Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sea Level Rise topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SFPUC hears sea level rise briefing; staff recommends 36-inch planning baseline for 2100
Summary
SFPUC staff briefed commissioners on citywide sea-level-rise guidance and how it will be applied to the Source System Improvement Program (SSIP), recommending infrastructure planning toward a static 36-inch mean sea-level rise by 2100 and noting potential operational vulnerabilities to salt intrusion and storm surge.
Emilio Cruz, assistant general manager for infrastructure, told the Public Utilities Commission on Oct. 14 that city planning now uses five scenarios and multiple time horizons to assess sea-level-rise risk and to inform the SSIP.
Cruz said the citys guidance looks at short (2030), mid (2050) and long (2100) horizons and that the committee that developed the guidance recommended using a 36-inch mean sea-level rise as a design baseline for long-lived infrastructure.
"There's a recommendation that maybe we look at this mean level rise of 36 inches for our 2100 design," Cruz said, noting that the number reflects a static sea-level increase rather than storm-surge extremes.
Cruz outlined the PUC's process: review the science, assess asset vulnerability, measure risk to operations, and then plan adaptation. He highlighted Mission Creek and the Bay-side collection box as sites with outsized economic or operational impact. If sea level rises and stormwater discharge points become underwater, Cruz warned, the system could bring salt into biological treatment processes and complicate primary-treatment discharges that currently perform within regulations.
Commissioners asked whether the 36-inch baseline was settled and how quickly the PUC would complete asset assessments. Cruz said the guidance was approved by the city task force and that the PUC aims to complete the vulnerability assessment in a matter of months, with the impact-level determination to follow. He said some adaptations may cost only millions and proceed quickly, while others could cost hundreds of millions and require phased approaches tied back into the SSIP budget.
Commissioners and public speakers urged cross-agency coordination, funding strategies and attention to equity and shoreline communities. Cruz said the PUC is evaluating state and federal funding sources (including the state revolving fund) and is integrating green infrastructure and watershed-level planning where feasible. He cautioned that some adaptation options are constrained by the physical siting needs of PUC facilities, and that choices will come down to return-on-investment questions for public funds.
The PUC did not take action on policy at the meeting; staff said they will return with vulnerability assessments, cost estimates and proposed phasing for commission consideration.
