Final General Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement: San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park, California

100 Pages·1997·4.9 MB·English

by  National Park Service

I 29.79/3: SA 5 F
Final
General Management Plan
Environmental Impact Statement
an Francisee-Mantime
"^
National Histo-pica-kPark • California
Printed onrecycled paper
DOCUMENlbH
PUBLIC
DEPOSITORY ITEM
1
NOV 1 9 1997
CLEMSON
LIBRARY
Final
General Management Plan Environmental
/
Impact Statement
July 1997
SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK
San Francisco County, California
TheDraft GeneralManagementPlan IEnvironmentalImpactStatementpresented a proposed action and two alter-
natives forthe management, use, and preservation ofresources and developed areaswithin San Francisco Maritime
National Historical Park. It also presented the purpose andsignificance ofthe park, draftvision and mission state-
ments, interpretive themes, management objectives, and managementzoning. The environmental consequencesof
the proposed action and the alternativeswereevaluated aswell.ThisFinalGeneralManagementPlan I
EnvironmentalImpactStatement includesonlyfactualcorrectionsand textclarifications to the draft documentplus
copies ofrepresentativecomment letters and responsesofthe National Park Service to publiccomments.
AlternativeA(the proposed action)wouldprovide aplan foremphasizing the preservation andmaintenance ofthe
park'scollection, including thefleet ofhistoricvessels, smallwatercraft, library, and archival materials. Minimal
measures to slow down deterioration ofthe steam schooner Wapama wouldbe implemented, but thevessel'sunder-
lyingstructural decaywould notbe addressed.The shipwouldbe dismantledwhen it could no longerbe maintained
in a safe condition. However,before this actionwouldbe taken, effortswouldbe made toseekout otheragencyor
private organizations interested in reconstructingorpreserving Wapama as a dryberth exhibit. The parkwould also
pursue multiple strategiesfor majorshiprestoration. Greateruseofthe park'scollection by the publicforresearch
and interpretive purposeswouldbe provided through the use ofadditional facilities, includingrehabilitation ofthe
Haslett Warehouse.The intersection at Hyde andJefferson Streetswould be redesigned toenhance pedestrian
access andvisibilityofthe pier and historicships and to expand interpretive opportunities. AquaticParkwouldbe
enhanced and maintained as apublic open space, and recreational activities in the lagoon such asswimming, row-
ing, and the temporarymooring ofsailboatswould continue tobe provided to all users. Parkvolunteerprograms
wouldbe enhanced andvisitorswouldbe encouraged toexperience otherrelated sites in the BayArea. The other
alternatives include alternative B, which issimilarto alternativeA,with afewmodifications, andalternative C,
which is the no-action, minimum requirements alternative.
TheDraft GeneralManagementPlan IEnvironmentalImpactStatementforSan Francisco Maritime National
Historical Parkwas released for formal public reviewonAugust2, 1996, as announced in theFederalRegister. The
draft documentwas on public reviewfor60days.
Arecord ofdecision on the final planwillbeissued 30daysafterthisfinal documenthasbeen made availablefor
public review, as announced in theFederalRegister. Forfurtherinformation about thisplan, pleasecontact San
Francisco Maritime NHP at the following address:
Superintendent, San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park
National Park Service
BuildingE, Fort Mason
San Francisco, California 94123
Telephone: [phone] Q.
CD
United StatesDepartment ofthe Interior • National ParkService vj-
CoD
I
oo
a>
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2012 with funding from
LYRASIS IVIembers and Sloan Foundation
http://archive.org/details/finalgeneralmana97sanfra
—
CONTENTS
Introduction 3
Errata 4
Comments and Responses 19
AppendixD: Letter ofAgreement for Consistency Determination, San Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development Commission 69
Appendix E: Programmatic Agreement: San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park,
California State Historic Preservation Officer, and Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation 78
MAPS
Management Zones 5
Land Use 13
-III

e Sailing Schooner
CJi. Thayer^'
Document
Revisions to the

INTRODUCTION
This document is an abbreviated final environmental impact statement (FEIS), and the material includ-
ed here is to be integratedwith theDraft GeneralManagementPlan/EnvironmentalImpactStatement
(NPS D-7/June 1996). The abbreviated format has been used because changes to the draft are minor, do
notresult in modification ofthe proposal or alternatives, and do not result in new information that may
have a significant effect on the environment. Use ofthis format is in compliance with the 1969 National
Environmental Pohcy Act regulations (40 CFR 1503.4(c)). It is important that the reader use theDraft
EnvironmentalImpactStatement in reviewing this document because the two documents together
describe the final proposed action, its alternatives, all significant environmental impacts, and the public
comments that have been evaluated.
The first part ofthis document contains corrections oferrors thatwere noted in the draft text. It also
contains clarifying text changes in response to publiccomments. The second part contains responses to
public comments and is broken down into responses to governmental agencies, organizations, and indi-
viduals. Because many ofthe letters from organizations and individuals presented the same issue, repre-
sentative letterswere chosen for response and are reprinted in this final document.
The major issues ofconcern raised in the letterswere related to the preservation/restoration ofthe
steam schooner Wapama, and concerns related to shared use ofthe Sea Scout Base.
ERRATA
Corrections and revisions to theDraftGeneralManagementPlan/EnvironmentalImpactStatement
(DEIS) are listed in this section. Revisionswere made in response to comments from public and agency
reviews ofthe DEIS. These revisions have not resulted in substantive modification ofthe proposed
action or the alternatives. It has been determined that the revisions do not require additional environ-
mental analysiswithin this document.
Changes to existingsentences are inbold:
SUMMARY
pageV second column, second paragraph, fourth sentence, change to read: Visitorswouldbe
guided byvisual, physical, and interpretive connections between the park's primary
facilities (Hyde Street Pier, Haslett Warehouse, Aquatic Park,Victorian Park, and
building E).
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PLAN
INTRODUCTION
page 3 second column, second paragraph, second sentence, change to read: The exhibit facility
is the Aquatic Park Bathhouse building, a national historic landmark, completed in
1939 as the centerpiece ofthe development.
page 3 second column, third paragraph, second sentence, change to read: the historic Hyde
Street cable car
MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES
page 16 first column, first bullet statement, change to read: (historicvessels, smallwatercraft,
artifacts, art, historic documents, library materials, historic structures, and the historic
district)
MANAGEMENT ZONING
page 18 first column, first paragraph, first sentence, delete: and a portion ofVictorian Park.
page 19 Management Zones map. The Development Zone boundary has been revised to
include all ofVictorian Park, which is not a contributing feature ofthe historic Aquatic
Park development. Victorian Parkwas constructed during the 1960s, which is outside
theperiod ofhistoric significance.