Can the City Save Pete's Harbor?

As noted in Save Pete's Harbor's most recent blog post, last week a group not related to Save Pete's Harbor publicly expressed their intent to the State Lands Commission to apply for the state leases for the publicly owned submerged lands in Smith Slough, which most of us know as the "outer harbor" at Pete's. Save Pete's Harbor has no intention of applying for these leases.

The membership of Save Pete's Harbor (SPH) is concerned that the development of Pete's Harbor is clearly becoming a complex matter with two or more commercial interests which may proceed in tandem. It is clear that private interests are realizing what an extremely valuable public asset a marina in Smith Slough is, and as parties emerge and begin jockeying to control the leases for these public trust submerged lands, SPH is concerned that nothing but increased confusion will be created for any developer interested in improving the upland area, to say nothing of the confusion to those in the Redwood City community who are concerned about what will happen to the site.

We at SPH strongly hope the City of Redwood City realizes that new private interest in marina leasing at the Pete's Harbor area creates a need for careful planning oversight, not just in the water but on land as well. We strongly urge Redwood City to consider putting Pete's Harbor into the Inner Harbor Specific Plan, as it would be one of the only ways for the city to assure adequate public discussion for development of the land or for use of the historic marina and harbor:

As the city is well aware, the Pete's Harbor area is almost proximate to the Inner Harbor Plan boundary. While SPH understands that the zoning at Pete's Harbor already provides the city with substantial direction on the future development of the area, the city must in turn understand that the area's proximity to public waterways and the Don Edwards National Wildlife Refuge provides a strong case for its inclusion in the Specific Plan, as does its partial inclusion in the jurisdictions of the State Lands Commission and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission.

We also note that many of the concerns at the Pete's Harbor site about sea level rise, vulnerability to liquefaction, and seasonal flooding aligns very neatly with most urgently articulated concerns of the nearly forty members of the public who attended the last Inner Harbor Plan taskforce meeting on July 9.

With Pete's Harbor excluded from the Inner Harbor Plan, the city would need to provide a separate formal process for public input regarding requirements for public access to the lands adjacent to the waterways of Redwood Creek and Smith Slough. This would in effect be something of a duplication of the hard work already being done with the Inner Harbor Plan taskforce, and we feel that staff time would be more wisely spent if the entire area could be planned under one inclusive process.

Finally, the membership of SPH has asked the city, very specifically, what its intent is with regard to its vision for the Pete's Harbor area. We asked if the City of Redwood City is looking to apply for the leases at Smith Slough and are awaiting a response.

It is our membership's hope that the ultimate holder of these "outer harbor" leases is a party that is committed and qualified to run a truly commercial, public marina with a commitment to the principle of maximum feasible public access and an eye to hiring a professional marina management company. With these concerns in mind we feel that a public agency like the city, one that is accountable to the community and committed to running the marina for the public benefit, would be far more desirable than a small private group possibly looking to turn a profit off of our community assets.

While there are many public agencies that could apply for the leases, SPH feels that the city is the most appropriate first choice and has asked if the city is interested. It is also our understanding that, managed correctly, a marina at Pete's could provide valuable revenue for any public agency that is in charge. It seems like it would be in the community's best interest that such revenue remain in the community for the benefit of Redwood City and its community.

In essence, what SPH is asking of the city is that it do what it can within its purview to help SPH maintain Pete Uccelli's legacy of recreational boating and community access to the bayfront in Redwood City.

To find out more about Save Pete's Harbor, go to SavePetesHarbor.Net.