port Commission that the City intends to place a $185 million parks and open-space general-obligation bond on the November ballot and that the Port would seek roughly $35 million of that total for waterfront parks.
Hodap said the proposal builds on the 2008 Clean and Safe Neighborhood Parks bond, which provided the Port about $33.5 million for projects including the Pier 43 Bay Trail promenade and other improvements. “The proposed bond amount, dollars 185,000,000 would again be split between the Recreation and Parks Department and the Port, with the Port receiving $35,000,000 for waterfront parks,” Hodap said.
The presentation listed candidate projects the Port could ask to fund if the measure is approved: a new plaza at Pier 43 adjacent to the Pier 43 Bay Link; a Northeast Wharf Plaza at Pier 27 in front of the James R. Herman Cruise Terminal (described as a roughly 2.7-acre park with a large lawn and bay views); Crane Cove Park at Pier 70, a seven‑acre park proposed within a National Register historic district that would preserve historic shipbuilding features and add about 1,000 feet of new shoreline access; and expansions or renovations to smaller sites such as Heron’s Head Park and Islais Creek shoreline connections.
Hodap said staff and Recreation & Parks solicited community input through neighborhood meetings and citizens advisory committees, and that the 2008 bond projects would be complete or substantially underway by the time a 2012 question could appear on the ballot. He told commissioners that the bond ballot language does not need to enumerate every project in legislative detail; representative projects are typically included in the voter pamphlet and project lists provide flexibility for final allocations.
Commissioners asked practical questions about specific uses — for example whether off‑leash dog areas would be described in the ballot text. Hodap answered that project‑level amenities generally are not specified in the bond description, though some projects under consideration (such as the Heron’s Head Park expansion) could include off‑leash areas and these details would be developed during project planning.
Next steps outlined by staff included a final presentation and vote by the capital plan committee and subsequent Board of Supervisors hearings in the spring before a final decision on placing the measure on the November ballot.
The presentation closed with staff committing to return with more detailed recommendations and project lists as the bond drafting process proceeds.
