What is Access?
Part Two: Issues and Answers
An unfinished draft for Bay Access and the Bay
Area Water Trail
by Paul Kamen, September 2004
(This is not a Bay Access document and does not
necessarily represent the position of Bay Access)
Organizational
and programmatic options, and how they relate to facilities design
The most important enhancements to water access are programmatic
rather than physical: The best way to enhance real access for the broadest user
base is to provide Space for a
non-profit organization, school or commercial operator
On-site
storage creates the possibility that an on-site club, co-op, school or
non-profit organization can make their equipment available to members and/or
the 
public.
These organizations usually rely heavily on the volunteer efforts
of dedicated members, and can therefore offer a wide range of services at
extremely low cost. They also tend to use public outreach programs as
promotional events, so their own interests coincide nicely with the access
needs of the local urban community.
Commercial
operations can also be a strong positive influence, sometimes combining a
loss-leading rental service with sales. Experience indicates that operating
cost burden for a commercial venture is at least several times higher than for
the non-profit, and commercial ventures have in general not been successful at
serving the broadest demographic. There are exceptions, however, and these
often take the form of separate outreach programs conducted by the commercial
operator.
These sites differ from others in that they generally serve
groups. In addition to appropriate
access to the water and parking for larger numbers of cars these sites require
adjacent land-based space for teaching, equipment maintenance and storage. This might be as simple as a couple of
containers near the beach (as ETC, a
non-profit serving disabled people, has in Sausalito) or as elaborate as the
new Aquatic Center in Oakland or the Marin Rowing Association’s new boat house
on Corte Madera Creek.
Critical detail: Long-term lease agreements with commercial
operators should never be written so as to preclude competition from
non-profits. The non-profits have the track record of providing services to the
public at the lowest possible cost, and this may appear to undercut the
commercial operators. However, experience suggests that the inexpensive entry
route into the various paddling and sailing sports is a major benefit to the
commercial operators in the long run. This is because a very high percentage of
the people who begin to paddle or sail in a low-cost non-profit will
subsequently move into the customer base of the commercial operator.
Other
issues: Esthetics and habitat
Esthetics:
park planners, landscape architects and even environmental 
advocates consistently take the position that boats are ugly and
need to be screened from their carefully controlled "natural"
synthetic landscapes. This is ludicrous to the people who will actually be
using the waterfront. Boats are esthetically pleasing to those who know them,
in very a much a "form follows function" kind of way.
Habitat
disruption: The environmental community has traditionally been aligned with
non-motorized watercraft, especially canoes and kayaks. But in planning
environments were the common enemies (jetskies, waterskiers, etc.) are not present,
environmental advocates act as if it is their duty to protect shoreline habitat
against the perceived destructive effects of non-motorized boating. This is
counterproductive for everyone; paddlers, rowers and sailors are among the most
dedicated environmentalists anywhere, and these activities are the breeding
ground for the next wave of good stewards of the Bay and the shoreline.
What
constitutes true "access?" and who needs it?
True
access is local and low cost (if not free). Developers like commercial
operations, but non-profits with a volunteer labor base consistently deliver
far greater access opportunities to far more people.
Who
gets to have access?
The best access does not filter for economic stature. Everyone should be able to get onto
the Bay. City dwellers who cannot afford
to buy, store or transport their own up-market watercraft should still have
ways of getting out on the water, e.g. an economical place near the water to
store an older and relatively inexpensive kayak, canoe or sailboat. People who
can not easily afford market rental rates need to have other options, e.g. the
volunteer-based non-profit co-op or club. Students and people with disabilities
need on-water sites and programs that are specially adapted to their
needs. Tourists and other first-timers
need convenient, safe access sites where commercial operators can provide them
with lessons, rentals and tours.
What
public policies can lower the barriers?
The
goal is to create an environment that encourages broad-based public access to
the water itself and promotes the development of access facilities 
and amenities. This will serve local communities and revitalize
previously neglected shorelines, especially in urban settings. It will also
encourage environmental stewardship of the shore and the Bay by local
residents.
This
can often be accomplished by offering small parcels of waterfront land to new
or existing non-profit organizations at no cost or at rates well below market.
It
can also be accomplished by incorporating water access facilities into park
plans or waterfront plans at all jurisdictional levels, from municipal to
federal.
What
development policies can enhance access?
Public
water access provisions need to be written into all waterfront development
contracts.
As
often as not, these will ultimately work in the interest of the developer. An
outrigger canoe club or well-known kayaking center can give a hotel or office
park or commercial center an enhanced identity that justifies the very small
amount of land and resources dedicated to the access feature.
Case histories and potential partnerships
A
tale of two shorelines: How commercial development and habitat preservation can
block access: In San Francisco, water access advocates are hard pressed to find
small bits of waterfront that are not preempted by commercial development.
While in Berkeley and Albany, water access advocates struggle against an "open space
monoculture," driven by an entrenched environmental lobby, that blocks and
delays plans for access facilities by raising largely unjustified habitat
concerns (even in areas already designated by the Eastshore State Park General
Plan as water-borne recreation areas).
A
better tale of two shorelines: How commercial development and habitat preservation
can enhance access:
Good
places for new access:
Bad
places for new access: Mouth of Codornices Creek, Berkeley Brickyard.
Symbiotic
relationships that waterfront planners should keep in mind
Symbiosis
1: Waterfront playing fields and water access
Playing
fields and indoor sports facilities are now being planned for several
waterfront locations [
plan]. When sports locations
are also suitable for water access, a very valuable user cross-over is
possible. Participants in field sports will get their first close look at various
small watercraft in operation. Siblings and parents will also be brought in
close proximity to the water access points, and traditional cultural and
economic barriers to participation are lowered when the access locations become
familiar.
It
is worth noting that field sports do not appeal to all youth. There is a large
segment of the youth population that is not being served by the sports culture,
whether in or out of school, and many of these individuals are strongly
attracted to water-borne recreation as an alternative.
Symbiosis 2: Ferry terminals and water access
Ferry
terminals are characterized by large amounts of parking and semi-protected deep
water. There is excess parking on weekends when ferry ridership is low but
recreational demand is highest. At least one local example (Larkspur)
demonstrates that small watercraft generally have little difficulty keeping
clear of ferry traffic. [photo of windsurfers in Corte Madeira Creek]. Ferry terminals are also served relatively
well by public transportation, increasing the feasibility of non-automotive
access if on-site watercraft storage is provided.
Symbiosis
3: Commercial waterfront restoration projects and water access
Commercial
waterfront developers have financial resources far beyond the usual allocations
of public sector funds for access projects. While marina development has
historically served as a loss leader for housing developments (Marina Village
in Alameda) or to revive the reputation of an abandoned industrial 
waterfront (Marina Bay in Richmond), access for small craft seems
to be of relatively little interest to developers unless mandated by regulatory
agencies during the permitting process.
Small
craft access is inexpensive and easy to implement compared to a traditional
marina, and it can add a very positive marketing value to the project. This is
one area in which public policy can have a profound effect on the future of
water-borne access to
Symbiosis
4: Historic ships and water access
Finding suitable locations for overnight stays is the most
difficult single component of water trail facilities development. Few
communities are amenable to camping on their shorelines, and environmental
concerns often work against establishing new campsites in remote locations.
Furthermore, with a severe shortage of camping facilities throughout the Bay
Area, any site that is easily accessible by land is likely to be problematic
because of competition from land-based travelers. Waterfront hotels tend to be
expensive, often prohibitively, and often present access and security problems
of their own.
Historic
ships offer a natural partnership with the WaterTrail. They generally have very
large spaces for basic accommodations, they are easily accessible by water, they
are established facilities presenting no new environmental concerns, and they
already have an organizational structure and staffing that tends to be
sympathetic to the concept of the Water Trail and the requirements of the
water-borne traveler. Several of these ships already host organized group
camping in cabins (C.A. Thayer), cargo holds (Red Oak Victory) or crew berthing
areas (Pampanito).
The ability to travel without a fixed itinerary is vitally
important to small craft dependent on weather and tides. Historic ships offer
the most likely opportunity to supply practical and economical overnight
accommodations without advance reservations.
Webliography:
"Logical Lasting Launches," a guide to
launch site details, from the National Park Service Rivers & Trails
Program.
Technical Report on Small Craft Operation in
the