PUC backs site outside Golden Gate Park for Westside recycled-water plant

San Francisco Public Utilities Commission members on March 25 heard staff present a proposed relocation of the Westside recycled-water plant from Golden Gate Park to a site within the Oceanside Water Pollution Control Plant canyon. Assistant General Manager for Water Steve Ritchie said staff evaluated 26 alternatives and narrowed them to five before identifying the Oceanside-adjacent armory/plant canyon as a feasible location.

"We've identified now a proposed site for the West Side plant that is actually within the canyon of the Oceanside water pollution control plant," Ritchie said, describing negotiations with the California National Guard over an easement on land that is under a long-term lease.

Ritchie said siting the plant outside Golden Gate Park responds to strong public opposition to construction inside the park. He said staff expects to reinitiate the environmental review process "in the next few months" for the project at the Oceanside location.

Commissioners asked about cost and routing implications for delivering finished recycled water to the park. Ritchie said the inability to use an existing West Side transport box for finished recycled water (because the pipe carries water too pure for finished product) means installing a new pipeline from Oceanside north to Golden Gate Park could add roughly $10,000,000, though that routing might allow the utility to serve other customers along the way.

Public commenters representing preservation and park groups praised the decision. Nancy Werfel urged the commission to "honor what was told to the voters in 1975" by returning former treatment-plant land to park use, while Catherine Howard of the Golden Gate Park Preservation Alliance called the move "very precious to the people of San Francisco." Anne Clark and other speakers expressed appreciation for staff engagement and outreach.

David Pilpel raised follow-up questions about the scope of the $2,000,000 figure he heard informally for a reroute and asked whether the pipeline alternative could affect project schedule, budget, or potable offsets required under the city's water-supply agreement; Ritchie said staff is continuing to assess routing, costs and potential additional customers along the pipeline corridor.

Next steps: staff said it will restart environmental review and continue discussions about pipeline routing and potential easements; the commission did not vote on a final site authorization on March 25.