Chapter 4 

Impact Topics and 

the Affected Environment 
109

Introduction

This chapter begins with a discussion of the planning issues and

concerns that were identified during the planning process. The

chapter then discusses impact topics—those resources, including

people, that might be affected by National Park Service actions

proposed in the alternatives. This discussion includes

explanations of why some of those topics were retained for

further evaluation and some were dismissed from further

analysis. 

The major portion of the chapter describes the existing

environment of Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park. It presents baseline information about

the Richmond, California area that is potentially relevant to the

implementation of any of the alternatives for Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park.

The narratives include a description of the cultural and historic

resources, existing and potential visitor use, the social and

economic environment, and the existing transportation facilities

in the area. Because the park is in the San Francisco Bay Area, the

transportation discussion has been broken out into land

transportation and water transportation. 

In some cases, facilities that are being proposed by various

entities are also addressed, as these facilities have the potential to

affect or be affected by implementation of any of the alternatives. 

IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES

The National Park Service hosted public and government agency

meetings and workshops to gather stories and ideas for the future

of the national historical park. Public opinions and ideas were

generated locally and nationally through newsletters, comment

cards, letters, and responses to the Ford Motor Company’s

campaign to collect Rosie the Riveter and World War II home

front stories and artifacts.

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED IN THIS GENERAL

MANAGEMENT PLAN

• World War II Historic Sites and Structures

The World War II-era historic sites and structures in Richmond,

California are maintained and managed by different public and

Planning Issues
private owners. The National Park Service does not

own any of the historic sites and structures. Many of

these park resources are losing their World War II

qualities and attributes while accommodating

contemporary uses. What elements of the park’s

sites and structures need to be preserved in order to

tell the World War II home front stories?

• Museum Collections

A large amount of World War II home front historic

objects, artifacts, works of art, documents, drawings,

and letters are located throughout the nation’s attics

and basements and in formal collections. What is the

purpose of the park’s museum collection and how

will it guide future acquisitions? 

The growing museum collection at Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park requires an appropriate curatorial

and research facility the meets the secretary of the

interior’s standards. Where should the curatorial and

research facility be located?

• Visitor Experience

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park is a newly established

partnership park. Currently, visitor opportunities to

explore and learn about the World War II home

front stories are not available at many of the park

sites and structures. The national historical park

lacks a unified identity among the many park sites

that could help guide park visitors. Most visitors

explore the national historical park on their own,

using self-guiding brochures. There are few

scheduled talks and guided tours. Visitor orientation

and information are available through the park’s

website and self-service information station. What

level and type of park services, orientation, and

education are necessary in order for visitors to

experience and learn about the themes of the

national historical park?

• SS Red Oak Victory

The Richmond Museum Association owns,

manages, and is restoring the SS Red Oak Victory.

There are potential alternative locations in which to

berth the SS Red Oak Victory in Richmond,

California. What is the best location to berth the SS

Red Oak Victory in order to integrate it with the

World War II home front stories and the visitor

experience of the national historical park?

• Role of the National Park Service

The National Park Service maintains a small staff

and is leading the planning effort in establishing the

national historical park. The National Park Service

has limited financial resources and does not own or

manage the primary historic resources of the

national historical park. What role and contributions

could the National Park Service provide to this

partnership park?

110

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
111

An important part of planning is seeking to understand the

consequences of making one decision over another. This

environmental assessment identifies the anticipated impacts of

possible actions on resources and on park visitors and neighbors.

The impacts are organized by topic, such as “impacts on the

cultural resources” or “impacts on visitor use and experience.”

Impact topics serve to focus the environmental analysis and to

ensure the relevance of impact evaluation. 

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical

Park is a partnership park where the resources are owned and the

visitor opportunities are managed primarily by other public and

private entities. The impact topics will focus the discussion of

environmental consequences that are described in chapter 5.

That discussion will be focused on the actions of the National

Park Service and the influence of those actions and not on

actions of the non-federal cooperating partners of the park.

The impact topics identified for this general management plan are

outlined in this section. They were identified based on federal

laws and other legal requirements, Council on Environmental

Quality (CEQ) guidelines, management policies, staff subjectmatter expertise, and the input of staff from other agencies and

the public who identified issues and concerns during the

planning process. Also included in this section is a discussion of

some impact topics that are commonly addressed in general

management plans but that are dismissed in this plan for the

reasons given.

IMPACT TOPICS TO BE CONSIDERED

• Cultural Resources

Cultural resource impact topics were selected on the basis of

significant values identified in the park’s enabling legislation,

major values identified during the plan’s scoping process, and

applicable laws, executive orders, and regulations as well as

management policies and guidelines. The National Historic

Preservation Act, Archeological Resources Protection Act, Native 

American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, National

Impact Topics – 

Resources and

Values at Stake in

the Planning

Process
Environmental Policy Act, and other legislation

require that the effects of any federal undertakings

on cultural resources be examined and analyzed.

Also, NPS Management Policies 2006, Director’s

Order 28: Cultural Resource Management Guideline

and Director’s Order 24: Museum Collections

Management Guideline call for consideration of the

effects of planning proposals on cultural resources.

Actions proposed in each of the alternatives

considered in this planning document could affect

four categories of cultural resources as defined in

NPS Management Policies: archeological (historic)

resources, structures (historic), cultural landscapes,

and museum collections (objects).

• Visitor Use and Experience

Enjoyment of the historic resources by visitors is

part of the fundamental purpose of the new national

historical park. The visitor experience is an

important issue that could be appreciably affected

under the alternatives. The Organic Act and NPS

Management Policies 2006 direct the National Park

Service to provide enjoyment opportunities that are

uniquely suited and appropriate to the resources

found in the national historical park. Two major

aspects of visitation and enjoyment are evaluated:

diversity of opportunities for exploration, and

comprehensiveness of interpretation and education.

• Social and Economic Environment

A community such as Richmond, California, could

notice changes brought about by a new national

historical park depending on the degree of actions

implemented by the cooperating partners. The

impact topic relating to the social and economic

environment of Richmond includes the influence of

the national historical park on the economic

environment, community infrastructure (such as

police and fire), quality of life for residents, and

opportunities for visitor support services.

• Transportation

There is the potential for the new national historical

park to become an attraction that results in a change

or additional use to the local land and water

transportation infrastructure. The effects of park

visitation could influence traffic patterns and

transportation modes. Because the park is located in

the Bay Area, the discussion of transportation is

divided into transportation by land and

transportation by water.

IMPACT TOPICS DISMISSED FROM

FURTHER CONSIDERATION 

Some impact topics that commonly are considered

during the planning process were not relevant to the

development of this general management plan

because (a) implementing the alternative visions

would have either no effect or a negligible effect on

the topic or resource, or (b) the resource does not

occur in the national historical park. Those topics

include ethnographic resources; geologic resources;

soils; prime and unique farmland; paleontological

resources; natural shoreline and coastal processes;

air quality; water resources; wetlands; floodplains;

vegetation and wildlife; essential fish habitat; coral

reef protection; marine protected areas; threatened,

endangered, and candidate species and species of

special concern; soundscape management;

lightscape management; wild and scenic rivers;

wilderness; environmental justice; energy

requirements and conservation potential; and

natural or depletable resource requirements and

conservation potential. A discussion of why these

topics were dismissed follows.

• Ethnographic Resources

The topic of ethnographic resources was dismissed

as an impact topic because an ethnographic

overview and assessment has not been undertaken

for Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park. Thus, no ethnographic

resources or sites of cultural significance have been

identified in or near the park, and no traditional

cultural properties have been listed, or determined

eligible for listing, in the National Register of

Historic Places.

Some historic sites, such as the Harbor Gate Homes

defense housing project where the Richmond

branch of the National Association for the

Advancement of Colored People was established in

1944, have been demolished. However, some known

historic buildings and sites associated with

Richmond’s World War II-era ethnic communities

remain extant. These include

 Galileo Club (Italian American social and

cultural organization)

 Japanese American nurseries (Cohesive

community/commercial sector that was

eradicated during the war and partially rebuilt

afterwards)

112

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
113

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

 Mexican Baptist Church (Center for Mexican American

community and source of information for migrants during

wartime)

Little or no ethnographic research has been conducted on these

groups or their cultural relationships to sites and resources in or

near the park area. 

It is recommended that an ethnographic overview and

assessment be conducted to provide comprehensive background

data on types, uses, and users of ethnographic resources in or

near the park. While it is thought that the national historical park

would have a negligible impact on any ethnographic resources

that were identified, the information generated by the study

would enable the National Park Service to provide a platform for

ethnic communities to tell their stories.

• Natural Resources

Following is a general overview of the area that includes the

noncontiguous sites of Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home

Front National Historic Park. The information provided is

pertinent to the dismissal of several natural resource impact

topics. 

In the 19th century, much of the area that is the present-day

location of several waterfront sites associated with the park

(Sheridan Observation Point Park, Ford Assembly Building,

Lucretia Edwards Park, Bay Trail and Esplanade, Barbara and Jay

Vincent Park, Shimada Peace Memorial Park, and Rosie the

Riveter Memorial) was a tidal basin and mudflats. During the

early decades of the 20th century this area was dredged and

reclaimed to create a deep-water port and waterfront. By the late

1920s the area was fully developed.

At the outset of the 1940s the site of Shipyard No. 3—the only

surviving shipyard of the four Richmond shipyards constructed

during World War II and today an integral part of the park—was

predominantly a series of small hills and tidal mudflats. Beginning

in January 1942, the hills were graded flat and about 2.2 million

cubic yards of soil and rock were dredged and/or moved to

accommodate the construction of the shipyard. Much of the

excavated soil and rock was used as fill to create acres of storage

and parking on what were once tidal mudflats.

Since the 1940s the park shoreline has been a developed

waterfront, hardened, and/or covered with riprap. There are no

natural or artificial water courses within the park boundaries, and

there are no stream or creek outlets along the shoreline of the

park.
Some of the present-day waterfront areas that

contain park sites are current or former brownfield

sites. Brownfields are former industrial and

commercial sites where reuse or redevelopment is

complicated by the presence of hazardous

substances, pollutants, or contaminants. During

World War II, activities related to shipbuilding, ship

repair, ship scrapping, and metal recycling

contaminated soils throughout the area.

Contaminants that have been detected include

asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls, polycyclic

aromatic hydrocarbons, total petroleum

hydrocarbons, and heavy metals. Much of the

waterfront area is, or will be, reclaimed (remediation

primarily includes the consolidation and capping of

contaminated soils and, in some cases, the

establishment of covenants restricting use to

commercial and industrial development).

The inland park sites (Maritime and Ruth C. Powers

child development centers, Kaiser Permanente Field

Hospital, Richmond Fire Station 67A) are in longstanding urban or commercial neighborhoods of

Richmond. Each site is a developed and/or

landscaped environment.

Geologic Resources. According to NPS

management policies, the National Park Service will

(1) assess the impacts of natural processes and

human-related events on geologic resources, (2)

maintain and restore the integrity of existing

geologic resources, (3) integrate geologic resource

management into National Park Service operations

and planning, and (4) interpret geologic resources

for park visitors. Examples of important geologic

resources in parks include rocks and minerals;

geysers and hot springs in geothermal systems; cave

and karst systems; canyons and arches in erosional

landscapes; sand dunes, moraines, and terraces in

depositional landscapes; and dramatic or unusual

rock outcrops and formations. 

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park neither protects and

preserves nor interprets important geologic

resources. Therefore, the topic of geologic resources

was dismissed from further analysis.

Soils. According to its management policies, the

National Park Service actively seeks to understand

and preserve the soil resources of parks, and to

prevent, to the extent possible, the unnatural

erosion, physical removal, or contamination of the

soil, or its contamination of other resources. 

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park comprises lands that are

classified by the Natural Resource Conservation

Service as urban lands. Urban land is nonagricultural

land comprising soil material that was disturbed and

manipulated by human activities in an urban

environment. Urban soils are extensively disturbed,

displaced, and compacted, which creates a soil

material unlike its natural counterpart. This can be

due to (1) the mixing of soil material when soil is

scraped away, stockpiled, and re-spread, or

transported to another location and spread; (2) the

dumping and spreading of soil material from diverse

sources over existing surfaces; and (3) the

contamination resulting from deposition, mixing,

and filling of materials not found in the natural soil,

or found at concentrations greater than those usually

found in natural soils. Such disturbance and

manipulation results in changes to the physical,

chemical, and biological properties of these soils;

these changes make them generally less favorable as

a rooting medium than soils in a natural landscape. 

The magnitude of earth that was moved to create the

deepwater port and waterfront, as well as to

accommodate the construction of Shipyards No. 2

and 3 during World War II, permanently altered the

topography of the land and natural soil regimes.

Since the 1940s much of the lands associated with

the park, both along the waterfront and further

inland, have been either developed or covered with

impermeable surfaces (asphalt and concrete); this

has eliminated much of the direct inflow of water to

the soil and has altered soil moisture, chemistry, and

landscape.

Construction associated with implementation of the

alternatives primarily involves the rehabilitation of

existing structures, which would have no additional

impact on soils. Because the soils in Shipyard No. 3

were extensively disturbed by the construction of

the shipyard in the 1940s, any short- or long-term

adverse impacts on soils associated with excavation,

grading, and resurfacing with concrete or asphalt

would be negligible. Existing topography and

elevations would not be altered during construction,

and the potential for soil erosion would be minimal

114

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
115

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

because much of the surrounding park land is developed or

covered with impermeable surfaces and appropriate soil erosion

control measures would be implemented for any excavated or

exposed soils.

Because the topography and natural soil regimes of the park

lands were permanently altered by construction of a deepwater

port and waterfront, as well as by decades of industrialization and

urbanization, and because any construction-related adverse

impacts on soils would be negligible, the topic of soils was

dismissed from further analysis.

Prime and Unique Farmland. In August, 1980, the Council on

Environmental Quality (CEQ) directed that federal agencies

assess the effects of their actions on farmland soils classified as

prime or unique by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural

Resource Conservation Service. Prime farmland is land that has

the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for

producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops and is

available for these uses. Unique farmland is land other than prime

farmland that is used for the production of specific high-value

food and fiber crops (e.g., citrus, tree nuts, olives, cranberries,

fruit, and vegetables). 

According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service, there

are no prime and unique farmlands in Rosie the Riveter/World

War II Home Front National Historical Park. The soil within the

land-based sites of the park is classified as urban land (see

description of urban land under “Soils”). The park sites were

extensively disturbed by decades of industrialization and

urbanization, and much of the land is covered with impermeable

surfaces. Because there are no prime and unique farmlands in the

park, the topic of prime and unique farmlands was dismissed

from further analysis.

Paleontological Resources. Paleontological resources are the

remains of ancient plants and animals—both organic and

mineralized remains in body or trace form—that provide

information about earth’s ancient environment. According to

NPS management policies, paleontological resources will be

protected, preserved, and managed for public education,

interpretation, and scientific research.

There are no known paleontological resources in Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park, and

it is extremely unlikely that any would be discovered. The landbased park sites are extensively disturbed by decades of

industrialization and urbanization, and many of the waterfront

sites were constructed on tons of fill material. Therefore, the

topic of paleontological resources was dismissed from further

analysis.
Natural Shoreline/Coastal Processes. According to

NPS management policies, natural shoreline

processes (such as erosion, deposition, dune

formation, overwash, inlet formation, and shoreline

migration) will be allowed to continue without

interference in order to maintain the integrity of

associated biological and physical systems.

Disruption of natural shoreline physical processes

directly impacts the species that depend upon them,

usually resulting in diminished biodiversity.

During the early 20th century the natural shoreline

in the area of the park was obliterated. The park’s

waterfront sites and their immediate environs are

developed and landscaped environments. The

shoreline is a developed waterfront, or is hardened

or covered with riprap. There are no stream or creek

outlets along the park shoreline, and there are no

estuarine resources within or near park boundaries. 

Decades of industrialization and urbanization have

permanently altered the natural shoreline and

coastal processes of the lands comprising the park.

Therefore, the topic of natural shoreline/coastal

processes was dismissed from further analysis.

Air Quality. Section118 of the 1963 Clean Air Act

(42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) requires a national park unit

to meet all federal, state, and local air pollution

standards. Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home

Front National Historical Park is a class II air quality

area under the Clean Air Act, as amended. A class II

designation indicates the maximum allowable

increase in concentrations of pollutants over

baseline concentrations of sulfur dioxide and

particulate matter as specified in Section163 of the

Clean Air Act. Further, the Clean Air Act provides

that the federal land manager has an affirmative

responsibility to protect air quality-related values

(including visibility, plants, animals, soils, water

quality, cultural resources, and visitor health) from

adverse pollution impacts.

The Clean Air Act requires the Environmental

Protection Agency to identify national ambient air

quality standards to protect public health and

welfare. Standards were set for the following

pollutants: ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO),

nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2),

inhalable particulate matter less than 10 microns

(PM10) and less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), and lead

(Pb). These pollutants are designated criteria

pollutants because the standards satisfy criteria

specified in the act. An area where a standard is

exceeded more than three times in three years can

be considered a nonattainment area.

The California Clean Air Act of 1988, as amended,

sets ambient air quality standards that are stricter

than the federal standards and requires local air

districts to promulgate and implement rules and

regulations to attain those standards. Under the act,

California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS)

are set for all pollutants covered under national

standards, as well as vinyl chloride, hydrogen sulfide,

sulfates, and visibility-reducing particulates. If an

area does not meet the California standards, it is

designated as a state nonattainment area.

In 1993 the Environmental Protection Agency

adopted regulations implementing Section 176 of

the Clean Air Act as amended. Section 176 requires

that federal actions conform to state implementation

plans for achieving and maintaining the national

standards. Federal actions must not cause or

contribute to new violations of any standard,

increase the frequency or severity of any existing

violation, interfere with timely attainment or

maintenance of any standard, delay emission

reduction milestones, or contradict state

implementation plan requirements. Federal actions

that are subject to the general conformity regulations

are required to mitigate or fully offset the emissions

caused by the action, including both direct and

indirect emissions that the federal agency has some

control over.

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park is in the San Francisco Bay

Area Air Basin, which consists of San Francisco, San

Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, Contra Costa, Napa,

and Marin counties, as well as portions of Sonoma

and Solano counties. The Bay Area Air Quality

Management District is the air quality agency

responsible for the entire basin. The agency monitors

criteria pollutants continuously at stations

throughout the Bay Area.

Overall, air quality in the basin is better than in other

urban areas of California despite widespread

urbanization and extensive industrial and mobile

source (vehicular) emissions. The Bay Area’s coastal

116

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
117

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

location and favorable meteorological conditions help keep

pollution levels low much of the year, primarily due to the area’s

relatively cooler temperatures and better ventilation. However,

when temperatures are hot and there are no ocean breezes, levels

of ozone and other pollutants can exceed federal and state air

quality standards.

The San Francisco Bay Area is designated a federal nonattainment

area for ozone and a state nonattainment area for ozone and

inhalable particulate matter. Ozone is a principal component of

smog. It is caused by the photochemical reaction of ozone

precursors (reactive organic compounds and nitrogen oxides).

Ozone levels are highest in the Bay Area during days in late spring

through summer when meteorological conditions are favorable

for the photochemical reactions to occur, i.e., clear warm days

and light winds.

The precursors for ozone are primarily generated by fuel

combustion, and one of the primary sources of ozone in the San

Francisco Bay Area is mobile source emissions. Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

comprises noncontiguous sites that in an urban/commercial/

industrial area of Richmond. Two heavily traveled highways—

Interstate 580 and Interstate 80—are nearby. Richmond has an

approximate population of 100,000 and is located within the Bay

Area with a population that exceeds six million; adverse impacts

on air quality associated with vehicle use by the current fourperson park staff would be imperceptible above existing

background conditions. Park staffing levels are expected to

increase only gradually and minimally in the foreseeable future,

and any adverse impacts (direct, indirect, or cumulative) on air

quality related to park staff use of vehicles during the life of the

general management plan would be negligible.

The number of visitor vehicles operating in the park could

potentially be correlated to the number of annual visitors to the

park. However, visitation statistics for Rosie the Riveter/World

War II Home Front National Historical Park are estimates based

upon comparable park units and are therefore questionable. 

The park is a relatively new unit of the national park system

(created October 25, 2000), and the sites associated with the park

are noncontiguous. In addition, the park is a commuter park—it

would be difficult, if not impossible, to differentiate between

those heading to park sites and those traveling through the area

or to another destination because there are no fee stations or

designated access points to park sites. However, due to the

location of the 13 noncontiguous park sites—in an approximately

14-square-mile urban/ commercial/industrial area bisected by the

well-traveled Interstate 580—emissions from visitor vehicles

would be a tiny percentage of the overall emissions generated by
mobile and stationary sources in Richmond and the

San Francisco Bay Area. Similarly, any emissions

associated with park operated land- or water-based

shuttles would be imperceptible above existing

background conditions. In addition, continued

mobile source emission reductions due to

technological improvements in engines and fuels

would benefit air quality. Any adverse impacts

(direct, indirect, or cumulative) on air quality related

to park visitation would be negligible.

Structures in the park that would undergo

rehabilitation would be surveyed for asbestoscontaining materials before any construction

activities. If asbestos-containing materials are

present, the Bay Area Air Quality Management

District would be notified and appropriate work

practice requirements would be developed to

prevent the emission of asbestos into the

atmosphere. The work practice requirements would

specify appropriate removal, handling, clean-up

procedures, and time schedules, as well as the

appropriate storage, disposal, and land-filling

requirements for asbestos-containing waste

materials. All operators would be required to

maintain records, including waste shipment records,

and would be required to use appropriate warning

labels, signs, and markings.

Construction activities, including equipment

operation and the hauling of material, could result in

temporarily increased vehicle exhaust and emissions,

as well as inhalable particulate matter. Construction

dust associated with exposed soils would be

controlled with the application of water or other

approved dust palliatives. Also, dust-creating

activities would be suspended when winds are too

great to prevent visible dust clouds from affecting

sensitive receptors (houses, schools, hospitals). In

addition, any hydrocarbons, nitrogen or sulfur

dioxide emissions, and airborne particulates created

by fugitive dust plumes would be rapidly dissipated

because the location of the park and prevailing

winds allows for good air circulation. Overall, there

could be a local, short-term, negligible degradation

of local air quality during construction activities;

however, no measurable effects outside of the

immediate construction site would be anticipated.

Any construction-related adverse effects on air

quality would be temporary, lasting only as long as

the construction.

None of the actions described in the general

management plan would violate any air quality

standard or result in a cumulatively considerable net

increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Bay

Area is in nonattainment under federal or state

ambient air quality standards. Implementation of any

of the alternatives described in the general

management plan would have negligible effects on

air quality, and Rosie the Riveter/World War II

Home Front National Historical Park’s class II air

quality would be unaffected. Therefore, the topic of

air quality was dismissed from further analysis.

Water Resources. NPS management policies require

protection of water quality consistent with the Clean

Water Act. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act

authorizes the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to

prohibit or regulate, through a permitting process,

discharge of dredged or fill material or excavation in

U.S. waters.

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park comprises noncontiguous

sites that are in an urban/commercial/industrial area

of Richmond. All park sites except for the SS Red

Oak Victory (which is currently moored in Berth 6A

in Richmond Shipyard No. 3) are developed or

landscaped environments that have been disturbed

by more than a century of intense manipulation and

use. There are no natural, artificial, permanent, or

intermittent watercourses within park boundaries,

and there are no stream or creek outlets along the

shoreline of the park. Groundwater does not occur

near the surface of the park sites. There are no

estuarine resources within park boundaries. The

park shoreline is either a developed waterfront or

hardened and/or covered with riprap. 

The park’s domestic water needs are, and would

continue to be, provided by the City of Richmond,

which is expected to meet the present and

predictable water needs of the park for any potable

and fire suppression water needs. Wherever

possible, water conservation features would be used

throughout the park to reduce consumption.

Wastewater treatment services for the park sites are

provided by the City of Richmond, which has

sufficient capacity to indefinitely handle park flows.

Precipitation that falls on buildings, roads, and other

impervious structures, which could contain

118

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
pollutants such as hydrocarbons and heavy metals

from vehicles, would continue to be diverted to

existing sewer systems. No water or waste generated

by park activities would be discharged into the

Richmond Inner Harbor, and all chemicals used in

the park, e.g. pesticides, solvents, paints, and wood

preservatives, would be properly disposed of so as

not to pose a threat to human or aquatic health.

The SS Red Oak Victory would be moored either at

Berth 6A, or in the Santa Fe Channel adjacent to

Sheridan Observation Point Park. To accommodate

the berthing of the SS Red Oak Victory in the Santa

Fe Channel, a small pier in the channel adjacent to

Sheridan Observation Point Park would be extended

a short distance from shore but out of the shipping

way. Pilings for the pier would be driven using a

barge-based steam or diesel pile driver. Operation of

the barge and driving the pilings would disturb

bottom sediments, temporarily increasing the

turbidity of the water, but any impacts would be

negligible—any suspended solids would be rapidly

dissipated by normal ship traffic in the channel, and

construction-associated turbidity would cease once

the pier was erected. All appropriate state and/or

national permits would be obtained before

construction.

Because the Santa Fe Channel and adjacent inner

harbor are hardened, littoral processes (interactions

among waves, currents, winds, tides, sediments, and

other materials near a shoreline that transport

coastal materials to and away from beaches) are

nonexistent, and the pilings associated with the pier

would have no effect on littoral processes. In

addition, no sources of point pollution (e.g., pipes or

other discrete sources) would be created as a result

of the pier extension.

Mooring the SS Red Oak Victory in the Santa Fe

Channel would have no impacts on the water quality

of the Richmond Inner Harbor because no water or

waste would be discharged from the berthed ship

into the waters of the channel or inner harbor.

Neither the short extension from Sheridan

Observation Point Park nor mooring the SS Red Oak

Victory in the Santa Fe Channel or Richmond Inner

Harbor waters would affect the water chemistry and

related physiochemical properties (pH, temperature,

dissolved oxygen, turbidity) of nearby coastal waters,

the nature of their aquatic habitats, or contribute to

increased silt loads or nutrient enrichment of coastal

waters.

Because implementation of the actions described in

the general management plan would have either no

effect or negligible effects upon water resources, the

topic of water resources was dismissed from further

analysis.

Wetlands. Executive Order 11990, “Protection of

Wetlands,” requires federal agencies to avoid, where

possible, adversely impacting wetlands. The goal of

NPS wetlands management is to strive for a no net

loss of wetlands as defined by both acreage and

function. Proposed actions that have the potential to

adversely impact wetlands must be addressed in a

statement of findings.

There are no wetlands within or adjacent to park

boundaries. There would be no impacts on wetlands

under any of the alternatives, and a statement of

findings for wetlands will not be prepared.

Therefore, the topic of wetlands was dismissed from

further analysis.

Floodplains. Executive Order 11988, “Floodplain

Management,” requires all federal agencies to avoid

construction within the 100-year floodplain unless

no other practicable alternative exists. Certain

construction within a 100-year floodplain requires

preparation of a statement of findings.

There are no natural, artificial, permanent, or

intermittent water courses in the park, and there are

no stream or creek outlets along the shoreline of the

park. The chances of a 100-year or 500-year flood in

the park are inconsequential. 

Four park sites—the southern end of Shipyard No. 3

(primarily the graving basins/dry docks), the western

edge of Sheridan Observation Point Park, Barbara

and Jay Vincent Park, and Shimada Peace Memorial

Park—are in the 100-year coastal floodplain. None

of the park sites is in the 500-year floodplain.

In the 19th century much of the area that is the

present-day location of the park’s waterfront sites

was predominantly a tidal basin and mudflats. Any

natural floodplain values associated with this area—

wildlife habitat, groundwater recharge, hydrologic

balance or buffering of flood flows—have been

119

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park
altered by more than a century of modification and

occupation, and it is contrary to the park’s purpose

and significance to reestablish an environment in

which the natural ecological systems associated with

floodplains could function.

There are no park-related administrative, residential,

warehouse, or maintenance buildings, and no

nonexcepted parking lots in the 100-year floodplain,

and there are no outdoor education and recreation

values associated with the floodplain. Any new parkrelated buildings associated with Richmond

Shipyard No. 3 would be constructed outside the

floodplain. In addition, the potential short extension

tie-up adjacent to Sheridan Observation Point Park,

to accommodate the berthing of the SS Red Oak

Victory in the Santa Fe Channel, would affect neither

the capacity nor function of the 100-year floodplain.

None of the proposed actions in the general

management plan would put life at risk; potential

harm to any property would be negligible. A

statement of findings for floodplains will not be

prepared, and the impact topic of floodplains is

dismissed from further analysis.

Vegetation and Wildlife. The National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 USC 4321 et

seq.) calls for an examination of the impacts on all

components of affected ecosystems. According to its

management policies, the National Park Service

strives to maintain all components and processes of

naturally evolving park unit ecosystems, including

the natural abundance, diversity, and ecological

integrity of plants and animals.

None of the park sites included in Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park is a natural ecosystem. Other than

the SS Red Oak Victory, the sites are developed or

landscaped environments, or both. There are no

natural, artificial, permanent, or intermittent

watercourses in any of the park sites. There are no

stream or creek outlets along the shoreline of the

park, and no wetlands inside park boundaries. The

waterfront shoreline is either developed or

comprised of hardened, bare soil, riprap, or

concrete. There are no rock reefs, tide pools,

marshes, kelp beds, subtidal sand flats, or estuarine

resources within park boundaries.

Vegetation along the waterfront is either ruderal or

characteristic of a designed and landscaped habitat.

Ruderal vegetation includes coyote brush (Baccharis

pilularis), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), yellow sweet

clover (Melilotus indica), mustard (Brassica sp.), and

pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana). Landscaped

vegetation along the Bay Trail/Esplanade and at the

Ford Assembly Building and oil house include

grasses/lawn (festuca sp.), ice plant (carpobrotus

chilense), Pride of Maderia (echium fastuosum),

lavender cotton (santolina sp.), eucalyptus

(eucalyptus sp.), and rockrose (cistus sp.).

Shipyard No. 3 is dominated by large structures and

open spaces that are predominantly surfaced with

impermeable material (concrete or asphalt). Minimal

landscaped vegetation (trees and evergreen shrubs)

is found near the cafeteria and first aid station.

Eucalyptus and photinia (photinia x fraseri) are

common examples. The remaining park sites

(Richmond Fire Station 67A, Kaiser Permanente

Field Hospital, and the Maritime and Ruth C.

Powers child development centers) are developed

and landscaped. Vegetation includes grasses/lawn,

sycamore (plantanus racemosa or plantanus x

acerifolia), eucalyptus, and pines (pinus sp.).

Decades of urbanization and industrialization have

destroyed any natural habitat available to wildlife in

the park. The absence of natural habitat and surface

water preclude the presence of any land mammals

except those common to urban habitats throughout

the Bay Area, e.g., rodents, ground squirrels, and

rabbits. Common avian species observed in the park

or general vicinity include the Canada goose (Branta

canadensis), mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), common

raven (Corvus corax), song sparrow (Melospiza

melodia), western gull (Larus occidentalis), European

starling (Sturnus vulgaris), house finch (Carpodacus

mexicanus), common loon (Gavia immer), doublecrested cormorant (Phalacrocorax avritus), blackcrowned night heron (Nyctiocorax nyctiocorax), and

black-necked stilts (Himantopus mexicanus). None

of the species are afforded special status by either

state or federal agencies. There are no seabird

rookeries in the park, and park lands are not critical

for nesting or breeding. In addition, none of the

actions proposed in the general management plan

would affect transient birds.

Harbor seals (Phoca vitulina), California sea lions

120

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
(Zalophus californicus), and occasional northern

elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) are known

to occur in San Francisco Bay. 

The park sites are urban and industrial in character

and lack natural habitat. Therefore, preserving and

restoring the natural abundances, diversities,

dynamics, and distributions of native animal

populations are not appropriate within the park. The

topic of biotic communities was dismissed from

further analysis. 

Essential Fish Habitat. In accordance with the 1996

amendments to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act, federal agencies

that fund, permit, or carry out activities that may

adversely impact essential fish habitat are required to

consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service

(NMFS) regarding the potential adverse effects of

their actions on essential fish habitat; such agencies

must also respond in writing to NMFS

recommendations. 

Essential fish habitat is defined as “those waters and

substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding,

feeding, or growth to maturity.” Waters include

aquatic areas and their associated physical, chemical,

and biological properties. Substrate includes

sediment underlying the waters. Necessary means

the habitat required to support a sustainable fishery

and the species’ contribution to a healthy ecosystem.

Spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity

covers all habitat types used by a species throughout

its life cycle. The conservation of essential fish

habitat is an important component of building and

maintaining sustainable fisheries.

Table 10 shows the species distributions for essential

fish habitat in San Francisco Bay (from the Bay

Bridge to San Rafael Bridge), according to the

National Marine Fisheries Service.

Loss or degradation of essential fish habitat is

primarily the result of activities such as point and

nonpoint water pollution, livestock grazing, mining,

road construction, estuarine or marine habitat

alteration, creation of migration barriers or hazards,

increases or decreases in sediment delivery, and

alteration of stream banks, shorelines, wetlands, and

floodplains.

None of the actions described in the general

management plan would contribute to a reduction in

the quality or quantity of essential fish habitat or

depress fish populations in San Francisco Bay.

Therefore, the topic of essential fish habitat was

dismissed from further analysis.

Coral Reef Protection. Executive Order 13089,

“Coral Reef Protection,” calls for research aimed at

identifying the major causes and consequences of

degradation of coral reef ecosystems, reduction of

impacts to coral reefs, and coral reef restoration.

There are no coral reef ecosystems in the Richmond

Inner Harbor or general vicinity of Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park. Therefore, the topic of coral reef

protection was dismissed from further analysis. 

Marine Protected Areas. Executive Order 13158,

“Marine Protected Areas,” defines marine protected

areas as any area of the marine environment that has

been reserved by federal, state, territorial, tribal, or

local laws or regulations to provide lasting

protection for part or all of the natural and cultural

resources therein. The executive order requires

every federal agency to identify its actions that affect

121

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

Northern anchovy Abundant

Jack mackerel Present

Pacific sardine Rare

English sole Abundant

Starry flounder Abundant

Brown rockfish Abundant

Pacific sanddab Present

Lingcod Present

Sand sole Present

Big skate Present

Pacific whiting Present

Kelp greenling Present

Soupfin shark Present

Curlfin sole Present

Bocaccio Rare

Cabezon Few

Spiny dogfish Present

Leopard Shark Present

SPECIES

RELATIVE

ABUNDANCE

Table 10: ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT – 

SPECIES AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE
the natural or cultural resources that are protected

by a marine protected area and, to the extent

permitted by law and the maximum extent

practicable, to avoid harming these resources.

There are no marine protected areas in the

Richmond Inner Harbor or general vicinity of Rosie

the Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park. Therefore, the topic of marine

protected areas was dismissed from further analysis.

Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species

and Species of Special Concern. The Endangered

Species Act (1973) requires an examination of

impacts on all federally listed threatened or

endangered species. NPS policy also requires

examination of the impacts on federal candidate

species, as well as state-listed threatened,

endangered, candidate, rare, declining, and sensitive

species, known collectively as species of concern.

The National Park Service must conference or

informally consult with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife

Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service

pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act

to (1) clarify whether and what listed, proposed, and

candidate species or designated or proposed critical

habitats may be in the project area; (2) determine

what effect proposed actions may have on these

species or critical habitats; and (3) determine the

need to enter into formal consultation for listed

species or designated critical habitats, or conference

for proposed species or proposed critical habitats.

Formal consultations begin when it is determined

that a proposed action(s) is likely to adversely affect

a threatened or endangered species or critical

habitat. 

On May 16, 2003 the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service

provided a list of threatened or endangered species,

candidate species, and species of special concern

that may be potentially found in Contra Costa

County (appendix D). For each threatened or

endangered species, candidate species, or species of

concern, the National Park Service must decide if

the actions described in the general management

plan would result in a determination of

No effect—The proposed actions would not

affect listed species or critical habitat.

May affect but not likely to adversely

affect—Any effects on listed species or

critical habitat would be expected to be

discountable, insignificant, or completely

beneficial. (Insignificant effects relate to the

inability to meaningfully measure, detect, or

evaluate effects and discountable effects are

those extremely unlikely to occur.) A may

affect but not likely to adversely affect

determination requires informal section 7

consultation. 

May affect but likely to adversely

affect—Any adverse effect on listed species

or critical habitat may occur as a direct or

indirect result of the actions proposed or its

interrelated or interdependent actions, and

the effect is not discountable, insignificant,

or beneficial. In the event the overall effect of

the proposed action is beneficial to the listed

species, but also is likely to cause some

adverse effects, then the proposed action is

likely to adversely affect the listed species. A

may affect but likely to adversely affect

determination requires formal section 7

consultation.

Is likely to jeopardize proposed species/

adversely modify proposed critical

habitat—The proposed action(s) is likely to

jeopardize the continued existence of a

species or adversely modify the critical

habitat.

Appendix D lists the threatened or endangered

species, candidate species, and species of special

concern potentially found in Contra Costa County.

The analysis indicates the potential for occurrence of

each species in or near park sites and identifies the

effect proposed actions would have upon each

species. As described in appendix D, the National

Park Service determined that the actions described

in the general management plan would have no

effect on any of the threatened or endangered

species, candidate species, and species of special

concern for the following reasons:

 The park sites are either outside the known

range of the species or the sites lack suitable

habitat. Decades of urbanization and

industrialization have destroyed any natural

habitat within park boundaries and, other than

122

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
the SS Red Oak Victory, the park sites are

developed or landscaped environments. There

are no natural, artificial, permanent, or

intermittent watercourses in the park. There are

no stream or creek outlets along the shoreline

of the park, and there are no wetlands in the

park. The park shoreline is a developed

waterfront or covered with riprap, with no rock

reefs, tide pools, marshes, kelp beds, or subtidal

sand flats. There are no estuarine resources

within park boundaries.

 None of the listed birds roost in park sites, and

none of the actions proposed would disturb or

endanger transient birds or result in habitat

loss.

 The San Francisco Bay, a migratory corridor

between riverine habitat and the Pacific Ocean,

is designated critical habitat for several listed

fish species. Habitat loss and degradation is

primarily the result of overfishing, timber

harvest, point and nonpoint water pollution,

livestock grazing, mining, road construction,

diking and stream bank stabilization, and

dredge and fill activities. None of the actions

proposed in the general management plan

would contribute to habitat loss or degradation.

 None of the listed plant species occur in the

park. 

 None of the listed invertebrates live in the park

due to the lack of suitable habitat (sand dunes,

streams, ponds, marshes, vernal pools,

grasslands, woodlands, and coastal scrub).

The National Park Service has determined that

implementation of the actions described in the

general management plan would have no effect on

threatened or endangered species, candidate species,

and species of special concern that may potentially

be found in Contra Costa County. This

environmental assessment will be forwarded to the

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National

Marine Fisheries Service for review and comment,

pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act,

as amended. The topic of threatened, endangered,

and candidate species and species of special concern

was dismissed from further analysis. 

Soundscape Management. In accordance with

NPS management policies and Director’s Order 47:

Sound Preservation and Noise Management, an

important part of the NPS mission is preservation of

natural soundscapes associated with national park

system units.

Natural soundscapes exist in the absence of humancaused sound. The natural ambient soundscape is

the aggregate of all the natural sounds that occur in

park units, together with the physical capacity for

transmitting natural sounds. Natural sounds occur

within and beyond the range of sounds that humans

can perceive and can be transmitted through air,

water, or solid materials. The frequencies,

magnitudes, and durations of human-caused sound

considered acceptable varies among national park

system units. Acceptable human-caused sound can

vary within each park unit as well, generally with

greater acceptance in developed areas and lesser

acceptance in undeveloped areas.

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park is in a highly urbanized

industrial and commercial area where the protection

of a natural ambient soundscape and the

opportunity for visitors to experience natural sound

environments is outside the influence of the national

historical park. 

Lightscape Management. In accordance with NPS

management policies, the National Park Service

strives to preserve natural ambient lightscapes,

which are natural resources and values that exist in

the absence of human-caused light. Due to its highly

urbanized industrial and commercial setting, and the

small size of the park, the preservation of natural

ambient lightscapes cannot be significantly

influenced by action taken by the National Park

Service. The National Park Service would

encourage, however, limiting the use of artificial

outdoor lighting to that which is necessary for basic

safety requirements. It would also ensure that all

outdoor lighting is shielded to the maximum extent

possible, keeping light on the intended subject and

out of the night sky to minimally contribute to

surrounding light sources of Richmond and the

greater Bay Area. Thus, the topic of lightscape

management was dismissed from further analysis. 

Wild and Scenic Rivers. According to NPS

management policies, parks containing one or more

river segments that are listed in the national rivers

inventory maintained by the National Park Service,

or that have characteristics that might make them

eligible for the national wild and scenic rivers

123

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park
system, must comply with Section 5(d) (1) of the

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. This act instructs each

federal agency to assess whether those rivers are

suitable for inclusion in the system. Such

assessments, and any resulting management

requirements, may be incorporated into a park’s

general management plan or other management

plan. No management actions may be taken that

could adversely affect the values that qualify a river

for inclusion in the national wild and scenic rivers

system. Because there are no rivers in Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park, the topic of wild and scenic rivers

was dismissed from further analysis.

Wilderness. According to NPS management

policies, the National Park Service will manage

wilderness areas for the use and enjoyment of the

American people in such manner as will leave them

unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as

wilderness. The management of wilderness areas

includes the protection of such areas, the

preservation of their wilderness character, and the

gathering and dissemination of information

regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness.

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park is an urban park with no

wilderness values. Therefore, the topic of wilderness

was dismissed from further analysis. 

• Environmental Justice

Executive Order 12898, “General Actions to Address

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and

Low-Income Populations,” requires all federal

agencies to incorporate environmental justice into

their missions by identifying and addressing any

disproportionately high and/or adverse human

health or environmental effects of their programs

and policies on minorities and low-income

populations and communities. According to the

Environmental Protection Agency, environmental

justice is the 

fair treatment and meaningful involvement of

all people, regardless of race, color, national

origin, or income, with respect to the

development, implementation, and

enforcement of environmental laws,

regulations and policies. Fair treatment means

that no group of people, including a racial,

ethnic, or socioeconomic group, should bear a

disproportionate share of the negative

environmental consequences resulting from

industrial, municipal, and commercial

operations or the execution of federal, state,

local, and tribal programs and policies.

The goal of fair treatment is not to shift risks among

populations, but to identify potential

disproportionately high and adverse effects and

identify alternatives that may mitigate these impacts.

Richmond, California, contains both minority and

low-income populations and communities; however,

environmental justice is dismissed as an impact topic

for the following reasons:

 The park staff and planning team actively

solicited public participation as part of the

planning process and gave equal consideration

to all input from persons regardless of age, race,

income status, or other socioeconomic or

demographic factors. The park staff and

planning team members will continue to

consult and work in a cooperative effort to

improve communications and resolve any

problems that occur during the general

management planning process and any later

implementation planning. 

 The developments and actions of the proposed

alternatives would not result in any identifiable

adverse human health effects. Therefore, there

would be no direct or indirect adverse effects

on any minority or low-income population or

community. 

 The impacts on the natural environment that

occur due to any of the alternatives would not

disproportionately affect any minority or lowincome population or community.

 The alternatives would not result in any

identified effects that would be specific to any

minority or low-income community.

 Any impacts to the social and economic

environments due to the implementation of the

alternatives would be negligible to minor

adverse impacts or beneficial impacts. These

impacts would not occur all at one time but

would be spread over a number of years. In

addition, the park staff and planning team do

not anticipate that the impacts on the social and

economic environments would appreciably

alter the physical and social structure of the

nearby communities.

124

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
• Energy Requirements and Conservation

Potential

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)

Guidelines for Implementing the National

Environmental Policy Act requires the examination of

energy requirements and conservation potential as a

possible impact topic in environmental assessments.

The National Park Service would encourage

incorporating the principles of sustainable design

and development into all facilities and park

operations at Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home

Front National Historical Park. Sustainability can be

described as the result achieved by doing things in

ways that do not compromise the environment or its

capacity to provide for present and future

generations. Sustainable practices minimize the

short- and long-term environmental impacts of

developments and other activities through resource

conservation, recycling, waste minimization, and the

use of energy-efficient and ecologically responsible

materials and techniques.

The NPS Guiding Principles of Sustainable Design

(1993) provides a basis for achieving sustainability in

facility planning and design, emphasizes the

importance of biodiversity, and encourages

responsible decisions. The guidebook for the design

and management of visitor facilities describes

principles that emphasize environmental sensitivity

in construction, use of nontoxic materials, resource

conservation, and recycling. Park staff at Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park would encourage owners of park

sites to reduce energy costs, eliminate waste, and

conserve energy resources by using energy-efficient

and cost-effective technology wherever possible.

Energy efficiency would also be incorporated into

any NPS decision-making process during the design

or acquisition of facilities, as well as all decisions

affecting NPS park operations. 

Value analysis and value engineering, including lifecycle cost analysis, would be performed to examine

energy, environmental, and economic implications

of proposed NPS development. In addition, the park

staff would encourage suppliers, permittees, and

contractors to follow sustainable practices and

address sustainable practices (relating to both park

and nonpark situations) in interpretive programs. 

Consequently, any adverse impacts relating to energy

use, availability, or conservation would be negligible.

Therefore, the topic of energy requirements and

conservation potential is dismissed from further

consideration.

• Natural or Depletable Resource

Requirements and Conservation

Potential

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)

Guidelines for Implementing the National

Environmental Policy Act require examination of

natural or depletable resource requirements and

conservation potential as a possible impact topic in

environmental assessments.

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park is in an urban commercial

and industrial area of Richmond. As described

above, there are no natural resource values

associated with the park, and park lands are devoid

of depletable resources such as minerals and other

energy resources. As stated above, any adverse

impacts relating to energy use, availability, or

conservation would be negligible. Therefore, the

topic of natural or depletable resource requirements

and conservation potential is dismissed from further

consideration.

125

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park
An overview of World War II home front and Rosie

the Riveter is presented in chapter 2 and provides

the local and national context for understanding the

historic and cultural resources of the national

historical park. The National Park Service has

identified four categories of cultural resources that

apply to the national historical park: archeological

resources, cultural landscapes, structures,

ethnographic resources, and museum objects. These

resource types are used in the following discussion

regarding resources at Rosie the Riveter/World War

II Home Front National Historical Park.

ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Archeological resources are the physical evidence of

past human activity, including evidence of the effects

of that activity on the environment. Archeological

resources represent both prehistoric and historic

time periods. They are found above and below

ground and under water. They include prehistoric

and historic period sites, materials found in museum

collections, and the records associated with these

sites and materials. Information revealed through the

study of archeological resources is critical to

understanding and interpreting prehistory and

history. 

• Archeological Resources in the Park

Consultations were conducted with the Richmond

Museum of History, the East Bay Regional Park

District, Richmond Redevelopment Agency, and the

National Park Service, including personnel at the

Pacific West Region. Based on these consultations,

no archeological surveys, studies, or assessments,

other than an initial cursory inventory of cultural

resources, have been conducted for lands and

properties listed in the enabling legislation for Rosie

the Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park. That cursory inventory was

prepared by California Archeological Consultants,

Inc. in 1979. 

Although the National Park Service currently owns

no land, the National Historic Preservation Act and

other laws, as well as National Park Service policies,

require that potential impacts to archeological 

resources be considered at the earliest possible stage

of planning to determine (1) whether and at what

level the proposed project area has been surveyed

archeologically, (2) whether archeological resources

eligible for the national register have been identified

in the area, and (3) whether such resources would be

affected by the proposed project. All feasible

measures would be taken to avail impacting

archeological resources, minimize damage to them,

or recover data that otherwise would be lost. Any

required data recovery would be designed in

consultation with the California state historic

preservation officer and would conform to NPS and

professional standards. 

The lands on which the City of Richmond is located

have been disturbed and manipulated by urban,

industrial, and harbor development activities since

the 19th century. Thus, natural landforms have been

altered substantially and many or most prehistoric

archeological resources have been disturbed or

removed from their original location. It is likely that

the only archeological resources that might be

discovered at the national historical park sites would

relate to historic urban, industrial, and harbor

developments of the 19th and 20th centuries.

CULTURAL LANDSCAPES

According to the National Park Service’s Cultural

Resource Management Guideline (NPS -28), a

cultural landscape is

...a reflection of human adaptation and use

of natural resources and is often expressed

in the way land is organized and divided,

patterns of settlement, land use, systems of

circulation, and the types of structures that

are built. The character of a cultural

landscape is defined both by physical

materials, such as roads, buildings, walls, and

vegetation, and by use reflecting cultural

values and traditions. 

Thus cultural landscapes are the result of the long

interaction between people and the land; they reflect

the influence of human beliefs and actions over time

126

Cultural

Resources
upon the natural landscape. Shaped through time by

historical land-use and management practices—as

well as politics and property laws, levels of

technology, and economic conditions—cultural

landscapes provide a living record of an area’s past

and a visual chronicle of its history. The dynamic

nature of modern human life, however, contributes

to the continual reshaping of cultural landscapes;

this makes them a good source of information about

specific times and places, but at the same time

renders their long-term preservation a challenge. 

• Cultural Landscapes in the Park

A cultural landscape inventory is designed to

identify, document, analyze, and evaluate cultural

landscape resources in a concise manner and with

sufficient information to determine whether a

resource is eligible for inclusion in the National

Register of Historic Places. 

To date no formal cultural landscape inventory

surveys or studies have been conducted at the

national historical park. The City of Richmond,

however, does have some rather notable industrial

landscapes that reflect the land use patterns and

openness of Richmond’s World War II era.

HISTORIC STRUCTURES 

Historic structures are constructed works created to

serve some human activity. At the national historical

park, historic structures include buildings, a vessel,

fences, graving basins/ dry docks, and other

assemblies of historical importance.

• Historic Structures/Buildings in the Park

A historic resource study provides a historical

overview of a park and identifies and evaluates a

park’s cultural resources within historic contexts.

Although a historic resource study has not been

prepared for the national historical park, a

preliminary historic survey has been conducted.

That survey, Mapping Richmond’s World War II

Home Front, indicated the potential for additional

World War II-related historic sites and structures

within the City of Richmond, although their historic

integrity has not been examined.

At the present time four historic properties within

the national historical park boundaries are

individually listed in the National Register of

Historic Places: Ford Motor Company Assembly

Plant Historic District; Richmond Shipyard No. 3

Historic District; SS Red Oak Victory (Victory Ship);

and Atchison Village Defense Housing Project

Historic District. 

By National Park Service policy, all historic

structures that are named in the enabling legislation

of a national historical park are considered to be

eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic

Places until determined otherwise by the state

historic preservation officer. Currently, draft

national register nomination forms have been

prepared by the National Park Service for the Kaiser

Permanente Field Hospital and the Ruth C. Powers

and Maritime child development centers. In

addition, one historic building—Richmond Fire

Station 67A, which continues to function as a city

firehouse—is listed in the national historical park’s

enabling legislation as contributing to the

significance of the park.

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS 

Museum collections are prehistoric and historic

objects, artifacts, works of art, archival documents,

and natural history specimens valuable for the

information they provide about processes, events,

and interactions among people and environment.

• Museum Collections in the Park

An interim scope of collections statement, approved

in January 2003, provides guidelines for the

acquisition, preservation, and use of Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park’s museum collection. Objects in the

park’s museum collection contribute directly to the

understanding and interpretation of the park’s

purpose, interpretive themes, and resource

management goals and objectives.

In the scope of collections statement, appropriate

cultural object types for the park’s museum

collection are identified by discipline: archeological

(artifacts and other specimens and records) and

historical (historic objects, historic fabric, and

archives).

127

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park
The park’s enabling legislation provides for the

collection of oral histories (in multiple formats) that

tell the personal stories of the people who

participated in World War II home front activities

throughout the nation. To date the University of

California, Berkeley, has completed multiple phases

of a project to collect digitally-coded videotapes of

regional World War II home front stories.

Working in partnership with the National Park

Foundation through the Proud Partners Program,

the Ford Motor Company provided funds for a

nationwide campaign calling for Rosie the Riveter

stories. Since November 11, 2003, when the

campaign began with a press conference in

Richmond, more than 9,000 “Rosies,” or their

friends and families, have contacted Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park. More than 2,000 stories written by

“Rosies” have been collected, and nearly 2,000

artifacts and packets of memorabilia have been

donated to the park. Some of these materials are

currently housed in a small collection processing

and storage facility at the park headquarters in the

Richmond City Hall and are exhibited in the lobby

of the city hall.

128

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

CURRENT TOURISM

Currently, tourism is not a major industry in

Richmond; however, the city’s infrastructures of

hotels, restaurants, marinas, recreational open

spaces, trails, and area attractions continues to

evolve. 

• Tourist Attractions

Tourist attractions in the area include the boating

marinas; the Bay Trail; historical sites including Point

Richmond, Winehaven, the Ford Motor Company

Assembly Plant, and the East Brother Lighthouse;

the Rosie the Riveter Memorial; the SS Red Oak

Victory; the Richmond Museum of History; the

Golden State Model Railroad Museum at Point

Richmond; and regional parks including

Miller/Knox Regional Shoreline, Sobrante Ridge

Regional Preserve, and Point Pinole Regional Park. 

One source of interest for visitors to Richmond is its

large number of attractive parks and waterfront

areas that span the city as part of the East Bay

Regional Park System. These sites attract mostly

locals residents on day trips, and since most of these

sites do not have nearby commercial retail and other

services, they do not have much of an impact on the

city’s economy and do not generate significant

revenues for the city.

• Lodging

Richmond provides opportunities for lodging. In

2004 there were 11 hotels and about 600 hotel

rooms. 

In 2003 the City of Richmond realized transient

occupancy tax revenues of $0.9 million, or only

0.5% of the city’s total income of $151 million. In

comparison, the nearby City of Berkeley, which is

approximately the same size as Richmond in terms

of population, realized $2.5 million in transient

occupancy tax revenues. Taking into account the fact

that the transient occupancy tax is 12% in Berkeley

and only 10% in Richmond, the total 2003 hotel

sales were $9 million in Richmond compared with

nearly $21 million in Berkeley.

Despite being relatively small, the Richmond lodging

market realized a significant increase in real

revenues during the last decade, mostly due to two

new hotels built in 1999 and 2000. These two hotels

added about 250 rooms to the city’s existing 350

room inventory, increasing total supply by 71% in

just two years.

Visitor Use and

Experience
Most Richmond hotels are located in areas away

from park sites. The major park sites are located

primarily in the South Shoreline area, whereas the

hotels are situated near the freeways and close to the

Hilltop Mall rather than near the waterfront. The

only two hotels located in more visitor-oriented

locations are in Point Richmond and are very small

(15 rooms in total). 

POTENTIAL TOURISM

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park occupies a unique niche for

historic sites in the Bay Area and in Richmond, 

California. With many of the park’s sites located on

the waterfront near popular recreation destinations

and close to major transportation systems, the park

could attract local, regional, and national visitors. A

wide array of considerations may be analyzed when

estimating the number of potential visitors to Rosie

the Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park, ranging from regional tourism

trends to the size of the park. However, five factors

stand out as the most influential considerations for

estimating visitation: local attractions, regional

attractions, accessible sites within the national

historical park, transportation options, and

population growth.

129

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

Rosie the Riveter Memorial, Richmond,

California, 2005. National Park Service.
130

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

POTENTIAL VISITATION TO ROSIE THE RIVETER/WORLD WAR II HOME FRONT NHS 

BASED ON COMPARABLE SITES

Comparable Sites

(with average 

annual visitation)

Adjacent

Attractions

Potential Visitation

(post-GMP

Implementation)

Transportation

Options

Accessible

Sites

Alternative

Visions

Alternative A

Alternative B

Alternative C

• SS Red Oak

Victory*

(2,500)

• Benicia

Capital

(12,000)

• USS Potomac

(15,000)

• John Muir

NHS (27,000)

• John Muir

NHS (27,000)

• Bay Model

(150,000)

• China Camp

State Park

(460,000)

• Miller Knox

Regional Park

(580,000)

• History San

Jose

(100,000)

• Bay Model

(150,000)

• Maritime

Museum -

San Francisco

Maritime

National

Historical Park

(205,000)

• Tech Museum

of Innovation

(650,000)

• Bay Trail

Segments

• Shoreline

Parks

• Bay Trail

Segments

• Shoreline

Parks

• Multiple

Visitor

Attractions in

Shipyard

No. 3

• Contemporary

attractions at

Ford Assembly

Building

• Bay Trail

Segments

• Shoreline

Parks

• Contemporary

attractions at

Ford Assembly

Building

• Self-serve

Visitor

Orientation

Center in City

Hall

• SS Red Oak

Victory

• Self-guiding

tours

• Ford Assembly

Building

• SS Red Oak

Victory

• Child

Development

Centers

• Kaiser

Permanente

Field Hospital

• Shipyard

No. 3

• War Worker

Community

• Ford Assembly

Building

• SS Red Oak

Victory

• BART

• Amtrak

• AC Transit

• BART

• Amtrak

• AC Transit

• Shuttle service

from BART to

park sites

• Water

taxis/ferries

• BART

• Amtrak

• AC Transit

• Shuttle service

from BART to

park sites

5,000 – 

30,000

75,000 –

300,000**

75,000 –

175,000**

Table 11: Visitation Estimates

* Although the SS Red Oak Victory is now part of Rosie the Riveter/World War II National Historical Park, it was a stand-alone

site for many years. Thus it is included as a "comparable site" with its own average annual visitation figures.

**The difference in potential visitation figures between alternative B and alternative C is due to the difference in number of sites

that visitors would have the opportunity to visit. It is assumed that a park with many opportunities would attract more visitors

than a park with one main attraction. 
• Local Attractions

Based on the experience of similar parks, Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park has the potential to draw visitors

from existing historic sites and nearby recreational

attractions around Richmond, California. The Bay

Trail provides a seamless bike and pedestrian

connection between the national historical park and

popular recreational destinations on Richmond’s

waterfront. Those attractions include the Miller

Knox Regional Park and Point Isabel Regional

Preserve, which attract 580,000 and 1,290,000

visitors respectively. Other World War II-era sites

such as the USS Potomac or Port Chicago Navel

Magazine National Memorial will continue to serve

as local attractions helping draw visitors to the park.

• Regional Attractions

Based on the large number of visitors to regional

attractions within 50 miles of Richmond, several

sites were analyzed in order to estimate potential

visitation to Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home

Front National Historical Park. Jack London Square

attracts upwards of 3.7 million visitors annually and

is approximately 10 miles away in Oakland. Napa

Valley, attracting 2.5 million leisure visitors annually,

also was considered when estimating potential

visitation to the national historical park, since many

visitors to the Napa Valley pass through Richmond.

While only a small percentage of visitors to these

regional attractions would visit the national

historical park, these attractions do provide a pool of

potential visitors from which the park could draw.

Of particular interest are parks and attractions in the

region that interpret World War II themes. Those

parks include Angel Island State Park, the Jeremiah

O’Brian Liberty ship, Port Chicago Naval Magazine

National Memorial, San Francisco Bay Model, San

Francisco Maritime National Historical Park, the

USS Pampanito, and the USS Potomac. The SS Red

Oak Victory also was included in this analysis

because it received visitors before it become part of

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park. Visitation to these eight

sites ranges from 165 visits to 4 million visits

annually. If a concerted effort were made to package

the marketing of Rosie the Riveter/World War II

Home Front National Historical with other World

War II-related sites in the region, visitation to the

park would grow. 

• Accessible Sites within the National

Historical Park

The amount of visitation to Rosie the Riveter/World

War II Home Front National Historical Park will

depend in large part on the diversity of facilities,

activities, and programming that will be accessible to

the public. Access to Shipyard No. 3 and the

development of restaurants, entertainment, and

visitor facilities along the waterfront would greatly

increase the visitation potential of the national

historical park. However, without public access to

most of the park sites, as is the current situation,

visitation would be expected to remain minimal.

• Transportation Options

Peak traffic counts on the I-80 and I-580 freeways

through Richmond average 12,000 and 7,000

vehicles per hour respectively. Park signs are located

along these freeways to attract visitors to the park. 

A variety of public transportation options are

available to the City of Richmond. Shuttle

connections between the downtown BART and

Amtrak stations would facilitate greater visitation to

waterfront sites. In the future, there is the potential

for ferry service that would link the national

historical park to major visitor attractions in San

Francisco. The 1992 Regional Ferry Plan for the San

Francisco Bay Area found that a limiting factor for

ferry service to Richmond would be the lack of a

“mid-day trip generator.” With visitor activities on

the Richmond waterfront, a greater demand for

daytime ferry trips would certainly be created.

• Population Growth and Potential Tourism

Parks such as Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home

Front National Historical Park, which may offer

diverse and dynamic opportunities for visitors, often

have great appeal locally and are able to draw

consistent visitation from those local populations.

Therefore, population growth, particularly in the

Richmond area, was considered important when

estimating potential visitation. Contra Costa County,

where the national historical park is located, has the

fourth highest population in the Bay Area; in 2006 it

had just over 1 million residents. The county will

likely experience a 69% population increase by the

year 2040. Neighboring counties of Solano and

Sonoma will also grow by an estimated 89% and

59% respectively by the year 2040; these population

increases could heavily influence visitation to the

131

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park
national historical park as well.

On a broader scale, over 50% of the visitors to

California’s national parks visited parks in the region

of the Bay Area, and visitation to national park units

around San Francisco has increased by 2.7% since

1997. Because of its location in California, with the

highest tourist visitation in the country, and its

location in an urban area, Rosie the Riveter/World

War II Home Front National Historical Park has the

potential to have high visitation. This is particularly

true if the park is directly connected to the most

densely populated areas of the region via a variety of

transportation options.

CHANGING PERCEPTIONS

Richmond is beginning to recognize and celebrate its

critical role in World War II. For many years the city

has held a “Festival by the Bay,” with art, music, and

food. In fall 2007, that festival was renamed the

Home Front Festival, and had an additional cultural

and historical aspect to it. An exhibit on Henry J.

Kaiser was part of the event, as well as a re-creation

of a historic ship launch at Shipyard No. 3. A Rosie

and Home Front Reunion was held at the Ford

Assembly Building. The Rosie the Riveter Trust held

its first major fundraising activity as part of the

festival, as well.

The City of Richmond has been granted “Certified

Local Government” status, which enables the city to

apply for historic preservation grants from the state. 

The City of Richmond also received “Preserve

America City” status in 2006. This program

recognizes and designates communities that protect

and celebrate their heritage, use their historic assets

for economic development and community

revitalization, and encourage people to experience

and appreciate local historic resources through

education and heritage tourism programs. This

designation also allows the city to apply for Preserve

America grants.

RECREATIONAL BOATERS 

Recreational boaters in the San Francisco Bay region

are looking for new destinations to sail and boat to

as part of the boating experience. The planning team

has recognized that Rosie the Riveter/World War II

Home Front National Historical Park is an ideal

attraction for recreational boaters to explore.

Although growing slowly, the number of recreational

boaters in the Bay Area is on the rise. That growth,

combined with a boating season that averages 300

days per year, increases the likelihood that boaters

will demand new destinations to visit. According to

several harbormasters in the region, there are

currently very few destinations in San Francisco Bay

where boaters may anchor near shore or tie up at a

marina if they wish to come on land to explore,

recreate, shop, dine, or overnight in a local hotel.

And there are even fewer opportunities for boaters

to access national park sites.

The typical day for a recreational boater involves

leaving from a home marina or a public launch ramp,

staying on the water for the afternoon then returning

back to the same marina or launch ramp from which

they originated. Included in a membership to some

private marinas or yacht clubs is the reciprocal

privilege to dock overnight at cooperating marinas.

However, this opportunity does not exist for the vast

numbers of boaters on San Francisco Bay. 

On the City of Richmond’s waterfront, the Marina

Bay Yacht Harbor is the only public facility at which

boats may tie up on a daily or overnight basis. That

particular facility does have a restaurant and is

adjacent to the Rosie the Riveter Memorial at

Marina Bay Park and the Bay Trail. Other facilities in

the area, such as Brickyard Cove Marina, are private

and do not allow boaters to tie up on a daily or

overnight basis.

Angel Island State Park, the inlet to the Napa River,

China Camp State Park, and South Beach Harbor at

the Embarcadero are a few of the top recreational

destinations for boaters in the Bay Area. Those

destinations offer a variety of activities and facilities

for boaters such as day use tie ups, pump-out

facilities, and land-based recreation. This

combination of characteristics is relatively hard to

find in the San Francisco Bay Area and is a potential

niche that could be filled by the Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park.

132

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
• Trends in Recreational Boating 

The San Francisco Bay Area continues to be the

major recreational boating destination for boaters

from all over Northern California. According to the

California Department of Boating and Waterways,

approximately 166,000 boats were registered in the

area of San Francisco Bay in 2005. While a small

number of these boats are registered for commercial

use, the vast majority of them are registered for

recreational use. 

While the number of recreational boats in the Bay

Area has not grown substantially in recent years,

portions of San Francisco Bay do experience

crowded boating conditions. According to the

California Department of Boating and Waterway’s

Report on Safe Boating in the San Francisco Bay Area,

Contra Costa County recreational boaters

experience extreme congestion in and around many

marinas. In fact, “congestion on waterways” was the

number one problem reported by boaters in the San

Francisco Bay Area. Areas such as Indian Slough in

Contra Costa County experience some of the

highest recreation boat congestion, due in part to the

numerous residential developments surrounding

waterways in those areas.

The California Department of Boating and

Waterways has projected that the number of

recreational boaters in the region will likely increase

over the next 20 years (see table 12). This is a

reflection of the population growth forecast for East

Bay areas such as Solano and Contra Costa counties.

• Facilities for Recreational Boaters

The waterfront of San Francisco Bay is dotted with

recreational marinas; according to several

harbormasters in the Bay Area there is a gradually

increasing demand for berths throughout the region.

Because of the nearly full utilization of marina

berths within the San Francisco, Marin, Contra

Costa, Alameda, and San Mateo county areas, many

facilities maintain waiting lists for owners of

recreational crafts looking to rent a berth on a

monthly basis. For example, berths at the San

Francisco Municipal Marina are in particularly high

demand: in recent years there were over 300 people

on the waiting list for slips at the facility.

Furthermore, due to constraints such as costs and

permit requirements, very few marinas in the Bay

Area are pursuing expansions at this time. 

In close proximity to the national historical park, the

privately owned Brickyard Cove Marina has 350

berths for recreational boats. Often, there are no

spaces available for monthly rent and no day-use

slips available for the public. Due to high demand

and limited space for boats, this private marina

maintains a waiting list for berths. 

Also in close proximity to the national historical park

and to the Ford Assembly Building, in particular, is

the public Marina Bay Yacht Harbor, which is

significantly larger than Brickyard Cove. Marina Bay

currently has 845 slips for recreational boats and

maintains an average occupancy rate experienced by

other marinas in the San Francisco Bay Area. In

addition to monthly rentals, the marina does offer

public tie-up spaces for day users and a limited

number of overnight berths for visitors. 

The availability of other facilities at or near marinas

such as restaurants, marine repair shops, waste

pump-outs facilities, fuel stations, or power supplies

are important to boaters as well. Along the City of

Richmond's waterfront, there are relatively few

associated facilities for recreational boaters. There

are a number of repair facilities and two pump-out

locations for boats in the Richmond area. A

restaurant is in operation at Marina Bay and is well

used throughout the year. However, there are few

other land-side services in the immediate area.

133

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

2005 2010 2015 2020

166,789 174,806 176,273 179,219

Table 12: Forecast Boat Population –

San Francisco Bay, 2005 to 2020

Source: California Department of Boating and Waterways
Richmond, California is the largest city in western

Contra Costa County. It is located 16 miles northeast

of San Francisco on a peninsula separating the San

Francisco Bay and the San Pablo Bay. 

The sites of the national historical park are scattered

throughout the southwestern corner of Richmond,

with many park sites situated along the waterfront.

The description that follows is focused primarily on

the areas of Richmond that include the park sites. To

simplify the analysis, the park sites were grouped

into two general areas which are called “Southcentral Richmond” and “South Shoreline.” The

borders of the two areas are defined by census tract

groupings that allow access to detailed community

and economic information. The two regions have

notably different profiles. 

South-central Richmond includes mainly

residential neighborhoods and is home to

three park sites: Atchison Village, the Ruth

C. Powers and Maritime child development

centers, and Richmond Fire Station 67A. It

comprises U.S. Census tracts 3770 and

3790. 

The South Shoreline area includes all of

Point Richmond as well as the south-facing

waterfront region extending to the border

with El Cerrito. It comprises Census tracts

3780 and 3800. South Shoreline includes a

mix of industrial, residential, and

recreational areas and is home to ten park sites:

Rosie the Riveter Memorial, Barbara & Jay Vincent

Park, SS Red Oak Victory, Ford Assembly Building

and Oil House, Richmond Shipyard No. 3, Bay Trail

and Esplanade, Sheridan Observation Point Park,

Shimada Peace Memorial Park, Lucretia Edwards

Park, and Kaiser Permanente Field Hospital.

While this analysis addresses social and economic

issues both in the entire city and the areas associated

with the national historical park, South Shoreline is

of particular interest, as it includes most of the park

sites and would likely be most directly impacted by

the future development of Rosie the Riveter/World

War II Home Front National Historical Park.

DEMOGRAPHICS

• Population Trends

The rise and fall of the city’s population from the

1940s to the 1960s is the most dramatic indicator of

the home front effort. The city saw a tremendous

influx of workers in the 1940s to support war related

industries. Then, when the war ended, those

industries left and so did many of the workers (see

figure 1).

The recent increase in population is due mainly to

new residential developments, many within areas

near the primary sites of the national historical park.

The population of Richmond is expected to grow by

25% between 2005 and 2030: from 102,186 to

approximately 127,700. 

In 2000, nearly one quarter of Richmond’s

population lived in the areas of South-central

Richmond and South Shoreline. From 1990 to 2000,

the population of these two increased much faster

than Richmond’s population as a whole, with South

Shoreline’s population increasing faster than that of

South-central Richmond. In 2000, the geographically

smaller South-central Richmond, with 13, 900

residents, was more populated than the much larger

South Shoreline, with 8,900 residents (see appendix

E, table 1 for details).

While a significant part of Richmond’s expected

growth will presumably be fueled by future housing

developments, South-central Richmond includes

134

Social and Economic

Environment

1930 1940 1943 1947 1950 1960 1970 1975 1980 1990 2000 2005

120,000

100,000

80,000

60,000

40,000

20,000

0

Figure 1: Population of Richmond, 1930 to 2005
only a few vacant parcels available for these new

developments. Accordingly, the South-central

Richmond population is not expected to grow

significantly in the future. However, several

residential developments are underway and

proposed projects in South Shoreline, if approved,

will cause the population in this area to increase

significantly during the next five to ten years.

• Population Composition

The South-central Richmond and South Shoreline

areas have considerably different compositions:

African Americans constitute the largest group in

South-central Richmond, while Caucasians

constitute the largest group in South Shoreline. 

Just as the percentage of African Americans in

South-central Richmond is significantly higher than

in the city as a whole, so is the percentage of

Caucasians in South Shoreline. Also, the proportion

of Hispanics is much higher in South-central

Richmond than in South Shoreline.

COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS

• Unemployment

Richmond had been economically depressed the

past few decades relative to most Bay Area

communities: however, in recent years its economy

has been growing stronger. While the

unemployment rate in Richmond was 7.8% in 2005,

more than twice the county’s rate of 3.3%, it was

down from 12.2% in 1993. 

• Household Income 

Over the last decade, household income has

remained lower in Richmond than in Contra Costa

County as a whole, but the gap is narrowing. In

2005, median household income was almost $53

thousand in Richmond compared with $69 thousand

in the county as a whole.

• Education

According to U.S. Census figures, 75% of the city’s

population had a high school diploma compared

with 87% in the county. Similarly, only 22% of

Richmond residents had a bachelor’s degree

compared with 35% in the county (see appendix E,

table 2 for details). 

• Poverty Levels

The proportion of people living below the poverty

level in Richmond has historically been at least

double the proportion in Contra Costa County as a

whole. 

Generally, the areas of South-central Richmond and

South Shoreline have extremely different socioeconomic profiles. On average, South Shoreline

residents are better educated, have more jobs, and

earn significantly higher incomes than Richmond

residents as a whole; the opposite is true of Southcentral Richmond residents. Accordingly the

disparity between the two neighboring areas is vast. 

While South Shoreline residents have higher

incomes as a whole, a relatively large percentage of

both areas residents live beneath the poverty level. In

2000, 30% of South-central Richmond residents and

19% of the much wealthier South Shoreline

residents were living beneath the poverty line,

compared to 16% in the city as a whole (see

appendix E, table 2 for details). 

These statistics point to the fact that South Shoreline

presents a mixed social and economic profile that

includes both prosperous and economically

distressed areas. The more prosperous areas of

South Shoreline are those areas located along the

waterfront offering valuable views of the San

Francisco Bay Area. The most economically

depressed areas are those located inland, just south

of South-central Richmond.

HOUSING TRENDS

Similar to the region’s population, the housing

supply in Richmond has only slightly increased since

the early 1990s. Of the new homes built between

1990 and 2000, less than 15% were affordable to

low-income and first-time homebuyers.

Nonetheless, Richmond maintains a more affordable

housing market than most other Bay Area

communities. Even though home prices doubled in

Richmond between 1997 and 2002, owning a house

in Richmond remains significantly less expensive

than in most other cities in the Bay Area. High

density development in South Shoreline is fueling

the rising housing costs in Richmond.

135

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park
• Proposed Residential Developments

Richmond is one of the last bayside Bay Area

locations with significant quantities of vacant and

underutilized land that potentially is available for

residential, industrial, or commercial use. This land

is generally available at a lower cost than in other

places in the region. The transportation system

serving these areas has been improved with the

completion of Interstate 580 and the Richmond

Parkway. 

Historically, the city’s reputation for high crime

rates, poor schools, and environmental problems

caused by the major chemical firms created a barrier

to residential and commercial investment and

development. However, the recent intensity of the

regional real estate market has encouraged some

developers to disregard these perceptions and to

recognize the positive attributes of the city. In

addition, Richmond has no locally imposed

restrictions such as “no growth” limitations, growth

management plans, or annual development quotas

on the supply of new housing. These favorable

conditions for new housing development explain

why housing developers are more and more

attracted to Richmond (City of Richmond).

In the last few years, new housing developments

have been completed throughout Richmond,

including projects in waterfront areas in South

Shoreline. South Shoreline leads the city in the

number of new housing projects.

South Shoreline, the large waterfront area that

includes most of the national historical park sites,

has long been an industrial area and still includes the

commercial Port of Richmond. However, the area is

slowly been transformed into a residential/

recreational area, beginning with the construction of

marinas on the southern shoreline of Richmond in

the late 1980s.

The recent and proposed housing units in South

Shoreline target middle to high-income families.

According to Richard Mitchell, City of Richmond

planning director, one of the reasons for the high

housing prices on the waterfront is that the cost of

developing housing units at those locations is very

high. Since most of the marina area was industrial at

one time, the sites must be decontaminated to allow

residential developments. 

• Bay Area Build-Out Capacity and

Urban Infill

One way to accommodate population growth while

preserving open space and sensitive environmental

lands is to develop housing in existing urban areas,

an idea called urban infill. The trend toward building

more housing developments in Richmond is likely to

continue due to the waning “build-out” capacity of

the Bay Area and the associated efforts towards

urban infill.

According to the California Department of Finance

population projections, the nine-county San

Francisco Bay Area is projected to add nearly 1.5

million new residents between 2000 and 2020. The

region will need between 90,000 and 150,000 acres

of developable land to accommodate this level of

growth. 

If recent trends were to continue, most new

development would occur on previously

undeveloped sites at the urban fringe, putting

substantial pressure on the region’s natural

environment and open space lands. However, that

trend is changing. Since about 1996, the market for

infill development has picked up significantly. 

Richmond in particular seems likely to be a target of

urban infill development in the years to come.

Within Contra Costa County, Richmond offers some

of the best access to the urban centers of San

Francisco, Oakland, and Berkeley, and also contains

some of the last remaining undeveloped waterfront

land left in the Bay Area. 

CURRENT DEVELOPMENT 

One current economic concern in Richmond is the

critical need for neighborhood retail development,

particularly in South Shoreline and in downtown. 

• South-central Richmond Projects

In the 1960s and 1980s, local planners and

policymakers envisioned downtown Richmond as a

regional center for high-end office employment.

However, in the 1970s and 1980s, the city’s

unemployment level was relatively high and the

predicted economic benefits of the Bay Area Rapid

Transit (BART) station and the Social Security

building in downtown Richmond did not

136

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
materialize. In addition, the construction in 1976 of

a large shopping mall at Hilltop, in the northern part

of Richmond adjacent to the I-80 freeway, caused a

significant decline in downtown retail activity.

It was estimated in 2002 that as much as $3,000 per

capita “leaks” out of the Richmond downtown area

each year due to a lack of retail outlets. Local retail

businesses capture less than half of residents’ total

retail purchases. In addition, the perceived lack of

community resources or entertainment options

prevent many nonlocal residents from visiting

downtown Richmond (University of California at

Berkley 2002).

The city has completed a major residential center

near its downtown BART station. Transit Village,

which includes 231 residential units and 24,000

square feet of commercial space, is expected to

initiate development along Macdonald Avenue and

to help rebuild the downtown as an active

neighborhood. 

The Richmond Main Street Initiative is working with

businesses and community leaders in the downtown

area to plan for the revitalization of Macdonald

Avenue as the center of Richmond’s arts, nightlife,

and community activity. These planned changes may

take 10 to 20 years to materialize and fully transform

the downtown area.

• South Shoreline Projects

In the late 1970s, Marina Bay was constructed in the

area of South Shoreline previously occupied by the

Kaiser Shipyards. Conceived as a mixed-use project,

an 800-slip recreational marina for small boats was

built and residential developments were constructed

around the marina. 

The number of residential developments has

increased in South Shoreline since the construction

of the marina. Over the past few decades, South

Shoreline has witnessed a further decrease in its

heavy industry and an increase in offices, as well as

an increase in research and development facilities.

The recent transformation of the area has given rise

to tensions between residential and industrial uses in

South Shoreline. 

Despite the trend away from industry, the South

Shoreline area still contains vacant and underutilized

parcels available for industrial or commercial use.

Because of the relatively low cost of land and

improving socio-economic factors, several

commercial and research and development projects

have been proposed for some of these parcels.

However, very few retail and hospitality services are

available in South Shoreline, despite the presence of

a significant number of residents.

• Ford Assembly Building 

The Ford Assembly Building is a historic structure

that is included in the Rosie the Riveter/World War

II Home Front National Historical Park; it is located

on the waterfront of the Richmond inner harbor.

Until recently, the building belonged to the City of

Richmond. Today, a private developer continues to

rehabilitate the 517,000-square-foot building for

mixed use, incorporating office, research and

development, light industrial, retail, event, and

public gathering spaces, as well as space for other

uses. According to documents associated with the

Ford Assembly Building Reuse Project, one of the

objectives of the project is to “develop the project

site into an exciting waterfront destination that will

attract visitors and Richmond residents.”

ECONOMIC TRENDS

Richmond was established as the western terminus

for the Santa Fe railroad at the beginning of the 20th

century. Because of its bayside location, the city

attracted the oil industry and developed over time as

an auto, shipbuilding, and chemical town with a

number of other smaller industries. While the city

“boomed” with the onset of World War II,

Richmond’s economic dependence on a few major

heavy industries caused economic decline when the

war ended and Kaiser shipyards, located in South

Shoreline, closed. In the 1950s additional major

employers left the city, resulting in increased

unemployment, as well as vacant shoreline facilities. 

During the 1960s new industries began to occupy

the shoreline—many of them warehousing,

distribution, chemical and research facilities. The

1970s saw development in South Shoreline on land

previously occupied by one of the four Kaiser

shipyards. The 1980s and 1990s saw additional

growth, including the arrival of biotechnology

companies. Then a slowing in the county and city

137

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park
economies in the early 2000s mirrored a national

slowdown.

The current distribution of jobs is still highly

concentrated in heavy and moderate industry;

Chevron is the largest employer in the city (see table

13). 

Today, however, Richmond’s economy is more

diverse than in the past. Like other places in the Bay

Area, Richmond’s economy is undergoing a major

transition from its historical focus on heavy industry

towards more light industry and high technology.

This has resulted in new business parks that

accommodate both light industrial and office/flex

type commercial buildings. Office/flex is a zoning

designation designed to provide areas for research

and development, offices, institutional uses, and low

impact industrial uses. 

Richmond is well served by the Bay Area’s

transportation roadway system (i.e., two interstate

freeways, I-80 and I-580, and the Richmond

Parkway). The completion of these systems in the

mid-1990s has resulted in industrial growth along

the corridors of both roadways.

Richmond currently has a number of successful

developments offering retail, research, and

commercial office space. However, the city still has

many roads linking these successful developments to

underdeveloped areas that contain large numbers of

vacant buildings and space. With the increase in land

prices in other Bay Area communities and the

increase in economic activity in Richmond, these

vacant buildings and spaces may soon become more

attractive to private investors for

industrial/commercial development and

redevelopment.

PORT OF RICHMOND TRENDS

The Port of Richmond occupies a significant amount

of space on South Shoreline and includes many

significance historic structures and features,

including Shipyard No. 3 

Chevron is responsible for the overwhelming

majority of port activity. The non-Chevron port

activities along the Santa Fe Channel have declined

in the last ten years, transforming the port from a

small but active port, boasting a diverse container

load, to its current primary orientation on oil and

chemical shipments. In 2003, the port unloaded less

than 70% of the metric tonnage that it had a decade

previously (see appendix E, table 3 for details).

As an economic indicator, the tonnage statistics

themselves do not accurately characterize the local

economic contribution of the port. Due to its nature,

the labor required to unload oil and other liquid

chemicals from ships is negligible: a port employee

essentially opens a tap and lets the commodity flow

to its destination container. So the employment

generated by port activities has been greatly reduced

from past years. For this reason, the Pacific Maritime

Association, an organization that tracks economic

activity at West Coast ports, estimates that the Port

of Richmond accounts for an extremely small

portion of total San Francisco Bay Area port activity. 

CITY FINANCE TRENDS

During the past decade, City of Richmond

expenditures often have been higher than revenues.

However, the situation has improved dramatically,

and fiscal year 2005-2006 saw the city in the black

(see appendix E, table 5 for details).

The largest sources of revenues for the City of

Richmond are property taxes and local taxes. Sales

and use taxes are also a significant source of

Business Name

Table 13: City of Richmond – 

Principle Employers 2005

138

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Chevron USA, Inc.

The Permanente Medical Group

Berlix, Inc.

Costco Wholesale #482

Macy’s Hilltop

California Autism Foundation, Inc.

Palecek Imports, Inc.

The Home Depot #643

Quick Response Services Corporation

TPMG Regional Laboratory

Source: City of Richmond Community

Development Department, 2005.

2,461

732

413

325

261

250

220

209

188

176

Number of

Employees
revenues (see appendix E, table 6 for details).

COUNTY FINANCIAL TRENDS

The City of Richmond has some influence on the

county’s fiscal condition. In a telephone

conversation on December 21, 2004, Paul Abelson,

chief accountant for Contra Costa County, stated

that Richmond’s Chevron, for example, is the single

biggest taxpayer in the county. However, none of the

other 10 largest taxpayers in the county are located

in Richmond.

In addition to taxes, the county collects revenue via

licenses and franchise fees, fines and penalties, and

charges for services and property use. During the

past decade, county revenues and expenditures have

grown at identical average annual rates over the

period, increasing faster than inflation due to the

rapid population growth and associated

development occurring in the county (see appendix

E, table 7 for details).

Contra Costa County tax revenues have risen over

the past five years due to the substantial growth in

property taxes collected by the county. As the

property tax rate remained constant over the period,

all of the growth in revenue reflects growth in the

aggregate value of properties within the county (see

appendix E, table 8 for details). 

139

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

EXISTING ACCESS TO THE PARK

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park consists of numerous

separate sites located along the shoreline and within

the urban fabric of Richmond, California. The sites

are located within approximately 3 miles of one

another. This proximity provides relatively easy

access by private vehicle and feasible, but more

difficult, access by public transportation if combined

with walking or bicycling. Some of the park sites are

open to the public, while others are currently in

private use and can be viewed only from the

exterior.

STREET NETWORK

For private vehicle access, the national historical

park is well served by the street and highway system.

The I-580 freeway is located less than a mile from

the current self-serve visitor orientation center, the

Rosie the Riveter Memorial, and Richmond

Shipyard No. 3. This highway provides access to the

west side of the bay via the Richmond/San Rafael

Bridge, and to the points on the east side of the bay

via the I-80 freeway.

In the vicinity of the national historical park, I-580

generally provides three travel lanes in each

direction and interchanges with Canal Boulevard,

Harbour Way, and 23rd Street/Marina Bay Parkway.

Figure 2 is a map of the area, and enlargements of

the three interchange configurations on I-580 are

shown in insets 1 through 3. The average daily traffic

on I-580 between the Harbour Way and Marina Bay

Parkway interchanges consists of approximately

86,000 vehicles per day with 6,300 vehicles per hour

during the peak hour. (California Dept. of

Transportation)

The interchange with Canal Boulevard provides

access to Richmond Shipyard No. 3 and the SS Red

Oak Victory. The interchange with Harbour Way

provides access to the existing self-service visitor

orientation center (located in the temporary

Richmond City Hall South), Sheridan Observation

Point Park, the Ford Assembly Building, Lucretia

Edwards Park, the Maritime Child Development

Center, Fire Station 67A, and the Kaiser Permanente

Transportation by

Land
Field Hospital. The I-580 interchange with 23rd

Street provides access to the Rosie the Riveter

Memorial in Marina Bay Park, Shimada Peace

Memorial Park, Barbara and Jay Vincent Park, and

the Ruth C. Powers Child Development Center.

I-580 creates a distinct boundary between the urban

street grid of Richmond to the north and the

discontinuous and sparser roadway infrastructure to

the south. Visiting the park sites south of the

interstate requires retracing routes several times

because Marina Bay and the Santa Fe Channel

separate a number of the sites. All of the park sites

north of the interstate are not yet open to the public

and are either in private ownership or are still in

contemporary, nonpark-related use.

The self-guiding auto tour (described in a booklet

currently available at the visitor orientation center

and on the park website) begins at the self-service

visitor orientation center located in temporary

Richmond City Hall South and continues with a visit

to the Rosie the Riveter Memorial in Marina Bay

Park. Visitors are then directed to Sheridan

Observation Point Park at the end of Harbour Way

South, where they can view the Ford Assembly

Building and see Richmond Shipyard No.3 across

the channel.

Visitors then make their way back north on Harbour

Way and west onto Cutting Boulevard, crossing 

I-580 twice, before driving south on Canal

Boulevard to the roadway providing access to

Richmond Shipyard No. 3 and the SS Red Oak

Victory. Use of a private vehicle is the only

motorized way to visit all of these sites, as public

transit does not serve the SS Red Oak Victory or

Richmond Shipyard No. 3.

Although the Richmond Museum of History is not a

park site as identified in the enabling legislation, it is

a major contributor to the visitor educational

experience. The museum is located at 4th Street and

Nevin Avenue, fairly close to the other park sites that

are located north of I-580. 

• Traffic Volumes 

The streets identified in the following discussion

provide access and circulation to the area and to the

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park. In 2004, traffic volumes on

several of the streets were documented as part of the

traffic study conducted for the initial study on the

Ford Assembly Building Reuse Project. Those

volumes are included in the following discussion.

Harbour Way is a north-south arterial with some

direct access to I-580 via on-ramp and off-ramp

connections. South of I-580, the street is referred to

as Harbour Way South and has one travel lane in

each direction. Harbour Way South provides access

to the west side of the Ford Assembly Building and

Sheridan Observation Point Park. North of I-580,

the street is four lanes wide, with two travel lanes in

each direction. In the 2004 traffic study, the daily

traffic volume on Harbour Way South was

documented at approximately 1,300 vehicles per day. 

During that same traffic study, peak hour volumes

were counted for intersections along Harbour Way

South from Hall Avenue to Cutting Boulevard.

During the morning peak hour, Harbour Way traffic

volume was 148 vehicles per hour north of Hall

Avenue, 329 vehicles per hour north of Wright

Avenue, and almost 1,200 vehicles per hour north of

Cutting Boulevard. During the evening peak hour,

Harbour Way traffic volume was 149 vehicles per

hour north of Hall Avenue, 306 vehicles per hour

north of Wright Avenue, and almost 1,100 vehicles

per hour north of Cutting Boulevard.

Marina Way South is a four-lane arterial street with

north-south orientation and no direct connections

to I-580. Marina Way South provides access to the

current park visitor center, located in the temporary

Richmond City Hall South, and to Lucretia Edwards

Park, located at the southern terminus of Marina

Way South. North of I-580, the Kaiser Permanente

Field Hospital is located along the west side of

Marina Way South, between Potrero Avenue and

Cutting Boulevard.

In 2004, traffic counts showed peak traffic on

Marina Way South to be 218 vehicles per hour

during the morning peak and 242 vehicles per hour

during the evening peak. 

Marina Bay Parkway and 23rd Street provides

north-south access in the study area and full access

ramps to and from I-580. South of I-580, the street is

named Marina Bay Parkway and provides access to

the Rosie the Riveter Memorial, Shimada Peace 

140

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
141

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

Figure 2: Park Area Map and I-580 Interchange
Memorial Park, and Barbara and Jay Vincent Park.

The February 2004 traffic study showed traffic

volume on Marina Bay Parkway, north of Regatta

Boulevard, to be 739 vehicles per hour during the

morning peak and 793 vehicles per hour during the

evening peak.

North of I-580, the street becomes 23rd Street. None

of the national historical park sites are located

directly on this street, but 23rd Street does provide

an access route to the Ruth C. Powers Child

Development Center located at 28th Street and

Maine Avenue. The February 2004 traffic counts

showed traffic volume on 23rd Street, south of

Cutting Boulevard, to be 1,669 vehicles per hour

during the morning peak and 1,940 vehicles per

hour during the evening peak.

Regatta Boulevard is a four-lane, east-west arterial

connecting Marina Way South and Marina Bay

Parkway. Regatta continues east of Marina Bay

Parkway and then jogs north to an interchange with

I-580. The February 2004 traffic counts showed

traffic volume on Regatta Boulevard, west of Marina

Bay Parkway, to be 356 vehicles per hour during the

morning peak and 312 vehicles per hour during the

evening peak.

Cutting Boulevard is a four-lane, east-west arterial

that connects I-80 and I-580 and provides ramp

access to and from both freeways. For access to

national historical park sites, Cutting Boulevard

provides an important east-west connection for

Canal Boulevard, Harbour Way, Marina Way, and

23rd Street/Marina Bay Parkway.

Two of the national historical park sites, Kaiser

Permanente Field Hospital and Fire Station 67A, are

located along Cutting Boulevard. The February 2004

traffic counts showed traffic volume on Cutting

Boulevard east of Harbour Way to be 844 vehicles

per hour during the morning peak and 848 vehicles

per hour during the evening peak.

Canal Boulevard is a four-lane thoroughfare

extending from Garrard Boulevard through an

interchange with I-580, then continuing

south/southeast to the gate of the Port of Richmond

and Shipyard No. 3.

The most recent traffic counts available for Canal

Boulevard were peak hour counts conducted in 2004

for the Northbay Business Park Development

Project. The2004 Northbay traffic count showed

peak hour traffic volume on Canal south of Cutting

Boulevard to be 350 vehicles per hour during the

morning peak and 340 vehicles per hour in the

evening peak. For Canal north of I-580, the

Northbay traffic study documented 1,130 vehicles

per hour in the morning peak and 1,050 vehicles per

hour in the evening peak. (City of Richmond,

Planning Department, 2004) 

Garrard Boulevard provides a diagonal connection

in a northeasterly direction from Cutting Boulevard

to the intersection with Canal Boulevard and then

continuing north to Macdonald Avenue. The

roadway is a four-lane arterial and is generally

parallel to a railroad-switching yard located along

the western edge of Garrard. 

Macdonald Avenue is an east-west arterial

extending from Garrard Boulevard on the west,

through downtown Richmond, and connecting to I80 east of the study area. From Garrard Boulevard to

6th Street, Macdonald Avenue is four lanes wide,

with two lanes in each direction. East of 6th Street,

the road is two lanes wide, with one lane in each

direction and a landscaped median. East of 16th

Street, the road transitions back to four lanes. The

most recent traffic volumes available for Macdonald

Avenue were 2002 counts from the City of

Richmond. The 2002 counts showed 5,300 vehicles

per day on Macdonald between Garrard and 6th

Street and 15,000 vehicles per day between 8th

Street and Harbour Way. 

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

The capacity of urban roadway networks is generally

determined by traffic operations at intersections

rather than operations along roadway segments.

Standard practices have been established for

transportation planning applications to evaluate the

traffic operating conditions at intersections by using

level of service (LOS) applications. Level of Service

is a qualitative assessment of traffic conditions, and

its rating generally reflects travel time and speed,

freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort,

and convenience. Level of Service “A” represents

free flow conditions, while Level of Service “F”

142

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
indicates excessive delays and long queues.

The City of Richmond has adopted policies stating

that transportation evaluations of this type shall

comply with requirements of the Contra Costa

Transportation Authority (CCTA) for traffic studies.

The Contra Costa Transportation Authority

methodology requires Level of Service computations

that are based on the intersection’s volume-tocapacity (V/C) ratio; these Level of Service ranges

are shown in table 14. 

• Existing Levels of Service

Recent traffic studies conducted for proposed

projects in the Richmond area were reviewed in

order to determine existing traffic conditions at

intersections that would potentially be used by

visitors to Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home

Front National Historical Park. Table 14 summarizes

the existing Level of Service for selected

intersections based on a traffic study done for the

Ford Assembly Building Reuse Project and a study

done for the 10-B Nevin Redevelopment Plan

Amendment. As can be seen in Table 15, the majority

of intersections are operating at Level of Service

“A.”

143

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

Level of Service Expected Delay

Table 14: Definitions of Levels of Service for Signalized Intersections

Range of Volume-toCapacity Ratio

(V/C)

Little or no delay

Short traffic delays

Average traffic delays

Long traffic delays

Very long traffic delays

Extreme delays potentially affecting other

traffic movements in the intersection

Less than 0.60

0.61 - 0.70

0.71 - 0.80

0.81 - 0.90

0.91 - 1.00

Greater than 1.00

A

B

C

D

E

F

Source: Contra Costa Transportation Authority, Technical Procedures, August 1992.

Canal Boulevard and Cutting Boulevard / (a)

Canal Boulevard and I-580 EB ramps / (a)

Canal Boulevard and I-580 WB ramp / (a)

Garrard Boulevard and Macdonald Avenue / (a)

Harbour Way and Macdonald Avenue / (a)

Cutting Boulevard and I-580 WB off-ramp / (b)

Cutting Boulevard and Harbour Way / (b)

Marina Bay Parkway and I-580 EB ramps / (b)

Marina Bay Parkway and I-580 WB ramps / (b)

23rd Street and Cutting Boulevard / (b)

Marina Bay Parkway and Regatta Boulevard / (b)

MORNING PEAK HOUR EVENING PEAK HOUR

0.20

0.23

0.54

0.37

0.39

0.26

0.56

0.42

0.34

0.59

0.22

INTERSECTION/

(SOURCE REFERENCE) Volume/

Capacity

Volume/

Capacity

Level of

Service

Level of

Service

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

0.14

0.25

0.22

0.65

0.72

0.15

0.55

0.31

0.35

0.67

0.20

A

A

A

A

C

A

A

A

A

B

A

Source:

(a) Table 6.3, Draft EIR, 10-B Nevin Redevelopment Plan Amendment, City of Richmond Redevelopment Agency, April 22, 2005.

(b) Table T-2, Ford Assembly Building, Reuse Project, Mitigated Negative Declaration. City of Richmond, June 2004.

Table 15: Existing Intersection Levels of Service
PUBLIC TRANSIT

The City of Richmond has a variety of public

transportation options with bus service provided by

Alameda-Contra Costa County (AC) Transit and

Golden Gate Transit, and rail service provided by the

Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) District and Amtrak.

The Richmond Intermodal Station, which is located

approximately 1 mile north of I-580 and within 2

miles of most national historical park sites, provides

access to each of these providers. The intermodal

station is located just north of Macdonald Avenue

between Marina Way and 19th Street. Originally

surrounded by parking lots and vacant city-owned

land, the station is now the heart of a high-density,

mixed-use development.

The station serves six AC Transit routes (70, 71,

72M, 74, 76, and 376), Golden Gate Transit Route

42, the BART orange and red lines, and the Amtrak

Capitol Corridor and San Joaquin routes. The AC

Transit routes provide local bus service within

Alameda and Contra Costa counties. Golden Gate

Transit provides regional bus service in San

Francisco, Marin, and Sonoma counties. BART

connections provide access to San Francisco and the

East Bay Area, while Amtrak provides long-distance

rail service to Sacramento, Fresno, Stockton, and

Bakersfield.

While public transit serves some of the national

historical park sites, there is no public transit service

that provides easy and convenient public access to

most park sites. A visit to several sites would require

walking distances of up to a half mile and

transferring between bus routes. 

• Alameda-Contra Costa County Transit

The Alameda-Contra Costa County Transit District,

known as AC Transit, provides local bus service in

Alameda and Contra Costa counties. Several AC

Transit routes serve sites within the park, and six

routes are accessible from the Richmond Intermodal

Station (see figure 2). Route 74 is the only local bus

route serving sites south of I-580. The route is run

every half-hour and passes Marina Bay Park (the site

of the Rosie the Riveter Memorial) and the visitor

center at the temporary Richmond City Hall South.

Other sites within walking distance (approximately

one-quarter mile) of this transit route include

Sheridan Observation Point Park, the Ford Assembly

Building, and Lucretia Edwards Park. North of I580, the Ruth C. Powers Child Development Center

is within walking distance of the route, as well.

Route 76 passes the Maritime Child Development

Center, Fire Station 67A, and the Kaiser Permanente

Field Hospital; it also passes within two blocks of the

Ruth C. Powers Child Development Center. This

route intersects Route 74 at the intersection of 23rd

Street and Cutting Boulevard. It runs every half hour

on weekdays and every hour on weekends. Route

72M passes by Atchison Village, and runs

approximately every half hour. Routes 71 and 376

pass within one or two blocks of the Ruth C. Powers

Child Development Center. Route 71 provides

service every half hour on weekdays and every hour

on weekends. No public transportation routes serve

the SS Red Oak Victory, Richmond Shipyard No. 3,

or the Shimada Peace Memorial and Barbara and Jay

Vincent parks.

• Golden Gate Transit

Golden Gate Transit provides bus service along the

Golden Gate corridor in San Francisco and in Marin

and Sonoma counties. Routes 40 and 42 provide

service over the Richmond/San Rafael Bridge

between Marin County and the City of Richmond.

Both routes follow I-580 over the bridge to Cutting

Boulevard. Route 40 continues east on Cutting,

passing by Fire Station 67A and the Kaiser

Permanente Field Hospital, and passing within two

blocks of the Ruth C. Powers Child Development

Center. Route 42 turns north on Harbour Way,

passing by the Maritime Child Development Center

on its way to the Richmond Intermodal Station.

Then Route 42 joins back with Route 40 at the

intersection of Carlson Avenue and Cutting

Boulevard, passing by the Ruth C. Powers Child

Development Center along the way.

Route 40 provides service approximately every hour

on weekdays during peak hours. Route 42 provides

service throughout the day on weekdays and

weekends. Route 42 runs every half hour on

weekdays until approximately 8:00 p.m. After that

time, and on weekends, service runs every hour. 

• BART – Bay Area Rapid Transit

Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) is the commuter rail

line serving the Bay Area. The Richmond Intermodal

Station is the northernmost stop on the BART

144

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
58

378

3,586

390

1,395

5,807

orange and red lines, which provide service from

Richmond to Fremont and from Richmond to

Millbrae/San Francisco International Airport

respectively. BART provides frequent service to the

station. On weekdays, the orange line trains run

every 15 minutes between 4:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.,

and every 20 minutes between 7:00 p.m. and

midnight. On weekdays, the red line trains run every

15 minutes between 5:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. On

weekends, the orange line trains run every 20

minutes between 6:00 a.m. and midnight on

Saturdays and between 8:00 a.m. and midnight on

Sundays. On Saturdays, the red line trains run every

20 minutes between 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. There is

no service on the red line on Sundays.

• Amtrak

The State of California provides funding for three

long-distance Amtrak rail routes in the state. Two of

these, the San Joaquin and Capitol routes, run

through Richmond and stop at the Richmond

Intermodal Station. The San Joaquin route, operated

by Caltrans, runs north-south in central California,

connecting Bakersfield, Fresno, Stockton, and

Sacramento; a spur line on the route connects to the

Bay Area. The line operates four round trips

between the Bay Area and Bakersfield. 

The Capitol Corridor route, operated by the Capitol

Corridor Joint Powers Board (CCJPB) runs eastwest in central California, connecting the Bay Area

with Sacramento. The Capitol Corridor line operates

12 round trips between the Bay Area and

Sacramento (Amtrak California).

• Tour Buses

There are currently no formal bus tour operations

providing access to or tours of the national historical

park. Private tour bus companies may be stopping in

the park, but no records have been maintained of

these visits. 

• Commercial Marine Activities

Richmond maintains a deepwater shipping port. The

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers documents annual

statistics on waterborne commerce for the United

States; vessel visits to Richmond Harbor are one of

the reported statistics. The numbers shown in table

16 are the reported inbound vessels to Richmond

Harbor; the outbound numbers are essentially the

same.

• Other Railroads

There are national and local railroad lines that are

located near many of the park sites. These active

railroad lines can disrupt traffic flow when in use.

The Union Pacific (UP) system includes former

Southern Pacific and Western Pacific lines and

facilities. The Burlington North Santa Fe (BNSF)

system includes former Santa Fe lines and facilities.

The main lines of the UP from Martinez and

Stockton are routed through Richmond, as well.

Richmond is also the western terminus of the BNSF

system; BNSF has two intermodal terminals in the

area, both of which handle domestic traffic.

Richmond Pacific (formerly Parr Terminal) provides

local switching service in the area. Richmond Pacific

provides rail connections to the Levin-Richmond

Terminal Corporation (or Port of Richmond’s

Terminal No. 9), located on Wright Avenue. The rail

lines serving the Richmond area cross many of the

city streets with at-grade crossings, as shown in

figure 3, and trains using the at-grade crossings can

block street traffic for lengthy periods.

In general, trains operated by the Levin-Richmond

Terminal are short (less than 13 cars) and run on a

varying schedule from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. The BNSF

has a minimum of two trains and a maximum of

eight trains per day that use the rail lines in this area;

these trains are up to 7,000 feet in length. Table 17

summarizes the at-grade crossings on access routes

to the national historical park sites. 

The City of Richmond currently has a study

underway that is analyzing the feasibility of a gradeseparated vehicular crossing for the BNSF route

south of I-580. Both the Marina Bay Parkway and

Harbour Way South at-grade crossings are being

studied as alternative locations for construction of

the grade-separated vehicular crossing.

145

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

Passenger and Dry Cargo (Self propelled)

Tanker (Self propelled)

Tow or Tug (Self propelled)

Dry Cargo (Barge)

Tanker (Barge)

Total

NUMBER OF 

VESSEL VISITS

(Inbound)

TYPE OF VESSEL

Table 16: Vessel Traffic to Richmond Harbor (2003)
146

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Marina Bay Parkway,

north of Regatta Boulevard

Marina Way South,

south of Wright Avenue 

(two crossings)

Regatta Boulevard,

east of Marina Way South

Harbour Way South –

Two crossings: Wright 

Avenue intersection and 

south of Wright

Cutting Boulevard,

west of I-580 ramp

Canal Boulevard,

south of Cutting

Garrard Boulevard,

between Ohio and 

Macdonald 

(two crossings)

Rosie the Riveter Memorial,

Shimada Friendship Park,

and Barbara & Jay Vincent

Park

Lucretia Edwards Park and

east side of Ford Building

Trips between Ford Building

and parks along Marina Bay

Parkway

West side of Ford Assembly

Building and Sheridan

Observation Point Park

Trips between Ford

Assembly Building and

Shipyard

Shipyard

Atchison Village

Long BNSF trains can block

the crossing for up to10

minutes

Northern crossing can be

blocked by long BNSF trains

for up to 10 minutes.

Southern crossing mainly

used by shorter Richmond

Pacific trains.

Crossing mainly used by

shorter Richmond Pacific

trains.

Northern crossing at Wright

Avenue can be blocked by

long BNSF trains for up to

10 minutes.

Southern crossing mainly

used by shorter Richmond

Pacific trains.

Long BNSF trains can block

the crossing for up to 10

minutes.

Most trains are for shorter

for transferring freight to

port terminals

Long BNSF trains can block

the crossings for up to 10

minutes.

AT-GRADE CROSSINGS ACCESS TO PARK SITES ISSUES

Table 17: At-Grade Rail Crossings
147

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

Figure 3: At-Grade Railroad Crossings
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities

The primary bicycle and pedestrian facility accessing

the park is the San Francisco Bay Trail (Bay Trail),

which runs through or near a majority of the

shoreline park sites. Richmond has 20 miles of

completed Bay Trail. 

This pedestrian and bicycle route provides access to

a number of park sites, including Shimada Peace

Memorial Park, Barbara and Jay Vincent Park, the

Rosie the Riveter Memorial, the visitor center at the

temporary Richmond City Hall South, Lucretia

Edwards Park, the Ford Assembly Building, and

Atchison Village. Planned extensions of the trail will

access Sheridan Observation Point Park and

Shipyard No. 3. 

The four parks currently on the trail, along with the

nearby visitor center and Ford Assembly Building,

are spaced from approximately .25 mile to .5 mile

apart on the trail. While the four-mile round-trip

distance is too long for an easy walking tour of these

sites, it is suitable for a bicycle tour. 

The Bay Trail runs along Marina Way South north to

Wright Avenue and on Harbour Way between

Wright Avenue and Hoffman Boulevard. If a bicycle

route were established along either Harbour Way or

Marina Way South leading north across I-580, three

additional park sites would be easily accessible by

bicycle: the Maritime Child Development Center,

Fire Station 67A, and Kaiser Permanente Field

Hospital.

Sidewalks are provided on all public streets

connecting the various park sites to one another, and

they provide pedestrian access from parking lots and

transit stops to most of the park sites. 

• Parking

Parking is available at the majority of the national

historical park sites. Formal parking lots are available

at the Lucretia Edwards, Barbara and Jay Vincent,

and Shimada Peace Memorial parks. Some of these

lots experience high levels of use during the

weekends when the open space parks experience

high recreational use. Parking for other national

historical park sites is available only as on-street

spaces adjacent to the individual sites. 

Figure 4 shows the existing available public parking

lots at Sheridan Observation Point Park and Lucretia

Edwards Park. These parking areas are located close

to the Ford Assembly Building. No formal studies of

parking occupancy have been done, but existing

levels of use appear to be low.

Figure 5 shows the existing public parking lot

adjacent to the Rosie the Riveter Memorial in

Marina Bay Park. Marina Bay Park is a fairly active

park, and the parking lot also serves the boat slips of

the Marina Bay Yacht Harbor that are located close

to the park. No formal studies of parking occupancy

have been done, but this parking lot currently has

higher levels of use than the public lots at Sheridan

Observation Point Park and Lucretia Edwards Park. 

Figure 6 shows the existing public parking lots for

the Shimada Peace Memorial Park and the Barbara

& Jay Vincent Park. Both of these parking lots jointly

serve park users and visitors to the national

historical park sites. Existing use levels are fairly

high, particularly on the weekends.

As shown in figure 7, parking for the Ruth C. Powers

Child Development Center is currently available

only at on-street locations with parallel parking

along Maine Avenue, 27th Street, and 28th Street.

Existing use levels appear to be low.

Figure 8 shows existing parking available for the

Kaiser Permanente Field Hospital and the Richmond

Fire Station. For Kaiser Permanente Field Hospital,

parking is available on the street with parallel

parking along Cutting Boulevard, 13th Street, and

Potrero Avenue, and in an area with angle parking

along southbound Marina Way. For Fire Station 67A,

on-street spaces are available along Cutting

Boulevard and 12th Street. Existing use levels appear

to be low.

Atchison Village is located south of Macdonald

Avenue between Garrard Boulevard and 1st Street.

Atchison Village remains an active, residential area,

and motor vehicle access to Atchison Village has

been closed at two of the three streets connecting to

the surrounding neighborhoods. Public access to the

area is mainly feasible from Macdonald Avenue, and

on-street parking is available on Macdonald from

Garrard to 1st Street. 

148

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
149

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

Figure 4: Sheridan Observation Point / Lucretia Edwards Park
150

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Figure 5: Existing Parking for Rosie the Riveter Memorial at Marina Bay Park
151

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

Figure 6: Existing Parking for Barbara & Jay Vincent Park / Shimada Friendship Park
152

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Figure 7: Existing Parking for Ruth C. Powers Child Development Center
153

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park

Figure 8: Existing Parking for Kaiser Permanente Hospital
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT

PROGRAM

The Transportation Improvement Program is a

comprehensive listing of all Bay Area transportation

projects that receive federal funds or that are subject

to a federally required action. The Transportation

Improvement Program sets forth the Metropolitan

Transportation Commission’s investment priorities

for transit and transit-related improvements;

highways and roadways; public transit; and other

surface transportation improvements in the ninecounty San Francisco Bay Area. Every two years the

Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)

prepares and adopts the Transportation

Improvement Program.

By law, the Transportation Improvement Program

must cover at least a three-year period and contain a

priority list of projects grouped by year. Further, the

Transportation Improvement Program must be

financially constrained by year (meaning that the

amount of dollars programmed must not exceed the

amount of dollars estimated to be available). The

Metropolitan Transportation Commission adopted

the 2005 Transportation Improvement Program in

July 2004, and it covers programming for fiscal years

2004-05 through 2006-07.

Projects in Contra Costa County that are included in

the adopted 2005 Transportation Improvement

Program and which could serve the transportation

system in the area of the national historical park are

provided in table 18.

MEASURE "J," CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

In November 2004, voters in Contra Costa County

approved the passage of “Measure J,” a continuation

of the county’s half-cent transportation sales tax for

25 more years. The expenditure plan for Measure J

includes potential funding for ferry service from

Richmond to San Francisco; the proposed ferry

project could directly benefit transportation services

for Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park.

Other projects in the Measure J expenditure plan

that may have indirect benefits for Rosie the

Riveter/World War II Home Front National

Historical Park include the following:

 upgrade the Richmond Parkway, including

potential intersection and interchange

upgrades

 BART parking, access, and other

improvements

 local streets maintenance and

Improvements

 pedestrian, bicycle and trail facilities

 additional bus service enhancements for

West County

154

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Local Street Projects

Richmond Greenway and Bikeway - Phase I

North Richmond Main Street Project

Dornan Dr/Garrard Blvd Tunnel

Richmond Parkway Bay Trail - Phase I

Carlson Boulevard Rehabilitation

Transit Projects

Richmond Intermodal Station - Phase III

Richmond Parkway Transit Center Parking

Richmond BART Parking Structure

Red Oak Victory Ship Restoration - Phases 1 & II

Richmond Intermodal Station Facilities - Phase III

Pedestrian and Bicycle

Richmond Transit Village Transit and Pedestrian Improvement

Richmond

Richmond

Richmond

Richmond

Richmond

WCCTAC

Richmond

BART

Richmond

Richmond

BART

Active

Active

Active

Active

Proposed

Active

Active

Active

Active

Proposed

Active

Projects Sponsor Status

Table 18: Transportation Improvement Program in Contra Costa County within the

area of Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park
CURRENT WATER TRANSIT SERVICE IN

THE BAY AREA

The city of San Francisco serves as the terminus for

all existing ferry routes in the San Francisco Bay

Area with terminals at Pier 41/43 (Fisherman’s

Wharf) and the San Francisco Ferry Terminal (see

appendix E, table 9 for details).

Sixty percent of the total annual riders, four million

passengers, are commuters moving between

communities in East Bay or Marin County to the

employment centers of San Francisco. The

remaining 40% of riders, or three million 

passengers, use ferries for recreational purposes,

traveling primarily to Alcatraz or Angel Island (see

table 19).

Currently there are six commuter-based watertransit services throughout the Bay Area:

 Oakland-Alameda-San Francisco

 Harbor Bay-San Francisco

 Vallejo-San Francisco

 Sausalito-San Francisco

 Larkspur-San Francisco

 Tiburon-San Francisco

155

Transportation By

Water

2,339,496

2,607,857

2,594,347

2,697,977

2,737,535

2,681,422

2,609,163

2,912,487

3,104,405

3,541,422

3,559,222

3,972,216

4,027,712

3,666,091

3,452,923

3,448,928

3,326,869

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2,700,000

2,700,000

2,700,000

2,780,000

2,975,800

2,970,200

3,026,000

2,907,678

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2,339,496

2,607,857

2,594,347

2,697,977

2,737,535

5,381,422

5,309,163

5,612,487

5,884,405

6,517,222

6,529,422

6,998,216

6,933,712

3,666,091

3,452,923

3,448,928

3,326,869

YEAR COMMUTERS RECREATION

RIDERS

TOTAL

Recreation Riders

and Commuters

Source: San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority.

Table 19: Bay Area Annual Ferry Ridership Trends
FUTURE WATER TRANSIT IN 

THE BAY AREA

The San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority

is a regional agency authorized by the State of

California to operate a comprehensive San Francisco

Bay Area public water transit system. The Water

Transit Authority’s goal over the next twenty years is

to develop a reliable, convenient, flexible, and costeffective water-transit system that will help reduce

vehicle congestion and pollution in the Bay Area. In

2003 the Water Transit Authority’s ferry transit plan

was approved by state statute and if implemented,

estimates suggest that ridership could grow to

approximately 12 million riders annually by 2025.

The primary objectives of the San Francisco Bay

Area Water Transit Authority planning efforts

include establishing new ferry routes and improving

service on the existing ferry systems.

Potential new routes that the Water Transit Authority

is considering include the following: 

• Berkeley-San Francisco-Mission Bay

• Richmond-San Francisco

• Treasure Island-San Francisco

• Antioch/Pittsburgh-Martinez-San Francisco

• Hercules/Rodeo-San Francisco

• South San Francisco-San Francisco

• Redwood City-San Francisco

• Port Sonoma-San Francisco (further study)

• East Bay-Peninsula (further study)

• Hunters Point (further study)

In addition, Water Transit Authority goals include 

 placing in service 31 new passenger ferries

over the next ten years 

 acquiring clean emission vessels

 developing convenient landside

connections to terminals

 expanding facilities at the San Francisco

Ferry Building

 constructing two spare vessels 

 partnering with Redwood City, Treasure

Island, Antioch, Martinez, Hercules and

Moffett Field to continue planning their

respective waterfronts 

 pursuing funding from federal and local

sources 

REGIONAL EFFORTS TO FUND 

WATER TRANSIT

In 1999, the San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit

Authority was created by the California Legislature

to produce a10-year plan for ferries and landside

connections in the Bay Area. In August 2003, the

state of California approved the Water Transit

Authority’s plan to operate a comprehensive regional

ferry system in the San Francisco Bay Area. The

primary funding mechanism to implement that plan

is a sales tax approved by Bay Area voters in March

2004. Referred to as Regional Measure 2 (RM2), the

sales tax raised the toll on the seven bridges in the

San Francisco Bay Area by $1.00. Passage of RM2

secures money for ferry projects along with more

than 30 other transportation projects around the

region. The tax will help fund new capital for ferry

routes between San Francisco, Berkeley, and South

San Francisco. In addition, RM2 will be used to

acquire more ferries for the existing Alameda/

Oakland line, subsidize operations for the Vallejo

route, and add more berths at San Francisco’s

Downtown Ferry Terminal to accommodate the

expected growth in ferry traffic. Up to $1 million in

funding for planning will also be made available to

study the viability of new service between Richmond

and San Francisco.

Although money from RM2 is a major windfall for

water -based transportation in the Bay Area, it does

not fund the entire Water Transit Authority ferry

plan. Therefore, the Water Transit Authority is

working with San Mateo and Contra Costa counties

to secure additional funds. On a national level the

Water Transit Authority is working with other ferry

systems to increase the Federal Ferry Boat

Discretionary Fund. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA)

and California Senators Feinstein and Boxer led an

amendment approved by the U.S. Senate to increase

the Federal Ferry Boat Discretionary Program from

$38 million to $125 million per year in the

Transportation Reauthorization Bill.

LOCAL EFFORTS TO FUND 

WATER TRANSIT 

The San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority

has recommended upgrading old boats to a faster,

more competitive boat for the Richmond ferry

156

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
service as well as developing an integrated marketing

campaign and convenient landside connection to the

Richmond Port. In support of this plan, the

Richmond City Council passed a resolution in 2004

requesting that a portion of the Contra Costa

County Transportation Authority sales tax

reauthorization be reserved for Richmond ferries.

Referred to as “Measure J,” the measure was

approved by voters in November 2004 by a twothirds margin and extends the current half-cent sales

tax for 25 years. Of the estimated $2 billion raised

through the sales tax, the package includes $45

million for ferry service in Contra Costa County and

includes language that would allow funding for the

Richmond Parkway ($16 million) to be re-allocated

to a ferry in the future if the City of Richmond

requests it. Money earmarked for ferry service could

go to either the City of Richmond or City of

Hercules proposed service.

For a number of years, Contra Costa County

residents have been pushing local authorities to

provide new ferry service from Richmond, Hercules,

Martinez, and Antioch. In response, a group of

prominent county policy makers has formed a

group, Water Transit Advocates for Contra Costa

County, in an effort to increase regional support for

ferries and to identify multiple funding sources. The

cities of Richmond and Hercules expect to include

$57 million for ferries in the Contra Costa sales tax

expenditure plan and the City of Martinez expects

to set aside approximately $8.5 million for ferries

from the same source.

WATER TRANSIT FACILITIES 

IN RICHMOND

The 1999-2000 ferry service between Richmond and

San Francisco docked at the Richmond Ferry

Terminal at Sheridan Observation Point Park. The

Ferry Terminal, adjacent to the Ford Assembly

Building, consisted of little more than an open air

shelter for waiting passengers and approximately 200

automobile parking spaces. For future high-quality

ferry service to be a success in Richmond, city

officials and the Water Transit Authority believe a

new terminal must be constructed. Some funds for

terminal construction are budgeted within the

Contra Costa County Measure J sales tax but not

enough to cover the $6 million the Water Transit

Authority estimates would be necessary for a new

terminal at Marina Bay in Richmond. 

The potential to develop water transit access to the

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park could result in easy,

affordable, and enjoyable visitor access to the park

while serving regional transportation goals and

supporting the residents of Richmond, California.

With over seven million ferry passengers annually,

the San Francisco Bay Area ranks as the third largest

market in the United States for water transit, and

continues its long history of moving its population

via ferries. Ferry ridership in the San Francisco Bay

Area has grown steadily over the past 20 years and

has experienced growth of approximately 1.5 million

riders annually since 1994. While this ridership is

significant enough to influence regional

transportation trends, current ridership is still far

less than historic numbers in the Bay Area which

approached 50 million riders annually prior to the

opening of the Bay Bridge in 1936. The fact that San

Francisco’s population in the 1930s was only a

quarter of what it was in 2004 highlights the fact that

the region’s population has moved away from water

transit over the years in favor of the automobile. 

Among San Francisco Bay Area communities, the

city of Richmond, California presents a unique mix

of development, economic, and water transportation

opportunities. Less than eight nautical miles north of

San Francisco, Richmond is located at the western

extreme of Contra Costa County, on a cape

separating central San Francisco Bay and San Pablo

Bay. While construction of bridges and development

of mass transit systems such as Bay Area Rapid

Transit (BART) have reduced the use of water transit

over the years, ferry service has been established in

Richmond several times in the past. The 1998 Loma

Prieta Earthquake presented a crucial need for ferry

service while the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge

was under repair, leading to several start-ups in the

East Bay. Richmond was among the cities served by

emergency ferry services following that earthquake

and experienced up to 993 riders per day during the

short operation of those services. However, with the

restoration of the Bay Bridge, ridership and the

viability of the Richmond ferry service quickly

declined. 

157

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park
Between 1999 and 2000, ferry service to Richmond

was provided once again by the Red & White Fleet, a

San Francisco excursion and charter operator. That

service used ferry terminals at Sheridan Observation

Point Park in Richmond and the San Francisco

Terminal Building. However, because fare revenue

did not sufficiently cover operating costs, the

operator was allowed to terminate the service under

terms of the agreement with the City of Richmond.

According to the San Francisco Bay Area Water

Transit Authority (Water Transit Authority), the

Richmond waterfront is still ideally suited for future

water transit to San Francisco and to outlying

recreation venues. Based on its population, its

development potential along the waterfront, and its

location, Richmond has the potential to draw

significant ridership in the future. The Water Transit

Authority estimates that as many as 1,850 daily

passengers would use a commuter ferry in year 2025.

However, factors such as the redevelopment of the

Ford Assembly Building, development of

brownfields in the area, and development of the

Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front

National Historical Park may serve to increase those

ridership estimates. 

In 2001 the consulting firm Booz-Allen & Hamilton

Inc. produced An Assessment of the Business Case for

Water Transit between Richmond and San Francisco

for the Richmond Redevelopment Agency. That

study looked into the many factors which would

potentially affect the development of new ferry

service in Richmond. Taking those many factors into

account, the study compared three different service

scenarios ranging from 12 vessel trips per day to 80

trips per day. As presented in table 20, the ridership

forecast for those service scenarios ranged from 500

riders per day to 3,500 riders per day.

158

CHAPTER 4: IMPACT TOPICS AND THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Daily one-way vessel trips (both directions)

Number of vessels

Travel speed

Travel time

Headways Peak period

Off peak

Projected daily ridership *

Projected parking need

Capital Costs = Vessels

+ Terminals/parking (surface)

= Total capital costs

Operating Costs = Annual operating cost

– Annual operating revenue

= Annual operating subsidy

20-year operating subsidy

Average one-way fare (including discounts)

Projected farebox recovery *

ATTRIBUTE LOW SCENARIO

(MTC 1992

FERRY PLAN)

MID-RANGE

SCENARIO

HIGH SCENARIO

(WATER TRANSIT

TASK FORCE)

12

1

25-35 knots

25 minutes

60

–

500

175

$3.50 Million

$2.85 Million

$6.35 Million

$1.02 Million

$0.53 Million

$0.49 Million

$9.80 Million

$3.50

51%

40

2

25-35 knots

25 minutes

30

60

1400

490

$7.00 Million

$4.74 Million

$11.74 Million

$2.04 Million

$1.26 Million

$0.78 Million

$15.60 Million

$3.00

62%

80

5

25-35 knots

25 minutes

15

30

3500

1200

$17.50 Million

$9.00 Million

$26.50 Million

$5.11 Million

$3.15 Million

$1.96 Million

$39.20 Million

$3.00

62%

Table 20: Potential Richmond, California Ferry Service Scenarios

*Based on MTC ridership forecasts for the low and high service scenarios