Loading (50 kb)...'

(continued) t, on the south by 17th Avenue extended to the Interstate 880 Frontage Road, and on the west by the Interstate 880 Frontage Road.


Note: Authority cited: Sections 66602, 66611, 66632(f), 66651 and 66652, Government Code. Reference: Section 66652, Government Code; and San Francisco Bay Plan, Parts I and IV.

s 11945. Seaport Plan Amendments.

(a) Resolutions.

1. On April 18, 1996, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission approved Resolution No. 96-06, adopting Bay Plan Amendment No. 2-95, modifying the San Francisco Bay Planand San Francisco Bay Area Seaport Planpolicies for marine terminal development and boundaries for port priority use areas.

2. On September 18, 1997, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission approved Resolution No. 97-09, adopting Bay Plan Amendment No. 1-97, modifying the San Francisco Bay Area Seaport Planto remove the port priority use designation from a 220-acre parcel along the Oakland Inner Harbor at the former Alameda Naval Air Station.

3. On March 2, 2000, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission approved Resolutions No. 00-01 and No. 00-02, adopting Bay Plan Amendments 1-99 and 3-99, respectively, modifying the San Francisco Bay Planand the San Francisco Bay Area Seaport Planto remove the port priority use designation from Encinal Terminals in the City of Alameda.

4. On January 4, 2001, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission approved Resolution No. 00-10, adopting Bay Plan Amendment No. 4-00, deleting from and adding to the port priority use area designations at the former Oakland Army Base and the Port of Oakland in the City of Oakland.

5. On February 20, 2003, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission approved Resolution No. 03-01, adopting Bay Plan Amendment Nos. 2-02 through 5-02 and 7-02, revising San Francisco Bay Area Seaport Plan findings and policies and designations at the Benicia, Oakland, Redwood City, Richmond, San Francisco and Collinsville port priority use areas.

(b) Policy Changes.

1. Modify cargo throughput capability analysis to reflect higher potential cargo throughput at existing and future marine terminals.

2. Eliminate the distinction between "long-term" and "near-term" marine terminals and instead use a single designation of "future" marine terminal sites.

3. Prohibit further deletion of sites from port priority use and marine terminal designations until a cargo monitoring process is implemented.

4. Modify requirements for updating the Seaport Plan.

5. Allow interim uses on areas designated for port or marine terminal use to exceed five years. Non-port priority interim uses can be allowed provided they do not impede the eventual use of the area for port uses or marine terminal development. Factors such as the amortization period necessary for investments in interim uses and the expected need for marine terminal development of the port area should be considered in the review of interim uses.

6. Modify container cargo throughput capacity at the Port of Oakland to reflect higher cargo throughput per marine terminal and berth because of operational efficiencies gained by the reconfiguration of the Port's marine terminals and Joint Intermodal terminal.

7. Allow bulk cargo handling in container terminals until needed exclusively for handling container cargo, provided the non-container cargo use would not impair the current or future use of the terminal for container shipping.

8. Allow passenger ferry terminals and ancillary uses in port priority use areas, but not in marine terminals, provided that the development and operations of the ferry facilities do not interfere with ongoing or future port-related uses, and navigational and passenger safety can be assured.

(c) Port Priority Use Designation Changes.

1. Port of Benicia: Remove long-term marine terminal designation.

2. Port of Oakland: Remove port priority use designation from a triangular parcel northeast of Interstate 880; remove near-term terminal and port priority use designation from the Ship Repair area; and change the "long-term" marine terminal designation at Bay Bridge site to "two-berth future marine terminal" designation.

3. Port of Redwood City: Remove port priority use designation from 106-acre area east of Seaport Boulevard.

4. Port of Richmond: Remove port priority use designation from the ancillary use zone.

5. Port of San Francisco: Remove all near-term marine terminal designations except for one at Pier 94 North, and change that remaining designation to a "future" marine terminal. Remove portions of port priority use area from existing terminals at Piers 48 and 50; remove port priority use area from Piers 52-64; remove portions of the port priority use area from Pier 70; remove port priority use area inland of and between Piers 70-80; remove portions of port priority use area from Pier 80 and Piers 94-96; and remove port priority use designation from Pier 98.

6. Mare Island Naval Shipyard: Remove port priority use designation from entire base. Retain the Mare Island dredged material disposal ponds, which are located in historic baylands, in water-related industry priority use for dredged material disposal and rehandling. The three northernmost ponds could be used to provide wetland habitat for the salt marsh harvest mouse in order to mitigate any potential adverse impacts resulting from the future use of the other seven ponds for dredged material disposal and rehandling.

7. FISCO Alameda Annex: Remove port priority use designation.

8. Fleet and Industrial Supply Center Oakland (FISCO): Retain port priority use designation and add 5-berth future marine terminal designation.

9. Hunters Point Naval Shipyard:Remove all but 55-acre port priority use designation on the southeast portion of the Shipyard.

10. Selby Site:Remove the port priority use designation from the Unocal property. Retain a 60-acre port priority use area and 5-berth marine terminal designation on the Wickland Oil property.

11. Vallejo Site: Remove the port priority use and near-term marine terminal designations from the waterfront.

12. Martinez (Pacheco Creek Sites): Remove port priority use designation from all areas.

13. Alameda Gateway Site (Former Todd Shipyard):Remove port priority use designation.

14. Port of Oakland:Remove port priority use area designation from 174.4 acres of land in the northern part of the former Oakland Army Base. Add port priority use area designation to an approximately 10-acre parcel east of Interstate Highway 880 between 16th Street, West Grand Avenue and Wood Street. Add port priority use area designation to an 11-acre parcel within the Interstate 880 right-of-way under the elevated portion of Interstate Highway 880 adjacent to the 10-acre parcel. Add port priority use area designation to a 30-acre parcel west of Interstate Highway 880 at Seventh Street. Revise the north and east boundaries of the Northern Area of the Oakland Priority Use Area consistent with the changes to the port priority use area designation.

15. Port of Benicia:Remove port priority use designation from 48 acres of Port property, from 30 acres owned by the City of Benicia, and from approximately 80 acres of privately owned property.

16. Port of Oakland:Remove port priority use and two-berth marine terminal designations from Ninth Avenue Terminal.

17. Port of Richmond:Remove port priority use and one-berth marine terminal designations from Terminal 4.

18. Port of San Francisco:Remove port priority use designation from all but approximately 16 acres and remove two-berth marine terminal designation in its entirely from Pier 70.

19. Redwood City:Remove port priority use and one-berth marine terminal designations from former Cargill salt terminal.

20. Collinsville:Remove port priority use designation.


Note: Authority cited: Sections 66602, 66611, 66632(f), 66651 and 66652, Government Code. Reference: Section 66652, Government Code; San Francisco Bay Plan Part IV; and San Francisco Bay Area Seaport Plan Part I, II, and III.

s 11960. 1996 San Francisco Waterfront Special Area Plan Amendment.

(a) On March 21, 1996, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission approved Resolution 96-02, adopting Bay Plan Amendment No. 3-95, modifying the San Francisco Waterfront Special Area Plan to permit certain uses on new or replacement fill at Pier 52 in San Francisco, by making the following changes to the Special Area Plan:

(1) Add "commercial recreation" to the uses allowed at Pier 52 on new or replacement fill in the Geographic-Specific Policies and Recommendations section and add a plan note to Special Area Plan Maps 4 and 5 adding "commercial recreation" to the list of uses now authorized at Pier 52 on new or replacement fill.

(2) Make minor corrective changes to Special Area Plan Maps 4 and 5 by adding the pier numbers to Piers 52 and 54 and changing the name of the street in front of Pier 52 from "China Basin Street" to "Terry A. Francois Boulevard."

(b) On July 20, 2000, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission approved Resolution No. 00-06, adopting Bay Plan Amendment No. 7-99, modifying the San Francisco Waterfront Special Area Plan as follows:

(1) Delete the "Introduction" to the Special Area Plan and provide a new, more current introduction.

(2) Re-define the boundaries of the Geographic Vicinities that define the locations where fill removal can offset fill placement for projects approved pursuant to the Replacement Fill policies in Part IV of the San Francisco Bay Plan .

(3) Delete the recommendations in all sections of the Special Area Plan.

(4) Add a policy to the Fisherman's Wharf Geographic Specific Policies calling for a community planning process to reevaluate the Special Area Plan policies governing the area between the Hyde Street Pier and East Wharf Park in San Francisco.

(5) Delete the partial quotations from the McAteer-Petris Act and San Francisco Bay Plan in the Special Area Plan.

(6) Modify Special Area Plan Maps 1 through 9 to reflect the above changes, and to incorporate past Special Area Plan amendments adopted by the Commission, but not reflected in the maps.

(7) Add "Appendix I" to the plan providing a brief history of the development of the Special Area Plan and amendments to it.

(8) Make necessary changes to the existing Special Area Plan General Policies to indicate when these do not apply within the area between Pier 35 and China Basin in San Francisco.

(9) Replace the Geographic Specific policies that apply to the Northeastern Waterfront (the area between Pier 35 and China Basin) with new Geographic Specific policies that apply to the Northeastern Waterfront as follows:

a. Permit uses consistent with the Public Trust Doctrine and the Port of San Francisco's legislative trust grant on repaired or wholly reconstructed piers not identified for removal in the area between Pier 35 and China Basin in San Francisco.

b. Require the provision of substantial public benefits, including the removal of Piers 24, 34 and 36, the Pier 15-17 "valley" and non-historic shed additions, and the partial removal of Piers 1/2, 2, and the shed at Pier 23; and the planning, design and construction of two major plazas: the Northeast Wharf Plaza and the Brannan Street Wharf Plaza.

c. Specify four Open Water Basins and other Open Water Areas, and permit a limited range of uses and types of fill within Open Water Basins and Open Water Areas.

d. Better define maximum feasible public access for major pier redevelopment projects and for small projects in the area between Pier 35 and China Basin in San Francisco.

e. Add policy sections addressing historic preservation, waterfront design, views and transportation and parking for the area between Pier 35 and China Basin in San Francisco.

f. Add Implementation Requirements to the Special Area Plan for the public benefits described in (2) above.

(10) Rescind the San Francisco Waterfront Total Design Plan Piers 7 through 24 .


Note: Authority cited: Sections 66632(f), 66651 and 66652, Government Code. Reference: Sections 66601, 66602 and 66605, Government Code.

s 11961. Approval of White Slough Specific Area Plan.

On December 15, 1999, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission approved the White Slough Specific Area Plan, pursuant to the White Slough Protection and Development Act. The Plan provides for the following in the White Slough area of Vallejo and western Solano County:

(a) permanent protection and enhancement of at least 336 acres of tidal wetlands within White Slough and 132 acres of tidally influenced areas in South White Slough;

(b) the minimum amount of fill, not to exceed 13 acres, necessary to widen State Highway Route 37 to a four-lane highway and to construct interchanges between State Highway Route 37 and State Highway Route 29 and Sacramento Street;

(c) flood protection for upland areas;

(d) suitable water quality; and

(e) wetland enhancement for all tidally influenced areas of South White Slough, including a program for the acquisition, enhancement and permanent preservation of those areas.


Note: Authority cited: Sections 66632(f), 66651 and 66652, Government Code. Reference: Sections 66670-66682, Government Code.


s 11990. Certification of Amendment to Solano County Local Protection Program.

On June 17, 1999, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission approved Resolution No. 99-02, certifying amendments to Solano County's Local Protection Program component to:

(a) allow wetland restoration and enhancement of diked former tidal marsh within the Collinsville water-related industry reserve area;

(b) assure that any restoration or enhancement project be planned and carried out in a manner that would not preclude development of a marine terminal on the deep water frontage needed for water-related industry or port development; and

(c) not preclude development of a transportation connection between the shoreline and the upland area for water-related uses.


Note: Authority cited: Sections 29200 and 29201, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 29415, 29418 and 29410-39424, Public Resources Code.