Fields Landing Waterfront Revitalization

Humboldt State University Senior Practicum 2013 Fields Landing Waterfront Revitalization Plan redwood coast placemakers progress in development

Figure 1. Fields Landing Waterfront.

Figure 2. Fields Landing Shoreline.

Throughout our academic career at Humboldt State University our coursework has equipped us with the skills to be placemakers and find alternative ways for people to live in harmony with the natural environment. We have learned how to satisfy our need for resources and space while protecting the environment and social capital. This document is a framework to build a vibrant thriving coastal community on the California Coast while facing a number of unique challenges.

째 N

_ Fields Landing ^ Data Source: United States Department of Agriculture, National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP), 2012 Coordinate System: NAD83_UTM_zone_10N

_ ^ 0

0.25

0.5

1 Miles

Acknowledgements

This report was developed under the auspices of the California State University Humboldt Environmental Management and Protection senior practicum course.

A collaborative effort designed and authored by Redwood Coast Placemakers, an organization of environmental planners.

Staff consists of Kara Houston, Julia Acker, Stephanie Calderon, and Nichole Crossland, all Environmental Planning undergraduates.

The development of the Fields Landing Waterfront Revitalization concept would not have been possible without the involvement of numerous individuals, including: Assistant Professor Dr. Laurie Richmond,

Department of Environmental Science and Management at Humboldt State University

Aaron Newman,

Humboldt Bay Harbor Recreation and Conservation District Commissioner and Fields Landing Resident

Mike Wilson,

Humboldt Bay Harbor Recreation and Conservation District Commissioner

Dan Berman,

Humboldt Bay Harbor Recreation and Conservation District Director of Conservation Division

Ralph Faust, Humboldt County Planning Commissioner

Jennifer Kalt,

Humboldt Baykeeper Policy Director

Aldaron Laird, Senior Environmental Planner for Trinity Associates.

John Miller

Senior Planner, Humboldt County Planning Division

Martha Spencer

Supervising Planner, Humboldt County Planning & Building Department

All of their efforts are greatly appreciated.

Figure 3. Public Boat Ramp Facilities in Fields Landing.

Redwood Coast Placemakers who drafted the Fields Landing Waterfront Revitalization Plan can be contacted at: redwoodcoastplacemakers@gmail.com

The aim of the Fields Landing Waterfront Revitalizatio waterfront through beautification, recreation, and considers the social justice and environmental impac plan proposes several activities that could help ac

Feasible project ideas considered and discussed in this Recreation: Creation of a recreational vehicle (RV) park and utilization of Humboldt Bay for water sport recreation activities could help bring economic input to the Fields Landing community and provide residents with a central community space.

Aquaculture: Fields Landing offers the opportunity to expand Humboldt Bay aquaculture, provide a new industry to the area, and enhance local job opportunities for residents of the Fields Landing community.

Greenway: Development of a greenway could create a safe route for bicyclists and pedestrians between Fields Landing and neighboring communities, provide a buffer between sensitive habitats and human activities, and could highlight the beautiful beaches and scenic views of Humboldt Bay. Businesses: Creation of several businesses for the Fields Landing area could increase economic revenue, provide job opportunities, establish a central gathering place for residents, and foster community identity.

on concept design is to enhance the Fields Landing economic development. The concept design also cts that the planned revitalization could produce. This chieve the overall goal of community revitalization.

s document include: Open Space: Establishment of a community park could increase community identity for Fields Landing residents, provide a central gathering location, improve access to recreational opportunities, and reduce criminal and social concerns for the area.

Wetland Restoration: Enhancement of existing wetlands in the Fields Landing area could increase recreation opportunities and environmental resilience through protection from natural hazards, increased pollutant filtering, and habitat for wildlife.

Site Cleanup: Contaminated and debris filled sites could be remediated to support a healthy environment to begin revitalization of the Fields Landing community.

Storm Water Management: Usage of Low Impact Development techniques can increase storm water infiltration and groundwater recharge, providing ecological function and aesthetic value to the site.

These projects are evaluated and assessed for their feasibility and need. There are several other project ideas that were determined to be infeasible, or inadequate for this revitalization plan. Other potential project ideas considered include:

Ecological – “Ability to persist and absorb changes in their environment whilst carrying on their current ecological relationships,” (Holling, 1973).

Economic – Ability of the economy to be locally sufficient as to absorb and react to economic changes

Social – Ability of a community to adapt to changes in community structure, resources, social capital.

Figure 4: Resiliency Defined

This project proposal includes suggestions o private business investors, and public monies plan include the identification of historical use and accounts of community representatives. To document contains visual aids such as A

Marina: Proximity to Humboldt Bay entrance makes Fields Landing an ideal location for a small boat marina.

This could provide economic input to the community, easy access to the Pacific for fishermen, and much needed marina space for small-scale fishermen and recreationists of Humboldt County.

Bulk aggregate export: Export of aggregate rock from river basins in Humboldt County could add industry to the community, provide job opportunity, and increase economic revenue.

Mobile home park: Creation of a mobile home park could provide lowincome housing for community residents, attract new residents to the area, and increase sense of community for Fields Landing.

Community Center: A central gathering location could provide sense of place, improved social dynamics within the community, decrease crime and poverty, offer educational opportunities, and establish social programs to improve the status of Fields Landing residents.

of funding opportunities in the forms of grants, . Methods assisting in the development of this es through baseline data, maps, photographs, o aid in visualization of the concept design, this ArcGIS maps, images, and 3D imaging.

째 N

Data Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agriculture Imagery Program, 2012 Coordinate System: NAD83_UTM_zone_10N

0

0.05

0.1

0.2 Miles

Why revitalize a waterfront?

All small cities and towns have their own answer to that question. Many times it is because of a decline in industry in the area and the need to introduce new economic opportunity, as is the case for Fields Landing.

A similar instance of waterfront revitalization in a small town can be illustrated in the city of Port Angeles, Washington. The waterfront had slowly converted to disuse by the 1970’s and was cut off from the downtown area. Neglect resulted in dilapidated structures and unattractive land use. That is not the setting of this small waterfront town any longer, now there are informational booths for visitors, colorful street banners, sidewalks with trees and street furniture. The community has come together and the waterfront is alive with numerous opportunities.

Fields Landing would benefit from this type of redevelopment to encourage social capital, economic growth, and community interaction.

Figure 5. Revitalization can help foster community.

Figure 6. Waterfront Revitalization example from Port Angeles, Washington.

This page has been left intentionally blank.

Table of Contents Contents Acknowledgements Why revitalize a waterfront?

Table of Contents Tables and Figures Introduction Current Setting Historical Backg round The Community Resilience of Fields Landing What would make Fields Landing a Nice Place to Live?

Opportunities & Challenges Projects Recreation Recreational Vehicles Aquaculture Gateway Potential Business Opportunities Greenway Open Space Wetland Enhancement Site Clean-up Stormwater Management Potential Hazards Alternative Projects Phases of Implementation Funding Conclusion Appendix 1- Stakeholders Appendix 2- Plants for Coastal Planting Appendix 3- Policies References Photo Credits

6 16 18 20 24 26 28 30 30 33 33 36 40 42 46 46 49 52 58 64 68 74 78 82 86 92 94 96 98 100 102 106 107 114

Tables and Figures List of Figures and Tables Figure 1. Fields Landing Waterfront.

Figure 2. Fields Landing Shoreline.

Figure 3. Public Boat Ramp Facilities in Fields Landing.

Figure 4. Resiliency Defined.

Figure 5. Revitalization can help foster community.

Figure 6. Waterfront Revitalization example from Port Angeles, Washington.

Figure 7. Sunset in Fields Landing.

Figure 8. Wildlife in Fields Landing.

Figure 9. Socioeconomic statistics of Fields Landing based on 1999 and 2010 Census Data.

Figure 10. Historical Photograph of Fields Landing Waterfront.

Figures 11-14. Historical photographs of Fields Landing from the Humboldt State University Library Humboldt Room.

Figure 15. Resilient Communities defined.

Figure 16. Project for Public Spaces diagram of amenities.

Figure 17. Dubai Open Space Concept Design.

Figures 18-19. Fields Landing Boat Ramp Interpretive Signs.

Figure 20. Kayak Launches within Humboldt Bay. Figure 21. Recreation Opportunities within Humboldt County.

Figure 22. Recreational Vehicle.

Figure 23. Example of RV Park by Waterfront.

Figure 24. Coastal Launches in Humboldt and Del Norte Counties.

Figure 25. Recreational Vehicle.

Figure 26. Recreation Vehicle Park Design example from Coquette Point.

Figures 27-30. Aquaculture industry.

Figure 31. Aquaculture Facility.

Figure 32. Oysters.

Figure 33. Oyster beds.

Figure 34. Gateway Initiative design for Andrews, North Carolina.

Figure 35. Current entrance to Fields Landing Waterfront.

Figure 36. Examples of Gateway design.

Figure 37. Gateway Design.

Figure 38. Catch and Cook Restaurant.

Figure 39. Fresh Seafood.

Figure 40. Oysters and beer.

Figure 41. Fishing from charter boat.

Figures 42-44. Greenway Designs.

1 2 8 12 17 17 24 25 26 28 29 30 32 35 36 42 43 44 44 45 46 47 48 50 51 51 52 54 55 56 61 61 62 63 64

Figure 45. Open space park design.

Figure 46. Open space park design.

Figure 47. Open space park design.

Figure 48. Open space park design.

Figure 49. Candlestick South Waterfront Trail, San Francisco, CA. Figure 50. Riverfront Park, Delaware concept design created by citizen participation.

Figure 51. Greenway and bike path built over sensitive wetlands.

Figure 52. Location of Contaminated Sites in Fields Landing.

Figure 53. Example of Low Impact Development from Portland, Oregon.

Figure 54. Example of Rain Garden.

Figure 55. Swale design.

Figure 56. Permeable Pavement Example.

Figure 57. Swale design.

Figures 58-59. Resilient shoreline design.

Figure 60-64. King Tides in Fields Landing.

Figure 65. Photograph of Humboldt Bay.

66 67 68 69 70 73 77 79 82 83 84 84 85 87 89 96

This page has been left intentionally blank.

This page has been left intentionally blank.

Introduction

Figure 7. Sunset in Fields Landing.

Fields Landings is a small, incorporated town falling just south of Eureka and King Salmon. Formerly an industrial community, Fields Landing has been greatly affected by the exodus of large business and the environmental effects that were left in their wake. Fields Landing represents an opportunity to renew sense of place while creating businesses that complement the town’s natural features.

Among those natural features is Humboldt Bay, the second largest bay in California. Fields Landing has direct waterfront access to the bay and is also located near the bay entrance providing easy access to the Pacific Ocean as well. The bay’s economic benefits, transportation linkages, ecological services, recreational opportunities, and aesthetic appeal make it a valuable resource to the state of California, as well as provide the community of Fields Landing with opportunities for economic and social growth and development (Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District, 2007).

In the Strategic Plan for 2007-2011, the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District expressed a desire to “pursue economic development that is attainable, innovative and consistent with... [the] best environmental practices� (Sera Group, 2007). The Fields Landing Waterfront Revitalization design addresses clean up of surrounding parcels near the waterfront, the restoration and remediation of wetlands, the creation of a park area, and the enhancement of coastal activities. The development of this plan required identification of historical uses through baseline data, maps, photographs, and accounts of community representatives.

The concept design will explore creative approaches to restoring the natural environment, harnessing cultural elements to renew sense of place, incorporate business models that feature natural landscapes, supply recreational sports, and boost tourism, while providing amenities to residents.

Figure 8. Wildlife in Fields Landing.

Current Setting Fields Landing Socioeconomic Statistics

Population

276 total 57.25% male and 42.75% female

Median Age Education of total population

36.8 years old 58.97% high school graduates 41.03% had some college or associate degree

Ethnic Diversity

Unemployment

White 76.1% Asian 7.6% Native American 4.7% Hispanic or Latino 6.5% African American 2.2% Pacific Islander 0.4% Two or more races 6.9% 22.6% of population

Figure 9. Socioeconomic statistics of Fields Landing based on 1999 and 2010 Census Data.

•

Areas of Employment

7% worked in arts, entertainment, recreation, and accommodation and food services 8% worked in educational, health, and social services 9.9% government employed

• •

Median Household Income

$35,313

$14,198

Per Capita Income

Below poverty level

24.5% of population

Housing Occupancy (95 Sampled)

Home Ownership

• •

• •

89.5% occupied 10.5% vacant

40% owner 60% renter

Historical Background

Figure 10. Historical Photograph of Fields Landing Waterfront.

Timber . Whaling . Fishing .

Before settlers came to Fields Landing Native American tribes such as the Wiyot, Hoopa, and Yurok occupied the area (Northwest Fisheries Science Center, 2013). In the early 1800’s the railroad was established and lumber companies began to buy docks in Fields Landing for lumber transport. With this investment productive businesses came to follow.

Lumber mills, warehouses, shipping and the railroad industries were the primary sources of employment for people living in this community. Whaling was also an important industry at this time and thrived until after WWII. “From the 1940s to 1951, the last active whaling station on the U.S. Pacific coast operated out of Fields Landing� (California Coastal Commission, 1976).

The whaling station in Fields Landing was the famed industry of the area. It was owned and operated by Maritime Industries, Inc., and handled 65 to 80 whales per season (Times Standard, 1946). Beginning in 1951 there was a moratorium placed on the hunting of whales resulting in the closure of this lucrative business in Fields Landing. The town began to lose its lumber mills and the fishing industry was no longer profitable causing Fields Landing to fall into disrepair. These unfortunate business closures have resulted in an abundance of vacant industrial properties located in the area.

Figures 11-14. Historical photographs of Fields Landing from the Humboldt State University Library Humboldt Room.

The Community Resilience of Fields Landing In recent years, the concept of “resilience� has been used as a guiding concept for the planning and revitalization of coastal communities. Resilience is defined as the ability of an ecosystem to respond to and rebound from perturbations and changes from a variety of events, allowing the ecosystem to continue without significant change to its original structure (Beatley, 2009). Beatley provides a framework to achieve resilience in coastal communities. These aspects include being diverse, ecologically varied, innovative, high in social capital, and the ability to provide for healthy ecosystem services (Beatley, 2009).

Figure 15. Resilient Communities defined.

Community diversity refers to diversity of the environment, biological resources, society, and the economy. Social capital describes the strength of relationships among community members. Communities with high social capital have developed trust and strong social networks among members that reduce overall community vulnerability. Resilience is seen as the solution to vulnerability. Vulnerability can be defined as the conditions that increase the susceptibility of a community to potential impact on life and property from hazards (Beatley, 2009). It can be in the form of poor infrastructure, weak economy, or lack of social wellbeing. The lack of economic diversity, ecological variability, social capital, and overlap in government structure makes Fields Landing vulnerable to multiple hazards. The revitalization plan discussed in this document has the potential to invite innovation into the community, increase economic diversity, encourage the development of social capital, and enhance ecological variability in the area.

What would make Fields Landing a Nice Place to Live?

Figure 16. Project for Public Spaces diagram of amenities.

The Fields Landing Waterfront Revitalization must reach far beyond the economic stimulus of business on the waterfront.

It must consider the wellbeing and relationship Fields Landing residents hold with their homes, their community, and the multitude of opportunities that lie in the waterfront. According to Cavaye, “Rural community vitality depends on communities maintaining adequate infrastructure, having access to services, and enhancing business and economic opportunities and establishing policy settings to foster outcomes� (Cavaye, 2001). The revitalization of the Fields Landing waterfront requires an assessment of the current socioeconomic status, and environmental state of the community and the current built environment for its residents.

Well-designed communities are places where people want to live and invest in the future. As the character of many rural communities is threatened by out-migration, loss of an economic base, and urbanization, designing vibrant rural places is increasingly important.

According to the author of How can struggling communities make a comeback, there are three indicators that make a neighborhood appealing to live in (Weinstein, 2011).

• Positive net growth in housing prices and surrounding amenities • Increased population growth • Positive net growth in wages Housing prices are a strong indicator of the depression of a region. The current national average listed housing prices are $189,000 for single-family homes (National Association of Realtors, 2013). As of March 27, 2013, the average listed price for a singlefamily home in Fields Landing is $117,000, well below the national average (Trulia Real Estate, 2013). Amenities are a strong factor that influence housing prices. “A real estate study performed

by American Lives, Inc. found that 77.7 percent of potential homeowners rated natural open space as “essential” or “very important” for the planning of communities (National Park Service, 1995). In order for a city or town to sustain net positive economic growth related to population, functioning labor markets, housing markets, general consumption, and amenities are needed.

Figure 17. Dubai Open Space Concept Design.

°

Opportunities & Challenges

Stakeholders, developers, and residents should look to Fields Landing’s comparative advantages that set it apart from surrounding regions. Resurgence of the community’s economy will need to rely heavily on the creation of a strategic redevelopment that fits Fields Landings opportunities and constraints (Weinstein, 2011). “Vitality also relies on communities ‘rethinking’ assets, developing networks, building local cooperation and acting on local passion and motivation” (Cavaye, 2001). A design for the area based on recreation, community involvement, and economic stimulation could be a catalyst for residents to take pride in where they live.

Figures 18-19. Fields Landing Boat Ramp Interpretive Signs.

Shoreline Characteristics Shoreline Structure Types Boat Ramp Bulwark Fill Fortified None Railroad

• Lower housing prices offer young professionals and families the unique opportunity to establish themselves.

• A number of vacant lots are adjacent to the waterfront, providing the opportunity for development in these locations. The lots were formerly used for industrial purposes and are now listed for sale. The acquisition of these lots could allow for more continuity and defragmentation of any development that occurs on the • Home to a boat launch and boat waterfront. yard.

• The vacant lots also offer the • Close proximity to the Humboldt Bay opportunity to clean up the Fields National Wildlife Refuge, Highway 101, Landing waterfront that connects the county boat ramp to the Humboldt and College of the Redwoods.

Bay Harbor, Conservation, and • Linked to the Bay and its resources as Recreation District property. well as its already established amenities • The Humboldt County General Plan such as the county park boat ramp.

Update provides the opportunity • Room for the development of to change the Industrial Coastal recreation related activities that will Dependent zoning to one more attract tourists and outdoor enthusiasts. suitable for Fields Landing community needs before the Plan is approved.

• Located across from the College Applications such as conditional use of the Redwoods, making it an permits (CUPs) may also be explored appropriate location for student to hasten the development of the area. housing or student amenity.

Opportunities

CG

PF1

RS-5/A

NR/W

PR

MC

RS-5

CG RS-5/W

MC MG/F,W

° C h a l l e n g e s

•The geological, topographic, and vegetative layout and structure of the Fields Landing waterfront pose potential constraints.

•The shoreline experiences extreme low and high tides on a daily and seasonal basis. These tide characteristics present challenges for the design of projects such as marina design and coastline aquaculture.

•Low elevation of the Fields Landing Waterfront will be effected by sea level rise.

•The Cascadia Subduction Zone off the Humboldt County coastline makes tsunamis a serious risk for the low-lying areas. The portion of Fields Landing west of Highway 101 is located within a Tsunami Hazard Zone.

RA-5/A MG/W

U

Zoning Designations

•Fields Landing also has an extensive network of wetlands that need restoration and protection from contamination throughout this waterfront revitalization process. •A large number of waterfront parcels along Humboldt Bay are designated Industrial Coastal Dependent (MC), shown above.

Current zoning is not suitable for the creation of diverse economic markets for the Fields Landing area. Design opportunities are present when attempting to rezone these areas for the new economic niche of recreation along the coastline of Fields Landing. •Land ownership along the Fields Landing waterfront is dispersed amongst various individuals. For revitalization of the Fields Landing waterfront there is the necessity to acquire several lands along the coast. These parcels have been included in the project footprint map.

째

Projects

Fields Landing has the potential to be a thriving community and town. A variety of projects were evaluated for their feasibility and effectiveness in the discussion of revitalizing Fields Landing. Suggested in the following document are business models determined to be appropriate for the location. Some of these include aquaculture and clamming opportunities as well as specialty restaurants, retail, and recreation. These additions could increase economic independence for Fields Landing and may encourage development of amenities catering to College of the Redwoods students and faculty.

Project Footprint Project Component Aquaculture Facility Business Location Gateway Location Greenway Park Location RV Park Access Road RV Park Location

In evaluating the site it was realized that there is a need for wetland restoration, stormwater management, cleanup of contaminated and dilapidated sites, and hazard mitigation for future disturbances. Revitalization could increase quality of life, enhance property values, attract new or relocating businesses, increase local tax revenues by encouraging tourism, and promote local community (Rivers, Trails, and Conservations Assistance Program, 1995).

Recreation There is an array of unique characteristics found in the Fields Landing area including a high diversity of wildlife and the prized California Redwoods (Sequoia sempervirens) that are not found anywhere else in the world. This creates a wonderful opportunity for expansion of recreational development in this area. Services and amenities should be cultivated to cater to those looking for a place to fish, kayak, and go clamming. Humboldt County already offers a number of attractions and services and maintains these services by means of policy. The Humboldt County General Plan and the Humboldt Bay Management Plan both highly encourage recreational development for the Fields Landing area.

Figure 20. Kayak launches within Humboldt Bay.

Figure 21. Recreation Opportunities within Humboldt County.

Recreation

Figure 22. Recreational Vehicle

Figure 23. Example of RV Park by Waterfront

The Redwood coast attracts vacationers every year seeking out the beauty of the redwoods and the Pacific coast. An informational map of amenities in Fields Landing reveals the true potential the region has to offer. The area is in close proximity to the unique redwood forest, a Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge, and Marine Protected Area (MPA), which are all important to the area.

Fields Landing’s location makes it a prime location for the popular sport of waterfowl hunting. The bay located directly in front of Fields Landing is known for its exceptional clam fishing. Fields Landing is also the closest town to the inlet connecting Humboldt Bay and the Pacific Ocean where fishermen can access salmon or other saltwater fishing areas. In addition to these natural features, Fields Landing has a public boat ramp and ship repair yard. The county has a heavily used public boat ramp that can accommodate small commercial fishing boats as well as sport and recreational watercraft.

These natural and established features can be developed into potential recreation based businesses. Planning for small town recreation poses different design opportunities than that of planning in a large metropolitan area. A few guidelines needing consideration when developing recreational activities ational a ctivities iin n smaller communities include: • Citizen demand • The maximum capacity for various recreation activities • Increased demand on infrastructure such as sewers and city water

Figure 24. Coastal Launches in Humboldt and Del Norte Counties.

Recreational Vehicles The Humboldt County coastline is a haven for Recreational Vehicle (RV) users and campers (Paddling California, 2013). It is one of the top activities in the summer time along the coast. The stunning natural features and extensive open space available in this region have made RV use easy and enjoyable for vacationers. Although there are many options for RV camping in the Humboldt region, the majority of these facilities are located slightly inland. Fields Landing is unique in that it is a prime location for the development of an RV facility due to its close proximity to the waterfront.

Figure 25. Recreational Vehicle

The Recreation Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) anticipates the number of RV-owning households will rise from 9 million to 10.4 million over the next decade, a 15% ownership increase during a period of less than 5% predicted population growth (The RV Consumer, 1997). Baby boomers are now entering retirement and contributing to the burgeoning rise of RV household purchases. This increasing popularity can be capitalized on for economic stimulus in Fields Landing.

According to the US Army Corps of Engineers there are certain standards that must be met when developing an RV park. Visitors to the area may express interest in exploring the recreational water activities offered. Proper water recreation boundaries must be marked in the proximity of the recreational vehicle park. According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers there are Recreation Facility Design Guidelines to be met that include having a visible entrance station and additional complimentary features. These facility features include campsite parking, picnic areas, appropriate grill installation, rest rooms, and hydration stations. There could be accessible trailer and dump stations and safety measures applied to utilities such as propane tanks enclosed with fencing.

Crowd control, park maintenance standards, and appropriate lighting within the park must also be supplied (U.S. Army Corps, 2007).

These Recreation Facility Design Guidelines should be fulfilled in the development of this project. RVing, although not as consumptive as staying at a resort or hotel, still demands larger energy inputs than in the past due to increased use of these vehicles and larger floor plans. In designing an RV park sustainable approaches should be taken such as recycling, energy efficient lighting, and bathroom retrofits to conserve water. These decisions could help to lessen the footprint of the RV park proposed for this area.

Figure 26. Recreation Vehicle Park Design example from Coquette Point.

Figures 27-30. Aquaculture industry.

Aquaculture The Humboldt County region has facilitated prosperous growth for over a hundred years through the development of infrastructure that embodies the entrepreneurial nature of the North Coast. Today, this portion of the coast is in need of a new type of business that creates jobs while minimizing environmental impacts. According to the Humboldt Bay Plan, the environmental characteristics of Humboldt Bay and the surrounding area are conducive to aquaculture production and development.

“Aquaculture represents an important opportunity for economic activity and social cohesion in coastal, rural areas, providing family wage jobs in rural areas that are often otherwise economically depressed�

(Shumway, 2003).

Fishing and timber industries have always been strong economic contributors to this area. However, in recent years Humboldt County has experienced a rapid decline in timber production leading to a drop in employment and economic security for citizens of the area (Hackett, 1999). Adding successful aquaculture businesses to the area could help to strengthen the area and relieve the uncertainty in the job market. The closing of the majority of the lucrative businesses in Fields Landing has left residents with little community identity. The establishment of an oyster aquaculture facility could aid in the revitalization of the community on a local level by providing jobs and economic stimulus to the area. To live in a community that provides economic opportunity for future generations will give residents a sense of pride and identity.

Aquaculture

Aquaculture is a growing industry and is very suitable for the California coast. Documents such as the Port of Humboldt Bay Harbor Revitalization Plan strongly express interest in this growing field. Environmental factors such as ocean acidification in the Pacific Northwest are severely affecting the health of aquaculture facilities, specifically oyster hatcheries (Langston, 2011). There is great interest in Humboldt Bay for expansion of the aquaculture industry supported by business momentum and intellectual capital (Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District Economic Development Committee, 2009). The Port of Humboldt Bay Harbor Revitalization Plan specifically targets the Fields Landing Vita Sea Corp a small parcel site, for the development of an aquaculture facility.

This recommendation is based on its location, size and existing infrastructure. This site also has the advantage over the Samoa Peninsula Small Parcel Site of being located away from potential deep draft vessel traffic. Deep vessel traffic consists of large ships that may potentially disturb sea life.

To develop this facility, proper permits will need to be obtained and funding will need to be established. The Humboldt Bay Revitalization Plan makes it clear that there is the desire for aquaculture business. The plan states that efforts by the aquaculture industry to develop new products or markets in the area will be considered. The City of Arcata and Eureka work together to coordinate policies regarding the management of tidelands within the bay for aquaculture purposes (Port PB Ports and Marine, Inc., 2003). This facility will apply sustainable design and be a low impact to the flora and fauna of Humboldt Bay.

Figure 31. Aquaculture Facility.

Figure 32. Oysters.

According to Coast Seafood, located in Eureka, CA, Humboldt Bay supplies over 70% of oysters that are sold locally and exported out of California. The protected, productive, temperate, and relatively clean waters of the region offer an ideal environment for shellfish aquaculture.

Figure 33. Oyster beds.

Gateway

“Walking towards a clearly visible main entrance should be perceive other interesting elements al

Figure 34. Gateway Initiative design for Andrews, North Carolina.

a natural and thoughtless decision, freeing one’s attention to ong the route� (Alcantara et. al, 2009.)

Gateway Fields Landing could benefit from visual landscape enhancement along the waterfront. A gateway can “entice visitors, signal arrival, create a first impression, direct visitors to their desired destinations, visually enhance roads, enhance character and identity, and unify the area with design elements” (City of Arcata, 2012). The City of Spokane Downtown Design Guidelines highlights some of the functional uses for a gateway. “Gateways and entryway areas should assist and enhance the visitors’ experience when entering into the Downtown area. These features serve as landmarks and should be visible to vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.

Gateways and entry ways should be designed to create a high quality visual environment for the public. These sites can provide an opportunity for architectural features, monuments, public art, signage, flowers, trees, and other landscaping” (City of Spokane Plan Commission, 2000).

Figure 35. Current entrance to Fields Landing Waterfront.

The gateway entrance will be located on Railroad Avenue leading to the public boat launch. Currently the main thoroughfare leading up to the waterfront consists of a paved street that is uneven, cracking, and old. There are no sidewalks or vegetation along the sides of the street aside from some sparse patches of grass. The area will benefit from strategically placed vegetation to attempt to divert citizens attention away from the industrial areas surrounding this location. The current design makes the area unpleasant to walk through because of the lack of aesthetically pleasing features.

Vegetation placement and sidewalks in this design will effectively act as natural boundaries between automobiles and pedestrians, and help ease the issues with storm water management.

Figure 36. Examples of Gateway design.

The proposed gateway entrance will utilize permeable pavement for the road and the sidewalk running alongside the road. The sidewalk will ultimately direct pedestrians to the trails along the waterfront. There will be trees, shrubs, and flowering plants put in that are compatible with the climate in this area. Through the use of vegetation, the gateway will accomplish a more inviting environment for pedestrians. An archway or large sign made from a natural and sustainable material should be considered in the design. Additional signage will help direct visitors to their desired recreational activity. The area will have lighting that is appropriate for both vehicle traffic and pedestrians. The placement of doggie kiosks and outdoor-furniture should be appropriately placed along the gateway.

Gateway

Figure 37. Gateway Design.

Potential Business Opportunities Fields Landing has the unique opportunity of being in close proximity to the coast, which gives them the chance to capitalize on a certain few area specific businesses. The local bar closed earlier this year, which leaves the community without an important establishment and gathering place. Including several new businesses in the revitalization of the Fields Landing area could provide the community with a gathering place, jobs, and economic stimulation.

Business development provides the opportunity to capitalize on the diverse local products that Humboldt County has to offer. Some of the appropriate businesses that should be considered are: • • • • • • • •

Fish & Chips Restaurant and Bar Wine & Cheese with Oyster Bar Charter Boat Tours Bait & Tackle Fresh Seafood Bar Coffee Shop Market Restaurants

Within the project area map three appropriate adjacent parcels are delineated which are currently vacant and could serve as ideal locations for these local businesses. There are many options for businesses in Fields Landing, here several potential businesses will be explored in greater depth.

Swim . Surf . Fish . Bike . Shop . Eat .

Possible Business Options

Since clamming and fishing are characteristic activities off of Fields Landing there is the opportunity to create novelty businesses tailored to these activities. A ”Catch & Cook” restaurant could appeal to recreationists utilizing the public boat ramp facilities in Fields Landing. Seafood caught off Fields Landing by residents and visitors could be brought back and cooked at a restaurant. This could provide Fields Landing with some economic stimulus from people who utilize the public boat ramp facilities.

Novelty business models like these have been extremely successful in Michigan where charter-fishing clients catch fish and take their fresh catch to a participating restaurant to cook and serve. A variety of state and local associations work together in “an effort to promote and encourage creative, yet safe, marketing of... sport fish through a partnership with the charter fishing industry and local restaurants” (Michigan Charter Boat Associations, 2013).

Figure 38. Catch and Cook Restaurant.

Figure 39. Fresh Seafood.

Possible Business Options

Figure 40. Oysters and beer.

Fresh Seafood with Beer Bar Fresh local seafood could be served at a casual bar style restaurant in a relaxed comfortable setting. This restaurant could offer Fields Landing residents an affordable option for dining within the area as well as establish a central place for residents to congregate. There is the opportunity to provide a diverse range of local products to residents and visitors.

Coffee Shop The boat ramp facilities in Fields Landing can be full of excited fishermen early in the morning at the start of a new fishing season while also serving the vacationing community early risers could potentially enjoy a hot cup of coffee and this small amenity could bring significant business to the Fields Landing area.

Seasonal Boat Tours The proximity to the Humboldt Bay entrance gives Fields Landing the opportunity to become a hub for small fishing charter boats.

This could potentially bring vacationers into the area and provide local economic growth, both through the creation of new jobs and economic stimulus.

Figure 41. Fishing from charter boat.

Bait & Tackle A bait and tackle shop along the waterfront could generate revenue from the local recreational fisherman and seasonal visitors.

This store could also rent kayaks, surfboards, wetsuits, and fishing gear.

Greenway

Greenways are a way to connect cities and encourage an throughout several cities to relieve some of the dependence

Figures 42-44. Greenway Designs.

active and healthy lifestyle. This concept has been applied e on vehicles for transportation and revitalize unused space.

They are used globally to encourage wildlife, vegetation, public recreation, and environmentally conscious transportation. Fields Landing could benefit from this type of development to connect to King Salmon and Eureka. There are no public schools within these areas and children who do not have daily rides must ride the school bus because there are no other ways for them to reach school safely. If a greenway were installed, adolescents would have the option to ride their bikes or walk to school instead of the alternative, which limits extracurricular activities and socialization.

Community members have already demonstrated the desire for such a project by the request for the transformation of Humboldt Counties abandoned railroads into a Class I Bike and Pedestrian Path between the cities of Arcata and Eureka. This area spans just over six miles (Humboldt Trails, 2012). This plan is not yet complete, however supporters of the initiative believe that the transformation of these rails could not only encourage positive recreation, but could also make the cities safer by encouraging unwanted activities to move elsewhere.

Humboldt County is known for its beautiful beaches and scenic vistas, the addition of trails and walkways would highlight these areas and create a connected corridor, which will help strengthen the bond between communities. These trails could help serve as a buffer and levee between the waterfront and the homes that are in the area. Property values may be increased as the result of this project.

Greenway

Figure 45. Open Space Park Design.

Landscaping Appropriate for the Northwest Coast and Usage The coastline within Fields Landing experiences high tides, saline mists, and large quantities of precipitation year round and therefore requires vegetation that can withstand these extreme conditions. The plantings desired for Fields Landing are appropriate for the geographical location, provide habitat for local flora and fauna, and are aesthetically pleasing for the residents and visitors to the area. Some plants that would be well suited for this project are plants that can survive windy and rugged conditions, which would likely be the native species found within the region.

Greenways are termed for their vegetative or green belt and park like qualities and are usually implemented as a redevelopment or restoration method to an unused road, railroad, or long sections of land.

Figure 46. Open Space Park Design.

Open Space Fields Landing will benefit greatly from a park that connects its residents. A park will connect the community to the region’s history and culture as well as serve as a transition into proposed recreation areas and greenways. Community parks act as dynamic features within neighborhoods by providing beautification, a sense of place, crime prevention, and access to recreational activity.

Crime prevention through environmental design is an assessment of the built environment and its influences on the perception of safety and quality of life. “The simple cleanup of a vacant lot or restoring a children’s playground or improving the street signage can cascade into more and more improvements that redouble into further community and government investment to the betterment of the entire community” (Jeffery, 1971).

Figure 47. Open Space Park Design.

Figure 48. Open Space Park Design.

“Community cohesion and pride in place is often manifested in design” (Project for Public Spaces, 2011).

Parks, recreation, and open spaces “offer places to exercise, participate in competitive sports, socialize with others, and space for people to get away from development and experience the natural environment,” which contributes to physical, mental, and emotional health (King County’s Open Space System, 2004). In addition to the health benefits, parks and open spaces create an opportunity for community congregation. Mark Lakeman, of Commitecture in Portland and founder of The City Repair Project, stated “what good is freedom of assembly without a place to assemble?” He claims that in order to build a community, people require a space to interact with one another, causing a personal revolution in defining sense of place and responsibility of its stewardship (Lakeman, 2013).

Open Space

Figure 49. Candlestick South Waterfront Trail, San Francisco, CA.

The current county park located on the waterfront is comprised of a parking lot and a boat launch. A few properties that are directly adjacent to the boat launch are vacant, industrially zoned parcels that are not currently in use. To say the least, the waterfront area is under-performing when it comes to providing for the needs of the Fields Landing residents.

Project for Public Spaces outlines some tactics to create an underperforming space into a vital place.

“Physical elements must be introduced that would make people welcome and comfortable, such as seating and new landscaping, and also through management changes in the pedestrian circulation pattern and by developing more effective relationships between the surrounding retail and the activities going on in the public spaces�

(Projects for Public Spaces, 2011).

Open Space When considering the location for the park, a system of connectivity should be addressed to create a flow of traffic between the recreation area, open spaces, the park, and the neighborhood.

A successful open space relates to the residential area it serves.

Critical habitat or sensitive areas should be interwoven into the open space network without compromising the protection or conservation of its ecological functions. In Fields Landing, wetlands are considered a sensitive resource that serves as a protection from natural hazard and storm water management. Based on proposed plans, the park could be adjacent to recreationoriented spaces. The park should harness these amenities by providing adequate access to them. Therefore, open space planning must be coordinated with transportation and capital facility planning.

The system should consist of a complementary greenway, park, and recreation spaces that, considered together, meet the needs of a full range of community interests. The Humboldt Bay Revitalization Plan calls for the connection of the coastal areas through trails.

According to the Project Public Spaces, a successful park requires the following considerations (Project for Public Spaces, 2011).

• • • • • • • • •

Use transit as a catalyst for attracting visitors Make management of the park a central concern Develop strategies to attract people during different seasons Acquire diverse funding sources Design the park layout for flexibility Consider both the “inner park” and “outer park” Provide amenities for the different groups of people using the park Create attractions and destinations throughout the park Create an identity and image for the park

“It is the way in which we weave these areas into a cohesive whole that makes the system work for the greatest number of people and this enhances the quality of life in our cities... The key is ... to look at open space both regionally and comprehensively�

(Bill Lamont in Henderson, 1990).

Figure 50. Riverfront Park, Delaware concept design created by citizen participation.

°

Wetland Enhancement

Wetlands provide great benefits such as flood damage reduction, groundwater recharge, improved water quality, shoreline erosion control, ecological benefits to wildlife, recreation, and education and research opportunities (Randolph, 2012). Wetlands are a valuable resource that provide many ecological services; their protection is critical to preservation of biological diversity in Humboldt Bay. Fields Landing contains approximately 88 acres of wetlands of various types.

There are several wetlands located near and within the planning area including freshwater emergent wetlands, estuarine and marine wetlands, freshwater-forested shrub wetlands, and salt marsh. The wetlands located in the planning area should not be affected by any activities described in this document.

Enhancement of these wetlands is encouraged to help Fields Landing revitalize their community and increase environmental resilience. Enhancement is defined as “increasing one or more of the functions performed by an existing wetland beyond what currently or previously existed� (Randolph, 2012).

National Wetlands Inventory Wetland Type Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland

Wetlands are “lands where saturation with water is the dominant factor determining the nature of soil development and the types of plant and animal communities living in the soil and on its surface� (Cowardin, 1979).

Enhancement of the wetlands near the project site could provide ecological benefits, as well as create an aesthetic appeal for visitors and residents to the Fields Landing area. Wetlands determined to be appropriate for enhancement are shown on the following page. The necessity of allowing nature to selfdesign wetlands is expressed by Mitsch et. al (Mitsch et. al, 1996).

Allowing wetlands to self-design can improve their ecological function by allowing nature to select the most appropriate vegetation for the particular area. When adding vegetation to a wetlands area during enhancement, it is best to add many different species of plants and give nature the opportunity to decide which are the most appropriate for the site. An active approach to landscaping requires intensive management and can be very costly over time. Wetland self-design provides a low cost solution for increasing both the ecological function of wetlands as well as improving site aesthetics (Mitsch et. al, 1996).

째

Wetland Enhancement

Enhancing the wetlands could encourage activities such as hiking, fishing, and recreational boating. It could also help protect the Fields Landing community from natural hazards such as flooding and shoreline erosion. Wetlands act like a sponge when flood events occur, absorbing the water and reducing the vulnerable population in Fields Landing. Wetlands also are great at filtering out impurities, which can improve overall groundwater quality, as well as Humboldt Bay water quality. Wetlands are also some of the most biologically diverse places in the world, creating an incredibly productive environment and providing amazing wildlife viewing opportunities for enthusiasts. The wetlands in Fields Landing should be considered an asset for the area.

It is recommended that should enhancement of the Fields Landing wetlands be incorporated into a revitalization plan a passive approach, as described above, should be followed to help reduce costs to the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District. Enhancement of these wetlands will help create a more resilient environment in the Fields Landing area.

National Wetlands Inventory Wetland Type Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Potential Wetland Enhancement Locations

Figure 51. Greenway and bike path built over sensitive wetlands.

Site Clean-up

The California State Water Resources Control Board Geotracker website shows several sites in the Fields Landing area that have either had or have spilled toxins on site. There are two sites near the project area that have not been cleaned-up yet. These sites include the former boatyard at 1 Yard Road in Fields Landing, and the Humboldt Bay Forest Products site located at 110 C Street, Fields Landing. The Humboldt Bay Forest Products contaminants have been identified as gasoline and waste oil, hydraulic, lubricating, and motor. A site assessment has not been completed for the boat yard property.

Therefore, the contaminants on the site have not yet been determined (California State Water Resources Control Board, n.d.). There is also a leaking underground storage tank on a different parcel slightly north of the planning area, which is being monitored. It is suggested that all sites be assessed and cleaned-up prior to beginning any construction activities for the development of recreational facilities for visitors and residents.

Figure 52. Location of Contaminated Sites in Fields Landing.

째

Contaminated Sites

There are basic chemical and physical treatment techniques available for remediation of contaminated soils, however these are often costly and environmentally destructive. One alternative technique that could be employed for cleaning contaminated soils is bioremediation. Bioremediation is defined as the use of living organisms to remove inorganic and organic compounds from soil (Zhao & Johnson, 2000). This process is less environmentally destructive than traditional remediation techniques and enhances soil quality. Bioremediation requires the placement of appropriate vegetation to the contaminated sites. Plants are able to absorb organic compounds through their roots, and they also have rhizosphere microflora that increase the biodegradation of soil contaminants.

Potential Remediation and Cleanup Sites

The appropriate vegetation for bioremediation of a particular site is dependent upon the type of contaminants on the site.

Plant species should be selected based on ability to promote microbial activity that can absorb the particular contaminant on that site (Lee & Banks, 1993). This technique could be used for remediation of the contaminated sites in Fields Landing, as it is less environmentally destructive and potentially more cost effective.

In addition to contaminated soils in the Fields Landing area, there are also several sites that are in need to debris removal.

These sites appear to have old railroad ties, sheet metal, and other large pieces of debris. This debris should be removed, and repurposed if possible to allow for the reclamation of these sites to their natural state. Potential remediation and debris removal sites are shown above.

Stormwater Management

Figure 53. Example of Low Impact Development from Portland, Oregon.

Stormwater management is a key issue in the creation of any sort of development on the site because of the proximity to the bay.

With the design proposed in this document, several stormwater management devices could provide both aesthetic appeal and ecological function. Traditional methods of stormwater management try to move water off-site as quickly as possible.

Traditional methods can cause contaminants to wash down into ecologically sensitive habitats like Humboldt Bay, presenting a problem for groundwater recharge. Treating stormwater on site can help filter out toxins, support vegetation growth, provide aesthetic appeal, and contribute to groundwater recharge.

Figure 54. Example of Rain Garden.

A sustainable practice contributing to protection of water quality and water supplies is Low Impact Development (LID). LID uses site design and storm water management to return the sites hydrology to its original state prior to development and treat water as close to the source as possible. LID uses specific tools to improve water quality, increase infiltration, reduce the amount of impervious surfaces on a site, and reduce costly stormwater infrastructure.

An EPA report on reducing stormwater costs through Low Impact Development states that “property owners are willing to pay a premium to be located next to or near aesthetically pleasing amenities like water features, open space, and trails� (EPA, 2007).

The same report also stresses the importance of Low Impact Development designs to be visually attractive and safe for residents and visitors (EPA, 2007). Therefore implementing LID practices in Fields Landing could help to raise property values and encourage homeowners to move to the area.

Stormwater Management

Figure 55. Swale design.

LID practices include rain gardens, permeable pavements, vegetated rooftops, rain barrels, cisterns, vegetated filter strips, and grass swales (California State Water Resources Control Board, 2010). Vegetated rooftops absorb, collect, and evapotranspire storm water while reducing the amount of impervious surface on a site. Rain gardens, or bioretention basins, can be used for reducing impervious surfaces in parking lots and along roadways.

With the appropriate design rain gardens can treat stormwater, as well as increase infiltration (Randolph, 2012). Swales are vegetated channels that drain to natural channels. The primary purpose of swales is to move water out of a system, however they still provide infiltration and treatment benefits similar to bioretention basins. Curb cuts can allow storm water to move into swales easily (Randolph, 2012).

Figure 56. Permeable Pavement Example.

Figure 57. Swale design.

There are four main types of permeable pavement that could be used for this project. The first type of permeable pavement is concrete grid pavers. Concrete grid pavers allow drainage through spaces around each grid filled with gravel. However these are still ninety percent impervious. A second type is porous asphalt and concrete. If properly installed these can absorb up to 200 inches of water every hour (Randolph, 2012). A third type is reinforced grass pavement, which consists of turf-blocks with gravel beneath and grass on top. These provide an attractive appeal and provide infiltration. The last type is reinforced gravel paving which is like grass pavement only there is gravel instead of grass in the voids (Randolph, 2012).

The greenway suggested in this document could significantly improve the stormwater management for the Fields Landing area. A greenway provides a buffer around human activities and sensitive resources. Greenways can help filter pollutants, encourage infiltration, and reduce the amount and toxicity level of contaminants that may travel into Humboldt Bay. Stormwater management will be an important factor in development of any sort of project on this site due to its proximity to the Humboldt Bay. Stormwater management can provide multiple ecological, functional, and aesthetic benefits to a site.

The various forms of stormwater management discussed above should be considered in the site design phase of any activities to occur on this site.

°

Potential Hazards

The proposed site location has several potential hazards including the threat of flood, sea level rise, tsunami, earthquake, and shoreline erosion. Aldaron Laird performed an inventory of shoreline conditions for the Humboldt Bay. Laird reports that the “existing shoreline conditions of structure and cover make the waterfront of Fields Landing vulnerable to erosion” (Laird, 2013). Laird’s inventory found that for the South Bay, which includes Fields Landing, thirty-two percent of the shoreline is natural, making this community vulnerable to ocean hazards.

The shoreline in Fields Landing on the North side consists of fill, and closer to the National Wildlife Refuge the railroad provides shoreline protection. Much of the shoreline is fortified however there are several areas on the North side of the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District property that are exposed shoreline, as shown in map above (Laird, 2013).

Approximately one third of the Humboldt Bay Harbor Recreation and Conservation District property has rock armoring on the shoreline.

Shoreline Characteristics Shoreline Cover Type Concrete Exposed Rock Vegetated Wood

Figures 58 and 59.

Resilient shoreline design.

Rock armoring provides protection from shoreline erosion and other ocean hazards. To reduce shoreline vulnerability it is suggested that the exposed portion of the shoreline on the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District property be armored with rock.

The shoreline on the West side of Fields landing by the Humboldt County public boat ramp is mainly all exposed natural shoreline until the South side of the county boat ramp (Laird, 2013). There is clear evidence that high tides cause waves to wash over the parking area for the Humboldt County boat ramp. This can be seen in photos from very high tides in the winter months, called King Tides (shown in Figures 60-64). Fortification should be considered for this area to help reduce the vulnerability of this area to ocean hazards. The District should make plans to complete reinforcement as soon as funds are available.

°

Hazards

Shoreline elevation ranges in the Fields Landing area ranges from 7.74 to 13.74 feet (Laird, 2013). Laird’s study also examined the flooding impacts of sea level rise for four different projected increases: 1 foot, 2 feet, 3 feet, and 6 feet.

For the South Bay it was determined that with one foot of sea level rise dikes will be overtopped in the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge area, White Slough and Hookton Slough. With one to two feet of sea level rise the Hookton Slough and White Slough will be completely overtopped and part of Salmon Creek as well. With two to three feet of sea level rise five more miles of shoreline will be overtopped, especially dikes and railroad levees. With three feet of sea level rise the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge dikes will be overtopped, which will cause the flooding of Highway 101. At six feet of sea level rise all but four percent of the shoreline will be overtopped (Laird, 2013).

Laird identified the land uses that are at risk for flooding from sea level rise in the South Bay. Land uses identified that pertain to ideas expressed in this document include the county boat launch, the North Coast Railway Authority railroad, Highway 101, industrial uses on the Fields Landing waterfront, service streets in Fields Landing, Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District dry dock, the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge, and commercial docks in Fields landing (Laird, 2013).

Tsunami Hazard Zone

Sea level rise must be a serious consideration in the development of this project. The threat of sea level rise can be dealt with in two ways, either relocating vulnerable land uses or building up shoreline protection devices.

Construction and revetment of shoreline protection devices can be extremely costly and acquiring the required permits is often a difficult and lengthy process.

Relocation of communities can also be costly and difficult if communities have historical roots in the area. Coastal planning is starting to aim at reducing vulnerable populations on the coastline, by limiting development of residential and commercial facilities in these hazardous areas. By placing a transitory land use on the waterfront in Fields Landing the social and financial costs associated with relocation of a community could be greatly reduced. A recreational vehicle park provides the opportunity to utilize the land until it is no longer safe to do so, while not significantly increasing the vulnerable population on the site.

Figures 60-64. King Tides in Fields Landing.

Flood Hazard Zone

째

Hazards

The Humboldt County Planning Department Web GIS Portal Database was used to determine other potential hazards for the project location. The entire project location was determined to be in a Moderate Coastal Vulnerability area. The project area is also located within a Tsunami Evacuation Zone, with the relative tsunami hazard for the area rated between moderate and high (Dengler et. al, 2006). Tsunami inundation maps from the California Emergency Management Agency, California Geological Survey and University of Southern California show the entire Fields Landing community to be within an inundation zone. Therefore the proposed project must plan for adequate tsunami hazard signage, an evacuation route, a hazard alert system and education for the community and visitors about how to react in the event of a tsunami event (Humboldt County Planning Department, n.d.).

Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone Areas of Potential Liquefaction

In terms of earthquake hazard, the Little Salmon Fault runs directly through the project area. Only the lower portion of this property is located in an Alquist-Priolo Fault Hazard Zone (shown above), however businesses and visitors in the project area should be informed of this potential hazard. In terms of seismic safety, the slope stability of the project area is rated as relatively stable, making it suitable for the construction of structures. The entire project area is located in an area of liquefaction, which poses a potential risk to developments on the site. The Natural Resources Conservation Services Web Soil Survey showed the area of Fields Landing to be unmapped; therefore the engineering capabilities of the soil were unable to be determined.

The shoreline along Fields Landing is located within a FEMA Flood Zone, but this area is just a short distance on the shore, therefore not greatly affecting the planning area. The majority of the project area has a moderate fire hazard severity, and the entire planning area is located within the Humboldt #1 Fire Protection District zone (Humboldt County Planning Department, n.d.). All of these hazards should be considered in the implementation of a revitalization plan for the Fields Landing community.

Alternative Projects This section describes potential projects that could be implemented in Fields Landing. Our evaluations have determined that the following projects are either infeasible or inappropriate for the Fields Landing community and their needs.

Marina Fields Landing is an ideal location for water activities in Humboldt Bay. It is the closest community to the Humboldt Bay entrance, which provides ocean access for activities such as salmon fishing, clamming, and an abundance of fishing opportunities within the bay.

This area is aesthetically ideal because of the close proximity to the Humboldt Bay Wildlife Sanctuary and a designated Marine Protected Area (MPA). This setting lends to an increased amount of water recreation in the area and a marina could supply the additional dock space and slips, which are not offered in Eureka.

Bulk Aggregate Export Past timber practices have resulted in an excessive amount of gravel that has accumulated in the river bottoms around Fields Landing. This resource presents an opportunity for the more environmentally conscious extraction of bulk aggregates. The constraints involved with this proposed business include the method of exportation of the product. All current methods for the transportation of bulk aggregates are not economically feasible and would require the reopening of the railroad that runs through Fields Landing.

Student Housing Fields Landing’s close proximity to the College of the Redwoods makes it an ideal location for the construction of affordable student housing. Due to the lack of student housing on-campus it is assumed that most students that attend College of the Redwoods commute from areas such as McKinleyville, Arcata, and Eureka. Students have the potential to bring revenue to Fields Landing and boost the local economy.

During this process of beautification and stimulus of other businesses, Fields Landing’s should consider the addition of student housing and amenities into its plan.

Mobile Home Park The residents of Fields Landing are predominantly renters. According to the 2010 census, 65.6 percent of Fields Landing residents are renters (United States Census Bureau, 2010). A mobile home park could help residents feel a sense of ownership to the area by providing opportunity for current residents as well as attracting new residents.

Community Center The residents in Fields Landing do not have a community center or a place in which local gatherings occur. In order to know one’s community people must come together and communicate frequently to understand the dynamics of the area. The lack of a communal gathering space in Fields Landing results in a fragmented social dynamic in the community, if provided with a community center perhaps this social dynamic can be remedied. Another benefit of a community center could be to provide a space for the youth of the area.

The youth of the community do not have a location where they can go to get support from peers or authoritative figures. For these reasons Fields Landing could socially benefit from a community center.

Phases of Implementation Feasible projects should be implemented in the following order to address the cleanup and restoration before development to prevent the disturbance of landscaping.

All of the proposed actions in Phase 1 are seen as necessary projects that are needed before any redevelopment occurs.

Phase 2 projects are slated for economic stimulus, creating commercial and retail ventures in the region.

Phase 3 is seen as a chance to revitalize and beautify Fields Landing through community space and the amplification of the areas vistas.

Phase 1:

Pha

• Rezoning of waterfront • Clean-up of toxins and debris • Restoration of shorelines and wetlands

• Eco Dev • Re • Ba • Bu • Bui •G • St

ase 2:

Phase 3:

onomic velopment estaurants ars usinesses lt Elements Gateway tormwater control

•Park development •RV park •Creation of Greenway •Aquaculture Facilities

Funding

With the right combination of projects and funding this revitalization project can offer rejuvenation to the community of Fields Landing as well as help the community work towards a more sustainable and resilient design. The design for Fields Landing relies on natural processes as much as possible and creating a sustainable system will reduce the long-term costs of the projects in terms of maintenance expenses. Sound decisions should be applied on how to most effectively invest funding and budgets should be kept as limited as possible.

There are a variety of resources that can be utilized for the funding of this project. Funding can be found through various agency grants, loans, local, county, federal and state funds. A collaboration of funds will be required to fully fund a project.

Some potential funders include:

Figure 65. Photograph of Humboldt Bay.

• • • • • • •

Outdoor Recreation funds Section 306 of the Federal Act & 306A Federal Economic Development Administration State Historic Preservation Offices-historical preservation sources Local Improvement Districts Community Development Block Grant Program Department of Agriculture-Rural Business Enterprise Grants, Direct Grant • Department of Agriculture-Business & Industry Direct Loans • Environmental Quality and Protection Resource Management

Conclusion

The revitalization of Fields Landing is important as a whole to enhance the Humboldt County Coast. The proposed projects in this document highlight some of the unrealized opportunities that could enhance and cater to the under served Fields Landing community.

This document provides a holistic assessment of the area and gives our client an overview of all concepts that should be addressed to bring back the vitality of Fields Landing. The importance of good design and care to meet the Fields Landing community needs are fundamental to the success of the area. Embracing this waterfront and all it has to offer will contribute to the success of the North Coast. In conclusion, a revitalization plan for Fields Landing should accomplish several things. It should be consistent with regional and local management plans, provide amenities for residents and students, encourage diversification of the economy, and promote increased recreation opportunities. Overall, a plan for Fields Landing should reduce community vulnerability to hazards and establish a more resilient community.

Appendix 1- Stakeholders To be successful, the revitalization of Fields Landing should encompass a large number of stakeholders and interested parties.

Some stakeholders include the residents of Fields Landing community, recreationists, the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Fish and Game Commission, Fishermen, aquaculturists, real estate companies, the Humboldt County Department of Parks and Recreation, the Humboldt County Planning Commission, Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex, the California State Coastal Conservancy, California Coastal Commission, California State Lands Commission, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, Environmental Protection Information Center, Humboldt Baykeeper, Headwaters Fund, Redwood Community Action Agency, North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District, California Department of Transportation, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Humboldt County Convention and Visitors Bureau, Eureka Chamber of Commerce, Humboldt Trails Council, California Biodiversity Council, EPA, Cal EPA, Humboldt Surfrider Foundation, Humboldt State University and the Northern Pacific Railway owners and historical association.

Appendix 2- Plants for Coastal Planting * Suitable for exposed conditions

Native Plants for Coastal Planting

Ground covers, grasses and forbs American Beach grass - Ammophila breviligulata * American Dune grass – Leymus mollis Bearberry - Arctostaphylos uva-ursi * Creeping Juniper - Juniperus horizontalis * False Heather - Hudsonia tomentosa * Hard Fescue - Festuca ovina var. longifolia Lance-leaf Coreopsis - Coreopsis lanceolata Little Bluestem - Schizachyrium scoparius Marsh Hibiscus - Hibiscus moscheutos Panic Grass - Panicum virgatum Pennsylvania Sedge - Carex pensylvanicum Red Fescue - Festuca rubra Saltmarsh Cordgrass - Spartina patens Scotch Lovage – Ligusticum scoticum Sea Lavender - Limonium nashii* Seashore Mallow - Kosteletzkya virginica Seaside Goldenrod - Solidago sempervirons * Sheep Fescue - Festuca ovina Smooth Cordgrass - Spartina alterniflora Sweet Goldenrod – Solidago odorata Thread-leaf Coreopsis - Coreopsis verticillata Tufted Hairgrass - Deschampsia flexuosa Virginia Creeper - Parthenocissus quinquefolia * Shrubs Arrow-wood - Viburnum dentatum Bayberry - Myrica pensylvanicum * Beach Plum - Prunus maritima * Chokeberry, Black - Aronia melanocarpa Chokeberry, Red - Aronia arbutifolia Coast Leucothoe - Leucothoe axillaris

Eastern Ninebark - Physocarpus opulifolius Elderberry - Sambucus canadensis Groundsel Bush - Baccharis halimifolia Highbush Blueberry - Vaccinium corymbosum Inkberry - Ilex glabra Marsh Elder - Iva frutescens Nannyberry – Viburnum lentago Arrow-wood - Viburnum dentatum Bayberry - Myrica pensylvanicum * Beach Plum - Prunus maritima * Chokeberry, Black - Aronia melanocarpa Chokeberry, Red - Aronia arbutifolia Coast Leucothoe - Leucothoe axillaris Eastern Ninebark - Physocarpus opulifolius Elderberry - Sambucus canadensis Groundsel Bush - Baccharis halimifolia Highbush Blueberry - Vaccinium corymbosum Inkberry - Ilex glabra Marsh Elder - Iva frutescens Nannyberry – Viburnum lentago Trees American Holly - Ilex opaca Eastern Arborvitae - Thuja occidentalis Atlantic White Cedar - Chamaecyparis thyoides Black Cherry - Prunus serotina * Colorado Spruce - Picea pungens Eastern Red Cedar - Juniperus virginiana * Green Ash - Fraxinus pennsylvanica Oak, various species - Quercus spp. * Pitch Pine - Pinus rigida * Red Maple - Acer rubrum Sassafrass – Sassafras albidum Sweet Bay Magnolia - Magnolia virginiana Tupelo - Nyssa sylvatica White Spruce - Picea glauca (native to North America)

Non-Native Plants for Coastal Planting

Groundcovers, grasses and forbs Bearberry Cotoneaster - Cotoneaster dammeri Dusty Miller - Artemisia stelleriana * English Lavender - Lavandula angustifolia English Ivy - Hedera helix Feather Reed Grass - Calamagrostis acutiflora Heather - Calluna vulgaris Juniper, Japanese Garden - Juniperus procumbens * Juniper, Shore - Juniperus conferta * Memorial Rose - Rosa wichuraiana Santolina - Santolina chamaecyparissus St. Johnswort - Hypericum spp.

Russian Sage - Perovskia atriplicifolia Thyme - Thymus spp.

Variegated Moor Grass - Molina caerula variegata Weeping Lovegrass - Eragrostis curvula Yarrow - Achillea spp.

Trees Crabapple, various cultivars - Malus spp.

Ginkgo - Ginkgo biloba Japanese Cryptomeria - Cryptomeria japonica Leyland Cypress - X Cupressocyparis leylandii Littleleaf Linden - Tilia cordata London Plane - Platanus x acerifolius Pine, Austrian - Pinus nigra Pine, Japanese Black - Pinus thunbergii * Pine, Japanese White - Pinus parviflora Pine, Scotch - Pinus sylvestris Pine, Swiss Stone - Pinus cembra Sawara False Cypress - Chamaecyparis pisifera Silk tree - Albizzia julibrissin White Poplar - Populus alba *

Shrubs Alternate Leaf Butterfly Bush - Buddleia alternifolia Bigleaf Hydrangea - Hydrangea macrophylla Bush Cinquefoil - Potentilla fruticosa Butterfly Bush - Buddleia davidii Climbing Hydrangea - Hydrangea anomela subsp. petiolaris Common Cherrylaurel - Prunus laurocerasus Firethorn - Pyracantha coccinea Japanese Holly - Ilex crenata Panicle Hydrangea - Hydrangea paniculata Purple-leaf Sand Cherry - Prunus x cistena Rockspray Cotoneaster - Cotoneaster horizontalis Rose of Sharon - Hibiscus syriacus Rugosa Rose - Rosa rugosa Scotch Broom - Cytisus scoparius Sea Buckthorn - Hippophae rhamnoides Seven-son Flower - Heptacodium miconioides Siberian Peashrub - Caragana arborescens Spirea, various species - Spirea spp.

Spreading Cotoneaster - Cotoneaster divaricata Viburnum, various species - Viburnum spp.

Vitex - Vitex negundo Yew, various species - Taxus spp.

Adopted from Landscape, Nursery & Urban Forestry Program

Appendix 3- Policies There are many ways that this Waterfront Revitalization Project in the Fields Landing community will fulfill policy recommendations presented in the California Coastal Act of 1976, which was revised in 2013.

This project will meet guidelines outlined in Chapter Three of the Coastal Resources Planning and Management Policies, which outline the important resources and infrastructure that apply to our California coasts.

• Under Article 2: Public Access- provides better access and recreational opportunities, improved public facilities, and lower cost visitor and recreational facilities.

• Under Article 3: Recreation- highlights the protection of certain wateroriented activities, accomplishes the recommendation of aquaculture facilities, and encouraging recreational boat use.

• Under Article 4: Marine Environment- fulfilling the maintenance and protection of marine resources, increasing biological productivity through proper wastewater, storm water and runoff management, and improving flood control. This project also influences the economic, commercial, and recreational importance of fishing.

• Under Article 5: Land Resources- restoring environmentally sensitive habitat areas and taking care that adjacent developments do not impact those sensitive areas.

• Under Article 6: Development- improving scenic and visual qualities as well as applying maintenance and enhancement of public areas.

References 1. Alcantara, D., Rheingantz, P.A. (2009). The charming soul of a street in Rio De Janeiro. Retrived from: http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article=1136&context=focus 2. Alta Planning and Design, Planwest Partners, & Streamline Planning and Consultants, State of California Coastal Conservancy. (2011). Humboldt county coastal trail implementation strategy. Retrieved from: http:// rcaa.org/sites/rcaa.org/files/Humboldt_CCT_Implementation_Strategy_ FinalReport.pdf 3. Arcata/ Eureka Bay Trail. The Humboldt trails council. Retrieved March 20, 2013, from http://humtrails.org/Bay_Trail.html 4. Architecture for Humanity. (2012). Design like you give a damn 2. (2nd ed., pp. 170-204, 264-318). New York: ABRAMS. 5. Atlas, R. M. (1991). Microbial hydrocarbon degradation—bioremediation of oil spills. Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology, 52(2), 149– 156. doi:10.1002/jctb.280520202 6. Barker, A. (2006). Improving local capacity in coastal management: Experiences and lessons from the developing world. Journal of Coastal Research, 42, 387-393.

7. Beatley, T. (2009). Coastal Resilience: What Is It. Planning for coastal resilience best practices for calamitous times (pp. 3-12). Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

8. Beatley, T., Brower, D. J., & Schwab, A. K. (1994). Creative coastal development: building sustainably along the coast. An introduction to coastal zone management. Washington, D.C.: 9. Barnhart, R. A., Boyd, M. J., & Pequegnat, J. E. (1992). The ecology of Humboldt Bay, California: an estuarine profile. DTIC Document. Retrieved from http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&id entifier=ADA323371 10. Bell, B., & Wakeford, K. (2008). Expanding architecture design as activism. Singapore: Tien Wah Press.

References 11. California Coastal Commission. (1976). California coastal act of 1976.

Retrieved from website: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/coastact.pdf 12. State of California Resources Agency. (n.d.). The health and social benefits of recreation. Retrieved from: http://www.parks.ca.gov/ pages/795/files/health_benefits_081505.pdf 13. California State Water Resources Control Board. (n.d.). GeoTracker.

Retrieved March 28, 2013, http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?C MD=runreport&myaddress=Fields+Landing%2C+CA 14. City of Arcata. (2012). Samoa boulevard gateway design. Retrieved from: http://www.cityofarcata.org/sites/default/files/files/document_ center/Public 15. City of Spokane Plan Commission. (2000). City of spokane: Downtown design guidelines. Retrieved from: http://www.spokaneplanning.org/docs/ Downtown/DT_design_guide.pdf 16. Clark, R. (2011, August). Selection and maintenance of plant materials for coastal landscapes. University of Massachusetts- Center for Agriculture.

Retrieved March 20, 2013, from http://extension.umass.edu/landscape/ fact-sheets/selection-and-maintenance-plant-materials-coastallandscapes 17. Coats, R., Swanson, M., & Williams, P. (1989). Hydrologic analysis for coastal wetland restoration. Environmental Management, 13(6), 715–727.

18. Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Online. http://www.npwrc.usgs. gov/resource/wetlands/classwet/index.htm (Version 04DEC1998).

19. Crompton, J. (2007). The impact of parks and open spaces on property values . Manuscript submitted for publication, Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station.

20. Despard, E. (2012). Cultivating security: plants in the urban landscape.

Space and Culture, 15(2), 151-163.

21. Donovan, G., & Prestemon, J. (2012). The Effect of Trees on Crime in Portland, Oregon. Environment and Behavior, 44(1), 3-30.

22. Ecosystem Research Science Challenge Workshop Organizing Committee. Department of the Interior, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). (2011). Ecosystem research science challenge workshop: Informing noaa’s ecosystem research agenda. Retrieved from website: http://nrc.noaa.gov/sites/nrc/Documents/Ecosystem%20 Research%20Science%20Challenge%20Workshop%20White%20Paper_ Feb%202012_FINAL.pdf 23. Good , J. W., & Goodwin , R. F. (1990). Waterfront revitalization for small cities. (Master’s thesis, University of Oregon).

24. Hiller, H. (2009, April). Economic impacts of trails. In National Trails Training Partnership. Retrieved March 20, 2013, from http://www. americantrails.org/resources/economics/Tourism-economic-benefit-EastCoast-Greenway-trail-Florida.html 25. Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District. (2007).

Humboldt bay management plan. Retrieved March 28, 2013, from http://www.humboldtbay.org/harbordistrict/documents/hbmp2007/ HumBayMgmtPLAN_print.pdf 26. Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District Economic Development Committee. (2009). Prioritization of potential policies and actions for economic development of Humboldt bay. Retrieved March 28, 2013, from http://www.humboldtbay.org/harbordistrict/humboldt_ bay_economic_committee/HBHRCD_Economic_Dev_Report_Potential%20 Policies%20and%20Actions%20June%202010%20Final.pdf 27. Humboldt County. (1995). Humboldt Bay Area Plan. Retrieved March 28, 2013, from http://co.humboldt.ca.us/planning/local_coastal_plans/hbap/ hbap.pdf 28. Humboldt County Planning and Building Department. (n.d.). Humboldt County Web GIS. Retrieved March 28, 2013, from http://gis.co.humboldt. ca.us/ 29. Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., & Ryan, R. L. (1998). With people in mind: Design and management of everyday nature. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

References 30. Kostof, S. (1991). The city shaped: Urban patterns and meanings through history . Hong Kong: A Bulfinch Press Book Little, Brown and Company.

31. Laird, A. (2013). Humboldt Bay Shoreline Inventory, Mapping, and Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment. Retrieved March 8, 2013, from http:// www.humboldtbay.org/harbordistrict/documents/other/Humboldt%20 Bay%20Shoreline%20Inventory,%20Mapping%20and%20SLR%20 Vulnerability%20Assessment-A.Laird.pdf 32. Langston, J. (2011). Northwest Ocean Acidification. Retrieved from http://www.sightline.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/02/OAprimer1.pdf 33. Lee, E., & Banks, M. K. (1993). Bioremediation of petroleum contaminated soil using vegetation: A microbial study. Journal of Environmental Science and Health . Part A: Environmental Science and Engineering and Toxicology, 28(10), 2187–2198. doi:10.1080/10934529309376003 34. Michigan Charter Boat Association. (2013). Michigan Catch & Cook.

Retrieved April 25, 2013, from http://www.michigancatchandcook.com/ 35. Mitsch, W. J., & Wilson, R. F. (1996). Improving the success of wetland creation and restoration with know-how, time, and self-design. Ecological applications, 77–83.

36. Morton, R. A. (2013, January 12). Role of shoreline characteristics: Coastal morphology and vegetation. In United States Geological Survey.

Retrieved March 20, 2013, from http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2003/of03-337/ morphology.html 37. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association. (n.d.). Fields landing.

Retrieved from http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/research/divisions/sd/ communityprofiles/California/Fields_Landing_CA.pdf 38. National Park Service. (1995). Economic impacts of protecting rivers, trails and greenway corridors. Retrieved April 16, 2013, from http://www.nps. gov/pwro/rtca/econ_index.htm

39. Natural Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game. (n.d.).

Marine region- information leaflet1 regulations governing marine aquaculture. Retrieved from website: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.as hx?DocumentID=24338&inline=true 40. Natural Resources Defense Council. (n.d.). NRDC: Stormwater Strategies - Chapter 12. Retrieved March 25, 2013, from http://www.nrdc.org/water/ pollution/storm/chap12.asp 41. Northwest Fisheries Science Center. National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration. (2013). Community profiles - socioeconomics program - SD - Northwest fisheries science center- fields landing. Retrieved April 17, 2013, from http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/research/divisions/sd/communityprofiles/ 42. O’Sullivan, E. (2011). Rejuvenating neighborhoods and communities through parks: A guide to success. In National Recreation and Park Association. Ashburn : The Center for Public Recreation and Parks.

43. Pangilinan, C. (2007). Land use and multi-modal considerations in the street functional classification system. Retrieved from: http://www. dksassociates.com/wp-content/files_mf/1334878809Pangilinan_Street_ Classification_132B7.pdf 44. Patton, J. R., & Dengler, L. A. (2006). Relative tsunami hazard mapping for Humboldt and Del Norte counties, California. In Proceedings of the 8NCEE/EERI Eighth Earthquake Engineering Conference. Retrieved from http://cascadiageo.org/documentation/federal_tax_docs/IRS_ response_2010/attachments/CD_files/att_5_e_8NCEE_patton_dengler.pdf 45. PB Ports and Marine, Inc. (2003). Port of Humboldt Bay Revitalization Plan. Retrieved from http://www.humboldtbay.org/harbordistrict/ documents/rev_plan_2003/port_revitalization/FinalReport.pdf 46. Project for Public Spaces. (2011). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.pps.org/reference/11steps/ 47. Project for Public Spaces. (2013, March 21). [Web log message]. What is Good Rural Design?.html 48. Randolph, J. (2012). Environmental land use planning and management (2nd ed.). Island Press.

References 49. Redwood Community Action Agency. (2011). Humboldt county coastal trail implementation strategy. Retrieved from: http://rcaa.org/sites/rcaa. org/files/Humboldt_CCT_Implementation_Strategy_FinalReport.pdf 50. Schuster. (Photographer). (n.d.). Historical fields landing bay front photo. [Web Photo]. Retrieved from: http://library.humboldt.edu/humco/ holdings/photodetail.php?

51. Sera Group. (2007). Strategic plan (2007-2011) for humboldt bay harbor, recreation, and conservation district. Retrieved from http://www. humboldtbay.org/harbordistrict/documents/stratplan/Strat%20Plan%20 2007%20Final%20Draft%20Nov%202007.pdf 52. Stout, D. (1986). Testimony at Orlando PCAO hearing.

53. Sullivan, W., Kuo, F., & DePooter, S. (2004). The fruit of urban nature: Vital neighborhood spaces. Environment and Behavior, 36(5), 678-700.

54. Tomasso, L.P. (2010). A study of sustainability at RV parks. Retrieved from http://www.calarvc.com/emails/2011/Tomasso_Grad_Project_RV_park_ sustainability_2010_XII.pdf 55. Urban Coastal Greenway. (2007, September). Urban coastal greenway manual. In Sea Grant. Retrieved March 20, 2013, from http://seagrant.gso. uri.edu/z_downloads/coast_ucg_designmanual.pdf 56. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Natural Resources Management. (2007).

Rec facilities standards http://corpslakes.usace.army.mil/employees/ facilities/refs.cfm 57. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2012). Federal stormwater management requirements. Retrieved March 28, 2013, from http://www. epa.gov/oaintrnt/stormwater/requirements.htm 58. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Reducing stormwater costs through low impact development (LID) strategies and practices. Retrieved from www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/ reducingstormwatercosts.pdf.

59. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2012). Stormwater management best practices. Retrieved March 28, 2013, from http://www.epa.gov/ oaintrnt/stormwater/best_practices.htm#best_practices 60. Weinstein, A. (2011). How can struggling communities make a comeback?. (Master’s thesis, Ohio State University ).

61. Wilkerson, J. Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development, Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (2005). Planning for parks, recreation, and open space in your community.

Olympia Washington: Municipal Research & Services Center 62. Whitney, A. (2010). An inventory of brownfields in Humboldt County, California. Humboldt State University. Retrieved from http://humboldtdspace.calstate.edu.ezproxy.humboldt.edu/handle/2148/627 63. Wilmington/New Hanover County Comprehensive Greenway Plan.

(2013, January 30). In Wilmington greenway. Retrieved March 20, 2013, from http://www.wilmingtongreenway.com/uploads/7/8/3/3/7833643/ wilmingtongreenwayplan_mainchapters_optimized.pdf 64. Zedler, J. B. (1996). Ecological issues in wetland mitigation: An introduction to the forum. Ecological Applications, 33–37.

65. Zhao, F. J., & Johnson, D. (2000). Bioremediation of contaminated soils. European Journal of Soil Science, 51(3), 541–549. doi:10.1046/j.13652389.2000.00334-3.x

Photo Credits Figure 1. Fields Landing Waterfront.

Houston, Kara. Taken February 7, 2013 Figure 2. Fields Landing Shoreline.

Houston, K. Taken February 7, 2013 Figure 3. Public Boat Ramp Facilities in Fields Landing.

Houston, K. Taken February 7, 2013 Figure 4. Resiliency Defined.

Markey, M. Created May 10, 2013 Figure 5. Revitalization can help foster community.

Care Cottage. (Photographer). (2009). [Print Photo]. Retrieved April 15, 2013 from http://www.carecottage.org/ Figure 6. Waterfront Revitalization example from Port Angeles, Washington.

Perkins, I. (Photographer). (Unknown). Wharf [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 2, 2013 from http://www.archdaily.com Figure 7. Sunset in Fields Landing.

Nyquist, Greg. (2013). Bay. Retrieved April 15, 2013 from http://www.north coastphotographer.net Figure 8. Wildlife in Fields Landing Nyquist, Greg. (2013). Bay. Retrieved April 15, 2013 from http://www.north coastphotographer.net Figure 9. Socioeconomic statistics of Fields Landing based on 1999 and 2010 Census Data.

Crossland, N., Houston, K. Created April 28, 2013.

Figure 10. Historical Photographs of Fields Landing from the Humboldt State University Library Humboldt Room.

Keir, W. (Photographer). (unknown). Str. Prentiss Loading Lumber at South Bay [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 2, 2013 from http://library.humboldt.edu/ humco/holdings/photodetail.php

Figure 11. Historical Photographs of Fields Landing from the Humboldt State University Library Humboldt Room.

Kilburn, K. (Photographer). (unknown). Fields Landing, CA [Print Photo].

Retrieved May 2, 2013 from http://library.humboldt.edu/humco/holdings/ photodetail.php Figure 12. Historical Photographs of Fields Landing from the Humboldt State University Library Humboldt Room.

Kilburn, K. (Photographer). (unknown). Whaling [Print Photo]. Retrieved April 28, 2013 from http://library.humboldt.edu/humco/holdings/ photodetail.php Figure 13. . Historical Photographs of Fields Landing from the Humboldt State University Library Humboldt Room.

Erickson. (Photographer). (unknown). Fields Landing, Humboldt Co., California [Print Photo]. Retrieved April 22, 2013 from http://library. humboldt.edu/humco/holdings/photodetail.php Figure 14. . Historical Photographs of Fields Landing from the Humboldt State University Library Humboldt Room.

Kilburn, K. (Photographer). (unknown). Fields Landing, CA [Print Photo].

Retrieved April 22, 2013 from http://library.humboldt.edu/humco/holdings/ photodetail.php Figure 15. Resilient Communities defined.

CDM Smith. (Photographer). (2013). Creating Resilient Communities [Print Photo]. Retrieved April 28, 2013 from http://cdmsmith.com/en-US/Insights/ Creating-Resilient-Communities.aspx Figure 16. Project for Public Spaces diagram of amenities.

Project for Public Spaces. (Photographer). (2003). [Print Photo]. Retrieved April 28, 2013 from http://www.ci.brisbane.ca.us/community-visioningworkshops Figure 17. Dubai Open Space Concept Design.

Foster Partners. (Designer). (2010). Dubai Waterfront Park [Web Photo].

Retrieved April 28, 2013 from http://www.2daydubai.com/mina/portodubai_clip_image013_0000.jpg Figure18. Fields Landing Boat Ramp Interpretative Signs.

Houston, K. Taken February 7, 2013

Photo Credits Figure 19. . Fields Landing Boat Ramp Interpretative Signs.

Houston, K. Taken February 7, 2013 Figure 20. Kayak launches within Humboldt Bay. Paddling California. (2013). Retrieved March 23. 1013 from http://www. paddlingcalifornia.com/8humboldt_launch.html Figure 21. Recreation Opportunities within Humboldt County.

Shelter Cove and the Lost Coast. (2007). Humboldt County and Vicinity.

Retrieved April 02, 2013 from http://www.sheltercoveca.info/countyMap. html Figure 22. Recreational Vehicle.

KOA. (Photographer). (2012). KOA Home Away from Home [Print Photo].

Retrieved April 28, 2013 from http://koa.com/rv-sites/ Figure 23. Example of RV Park by Waterfront.

Cassowry Coast Alliance. (Photographer). (2012). RV Vacation [Print Photo]. Retrieved April 28, 2013 from http://www.cassowarycoastalliance. com/6/category/coastal planning/1.html Figure 24. Coastal Launches in Humboldt and Del Norte Counties.

Paddling California. (Photographer). (2012). [Print Photo]. Retrieved April 28, 2013 from http://www.paddlingcalifornia.com/8humboldt_launch.html Figure 25. Recreational Vehicle.

San Francisco RV Resort. (Photographer). (2011). On a 60ft Bluff Overlooking The Pacific Ocean! [Print Photo]. Retrieved from http://www. sanfranciscorvresort.com/ Figure 26. Recreation Vehicle Park Design Example from Coquette Point.

Cassowary Coast Alliance. (2013). Recreational Vehicle Park. Retrieved April 15, 2013 from http://www.cassowarycoastalliance.com/6/ar chives/08-2012/1.html Figure 27. Aquaculture Industry.

Nakabe, S. (Photographer). (2013). Shells [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 8, 2013 from http://work.s-nakaba.com/?month=201207

Figure 28. Aquaculture Industry.

Mammuth. (Photographer). (2007, January 12). Chionecancellata [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 12, 2013 from http://aqua-culture.blogspot. com/2007/01/chione-cancellata.html Figure 29. Aquaculture Industry.

Mammuth. (Photographer). (2007, January 12). Chionecancellata [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 8, 2013 from http://aqua-culture.blogspot. com/2007/01/chione-cancellata.html Figure 30. Aquaculture Industry.

Mammuth. (Photographer). (2007, January 12). Chionecancellata [Print Photo]. Retrieved April 29, 2013 from http://aqua-culture.blogspot. com/2007/01/chione-cancellata.html Figure 32. Aquaculture Facility.

NOAA. (Photographer). (2011, July 15). Aquaculture [Print Photo].

Retrieved April 16, 2013 from http://www.ipacuicultura.com Figure 33. Oyster beds.

Bourdos, S. (Photographer). The Oyster Parks [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 12, 2013 from http://www.fotopedia.com/items/flickr-2636399795 Figure 34. Gateway Initiative- Andrews, North Carolina.

Pueblo Management. (2013). Pedestrian walkway. Retrieved April 13, 2013 from www.pueblowarriors.org Figure 35. Current entrance to Fields Landing Waterfront.

Houston, Kara. Taken February 7, 2013 Figure 36. Example of Gateway Design.

Meek, E.T. (2013). Gateway Initiative / Andrews, North Carolina. Retrived April 15, 2013 From http://etm-architect.com/gateway.html Figure 37. Gateway Design.

Crossland, N. Created May 10, 2013.

Figure 38. Catch and Cook.

Department of Natural Resources.(2012, May 31). [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 8, 2013 from http://www.michigan.gov

Photo Credits Figure 39. Fresh Seafood.

This Little Piggy Went to the Farmer’s Market. (Photographer). (2011). Sum mer Beauties [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 6, 2013 from http://thislittlepig gywenttothefarmersmarket.com Figure 40. Oysters and Beer.

Olives and Mermaids and Wine, Oh My‌ (Photographer). (2012, Feburary 11). Farewell - Oysters and Sunsets and Beer, oh my... [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 8, 2013 from http://olivemermaids.blogspot.com Figure 41. Fishing from charter boat.

SA Boat and Fishing Show. (Photographer). (2013). [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 8, 2013 from http://www.saboatshow.com.au/ Figure 42. Greenway Designs.

New York Architects Project. (Photographer). South Waterfront Greenway [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 6, 2013 from http://www.newyork-architects. com Figure 43. Greenway Designs.

Cycling USA: New York City. (Photographer). Mr TT putting me through my paces. [Print Photo]. Retrieved May 6, 2013 from http://theclimbingcyclist. com Figure 44. Greenway Designs.

Rogue Valley Council of Governments. (Photographer). (2013). Rogue River Recreational Corridor and Greenway [Print Photo]. Retrieved April 31, 2013 from http://www.rvcog.org/mn.asp?pg=NR_Rogue_River_Gre enway Figure 45. Open space park design.

Calderon, S. Created on May 10, 2013 Figure 46. Open space park design.

Calderon, S. Created on May 10, 2013 Figure 47. Open space park design.

Calderon, S. Created on May 10, 2013

Figure 48. Open space park design.

Calderon, S. Created on May 10, 2013 Figure 49. Candlestick South Waterfront Trail San Francisco Greater Philadelphia Tourism Marketing Corporation. (2010, December).

Race Street Pier Park Philadephia [Web Graphic]. Retrieved May 13, 2013 from http://www.uwishunu.com Figure 50. Riverfront Park, Delaware concept design created by citizen participation.

Cohen. (Designer). (2009, May 29). Candlestick South Waterfront Trail [Web Photo].http://www.sfgate.com Figure 51. . Greenway and bike path built over sensitive wetlands.

Cerna, Martha. (2010). Biking the Salado Creek Greenway. Retrived March 28, 2013 from http://www.kens5.com/news/slideshows Figure 52. . Location of Contaminated Sites in Fields Landing.

California State Water Resources Control Board. (n.d.). GeoTracker.

Retrieved March 28, 2013, http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/ ?CMD=runreport&myaddress=Fields+Landing%2C+CA Figure 53. Example of Low Impact Development.

Siobhan. (2011) Introducing LIUDD. Lists, lessons and lovely things.

Retrieved April 15, 2013, from http://listlessonlove.wordpress. com/2011/12/08/introducing-liudd/ Figure 54. Example of Rain Garden.

Amsel, S. (2011) Rain garden poster. The Huletts Current — News & Opinion About Huletts Landing, N.Y. Retrieved April 15, 2013, from http:// blog.hulettsonlakegeorge.com/Pictures/rain_garden_poster_large.png Figure 55. Swales.

Aquascape Environmental. (2012). Rain Garden. Retrieved April 12, 2013 from http://www.aquascape.net/aquablog/rain-gardens-forattractive- effective-stormwater-management.html Figure 56. Permeable Pavement Example.

Sitephocus. (2010). [Permeable pavement]. Green Infrastructure Digest. Retrieved April 15, 2013, from http://hpigreen.files.wordpress. com/2010/05/highresdownload_highpoint-005.jpg

Photo Credits Figure 57. Swales.

Aquascape Environmental. (2012). Rain Garden. Retrieved April 12, 2013 from http://www.aquascape.net/aquablog/rain-gardens-for-attractiveeffective-stormwater-management.html Figure 58. Shoreline Design.

Tidal Hydrology. (Photographer). (2010). Shoreline sketch [Print Photo].

Retrieved May 6, 2013 from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/hy draulics/hydrology/hec25c7.cfm Figure 59. Shoreline Design.

BSG Rock. (Photographer). (2010). NAtural Stone Armor [Print Photo]. Re trieved April 12, 2013 from http://www.bsgrock.ca/natural/index.html Figure 60. King Tides at Fields Landing Boat Launch.

Humboldt BayKeeper. (2013). King Tides. April 12, 2013 Figure 61. King Tides at Fields Landing Boat Launch.

Humboldt BayKeeper. (2013). King Tides. April 12, 2013 Figure 62. King Tides at Fields Landing Boat Launch.

Humboldt BayKeeper. (2013). King Tides. April 12, 2013 Figure 63. King Tides at Fields Landing Boat Launch.

Humboldt BayKeeper. (2013). King Tides. April 12, 2013 Figure 64. King Tides at Fields Landing Boat Launch.

Humboldt BayKeeper. (2013). King Tides. April 12, 2013 Figure 65. Photograph of Humboldt Bay. Nyquist, Greg. (2013). Humboldt Bay. Retrieved April 15, 2013 from http:// www.northcoastphotographer.net

redwood coast placemakers- Humboldt State University