Foundation Document Part 2

Note: this Foundation Document was written in March 2016; some aspects of the Park have changed in the years since its creation.
Introduction · Part 1 · Part 3 · Appendixes

Part 2: Dynamic Components

The dynamic components of a foundation document include special mandates and administrative commitments and an assessment of planning and data needs. These components are dynamic because they will change over time. New special mandates can be established and new administrative commitments made. As conditions and trends of fundamental and other important resources and values change over time, the analysis of planning and data needs will need to be revisited and revised, along with key issues. Therefore, this part of the foundation document will be updated accordingly.

Special Mandates and Administrative Commitments

Many management decisions for a park unit are directed or influenced by special mandates and administrative commitments with other federal agencies, state and local governments, utility companies, partnering organizations, and other entities. Special mandates are requirements specific to a park that must be fulfilled. Mandates can be expressed in enabling legislation, in separate legislation following the establishment of the park, or through a judicial process. They may expand on park purpose or introduce elements unrelated to the purpose of the park. Administrative commitments are, in general, agreements that have been reached through formal, documented processes, often through memorandums of agreement. Examples include easements, rights-of-way, arrangements for emergency service responses, etc. Special mandates and administrative commitments can support, in many cases, a network of partnerships that help fulfill the objectives of the park and facilitate working relationships with other organizations. They are an essential component of managing and planning for San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park.

For information about the special mandates and administrative commitments for San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park, please see appendix C.

Assessment of Planning and Data Needs

Once the core components of part 1 of the foundation document have been identified, it is important to gather and evaluate existing information about the park’s fundamental and other important resources and values, and develop a full assessment of the park’s planning and data needs. The assessment of planning and data needs section presents planning issues, the planning projects that will address these issues, and the associated information requirements for planning, such as resource inventories and data collection, including GIS data.

There are three sections in the assessment of planning and data needs:

1. analysis of fundamental and other important resources and values (see appendix B)
2. identification of key issues and associated planning and data needs
3. identification of planning and data needs (including spatial mapping activities or GIS maps)

The analysis of fundamental and other important resources and values and identification of key issues leads up to and supports the identification of planning and data collection needs.

 

Analysis of Fundamental Resources and Values

The fundamental resource or value analysis table includes current conditions, potential threats and opportunities, planning and data needs, and selected laws and NPS policies related to management of the identified resource or value. Please see appendix B for the analysis of fundamental resources and values.

Identification of Key Issues and Associated Planning and Data Needs

This section considers key issues to be addressed in planning and management and therefore takes a broader view over the primary focus of part 1. A key issue focuses on a question that is important for a park. Key issues often raise questions regarding park purpose and significance and fundamental and other important resources and values. For example, a key issue may pertain to the potential for a fundamental or other important resource or value in a park to be detrimentally affected by discretionary management decisions. A key issue may also address crucial questions that are not directly related to purpose and significance, but which still affect them indirectly. Usually, a key issue is one that a future planning effort or data collection needs to address and requires a decision by NPS managers. 

The following are key issues for San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park and the associated planning and data needs to address them: 

• Long-Term Preservation of the Historic Ships and Other Cultural Resources – The preservation of large ships, Municipal Pier, and other cultural resources is a significant challenge requiring extensive and ongoing financial support, as well as specialized knowledge. The ships, identified as a fundamental resource, require significant maintenance and restoration using specialized skills and training. However, funding and staffing are currently inadequate. In addition, contemporary environmental protection standards preclude some work that would have historically been carried out on-site, which means that other work must be accomplished using nontraditional techniques. A decline in the ship building and repair industry in the San Francisco Bay Area has also impacted the park’s capacity to maintain and repair ships—for instance only one dry dock capable of handling the largest historic ships remains. The loss of the national historic landmark Wapama illustrated the importance of avoiding excessive deferment of preservation work. 
  
  Municipal Pier is also in critical need of restoration. After more than 80 years in a marine environment, Municipal Pier is crumbling, with portions already closed for visitor safety. In addition to being a cultural resource in its own right (part of the Aquatic Park National Historic Landmark District), Municipal Pier provides storm surge protection for the ships, Hyde Street Pier, Aquatic Park, and the Fisherman’s Wharf area—and will become even more important with predicted sea level rise due to climate change. Municipal Pier is critical for the protection of park and local resources, as well as providing a key aspect of the visitor experience at the park. However, the financial cost of repairing Municipal Pier is very high, and a funding source has not been identified.
  
  A variety of other cultural resources in the park also require ongoing preservation and maintenance. The park has nearly completed a multiyear restoration of the Aquatic Park Bathhouse. A project is also underway to improve safety and accessibility on the Aquatic Park promenade while continuing to protect historic resources and the cultural landscape.  
  
  Associated High Priority Planning and Data Needs: business plan (update), historic structure reports for national historic landmark ships, Hyde Street Pier development concept plan, Museum Building plan, preservation plan for the national historic landmark ships, Van Ness Avenue corridor development concept plan, workforce management (staffing) plan / position management plan.
   
• Park Identity and Mission – With more than 4 million visitors a year, San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park is one of the most visited parks in the national park system. Most visitors to the park are tourists to Fisherman’s Wharf, while local residents are often unware of the park and its resources. Many visitors arrive by chance, many are looking for waterfront recreational space, and others come intentionally to learn about maritime heritage. Many are unaware of the park’s maritime significance and the national park status, particularly visitors in Victorian and Aquatic Parks. The park therefore has multiple identities to the public as both a recreational and educational space, and the staff and park partners have different ideas regarding what the visitor experience should be across the park.
  
  While the park has very high visitation, it is not reaching many local and diverse audiences. Most residents of the Bay Area do not realize what the park has to offer, and the technical nature of maritime history is challenging to convey to a broad array of audiences. In addition staff capacity is an issue—the park has limited capacity to do outreach, produce innovative new materials to connect to new audiences, maintain a social media presence, and provide information to the public.
  
  Many park areas, including Hyde Street Pier, Jefferson Street, Van Ness Avenue, the Museum Building, and Aquatic Park, lack defined visitor experiences, spatial organization, and defined facility uses. Hyde Street Pier, one of the most visited areas of the park, includes spaces to accommodate visitors, staff, and park partners. Over time, large maritime artifacts and buildings have been added to this area without a clear vision of how they relate to park operations and visitor experiences on the pier. Jefferson Street provides some parking and leads to the Aquatic Park Promenade, but gives no indication it is part of a national park. Van Ness Avenue similarly has a variety of uses without a clearly defined visitor experience. For almost a decade, the Museum Building has been largely empty. Decisions need to be made regarding the use of this space for exhibits, facility rentals, interpretive programming, and other uses. In all of these areas, the park has administrative and fundraising needs for spaces that sometimes conflict with visitor use.
  
  Associated High Priority Planning and Data Needs: communications plan, Hyde Street Pier development concept plan, long-range interpretive plan, Museum Building plan, Van Ness Avenue corridor development concept plan, visitor surveys, workforce management (staffing) plan / position management plan.
   
• Accessibility of the Collections – San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park contains large, varied, valuable, and unique collections—identified as fundamental resources and contributing to the significance of the park. However, these collections, comprising the largest portion of the park’s resources, are largely invisible to the public, and their importance is not well understood or communicated. Lack of exhibits and interpretive methods make the vast majority of park collections inaccessible to the public. Archival materials can be accessed through the Maritime Research Center, but this is only available by appointment on weekday afternoons. The small craft collection and other larger collection items stored off site in a warehouse in San Leandro are essentially inaccessible to the public. The park currently also faces a backlog of cataloging and digitizing of documents and photographing of artifacts. The park’s purpose, significance, and fundamental values all recognize the park’s mandate to give visitors the opportunity to understand maritime heritage. Better access to the collections, whether digitally or on exhibit, could go a long ways toward this.
  
  Associated High Priority Planning and Data Needs: collection management plan, communications plan, Hyde Street Pier development concept plan, long-range interpretive plan, Museum Building plan, workforce management (staffing) plan / position management plan.
   
• Loss of Traditional Skills and Knowledge – The park relies on a highly specialized workforce for the preservation of historic ships and the curation and study of an extensive museum collection. However, the park faces a number of challenges in maintaining this workforce. Skills and knowledge are being lost when employees move on or retire. Changing technology on a worldwide scale (from wood to fiberglass and steel) means that it is increasingly difficult to find applicants with skills appropriate to working on historic ships. It is also difficult to recruit staff with academic knowledge about maritime artifacts and collections. Access to formal training is also lacking, as maritime specialties are not trained anywhere else in the national park system. The high cost of living in the San Francisco Bay Area is also a challenge in recruiting staff. In addition, empty positions are often not backfilled due to budget constraints.
  
  Associated High Priority Planning and Data Needs: workforce management (staffing) plan / position management plan.
   
• Climate Change – Given the park’s location in and on the water, climate change has the potential to have very serious impacts on park resources, visitors, and staff. Sea level rise, increased storm surge and storm intensity, and warming waters due to climate change are particular points of concern. The proximity of the park’s resources to the water (particularly the Aquatic Park National Historic Landmark, the national historic landmark ships, collection items on Hyde Street Pier, walkways, and other infrastructure) increases the risk of flooding and damage. The park has already observed difficulties in maintaining the historic ships’ moorings during extreme high tide events, which have been happening more often over the past few years. A large storm surge in the San Francisco Bay or a local tsunami-generated wave front in this earthquake-prone area are the greatest immediate dangers for flooding and destruction at this park. Flooding and storm surge associated with sea level rise also have the potential to affect visitors, employees, and partners if portions of the park, such as the promenade and the lower level of the museum, end up underwater. Increases in water temperature in Aquatic Cove would change the organisms in that water, which could be detrimental to ships and pilings.
  
  Associated High Priority Planning and Data Needs: Hyde Street Pier development concept plan, Museum Building plan, preservation plan for the national historic landmark ships, Van Ness Avenue corridor development concept plan.

Planning and Data Needs

To maintain connection to the core elements of the foundation and the importance of these core foundation elements, the planning and data needs listed here are directly related to protecting fundamental resources and values, park significance, and park purpose, as well as addressing key issues. To successfully undertake a planning effort, information from sources such as inventories, studies, research activities, and analyses may be required to provide adequate knowledge of park resources and visitor information. Such information sources have been identified as data needs. Geospatial mapping tasks and products are included in data needs.

Items considered of the utmost importance were identified as high priority, and other items identified, but not rising to the level of high priority, were listed as either medium- or lowpriority needs. These priorities inform park management efforts to secure funding and support for planning projects.

Criteria and Considerations for Prioritization. The following criteria were used to evaluate the priority of each planning or data need:

• Emergency or urgency of the issue
• Protect fundamental resources and values or prevent resource degradation
• Enhance visitor experience
• Address multiple interrelated issues
• Opportunities, including partnerships or other assistance
• Sequencing, critical prerequisite

High Priority Planning Needs

Business Plan (Update).

Rationale — The park does not have adequate funding to address large operational and maintenance shortfalls created by increased deferred maintenance and declining budgets. Critical ship preservation and deteriorating resource needs include drydocking and reconstruction of the 1890 Eureka and restoring Municipal Pier. The park’s business plan was completed in 2007 and could be updated. The park has identified new opportunities not considered in the previous business plan, which are worth exploring.

Scope — The updated business plan would create an overall funding strategy by first evaluating current funding and revenue streams, and then determining park priorities and revenue targets. Philanthropy could potentially play a major role in accomplishing some of the park’s major projects (Municipal Pier and the Eureka), so fundraising opportunities and partners would be considered. Both formal and tangential partnerships should be evaluated to determine the level and appropriateness of the overall relationship, prioritize the level of park engagement, and analyze the costs and benefits of that partnership.

Communications Plan.

Rationale — A communications plan would help San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park develop and promote a cohesive identity and would strategize how to connect and create sustaining relationships with diverse communities. A plan would also help the park form strong connections with various partners and find mutually beneficial ways to accomplish joint goals. It could also help develop a more coordinated, focused outreach effort to leverage opportunities.

Scope — This communications plan would examine all external forms of communication, including social media platforms, traditional press releases, programs, and current outreach efforts, to maximize their effectiveness. The plan would look for ways to create new partnership opportunities for joint outreach while better leveraging existing partner resources.

Hyde Street Pier Development Concept Plan.

Rationale — Hyde Street Pier is a highly visible and visited area of the park, which has a large impact on the overall visitor experience. Hyde Street Pier currently includes spaces to accommodate visitors, staff, and park partners. Over time, objects and buildings have been added to this area without a clear vision of how they relate to park operations and visitor experiences on the pier. There is also a need for a structural analysis of the pier and utilities and improvement of the moorings, particularly in light of climate change. A development concept plan is needed to improve the use of space, structural stability, sense of arrival, accessibility, and overall visitor experience in this part of the park.

Scope — The Hyde Street Pier development concept plan would determine the best use of the space and structures on the pier for preservation of resources, interpretation, education, visitor experience, and maintenance of vessels, while creating a sense of arrival and coherent appearance. It would also consider the NPS parking area on Jefferson Street, the intersection of Hyde and Jefferson, and the entrance to the visitor center. An exhibit and wayside plan for the pier would also be included. The plan would look at improvements to the moorings and access to the vessels and would consider the results of the upcoming structural analysis of the pier.

Long-range Interpretive Plan.

Rationale — San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park is in a large metropolitan area and is underused by local, diverse audiences. Due to the central, high-traffic location, the park has the opportunity to reach out to a variety of different populations. The park has a draft long-range interpretive plan from 2005 that was never completed. A new long-range interpretive plan would help create interpretive themes that are relevant to new and emerging audiences and provide opportunities to incorporate new technologies.

Scope — The long-range interpretive plan would provide overall guidance for interpretation and education. The plan would also evaluate opportunities for exhibits and new visitor programming and activities, as well as lifelong learning and youth engagement opportunities that would resonate with current visitors. The plan would also address partnerships, particularly with San Francisco Maritime National Park Association, to better align that group’s educational programs with park interpretive themes. The plan would benefit from a targeted new visitor use survey.

Museum Building Plan.

Rationale — The recently restored Museum Building (also known as the Aquatic Park Bathhouse or Sala Burton Building) has been sitting largely empty since the latest stage of its restoration was completed. A plan is needed for the use of the building, which encompasses its multiple functions as a museum and creates a great visitor experience in this key structure. A Museum Building plan would help to resolve long-standing controversies about the appropriate use of the building, as well as maximizing the efficient use of the building and preventing damaging uses. The building has been known as a maritime museum for more than 60 years and was identified as a museum in the park’s enabling legislation. There is a public expectation that there will be museum exhibits and programs in the building, and this expectation is currently not being met. As identified in the key park issues, the impressive collections of the park are only minimally accessible to the public—putting items on display in the Museum Building would help to resolve this issue. The building also needs to balance a variety of uses beyond museum exhibits, including fundraising, partner space, and events. Assistance may be available from the American Alliance of Museums.

Scope — The Museum Building plan would include space use planning, programming decisions, and operations and maintenance guidance. Space use and programming decisions would balance exhibits, lectures, classes, events, and partner and park staff use of the building. The plan would consider fundraising, partner, and revenue opportunities in the building and how those could best be balanced with general visitor use. Safety and security, operations and staffing, preservation maintenance, environmental condition assessment, and plans for the completion of the building’s restoration would all be included.

Preservation Plan for the National Historic Landmark Ships.

Rationale — The national historic landmark ships (Alma, Balclutha, C. A. Thayer, Eureka, and Hercules) have an immediate and ongoing need for preservation work. A preservation plan is needed to prioritize among the needs of the vessels, as well as guide their management and use. The plan is needed to inform long-term project and budget planning, as well as annual work planning and reasonable staffing requirements.

Scope — The plan would prioritize timing and nature of major work processes based on an understanding of conditions of the ships from the historic structure reports. The completion of historic structure reports for all the vessels, identified as a high priority data need, would be necessary prior to beginning this plan. The plan would include cost estimates for the work to be done on each ship. This plan would require a clear understanding of the structural condition of the vessels, staff capabilities, and the potential for outside fundraising through partnerships.

Van Ness Avenue Corridor Development Concept Plan.

Rationale — The Van Ness Avenue corridor is a highly visited area with overlapping and conflicting uses, including bicycles, pedestrians, and parking. Visitor and staff safety are a concern. This area is one of the major entries into the park and is the transition between Golden Gate National Recreation Area (Fort Mason) and San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park. However, the area has nothing to identify it as being part of the park, and most visitors are unaware of the park status of this area. The area provides access to Municipal Pier, the Bay Trail, public transportation, and parking, and has the potential to be a gateway and more active area of the park. Particular concerns include the potential of the F-line light rail being constructed through this area and the use and preservation of various historic structures.

Scope — The Van Ness Avenue corridor development concept plan would address access and transportation, facilities, uses and functions, programmatic requirements, and development of a consistent character. The completed plan would create a sense of arrival to the park when arriving from the Van Ness side. The plan would consider visitor use and circulation patterns, including lighting, accessibility, congestion, and user conflicts. Sign planning, waysides, and landscaping would also be incorporated into the plan. It would determine the highest and best use of the west round house, Aquatic Park, and the pocket park. The plan would also consider the best location for the Maritime Heritage Learning Center (also known as the “Sea Scout” building), particularly in light of potential nuisance flooding or storm surge associated with sea level rise and preservation needs for the building in its current location. The potential to create a revenue stream by metering the currently free parking would also be analyzed. The plan would be coordinated with Golden Gate National Recreation Area, the reconstruction of Municipal Pier, and any plans to install the F-line light rail.

Workforce Management Plan / Position Management Plan.

Rationale — The park’s staffing plan (2007) is outdated. Since then, base budgets have been reduced, staffing ceilings have been imposed, and operational needs have changed. The park has an aging workforce with a large number of imminent retirements. The park would benefit from succession planning, evaluating operational needs, and exploring flexibility in restructuring the organization.

Scope — The plan would determine current staffing needs and analyze how those needs will change over a five-year period. The plan would consider alternatives to traditional permanent full-time positions, with the goal of maximizing flexible appointment types, while maintaining critical staffing levels. Succession plans for critical positions would be established. Varying funding scenarios would be considered. The plan would identify ways to create internships and promote student hires, consider nonstandard and standard positions, and develop new positions for cross-divisional work. The plan would include career development opportunities.

Collection Management Plan.

Rationale — The park currently has no collection management plan, a core document required by NPS Director’s Order 24: NPS Museum Collections Management. The park lacks guidance for identifying needs and setting priorities for museum collections. Failure to identify and resolve or mitigate park museum program deficiencies could result in deterioration of the physical and informational condition of the collection. The park’s recent cultural resources condition assessment (2014) recommends completion of a collection management plan.

Scope — The collection management plan would provide site-specific programmatic guidelines for the park’s collection, which contains more than 6 million items, and would also document existing curatorial operations, analyze current collection management methods, evaluate the park’s curatorial program and its relationships with other park programs, and recommend actions needed for programmatic growth and improvement. The plan would provide park managers and staff with essential information required for sound decisions regarding the park’s museum and archival collections. It would include a detailed action plan that identifies tasks, personnel, funding options, and time frames for implementing the plan. Completion of the collection management plan would assist in the documentation and preservation of the park’s art, historical, ethnographic, and archival resources.

High Priority Data Needs

Historic Structure Reports for National Historic Landmark Ships.

Rationale — An accurate and up-to-date historic structure report for each national historic landmark ship (Alma, Balclutha, C. A. Thayer, Eureka, and Hercules) is required in order to inform and guide the park’s actions on each vessel. This is needed to prevent or address resource degradation, and also to ensure that actions on each vessel are in alignment with management goals and historic preservation standards.

Scope — The historic structure reports would include a detailed and confident structural marine survey of each ship. The studies would determine management and use of each vessel to preserve and highlight their historical value, with particular consideration given to their period of significance. The reports would recommend both immediate and long-term preservation treatments.

Visitor Survey.

Rationale — A visitor survey would inform a number of high priority plans, including the Museum Building plan, the Hyde Street Pier development concept plan, the Van Ness Avenue corridor development concept plan, and the long-range interpretive plan. The visitor survey would help to give the park insight into how visitors, particularly younger generations and diverse audiences, want to get information and interact with the park. The last visitor survey was done in 2005, so an update is urgently needed.

Scope — The visitor survey would identify visitor use patterns, demographics, effectiveness of exhibits, and how relevant people feel the park is. The survey would ask questions about what would make the park better, how to prompt people to return to the park, and how people found out about the park.

See appendix D for recently completed and ongoing planning and data collection efforts that address park issues.

 

Planning Needs and Data Needs

 

Parkwide (operations, etc.)

Planning or Data Needs	Priority (H, M, L)	Notes
Plans	H
Business plan (update)	H
Communications plan	H
Hyde Street Pier development concept plan	H	Including Jefferson Street
Museum Building plan	H
Van Ness Avenue corridor development concept plan	H
Workforce management (staffing) plan / position management plan	H	Including succession planning
Fundraising plan	M	The plan would identify real costs It could be part of the business plan, but could also be done separately if the business plan is delayed
Space use plan	M
Data Needs and Studies
None identified

 

Resource Management

Planning or Data Needs	Priority (H, M, L)	Notes
Plans
Collection management plan	H	Funding is expected in 2017
Preservation plan for the national historic landmark ships	H	Alma, Balclutha, C. A. Thayer, Eureka, and Hercules.
Climate change scenario planning	M
Cove management plan	M	Policies and practices for boats in the cove (current visitors), consider additional amenities for boaters
Scope of collection statement (update)	M
Resource stewardship strategy	M	Park is open to doing a resource stewardship strategy, but is waiting for cultural resource guidance
Aquatic Park cultural landscape report (update)	L
Collections storage plan update	L	Amendment to reflect new facility
Plan to restore the Lewis Ark to her houseboat days and make her accessible	L
Tubbs Cordage Office Building exhibit plan	L
Data Needs and Studies
Historic structure reports for national historic landmark ships	H	Alma, Balclutha, C. A. Thayer, Eureka, and Hercules.
Aquatic Park national historic landmark / national register update	M
Continued understanding of observed and projected climate change through monitoring of (or access to) weather parameters (precipitation, temperature, storm events), sea level rise and impacts on resources, and assessment of projected climate futures (models) for the region	M	Various agencies, including the City of San Francisco, have already developed climate change models for the region
Climate change vulnerability assessment	M	Much of this would be done in conjunction with other high priority plans
Comprehensive investigation and documentation of existing electrical and plumbing systems in Museum Building	M
Ethnographic overview and assessment	M	To increase the confidence in managing cultural anthropological resources in the park
Evaluate significance of the tugboat Eppleton Hall	M	Eppleton Hall is ineligible for the national register (but managed as a resource) Evaluate using current historical contexts
Historic structure report for Lewis Ark	M
Historic structure reports for Aquatic Park, bathhouse, speaker towers, and convenience stations	M
Update National Register of Historic Places nominations	M
Aquatic Park cultural landscape inventory (update)	L

 

Visitor Experience

Planning or Data Needs	Priority (H, M, L)	Notes
Plans
Long-range interpretive plan	H
Exhibit plan for Museum Building	M	Both static and rotating, and also including online exhibits Would follow completion of the museum plan Temporary exhibit plan is underway
Historic furnishings plans for historic vessels	M
Data Needs and Studies
Visitor surveys	H