CITY DOCK #1 MARINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE

OPPORTUNITY SITE

VISIONING STUDY

Prepared for

The ANNENBERG FOUNDATION

and

The PORT OF LOS ANGELES

Southern California Marine Institute 820 S. Seaside Avenue

Terminal Island, CA 90731

James A. Fawcett, Ph.D. Sea Grant Program

Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies University of Southern California

March 19, 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface.............................................................................................................................. 3 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 4 Acknowledgements........................................................................................................... 6 Section 1: Introduction...................................................................................................... 7 Section 2: Southern California Marine Institute Project Definition .................................... 9 Section 3: Other Research Users at City Dock................................................................... 15 Section 4: Researcher-Defined Needs Assessment ............................................................ 21 Section 5: Stakeholder Analysis, Community Interest and

Potential Use of the Project ........................................................................ 31 Section 6: Design Analysis................................................................................................ 36 Section 7: Business Plan and Funding ............................................................................... 56 Section 8: Conclusions...................................................................................................... 64 Appendices Appendix 1: SCMI board of Directors............................................................................... 69 Appendix 2: SCMI Institutional Organization Chart.......................................................... 70 Appendix 3: SCMI Management Organization Chart ........................................................ 71 Appendix 4: Existing space inventory at the SCMI Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory.......... 72 Appendix 5: Estimate of space needs in a redeveloped marine laboratory, California State University, Ocean Studies Institute .......................................................... 74 Appendix 6: Estimate of space needs in a redeveloped marine laboratory, University of Southern California...................................................................................... 77 Appendix 7: Interviews and Presentations (Partial List)..................................................... 79 Appendix 8: Port of Los Angeles Brochure, Marine Research Institute Opportunity Site, 2008 ...................................................................................................... 82

3

PREFACE We are especially indebted to the Annenberg Foundation for support of this study. The trustees of the Foundation clearly understand that, of the great scientific and policy dilemmas facing our age, global climate change and the role of our marine environment in that process is of critical importance for the world. Understanding the dynamics of the complex interactions between the oceans and the atmosphere is an ongoing process for the academic research community. Moreover, the influence of climatic modification on marine food sources, hazards to coastal development, marine transportation and coastal populations is nowhere more profound than those areas of large concentrations of settlements such as the southern California coast. We sincerely appreciate the contribution that the Annenberg Foundation to this study, providing a firm baseline upon which to establish a comprehensive marine research facility in the Port of Los Angeles.

4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY University based marine research has a long history in the Port of Los Angeles; for almost one hundred years the University of Southern California has deployed marine research vessels from the port and has built and operated marine laboratories in Wilmington and Terminal Island. Similarly, the California State University, most notably through faculties at its Long Beach, Fullerton and Northridge campuses has a history of conducting research and marine operations from the Port. Mindful of this long history and renewed international interest in marine research to better cope with the challenges of global climate change, in 2007, the Port of Los Angeles has proposed to devote a section of its property to encourage development of a Marine Research and Development Park in San Pedro, near the harbor entrance and the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium. This “visioning study” compiles and organizes a diverse body of material from academic marine researchers at various campuses, community stakeholders, non-university educators, public officials and designers, into a single volume to envision the outlines of what has the potential to become a major center for marine research on the West Coast. At a site of potentially 28 acres, it is most likely that the complex will be developed in stages with multiple parties installing marine laboratories to create a multi-institutional marine science campus in Los Angeles Harbor. Two large transit shed warehouses currently exist on the west side of the site along the East Channel. While not suitable in their current state for occupancy as laboratories, classrooms and lecture halls, the buildings, remnants of a past history of breakbulk cargo movement in the port, could be adaptively reused and converted into laboratory buildings according to architects who have inspected them. Moreover, there is ample community support for retaining and reusing these existing buildings including providing space for public lectures and public involvement by K-12 students as well as the citizens of the harbor communities. Links currently exist between other marine science facilities in both Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors: the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium and the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach currently interact with researchers at the existing Southern California Marine Institute facility in Terminal Island and their continuing involvement in a new laboratory complex will enhance the public education role of a Marine Research and Development Park in San Pedro. Project costs are estimated at $25-$27 million to complete an initial lab meeting the needs of one of the current SCMI partners, the Ocean Sciences Institute, representing the interests of eight California State University campuses. Subsequent laboratories will vary in cost depending upon the facilities needed in each and this report depicts the ambitions of USC for a laboratory complementary to that articulated by the California State University. Occidental College, a partner of many years duration, will also retain facilities at the laboratory. Discussions are ongoing with the Southwest Fisheries Center, a major federal laboratory of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Brought to fruition, this could be a third major laboratory on the site. Similarly, recent discussions with the marine science faculty at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) indicate an interest from their campus in joining the SCMI consortium with the potential of developing another laboratory in the complex for that university. Discussions are continuing with the Los Angeles Community College District over their use of

5

the site as well and other universities, colleges and research-related marine businesses may also find a home at City Dock. Construction funding for this project will most likely be developed from extramural sources including federal grants for marine laboratory development, philanthropic funding from foundations committed to marine research, possibly through funds derived from bond issues supporting educational infrastructure, industry support from marine industries in the harbor area and at some point in the future, through appropriations from the State of California. Operational funds will be generated through funded research, university support, contract research performed at the labs and through student tuition. Advice from architects who have examined the facilities estimate that the first laboratory building could be occupied approximately two years after project initiation. When global climate change, air and water pollution, aquaculture, remote sensing, and tsunami research are embedded in the themes of faculty of our southern California universities and colleges, and they exist in a region with a long history of examining the relationship of a large urban concentration to the coastal ocean, it is wholly appropriate for the region to accommodate such an ambitious project as a new complex such as this. Moreover, since our local research community is tenaciously working on themes of food from the sea as well as the implications of global climate change, a laboratory optimized to facilitate that research is a critical regional need.

6

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The nature of this study has been to assess how a site in the Port of Los Angeles might best be used for research and development of science and technology concerning the marine environment. It is by its very nature a compilation of concepts shared with the author by many experts from a variety of disciplines. Without their willingness to share their insights and visions for the project, this study would not have been possible. At the Port of Los Angeles, Geraldine Knatz, Ph.D., Executive Director, Dave Mathewson, Director of Planning and Research has been a constant source of help and advice. Their colleagues in the Real Estate Division, Mike Galvin and Rica Viola provided much needed information on the City Dock site as well as giving various groups of academicians and designers access to the buildings at City Dock. Isaac Kos-Read in Government Affairs likewise provided valuable data on funding sources. Millard Lee, AIA and Young Kimm, AIA at Gin Wong Associates were generous with their time and ideas in sketching how a reconfigured site might look. Likewise, Brian Kite, AIA, Victor DeSantis, AIA, Enrique Cabello, AIA, Hraztan Zeitlian, AIA, and Dianne Lee at Leo A Daly have been equally generous with their time, ideas and advice and spent many hours with the author and SCMI administration in refining ideas for the project. Both of these firms deserve special thanks for their generous pro bono assistance on this project. The leadership of the San Pedro Chamber of Commerce, especially Herb Zimmer, Camilla Townsend and John Ek gave us the opportunity to present our ideas and hear comments from their Economic Development Committee. Joe Galvin, President of the Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council shared his insights with us about jobs and the value of marine science education. His counterpart, Dan Dixon of the Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council was similarly helpful. Jack Babbitt of the Wilmington Neighborhood Council shared his ideas and also invited us to make a presentation to the full council. Peter Warren and Dean Pentcheff invited us to make our presentation to the Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council who shared their ideas with us. We enjoyed the community interaction and have incorporated many of their good ideas into this report. Our marine science colleagues were especially generous with their time and ideas. Especially helpful were Dr. Rick Pieper, then director of SCMI, who joined in many of the community interviews and offered many of his own insights. Dr. Larry Allen, acting director of SCMI and the entire SCMI board of directors have carried on in Rick’s footsteps and I appreciate their help immensely, especially Professors Laura Kingsford, Dan Pondella and Steve Murray. Almost 40 colleagues at USC shared ideas and aspirations for a new laboratory facility. Professors Doug Capone, Dennis Hedgecock, Dave Caron, Dave Hutchins, Jim Moffett, Sergio Sanudo-Wilhelmy, Donal Manahan and Michael Quick gave ongoing advice and feedback in writing about their scientific work. Again, they were enthusiastic in their suggestions and help and essential in providing the science foundation for this report. These and many unnamed individuals who have provided information and advice about the potential of the City Dock site deserve thanks for their willingness to help in this endeavor.

7

Section 1

INTRODUCTION This study reports on a proposal by the Port of Los Angeles to dedicate approximately 28 acres of warehouses and land near the intersection of 22nd Street and Signal Way in San Pedro to marine research uses and known as the City Dock #1 site (in the following pages, City Dock). In early 2008, the port designated the site a Marine Research Institute Opportunity Site and published a brochure (see Appendix 8) outlining the location and extent of the site as well as expressing the willingness of the port to use the site for other than cargo movement uses. Subsequent to the designation of the site, the Annenberg Foundation offered to fund a “visioning study” for the site, if matched by funds from the port. The document you hold is that study and is the result of almost 18 months of work (including pre-funding research) to determine how best to utilize the site for the purposes of marine research. The study has four objectives: 1) an exploration of the actual research needs that could be met with a research facility at City Dock based on interviews with the research community both regionally and nationally; 2) a stakeholder analysis based on interviews with representatives of stakeholder groups including business, neighborhood councils, education and civic groups; 3) a preliminary design analysis based on inspection of the site and architectural sketches of both the site and the existing structures; and 4) an analysis of the funding necessary to bring the project to fruition. Responsibility for the preparation of the report was assigned to the Southern California Marine Institute (SCMI), a not-for-profit consortium that operates the existing marine laboratory at Fish Harbor on Terminal Island. SCMI is a partnership of ten university entities that joined in 1994 to operate the existing Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory, built by the University of Southern California in the early 1980’s. The ten universities now partnering in SCMI include eight campuses of the California State University: Northridge, Long Beach, Fullerton, Los Angeles, Dominguez Hills, San Marcos, San Bernardino, and California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. Joining them are the University of Southern California and Occidental College. This is a visioning study, assessing how a laboratory facility and marine research businesses at City Dock might be developed. It has been developed primarily by interviewing a wide variety of interested parties: marine researchers, elected community leaders, business leaders, educators, educational administrators and the public. These groups were asked, “If a marine laboratory were to be located at the City Dock site, how could it improve your work or the quality of your community’s life?” We queried each group based on the unique needs of that group using in-depth interviews. This report is an aggregation of ideas, suggestions and needs brought forward by the various groups interviewed and delineates the ways in which the marine research complex could best serve the needs of the entire region. A caveat to the reader: this report presents a vision of how the City Dock site might be used. While a great deal of thought and effort has been devoted to this study, nevertheless, the results are not determinative of every possible use to which the site might be put. Moreover, the

8

estimated project costs will control the speed at which any facilities will be constructed at City Dock. Nevertheless, this report makes every effort to explore the most viable uses for the site consistent with both community needs and the needs of the marine research community. The report is divided into eight substantive parts with this short introduction as Section 1. The second section discusses the background of the existing SCMI laboratory and explores how its research function would be enhanced in an expanded facility. Section 2 also provides a description of the existing facilities at SCMI that would be relocated and expanded at City Dock. However, the site has the potential to house more than SCMI and thus a third section will discuss the potential for the balance of the site beyond the SCMI relocation. The fourth section will present the results of many hours of interviews, meetings and discussion over the research needs of a new and expanded laboratory complex. In the fifth section, we will present the results of the stakeholder analysis and conclusions drawn from those discussions from the community. Design is the focus of the sixth section including drawings and an explanation of the preliminary ideas of the designers who have looked at the site. In section seven we will discuss funding for such a substantial project, including an assessment of a role for the private sector on the site. Finally, the eighth section will contain our conclusions based on 18 months of study.

9

Section 2

SCMI PROJECT DEFINITION The Southern California Marine Institute (SCMI) In 1993 after many years of operating its own marine laboratory in the Port of Los Angeles and after sharing facilities at its laboratory in Fish Harbor, the University of Southern California sought to expand the ownership of that laboratory to include the de facto partners from Occidental College and campuses of the California State University. Largely through the efforts of Lon McClanahan, the acting director of the Ocean Studies Institute at the California State University, negotiations began with USC and evolved into the California not-for-profit corporation, the Southern California Marine Institute. As Dr. Richard Pieper describes the events:

The beginnings of SCMI officially started in May 1993 with Lon McClanahan, then Acting Director of the California State University’s (CSU’s) Ocean Studies Institute (OSI), proposing the creation of a Regional Laboratory at Fish Harbor to the Board of Governors of OSI. Lon saw the potential for maximizing resources, and recognized that OSI’s budget had been dealing with consistent cuts since 1989; the early 1990’s were a tough economic time. At the same time, the University of Southern California (USC) was terminating some of the operations at the Fish Harbor facility, and Don Newman, then Manager of USC’s Marine Support Facility, was looking for additional use of the laboratory. Concurrently, faculty members at USC were strongly lobbying for the continuation of marine science facilities and operations at Fish Harbor.

Thus, the three partner institutions that had shared the laboratory for a number of years became de jure partners in the new organization, SCMI. The charter of the new institute specified a board of seven to eleven directors representing the shared interests in the laboratory including members from each of the participating institutions: Occidental College, the California State University and USC. It is important to note that the essence of SCMI is its organization, not the laboratory that it currently operates. SCMI is a not-for-profit California corporation and, as such, represents the interests of its partners and the public but its fundamental role is to act as a consortium whether that involves operating facilities or acting on behalf of its members and the public in other ways. In the discussion that follows, we will refer to the SCMI laboratory, but in a new marine research park, SCMI may have other responsibilities as well. SCMI currently operates a laboratory on behalf of all its members, however in a new marine research park, its role may shift to that of an overall facility manager of laboratories built and operated by a variety of marine research institutions. Looking back, USC’s marine research operation has had a presence in the Port of Los Angeles since the early parts of the 20th Century with a series of research vessels sponsored by Captain Allan Hancock. The last of these was the R/V Velero IV, a purpose-built ship that came off the drawing board in 1948 and continued to be a valuable part of the USC research fleet until the

10

1990’s. The laboratory and facilities supporting R/V Velero IV were for many years located at in a large transit shed warehouse at Berth 185 in Wilmington at the foot of Avalon Boulevard, a site now occupied by the Banning’s Landing Community Center, completed in 1998 and built by the Los Angeles Harbor Department. For many years as well, the USC Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory and its predecessor in Wilmington have also served as support bases for the Philip K. Wrigley Marine Science Center, USC’s offshore temperate water marine research laboratory at Big Fisherman’s Cove on Santa Catalina Island, approximately 25 miles offshore. The mainland support base continues to be essential to maintaining research operations on Santa Catalina Island. The support base provides mission-critical support for vessels, laboratory supplies, personnel and students transiting to/from the laboratory. However, USC was only one partner in marine research in southern California. Occidental College had for a number of years used the USC marine laboratories at Berth 185 and Fish Harbor as a staging base and homeport for their research vessel, R/V Vantuna. The labs supported both maintenance and operations of the vessels. Similarly, the California State University Ocean Studies Institute home ported various of their research vessels including R/V Nautilus at both facilities and also used both as a support base for the vessel as well as a lab site. Historically, while USC had been the original lessee from the Port of Los Angeles, both of these laboratories, in Wilmington and then Terminal Island, have provided important support, both technical and scientific, to the California State University campuses and Occidental College. In that respect, SCMI represents an important continuation of those historical relationships. The Proposal to Move the SCMI Laboratory to City Dock The impetus for moving SCMI came about as a result of the Port of Los Angeles’s desire to develop a land use plan for Terminal Island that would optimize cargo handling; the SCMI facility would be in the path of future development at its existing location. Simultaneously, the port had developed another plan for the San Pedro waterfront that would de-industrialize it, remove cargo and heavy rail operations leaving vacant warehouses owned by the port. Recognizing that academic marine research facilities represented a land use compatible with the plans for the waterfront, discussions began in 2007 between the port and Dr. Richard Pieper, Executive Director of SCMI. Following preliminary discussions, Dr. Pieper introduced Dr. Knatz, the port’s executive director to Dr. Tony Michaels, President of SCMI and Director of USC’s Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies. Those discussions inspired a short white paper written in August 2007, Prospectus for a Marine Laboratory and R&D Center in the Port of Los Angeles, by Dr. Michaels. With that as background, the port staff worked with the San Pedro Chamber of Commerce to develop the Marine Research Opportunity Site brochure, published by the port (included in this study at Appendix 8). This Visioning Study evolved from a meeting where Dr. Knatz appeared at a Women in Philanthropy gathering at the offices of the Annenberg Foundation and mentioned the concept of the relocated and expanded marine research facilities on the San Pedro waterfront. The concept intrigued Mrs. Annenberg and discussions ensued about further refining the definition of the

11

project with the support of the Annenberg Foundation. This study is, thus, a result of those discussions and the generous support of the Foundation, with joint funding from the port. The intersection of interests between the port and SCMI coincided in a proposal to utilize transit shed warehouses at Berths 57-58-59-60 and the site of the Westway chemical terminal at Berths 70-71 as an “opportunity site” at which to consider relocating and expanding marine research facilities in the harbor. The Port of Los Angeles has subsequently taken over the Westway site to dismantle the terminal and remedy any site contamination from its former use, making the site suitable for alternate uses once site clean up is completed. In the summer of 2007, the Cal State Ocean Sciences Institute met at California State University, Long Beach to discuss the proposal from the port. Dr. Pieper and Dr. Fawcett made presentations and the consensus of the OSI meeting was that there should be a workshop of OSI representatives from the eight campuses to determine the type and magnitude of facilities that would be optimal in a newly designed SCMI facility. With assistance from one of their psychology faculty members with a specialty in group dynamics and negotiation, the OSI group met in the fall of 2007 to discuss their needs. The section of this report entitled Needs Assessment presents the result of that meeting. A concurrent dispute with the US Coast Guard over uses of research vessels for undergraduate students further drew the attention of the campus representatives of OSI to their common interests in the port. By the fall of 2007, and with the leadership of Dr. Larry Allen (Cal State Northridge), Dr. Steve Murray (Cal State Fullerton), Dr. Laura Kingsford (Cal State Long Beach) and others, the ambition of the California State University for new marine laboratory facilities came into clearer focus. OSI felt that it was appropriate for the Cal State campuses to express their own needs for facilities at a new lab independent of the needs of either USC or Occidental College. A number of factors influenced that decision: the Cal State student population is considerably larger than that at USC or Occidental College, the focus of research at these universities differs and certainly the funding mechanism for facilities is vastly different between public and private institutions. For that reason, the OSI felt that they needed to think of the project in their own terms rather than jointly with the other institutions. A consolidated statement of their facilities interests in a Cal State University laboratory is found in Appendix 5. USC chose a somewhat different path to determining research needs: with funding for this study in place, the author has systematically interviewed as many as possible of the faculty who currently have marine interests and for whom laboratory space in Los Angles Harbor would facilitate their research. The list includes faculty members in the departments of marine environmental biology, earth sciences, civil and environmental engineering, aerospace and mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, systems and industrial engineering and the school of policy, planning and development. The focus of these in-depth interviews has been to identify not only interest in facilities in Los Angeles Harbor but also the level of need and the likelihood that, were facilities to be constructed, the researchers would have an ongoing need for use at City Dock. Initial Needs Assessment

12

Evolving out of those discussions with researchers from all the participating universities were common concerns about deficiencies and limitations at the SCMI Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory:

The lab lacks adequate facilities for teaching the increasing numbers of students interested in marine science at all participating institutions

If additional students could be accommodated, existing laboratory space is inadequate to support those students as well as ongoing faculty research

The lab lacks adequate space for storage of research equipment The lab lacks adequate space to conduct a wide variety of research that demands

circulating seawater (although there is circulating seawater, lab space is deficient) The dock space is capable of supporting only a few relatively small research vessels The lab lacks the ability to accommodate many marine research vessels in the UNOLS

(University National Oceanographic Research System)1 fleet for pre- and post-staging of research cruises

There is no room for growth at the current SCMI site

Description of Existing Facilities The SCMI Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory occupies 57,350 square feet (1.32 acres) of space at 820 South Seaside Avenue in the Terminal Island District of the Port of Los Angeles. Landside access is accomplished from the west via the Vincent Thomas Bridge from San Pedro or from the east by the Gerald Desmond Bridge from Long Beach. From the water, vessels can gain access from the south through the Fish Harbor entrance between Berth 301 and the Los Angeles Fire Department Station 111 housing POLA Fire Boat #1. Water depth in inner Fish Harbor is generally 18-20 feet. The laboratory building was constructed in 1983 by USC and contains offices, laboratories, a circulating seawater system, machine shop, warehouse and outside storage for equipment as well as staging for equipment. The site is divided into two parcels separated by a building operated

1 The University-National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) is an organization of 61 academic institutions and National Laboratories involved in oceanographic research and joined for the purpose of coordinating oceanographic ships' schedules and research facilities. The original UNOLS Charter was written in 1972 and most recently revised in 2004. As of May 1, 2000, the office for UNOLS is located at Moss Landing Marine Laboratories in Moss Landing, California. The US Navy or the National Science Foundation own the vast majority of these vessels with a few owned by academic institutions. The National Science Foundation most commonly funds research cruises but other organizations such as the US Navy also provide research cruise funding. One of the primary functions of UNOLS is to ensure the efficient scheduling of scientific cruises aboard the 22 research vessels located at 17 operating institutions in the UNOLS organization. Both current and future schedules for these ships are available through the UNOLS scheduling link. Ten of these vessels are homeported on the West Coast including one in Hawaii; they range in size from 279 feet (85 meters) to 66 feet (20 meters) in length.

13

by the Port of Los Angeles for their port police operations. The northern site of 0.45 acres contains the labs and offices as well as parking for lab and office employees and guests. The southern site of 0.61 acres contains the shops, warehouse and staging area. In addition, there is a 0.26 acre site on the west side of Seaside Avenue used both for small boat storage and as an automobile parking lot. See figure 1 below for an aerial view of the existing facilities.

FIGURE 1 SCMI Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory

The laboratory/office building is of wood frame construction on a concrete slab foundation. Both the machine shop and warehouse are steel frame buildings with corrugated steel siding of the “Butler® building” type. Materials not secured under cover are stored in both the south parcel and the west parcel (shown on the above photograph). The site also accommodates twenty-foot intermodal cargo containers that have been retired from cargo handling and that researchers have converted into storage for marine research equipment and instruments. The containers measure 8’x8’x20’, are weatherproof and are stored on the site by various researchers from the participating institutions.

Appendix 4 presents the current configuration of the SCMI laboratory and support facilities. Floating docks constitute most of the dock space noted above and similar docks would be required at the City Dock site. The boat donation program is noted mainly to indicate that there has been a need for transient boat docking space for those vessels donated to SCMI and that are awaiting sale but space requirements for these vessels is widely variable depending upon the number of boats in the inventory at any one time.

14

Property Ownership The Southern California Marine Institute subleases the property at Berth 260 from the Port of Los Angeles under Permit 398. The original lease for the site in 1983 was made to the University of Southern California, but upon formation of the Southern California Marine Institute the lease was assigned from USC to the new SCMI. At its March 24, 1995 meeting, the Board of Harbor Commissioners approved the assignment of Permit 398. Organizational Structure SCMI as an organization has three primary partners: the Ocean Studies Institute of the California State University representing eight California State University campuses in southern California; the University of Southern California, a private university; and Occidental College, also a private college (see Appendix 2). Since its formation in the early 1990s the California State University through its Ocean Studies Institute (OSI) has taken a leadership role in lab management at SCMI and has been instrumental in articulating the interests of researchers at its eight member campuses. Dr. Steven Murray, Dean of Natural Sciences at California State University, Fullerton and Dr. Laura Kingsford, Dean of Natural Sciences and Mathematics at California State University, Long Beach have taken lead roles in this regard. Dr. Chris Lowe, Professor of Biology, California State University, Long Beach and Chair of the Executive Committee of OSI now joins them on the SCMI board. Similarly, Dr. Dan Pondella, the Director of the Vantuna Research Group at Occidental College, represents the interests of his faculty. USC also has an important role in the SCMI organization both because of its long history in marine science, its very active marine science faculty but also because the lab in Fish Harbor remains critical to the operation of USC’s Philip K. Wrigley Marine Science Center on Catalina Island. Dr. Donal Manahan, director of USC’s Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies sits as one of the USC representatives on the SCMI board. The other USC seat on the board represents non-Wrigley marine research interests from USC faculty through Dr. Douglas Hammond of the Department of Earth Sciences. Appendix 1 lists the entire membership of the SCMI board. SCMI as the Project Representative As a consortium of users, SCMI is the logical entity with which the Port of Los Angeles should negotiate the implementation of a development plan for laboratory and teaching space at the City Dock site. It is important that the negotiating entity adequately represent the interests of all, or nearly all, of the potential users of such a large site and SCMI is that entity. Moreover, a single entity provides the port with a single point of contact as the development process proceeds. Currently representing ten universities with at least one additional university considering membership in the institute, SCMI has already established an organizational structure to meet the needs of its members. Moreover, the institute has operated effectively for thirteen years both as a tenant of the Port of Los Angeles and as a stable representative of the varied interests of its members. There is every reason to believe that its past success, history both in the university community and among commercial users of its facilities will continue into the future. It is also clear that there is no better alternative to this existing organization, having substantial experience, knowledge of the environment and reputation both in the port and in the eyes of its constituent institutions.

15

Section 3

OTHER RESEARCH USERS AT CITY DOCK The brochure published by the Port of Los Angeles in 2007, Marine Research Institute Opportunity Site, envisions a complex of marine research institutions co-located along Signal Street in the vicinity of Berths 57-58-59-60 on the west side of Signal Street and Berths 70-71 on the east side of the street along the port’s main channel. Section 2 of this study has focused on the existing joint-use laboratory operated by SCMI and its possible relocation. Because it is currently the active marine laboratory in the port, it would likely be the first tenant at the City Dock site. Nevertheless, SCMI is only one of a handful of potential labs that could efficiently utilize the space at City Dock. The entire City Dock site as depicted in the port’s brochure shows the aggregate space as 28 acres, a generous tract of space far in excess of the needs of the SCMI lab alone. It is therefore important to conceptualize other uses/users that might effectively utilize this peninsula of land that provides water access on both its east and west flanks. This section will address other potential users of the City Dock site and the rationale for their co-location.

For the past 40 years at least, marine researchers in the Los Angeles region have studied the impact of urbanization on the marine environment and the reciprocal impact of the Pacific Ocean on the southern California coastline. Marine and atmospheric sciences, because they study fluids, inevitably face the “contamination” of their study areas by forces and factors outside of their control. In fact, however, this is what makes their work so important: studying how forces of nature and mankind interact with one another. Especially important in this large urban complex of more than ten million people, is the close relationship that coastal residents and the coastal ocean share. A wide variety of universities and colleges in the region historically and currently study these phenomena including Loyola Marymount University, Occidental College, UCLA, USC, Cal Tech, many of the California State University campuses, including those at Long Beach, Fullerton, Northridge, Los Angeles, Cal Poly Pomona, Dominguez Hills, San Bernardino, San Marcos, UC Irvine, community colleges including Los Angeles Harbor College, Santa Monica College and many more. Yet, among all these institutions of higher learning, there are very few laboratories located on the coast that would permit either large-scale marine laboratory science or ready access to the marine environment for exploration and study. Unlike research facilities 125 miles south at Scripps Institution of Oceanography or the California State University research complex at Moss Landing Marine Laboratory in the Monterey area2, Los Angeles has no comparable marine research complex and yet the interactions of science and such a large concentration of population is characteristic of the environmental challenges of the modern world.

2 The Moss Landing Marine Laboratory is a collaborative facility similar to SCMI but is supported by seven California State University campuses. Constituent laboratories include those specializing in biological, chemical, geological, and physical oceanography; vertebrate ecology; ichthyology; invertebrate zoology; phycology; benthic ecology; ecomorphology; fisheries and conservation biology. The lab has a staff of approximately 125 and hosts students from throughout the California State University system.

16

At least four institutions are potential tenants for the City Dock site but the site has the potential to host others. Discussions over use of the City Dock site have already been undertaken with each of the four. They include: the Southern California Marine Institute (SCMI), the University of Southern California (USC), Occidental College and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). SCMI Over the years, there has been a tendency to think of SCMI as if it were merely the lab and vessels at Fish Harbor. More accurately, SCMI is really the organization that supports a joint-use lab there. When conceptualizing the use of the City Dock site, and considering the differing needs of each institutional partner in SCMI, the organization’s role will most likely evolve into managing the entire site and supporting laboratories that are built to the unique specifications of the various university, government and private users. Also, since the building requirements of the California State University are more stringent than those for private institutions, an initial laboratory building—even if many participating institutions share it—should be constructed and configured to the needs of the California State University. In that scenario, all of the existing facilities at the current SCMI Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory could be moved and accommodated and existing users would continue to be supported by the facility. Eventually, as other institutions develop their own unique plans, those institutions can evolve out of the original laboratory into additional purpose-built facilities. SCMI’s organizational role will evolve as the suite of laboratories at City Dock expands. Regardless of longer-term plans, SCMI as an organization will support the full range of activities now underway at Fish Harbor in a new facility at City Dock. Included will be the need for a facility accommodating the existing lab, machine shop, warehouse and supporting facilities. One of the more important of those is the docking facility required for the fleet of vessels now docked at Fish Harbor. Table 1 describes the current boat slip needs at the existing facility.

TABLE 1 Vessel Docking Requirements at SCMI

Slip Capacity Description

80 feet R/V Yellowfin 80 feet R/V Sea Watch (or replacement) 80 feet R/V Sea World (or replacement) 60 feet M/V Blacksilver 50 feet M/V Zephyrs 40 feet M/V Harmony 30 feet M/V Midshipman 30 feet M/V Vibrio 100 feet Small boat ties for boats 15’ to 28’ Unknown Slips to accommodate vessels donated to SCMI or the

partner universities

17

These vessels can be accommodated on floating docks and the docks can be configured as necessary to fit the available waterfront. In addition to floating docks, however, the users of the facility will need dockside space along the wharf of at least 600 feet to support one or more research vessel from the University National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) fleet (discussed elsewhere in this report). These vessels support offshore marine research by a variety of researchers at the partner universities and the dockside loading/unloading capability is a major attraction of this location. The UNOLS fleet includes vessels of up to 275 feet in length and the facility will need to have the capacity to host more than one of these at a time. It is also conceivable that a private research vessel could call at the laboratory and will need ample alongside space. In each case, the vessels will be loaded/unloaded by dockside cranes and other heavy equipment from the wharf such that ample space should be reserved at the wharf for these users. The California State University SCMI has been under the operational umbrella of the California State University since its founding in the early 1990s. Thus, when considering how to utilize an expanded space for the facility, the combined faculties of the eight Cal State Universities, under their scientific consortium, the Ocean Sciences Institute (OSI), met in 2007 to collaborate with one another and define their vision for a new laboratory. As contained in this study, the articulation of space needs at a new facility is the result of their deliberations and mutual compromises. (See Appendix 5). The needs of the Cal State Universities are different in type than the needs of scientists at USC and Occidental College, differences that are reflected in Appendices 5 and 6 and will likely call for more than one laboratory at the City Dock site to meet their diverse needs. Furthermore, the construction requirements of the California State University are set out in the California Education Code, standards that do not apply with similar rigor to private universities, suggesting that separate laboratory facilities may be desirable. NOAA The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration hosts a large team of marine scientists in the federal building in Long Beach. The limitations of a landside site for marine researchers is clear and in discussions with the senior management of the NOAA facility, there is interest in relocating their facilities to a waterside location. Such a site would provide the opportunity for NOAA research vessels3 to moor at or near the laboratory, it would similarly provide a site for mooring small NOAA vessels as well as supporting the multi-dimensional needs of an agency that is involved in fisheries, maritime charting, pollution studies and management, atmospheric research and coastal engineering. The NOAA Southwest Fisheries Office of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) currently hosts a staff of about 120 and is likely to expand in the future. They estimate that an office/lab building of 25-30 ksf will be required to support current

3 The current NOAA vessel, NOAA David Starr Jordan, is 171 feet in length overall and displaces 993 tons. While homeported in San Diego, the Jordan is the NOAA vessel most likely to call at a NOAA lab located at the City Dock site. The Jordan is scheduled for replacement but its successor is believed to be about the size of a US Coast Guard medium endurance cutter at 210 feet and 1000 tons or 270 feet and 1825 tons.

18

and anticipated staff. This is a staff commensurate in size with the Moss Landing Marine Laboratory in Monterey, California and other coastal marine laboratories. The benefits of the City Dock site for NOAA are many; not least of which is the opportunity to conveniently collaborate with researchers at southern California universities, researchers with whom the NOAA NMFS staff already maintains relationships, but at a geographic distance. Public outreach at the City Dock site will also provide NOAA the capability of interacting with individuals in the fishing industry, many of whom have facilities in San Pedro and especially with the public as well as K-12 students through programs such as the NOAA-sponsored Sea Grant program at the University of Southern California. Discussions are continuing with NOAA NMFS regarding the City Dock site. A decision to site a lab at City Dock will require the support of the NOAA leadership and congressional support but with the interest of the NOAA staff, the unique qualities of the City Dock site and the opportunities for collaboration with fellow fisheries researchers and the public, this is an unprecedented opportunity for the agency to develop a permanent waterside location as a part of the City Dock Marine Research and Development Park. California Department of Fish & Game The California Department of Fish & Game (DF&G) has moored their research vessel, the R/V Mako and occupies a landside office adjacent to the City Dock site at Berth 56. The DF&G anticipates discontinuing boat operations at the site in the next few months and may need an alternate site from which to stage research on an as needed basis using other vessels at their disposal. Both the statewide and regional facilities managers for DF&G are interested in utilizing the resources of City Dock as proposed as well as using docking and support facilities for research vessels that they use. Additionally, the meeting rooms, offices and opportunity for involvement with fellow marine researchers are a major incentive to the DF&G staff. SCMI remains in the exploratory stages of joint operations with DF&G. USC While USC is a partner in SCMI, it has interests in space beyond those currently expressed in its current arrangements at SCMI. As described below in greater detail (See Appendix 6), USC researchers have an interest in expanding considerably beyond even the space that is available in the transit shed at Berth 57. The metazoan group envisions an aquaculture facility of considerable size, the coastal engineering group envisions installing a major wave tank and control facility at the site, the mesocosm group seeks space for their tank experiments as well as specialized laboratory facilities for the geochemists and biogeochemists. The robotics and remote sensing group is eager to have a waterside location to house an expanded fleet of autonomous remote sensing vehicles and the entire seagoing component of this major marine science faculty seeks reliable alongside space, and support equipment for University National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) research vessels, thirteen vessels of which exceed 150 feet in length. That is a critical need for researchers and the vessels in that fleet do not currently call at our local seaports.

19

USC continues to have a need for facilities that can support the vessels serving the USC Philip K. Wrigley Marine Laboratory on Santa Catalina Island as well as the boat support staff that can maintain and operate these vessels. That will continue to be a role of the SCMI facility. However, the university also has an interest in facilities that exceed those envisioned solely by an expansion of the Southern California Marine Institute. UCLA Researchers at UCLA, recognizing that their convenient, yet inadequate facilities in Marina del Rey are too small and not suited to the type of marine research that they could undertake, have now discussed collaboration with the leadership of SCMI. Bringing a UCLA facility to City Dock would be a further evolution of the multi-institutional nature of the site. Similar to NOAA, USC and Occidental, UCLA has a need for a marine support facility for its boat, shoreside support for its researchers and potentially a laboratory site adjacent. While UCLA researchers have used the Fish Harbor laboratory in the past and collaborate with researchers at the other SCMI institutions, their recent expressed interest in joining the consortium brings further credence to the value of a joint-use facility in Los Angeles Harbor. Other potential educational users These five institutions all have an interest in use of the City Dock site but they are by no means the only institutions in the region that could benefit and, indeed, need to be located at a waterfront site. The California Institute of Technology has owned a small marine lab, the Kerckhoff Marine Lab, in Corona del Mar in Orange County since 1929 but might also benefit from co-locating some of its operations at a more convenient site such as City Dock. Since City Dock is directly south of Pasadena on the Harbor Freeway, access to the facility is far easier than at the Corona del Mar site in Orange County. The Los Angeles Community College District, especially Los Angeles Harbor College, nearby in Wilmington, has expressed a similar interest in using facilities at City Dock, perhaps both for teaching marine science as well as training marine technicians. Likewise, discussions with the Port of Los Angeles Charter High School have revealed that they, too, would benefit from using labs at City Dock for marine science classes. SCMI currently has cooperative relationships with the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium in San Pedro and the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach as well and the director of the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium is an advisor to the management of SCMI. In addition to these institutional users, in extensive conversations with neighborhood councils in both San Pedro and Wilmington, members expressed enthusiasm for public use of facilities at City Dock, notably lecture halls, for discussions of marine issues with the scientists at the laboratory in what was envisioned as an ongoing effort to connect the community to the science at the facility through perhaps lecture series on current marine science issues, much as is currently achieved by the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach. Clearly there are many potential institutional and non-institutional users for such a facility. Business Park/Incubator at City Dock In considering a vision for City Dock, we have interviewed potential with businesses as well as academic scientists. For established marine businesses, the site offers potential but conversations

20

with business leaders did not generate much interest, mainly because of the cost of converting the existing transit sheds into other than warehouse uses. There was some interest in perhaps inexpensive purpose-built structures on the former Westway chemical terminal site and some vague interest in use of Warehouse 1 but interest was lukewarm mainly because of the expectation on the part of these business leaders that the conversion costs at the transit sheds would be capitalized into the operating costs at that location and the rents would not be economically viable for incubator businesses unless the covered warehouses could be used “as is.” On the other hand, the economic development committee of the San Pedro Chamber of Commerce was enthusiastic about the potential of City Dock to provide space to new high-tech businesses that might emerge over the next few years. Already zero-emission trucks are being manufactured in the harbor area and they believe that the trucks are only the leading edge of other innovative and “green” businesses that will evolve. While the City Dock site will not be suitable for truck production, it will be able to provide space for those incubator businesses that are water dependent and could benefit from being located in proximity to academic marine research facilities. Included would be businesses needing to be located in proximity to a dock for ship operations or require flow-through seawater, for example. For that reason, we have designated space at City Dock for “business park/incubator” use and distributed it between a portion of the existing transit sheds, the former Westway site and Warehouse 1. The site has the potential to create employment in new technologies in the harbor area, including both research and development and employment training in these emerging technologies. Thus, while the prospects for business incubator use of the site are not as clearly defined as the scientific uses of the site, we expect that there will be demand for use as the laboratories become operational and the findings of their research become more widely publicized.

21

Section 4

RESEARCHER-DEFINED NEEDS ASSESSMENT Emerging themes in marine and atmospheric research Scientific interest in global climate change and its related phenomena (air and water pollution, ocean acidification, sea level rise, changing and declining fishery resources, harmful algal blooms, tsunami prediction, among others) as well as scientific studies directed at monitoring and developing mitigation strategies for these changes are a major focus of university marine researchers in southern California, especially in the Los Angeles basin. All of the institutions that are a part of SCMI engage these themes to one extent or another utilizing the facilities of the current SCMI campus. Moreover, this type of research is currently underway at other southern California universities including UCLA, the California Institute of Technology, the various California State University campuses and to some extent in private industry. Unfortunately, the demands of the research, the urgency of the problems on regional, national and global scales as well as the limitations of the current SCMI Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory—the only marine lab in Los Angeles Harbor—hinder advancement in many of these fields and limit research to the home campuses where direct ocean access is not possible. The urgency of learning how to anticipate the consequences of global climate change requires a large waterside facility capable of meeting the needs of sophisticated research now being conducted at these institutions. The City Dock site can provide that opportunity both in terms of covered space but also with ample waterside access. These themes, however, are not merely local or regional research themes. Every marine laboratory responds to its local environment and both the SCMI’s Fish Harbor Marine Lab and a new lab complex at City Dock are not unique in that respect. USC’s offshore Catalina Marine Science Center is itself in a uniquely pristine, temperate water location and the research conducted there utilizes that unique environment. Nevertheless, the urban context of the Port of Los Angeles provides a fascinating laboratory setting to explore, understand and solve some of the most vexing environmental problems facing mankind today. Perhaps a few examples will serve to demonstrate the importance of the research currently underway but that would be enhanced by relocation and expansion at the City Dock site. As fishery resources are being depleted, we are likely to become more dependent upon farm-raised seafood. Our local universities have experts in propagation of seafood including geneticists, cultural experts, disease and feeding experts. But, this type of research relies upon vast amounts of space to test theories of fish and mollusk culture in a setting that is larger than can be maintained in a campus laboratory. This research is critical to enhancing mankind’s food supply from the sea without depleting the remaining fish stocks there. Yet, without adequate space, the work on our campuses is constrained by space. Understanding pollution in the sea, especially the sea adjacent to urban areas, often requires controlled (and contained) samples of seawater that can be contaminated precisely to depict pollution effects in the ocean but that are too large to house in a campus lab. A marine lab at the waterfront allows this work to proceed such that the pollution effects can be studied, perhaps

22

remedied and we can learn how to ameliorate or prevent the effects of pollution in our coastal waters. One of the challenges in understanding the ocean is to study it robotically. Researchers in southern California are at the forefront of this work. However, their robots are large and require both maintenance and repair as they are recovered and perhaps modified before being sent on the next mission. Storing, maintaining, launching and recovery of these large robots is all the more cumbersome when they cannot be stored at the waterside. Facilities such as City Dock will provide not only these capabilities but also potential interaction with private firms developing new sensors for these unique devices as well as the capability to grow the fleet of robots studying our coastal ocean. In some ways this phenomenon is similar to the aerospace industry developing sensors for space satellites. A few other ports in the nation have been heavily instrumented both to facilitate shipping but also for security and protection of facilities from anthropogenic damage. Our universities, especially USC, are worldwide leaders in remote sensing and communications technology. With a laboratory facility at the harbor, the university has the potential to work closely with the port using it as a test-bed for new technologies of this kind. It should be noted at the outset that while the following comments are based upon the capabilities and deficiencies at the current SCMI facility, there is no other marine laboratory of the that scale either in Los Angeles Harbor or any of the other surrounding harbors. UCLA has a small facility at Marina del Rey and Cal State Long Beach has another small lab on its main campus. The only marine lab comparable in size to SCMI is the Cal Tech Kerckhoff Marine Laboratory at Corona del Mar in Orange County yet it lacks the storage and boat support facilities of the current SCMI facility. Moreover, it does not enjoy the benefits (to urban researchers) of being located in the center of this large urban complex of southern California. City Dock offers a multitude of opportunities for marine research given the location and size of the existing buildings on site. Referring to the earlier assessment of deficiencies at the current SCMI Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory, at least four of those deficiencies could immediately be resolved at the proposed City Dock site. First, the site offers ample storage space for research equipment that is now crowding the existing SCMI warehouse. The City Dock space would offer over 225,000 square feet of covered space in comparison to the 2,400 square feet of warehouse space at SCMI in Fish Harbor. Second, the problem of alongside access for UNOLS research vessels would be quickly resolved since there is 40 feet of water depth alongside the wharf at berths 58-59-60 and at least 35 feet of water at Berth 57. Third, there is ample room for growth of the facilities at City Dock. Finally, the wharf at City Dock is more than 2,000 feet long, with ample space in the East Channel for siting of floating docks to support the fleet of small boats that serve the needs of SCMI, the Cal State Ocean Studies Institute and USC. However, the site is currently not improved to a condition permitting the California State University, USC, Occidental College, UCLA, NOAA or other institutions to move their operations there. The following section reports on facility needs in a newly configured marine laboratory facility. It is based on consultation with researchers, administrators and students from the three participating institutions. Section Four of the study will address the perceived needs of

23

those not directly connected with the laboratory: the public, community groups, community colleges and secondary schools. As noted above, the needs assessments for SCMI, OSI and USC were developed separately as was the assessment from Occidental College. There are certainly common elements between them, but we will address their needs first in terms of their individual perceptions of facilities that would be required in a newly configured facility. SCMI The immediate need for SCMI is a replacement for the current facilities now located in the Fish Harbor district of the Port of Los Angeles. When constructed more than 25 years ago, the facility was designed to support the activities of the USC Institute for Marine and Coastal Studies. As noted above, initially the university shared space there with other local universities and then in 1993-4, transferred ownership of the infrastructure to a new entity, the Southern California Marine Institute. It now supports researchers from eight campuses of the California State University, Occidental College and USC. As marine research efforts have expanded at each of those institutions, the demand on the facility has now increased far beyond the capability of the SCMI Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory. The California State University The challenges of global climate change affect research at the California State University primarily upon living marine systems for that is the primary work now conducted at SCMI. The SCMI lab provides a small lecture room, a few small laboratories and offices. Joining the efforts of other research campuses in the region, these eight examine the effects of environmental change upon coastal ecosystems and the lab, even in its current configuration, provides access to the research fleet of vessel as well as to communication between researchers from all campuses. Missing is an adequate facility for both teaching and research in the limited space at the current SCMI campus. Among the eight CSU campuses that are partners in SCMI, research themes concentrate around environmental effects on coastal ecosystems, fisheries, conservation biology and impacts of urbanization on natural resources of the southern California coast. This research is carried out by researchers at geographically disparate campuses ranging from San Bernardino to Northridge and Pomona to Long Beach. An expanded facility in Los Angeles Harbor with ample research and teaching space will give these CSU researchers a new opportunity to collaborate with one another. Moreover, since teaching is a priority at in the California State University, having teaching space adjacent to laboratories will greatly enhance the ability of the institutions to bring students from these inland campuses to the waterside and will allow hands-on he opportunity to engage in marine research. The CSU faculties conduct offshore research using vessels operated by SCMI including the R/V Sea Watch, R/V Yellowfin and various small craft. Research themes currently underway and continuing are:

24

Environmental effects on marine organisms: Its location in southern California provides the chance to study both the regional and local impacts of urbanization upon the coastal and nearshore marine environment. However, because of the wealth of historical and current data and concentration of researchers, we also have the opportunity to examine changes over time in local and regional ecosystems brought about by global climate change. That process involves long-term study (monitoring) and detailed local analysis. The current lab is not sufficient in size to permit but a small amount of ongoing research to remain at the lab; generally samples are collected via the lab’s vessels and then removed to laboratories on the individual campuses for further analysis. Expanded lab facilities will allow some of that research to remain at the lab between research cruises if researchers have adequate access to the type of facilities that they would have on their home campuses. This category of work can be further broken down into the following categories:

Environmental effects on rocky shore ecosystems: This work is of critical importance both because of the stress imposed by changing water temperatures, stress from pollution as well as from human contact (trampling and taking of intertidal organisms). Endocrine disruptors in fish populations: Some common household and industrial chemicals contain substances that can, when discharged through waste water systems into coastal waters, disrupt normal endocrine processes in both invertebrates and fish. For example, household detergents may contain estrogen mimics disrupting fish reproduction cycles. Marine algal nutrient and pollutant assimilation: Algae are ubiquitous in the marine environment. Since they provide a food source for other marine organisms, it is important to know how they process both nutrients that are passed along the food web to other organisms. However, in along an urbanized coastline, these organisms also metabolize pollutants and because of their nature as a food source, it is equally important to know how the process these pollutants, including heavy metals, and to what extent they are capable of detoxifying these chemicals. Heavy metals metabolism and detoxification in marine invertebrates: Researchers are also interested in how marine invertebrates, also a food source for organisms higher in the food web, metabolize and detoxify heavy metals and other marine borne pollutants. This is analogous to the ability of marine algae to concentrate pollutants that may be passed along and concentrated in higher forms of organisms. Since these organisms are found in coastal areas, an expanded laboratory will provide an opportunity for culturing as well as study in mesocosm environments. DDT and PCB levels in marine mammals: Studying higher animals in the food web can elicit evidence of stress on the ecosystem from concentration of these environmental pollutants. Thus, the lab would provide an opportunity to bring in

25

samples from fish and marine mammals to study the consequences in these more complex organisms. The waterside location of the lab will permit samples to be collected and brought immediately to the analytical laboratory.

Conservation biology: Along our crowded urban coastline it remains important to preserve all those areas of the coastal ecosystem that we can. We retain a few salt marsh ecosystems along the coast and researchers seek to study and maintain them in the face of human interactions. Most of this work is fieldwork but the lab can provide a teaching venue to better inform coastal residents of the importance of these ecosystems and engage them in teaching others to protect them. Fisheries research: Fisheries research has been a longstanding effort among a cadre of researchers at many of the CSU campuses. The work is multi-dimensional and an expanded laboratory will further facilitate the work:

Physiological and behavioral fisheries ecology: A major aspiration that researchers have had for an expanded laboratory is space to accommodate large tanks in which researchers can study fish behavior. The current SCMI laboratory does not have this capability. Studying fish behavior is important as we seek to learn about predation, reproduction and the physiological bases for schooling. Such a facility would, by its very nature, need to be located near a source of clean marine water and in a large facility capable of accommodating a large tank along with the equipment needed to study the school. Such a facility meshes with the tank requirements of researchers seeking to study aquaculture and the support system for them will certainly be a common system. Beyond schooling, the facility would also provide a capability to study swimming performance and metabolic biochemistry in fish, probably in other tank-like structures in the laboratory. Moreover, such a facility would permit studies of reproductive and feeding behavior, especially with commercially important recreational and commercial species such as white sea bass, California halibut, kelp bass, barred sand bass, spotted sand bass and giant sea bass. With adjacent laboratory facilities, large holding tanks and clean salt water, the facility will be able to support this research in an advanced fashion. And, with such a facility it will be possible to collect information necessary for effective management of California’s nearshore fishery resources. A related opportunity merges with an aspiration of USC researchers in their mutual desire to establish a mid-size aquaculture facility, larger than a small campus lab tank and scaled up to provide reliable research results to large-scale commercial aquaculture farms. This use is consistent with the notion of “mesocosm” research (see below) where fish populations are raised in a grow-out facility that, while not of commercial scale, nevertheless is sufficiently large to test new methods of increasing yield from farm-raised finfish.

26

Occidental College For almost 40 years, Occidental College has maintained a relationship with the Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory. Their research vessel, the R/V Vantuna was, for years, an important part of the fleet of research vessels at the USC lab in Wilmington and then the USC/SCMI Fish Harbor Laboratory. The Vantuna has now been decommissioned and Occidental faculty commonly use the R/V Yellowfin but their work continues. Occidental uses the laboratory in a different manner than either the CSU or USC faculties, however. Since their work is primarily focused on offshore marine protected areas (MPAs) and offshore monitoring, they are seeking a good onshore base for those operations. Their priorities are for good vessel support from SCMI because they anticipate securing their own research vessel. Thus, they would like to see additional support from the technical staff of SCMI, especially when they acquire a new vessel. In the meantime, they, too, would do more of their laboratory work at SCMI if there were available space. Occidental College research themes:

Ecosystem assessment and monitoring of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs): The Vantuna Research Group has a long history of monitoring the ecological health of offshore MPAs and that work in continuing. Under contract to Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission, they survey waters within southern California MPAs to assess biological diversity, species abundance and changes in those ecosystems. To perform these tasks, they utilize SCMI vessels and bring ashore samples to the current SCMI Fish Harbor Laboratory. Currently, the samples are then transported to the Occidental College campus for analysis but with adequate lab space at City Dock, a greater portion of the lab work would likely be performed there. Reef surveys in the southern California bight: As well as monitoring the health of southern California MPAs, the Vantuna Research Group maintains an ongoing monitoring program on southern California reefs throughout the entire bight, mainly evaluating the health of fishery resources in the area. Much like the work performed on the MPAs, this work relies on technical support from SCMI, currently using the R/V Yellowfin but the college is eager to again acquire its own research vessel that would also be home ported at an SCMI facility. This work is sponsored by a consortium of agencies concerned about the ecological health of these reefs, including the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission, the Port of Los Angeles, and the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) through its ASBS (Area of Special Biological Significance) Working Group, which is a part of SCCWRP’s Bight 08 Program that monitors water quality and species diversity throughout Santa Monica and San Pedro Bays.

The University of Southern California Because the type of marine research done at USC, there is a wide range of needs in a new marine laboratory. Of course, a lab at the water with ample space is a minimum requirement but the rationale for such a facility grows out of the increasingly important marine work now conducted on the downtown campus. Work in global climate change, water pollution, air pollution, coastal processes, tsunami, aquaculture, biogeochemistry, toxicant chemistry, biological oceanography,

27

physical oceanography, marine engineering including underwater acoustics, robotics, remote sensing as well as policy work in marine transportation, marine education and coastal management. Much of the natural science and engineering work requires a waterside location for deployment of sensors, proximity to ample supplies of circulating seawater and simply sufficient space to site experiments where they can be conducted at an appropriate scale and without disturbance. Much of that is difficult if not impossible in the current campus setting of the university. Another important issue is access to research vessels. For faculty who conduct pelagic research (as opposed to local, coastal work), there is often a need to load substantial amounts of, at times, bulky, voluminous and heavy equipment onto the research vessel that will conduct the cruise. Many researchers among the USC faculty do this sort of research. They typically use vessels funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) that are a part of the fleet of university research vessels known as the University-National Oceanographic Research System (UNOLS) fleet. The 27 (including one NOAA and three US Coast Guard) vessels that comprise the fleet, only five are classified as “small/local research vessels” and of the remaining, the smallest is 116 feet with 17 more than 150 feet in length. Usable shore side facilities for loading and unloading equipment from these ships is difficult to find in the Port of Los Angeles and the ability of these vessels to stage equipment for days at a time is likewise not easily accessible in this seaport whose facilities are designed and used for moving various types of cargo, most commonly containerized cargo. This is not to say that it is impossible to stage cruises in the Port of Los Angeles, just that the port is not designed to accommodate this use and, as a result, researchers most commonly truck their equipment to San Diego where they can load at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, a unit of the University of California at San Diego. The time lost and inconvenience of such a logistics effort reduces the efficiency of marine research from USC by several days’ time for researchers and technicians on each cruise. In cases where a critical piece of gear has been left behind, an urgent 250 mile round-trip to fetch it from the USC campus prior to sailing further inhibits the efficient use of both ship and research time. Research currently conducted by USC faculty falls into the following general categories:

Metazoans: Aquaculture of medium sized organisms. The objective is to have sufficient space to conduct grow-out experiments on finfish and mollusks and to build on the substantial work already conducted by USC faculty on molluskan genetics. This work is already well integrated with the aquaculture industry but the location of facilities at City Dock will allow the mature work on campus to grow and expand, whereas there is currently a dearth of space on the USC campus to expand metazoan research into finfish. A facility with this capability will require circulating, filtered seawater and would probably require an intake outside the POLA breakwater with processing tanks and filters on the City Dock site. This capability would be a common utility maintained for researchers from all institutions using the laboratory.

28

Mesocosm: “Mesocosm systems are culture systems for fish larvae [and experimental studies of microbial communities] with a water volume ranging from 1 to 10,000 m³.4 In the context of the City Dock project, mesocosm research would likely be conducted at a small scale, for some researchers, less than a single cubic meter of seawater. The site offers many advantages including access to ample seawater and a facility that is sufficiently large to include adjacent laboratory space for researchers to evaluate on-site the findings of mesocosm research. The USC faculty conducts water quality work as a team, often on projects funded in multiple millions of dollars. The projects evaluate bacterial contamination of beaches, harmful/toxic algal blooms that endanger the public and kill fish stocks and these projects often tie into the work of the marine robotics team who monitor these phenomena remotely via robots and deployed sensors. Facilities at the City Dock site would be invaluable in enhancing this work by providing space to accommodate joint laboratories for these disciplines. Climate change and ocean acidification: Like fisheries research, a major research need for current climate change and ocean acidification projects is the ability to incubate communities of marine organisms such as plankton under controlled conditions of pH, temperature, etc. Seawater mesocosm facilities equipped with sophisticated environmental control systems at City Dock would provide the facilities needed to carry out these types of experiments. The availability of ample space, convenient access, fresh seawater supplies, and on site power and lab facilities makes this site ideal for these ocean climate change simulation studies. Geobiology and biogeochemistry: Geobiology explores the interactions between the biosphere and the lithosphere. Typically, it examines how microorganisms interact with minerals in the earth’s crust. Biogeochemistry examines how chemical and geological processes influence species and abundance distributions of microorganisms and phytoplankton in the ocean. USC scientists in geobiology and biogeochemistry conduct deep-sea research to learn the interactions of organisms and the seabed as well as the chemistry of these complex interactions. A feature of this research is that the work is conducted in the deep ocean from large marine research vessels, ships that do not now have adequate mooring facilities in our two local seaports. The City Dock site would provide both alongside space and sufficiently deep water to host large marine research vessels of this type. Moreover, converting the warehouses into scientific laboratories will provide ample space to store large marine research equipment as well as laboratory space for post-research cruise examination and assessment of samples collected at sea. Current studies on the impact of increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 or the biochemistry of phytoplankton will also benefit from the mesocosm facility discussed above. Toxicant/chemistry: Both marine biologists and atmospheric scientists on the USC campus seek adequate space in the harbor area to conduct toxicant and chemistry research. Some of this is currently underway in atmospheric research. Establishing a

4 United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). (N.d.). Manual on the Production and Use of Live Food for Aquaculture.... Retrieved on 11/15/08 from http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/W3732E/w3732e0u.htm.

29

permanent laboratory at City Dock will permit that work to have a fixed (as opposed to mobile) station at which samples can be collected from fixed as well as mobile sensors and evaluated in an in situ laboratory. This will not only facilitate the collection of samples but will greatly facilitate the scale of such work in Los Angeles Harbor. The chemistry component of this research includes work in both water chemistry and benthic (seafloor) chemistry, work that has gone on for many years at USC. Again, the ability to have a laboratory at the waterside will permit researchers not only to have greatly expanded access to the marine environment but also substantial capabilities for storing research equipment and ready access to laboratory space for samples collected at sea. Oceanography: Oceanography is an umbrella term for some of the specific types of research described above. Nevertheless, the USC research community has a distinct need for a facility to house the equipment needed to conduct physical oceanography including buoys, meters, undersea gliders and a variety of other equipment needed to study the movement and composition of the adjacent ocean. Those facilities are currently housed on the USC campus and must be transported each time that they are deployed to sea. Having a space at the harbor in which to store, maintain, deploy and collect data from these sensors and instruments will provide an unparalleled opportunity to these researchers not only because of the ample space but time for research will expand when the equipment can be domiciled at the harbor. Engineering—Oceanography, Robotics and Communications: The need for marine-related engineering support space at the harbor is now undisputed. USC researchers in both oceanography as well as robotics and communications technology would use the space to store, maintain, deploy and collect data from their remotely operated instruments at the City Dock site. Since much of this equipment is deployed in the marine environment to be used, a waterside space where all these evolutions can be conducted at a well-equipped waterside laboratory will be invaluable to these researchers not only because of convenience but also because of the ample space that is not currently available on the main campus. Engineering—Coastal Processes, Tsunami and Wave Dynamics: One of the unique features of the City Dock site is that it provides a near-optimum location for a large-scale wave tank to study the impacts of sea level rise on coastal landforms and structures as well as the impacts of tsunami on the coast and wave dynamics in general. No comparable facility exists in the nation and experts in the USC Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering consider the City Dock site as optimum for developing a very large wave tank to study these processes. This facility would probably be constructed in the East Channel slip and with considerable financial support of the U.S. Government. However, given the issues of sea level change and the vulnerability of the coast to inundation, the facility could be of critical importance in studying the impacts of global climate change. Clearly, after the events of December 2007 in Indonesia, there needs to be additional work on tsunami dynamics, prediction and prevention. A large wave tank offers the opportunity to study these processes in near actual scale, giving researchers unique insights into the nature of large wave systems on coastal landforms and structures.

30

This potential at the City Dock site is unprecedented and researchers believe that such a facility would attract research from around the world.

Collaboration in Marine Science One of the hallmarks of high quality marine science is that researchers interact with one another. That interaction leads to discoveries and approaches that would not likely have been uncovered were it not for the opportunity for scientific interaction. When the famed architect, Louis Kahn, designed the Salk Institute in La Jolla, California in 1959, one of his guiding principles was to create a design that would facilitate interactions among the researchers working in the institute. The serendipitous and casual contacts between them, he felt, led to a more robust and integrated approach to science. Kahn’s design deliberately encouraged these interactions by design and the Salk Institute has benefited from his vision. City Dock, while a much larger facility than the Salk Institute, has the potential to offer similar interactions between marine scientists. As we can see from the descriptions above, the needs and focus of faculty at these institutions is clearly diverse, all of which provides the opportunity for interactions that generate out-of-the-box new ideas. The notion of a marine research and development campus is a new one here but clearly the preconditions for it exist in a great diversity of high quality marine research currently underway at many of the region’s universities. What is now needed is a site with more extensive facilities providing great opportunities for interaction and further collaboration.

31

Section 5

STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS: COMMUNITY INTEREST AND POTENTIAL USE OF THE PROJECT

Expansion of regional marine research capabilities at the waterfront involves more than merely the researchers and institutions involved. The site proposed by the port has special significance for the community as it is one of the last vestiges of the old style of cargo movement, breakbulk cargo, that has been with mankind since the Phoenicians. The changes wrought by Malcolm McLean and the introduction of containerized cargo in the 1960s has vastly changed the landscape of ports both domestic and foreign. Therefore, a site such as City Dock, with its two large transit shed warehouses speaks to the history of the Port of Los Angeles as well as providing a potential location for relocating research activities now on Terminal Island. Moreover, the proximity of the City Dock site to the downtown and populated areas of San Pedro makes it much more visible in both a literal and figurative sense to the residents of this storied port city. Naturally a change in the use of the warehouses at Berths 57-58-59-60 would have the attention of the residents and decision leaders in the city. Accordingly, as plans emerged to relocate the SCMI laboratory and perhaps other university marine labs and potentially other marine uses to the City Dock site, the community needed an opportunity to become aware of the project as well as to weigh in on how it could be utilized not only for the benefit of the university research community but also for the community at large. In the early stages of this study we advocated with the port staff for a series of smaller meetings with important decision leaders rather than a large public announcement of our plans. Since the project has evolved as the many potential users have expressed their needs and desires for facilities at the site, it became clear early on that the overall configuration of a marine research complex would be one of evolution rather than a more concrete conception. As a result, we have sought to involve important sectors of the community in both formal and informal presentations seeking their advice and comments as to features that they and their constituents believe are important in a facility of this type. We started by meeting with the office of Councilwoman Janice Hahn whose staff carried our initial conception to her to ensure that she was aware of the overall study plan. She subsequently met with one of the architecture firms whose work has helped us refine an overall master plan for the site. Beyond involvement with the councilwoman, our efforts were directed especially at three groups: the neighborhood councils in the area; the business leadership as represented especially through the San Pedro and Wilmington Chambers of Commerce, the Harbor Association of Industry and Commerce and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, and the regional educational institutions. We have now appeared before or interviewed a number of these parties as noted below. The focus of these discussions has been to explain what will most likely become the first phase of this project, moving the SCMI laboratory from Fish Harbor to the City Dock site. But, we also solicited their views on other uses that they felt were important at a marine research complex, comments that we captured and reveal a sincere interest in the community to teach both young people and the general public about the marine environment, their influence on it and its influence on them. There is clearly a general eagerness to learn how to interact with the ocean in

32

an environmentally sensitive way but also a fascination with the physical and biological processes that are embodied in the ocean realm. In early 2007, as discussions concerning relocation of the SCMI laboratory were proceeding, the then Executive Director of SCMI, Dr. Richard Pieper, and Dr. James Fawcett of the USC Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies, began discussions about community interest in a new and expanded marine laboratory at the City Dock site. The Fish Harbor laboratory has been used for many years by a wide range of students from secondary school students in local school systems to undergraduates and most heavily by graduate research students. But, that use has been primarily organized around the vessels as a means of introducing students to the marine environment by taking them on short cruises to collect organisms and return them to the lab for examination. The cruises have been hosted for a number of years but have limited scope due to passenger limitations on the vessels and vessel time availability. Nevertheless, the cruises have been popular and an effective means of introducing students to marine science. As the proposal for the project developed, Dr. Pieper and Dr. Fawcett developed a series of talking points and began appointments and discussions with decision leaders in San Pedro and Wilmington regarding the prospect of a laboratory facility at City Dock that involved not only SCMI but other research uses as well. These discussions included questions of how the facility might be used both for research as well as so-called business incubator space for start-up firms using marine technology, especially technology developed in the university laboratories. Among those with whom we discussed the project were: The San Pedro Bay Port Technologies Development Coalition This coalition of the San Pedro and Wilmington Chambers of Commerce (SPCC and WCC) and the Harbor Association of Industry and Commerce (HAIC) is focused on revitalizing the San Pedro and Wilmington economies. The objective of the Coalition is to create businesses that can comfortably co-exist with the existing residents and be good stewards of the natural environment. The operational goal is to create a cluster of high tech industries focused on the marine environment. Discussions with Herb Zimmer, President of the Coalition and Bill Lyte, one of its founders, emphasized its role in commercializing the innovations developed at the university level. They expressed a great deal of interest in involving both secondary schools and colleges in that process. The SCMI laboratory at City Dock would be a valuable part of their overall program. Port of Los Angeles Charter High School Camilla Townsend and Herb Zimmer of the Port of Los Angeles Charter High School were eager for the school to have a good working relationship with a new laboratory facility at City Dock. One of the benefits of a laboratory at City Dock is that it would greatly enhance the educational efforts now carried out at the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium. They emphasized that City Dock would have facilities that the Cabrillo Aquarium does not have but that with both facilities in the harbor, it would enhance the educational potential for students eager to learn more about marine science. They considered this a major benefit of the facility. A facility such as SCMI can provide the general public a better understanding of marine issues if there is some display

33

capability or explanation of the work being done there. Both expressed a desire for public meeting rooms that would allow the marine science staff to share the insights of their work with the general public. They both expressed the view that the community has great affection for the existing warehouse buildings and that they should be retained as structures and adapted to a new use as marine research laboratories and lecture rooms. Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council Joe Gatlin, then president of the CSPNC, expressed the view that the public in San Pedro, while interested in economic development, is also interested in the condition of the ocean and the contributions of pollution to global climate change. He expressed the view that his neighborhood council felt that this is a major issue for the community and that if this lab facility is working on global climate change issues, that it would have ample support from his group. He also felt that the lab could have a positive effect on tourism to that extent that its work was shared with the public. In that regard, he emphasized the need for tours of the lab for the public, educational programs there for school kids in the community and could be a spark for developing interest in what he referred to as the “stagnant” waterfront. With respect to the warehouse buildings, he emphasized that they are popular in San Pedro and that every effort should be made to adapt them to the new marine research use. Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council Dan Dixon, president of the Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council (NWSPNC), is familiar with the Moss Landing Marine Laboratory in central California and suggested that this facility could be a southern California counterpart of that very effective lab. In discussing the possibility of building a large wave tank to study coastal processes and erosion, he cautioned that the support of the U.S. Congress, especially Rep. Jane Harman would be important to bring that to reality. As with Mr. Gatlin, he emphasized the need for the lab to welcome the public by providing tours, public education opportunities and “give the community something to be proud of.” A visitor center at the lab might also be a good idea, he said. He echoed the notion that the community has great affection for the old warehouses as they represent the past history of breakbulk goods movement in the city. As such, he posited the notion of a “dockworker’s museum” as a part of rehabilitation of the warehouse structures, even if the museum was of small size, at least it would honor the work of dockworkers who were and have been an important part of San Pedro. Wilmington Neighborhood Council Jack Babbitt, president of the Wilmington Neighborhood Council said that SCMI was familiar to his community and that the facility is well respected. As with others, he emphasized the need for public education about the marine environment at the lab. He said that kids have little understanding of the ocean and its impact on them and that a good outreach program at City Dock could inspire them not only to better understanding but also to marine related jobs. If there were a big lab at City Dock, it likely would offer opportunities for internship programs, he felt. We assured him that Mike Schott, Director of the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium is a part of our planning team and that we will continue to coordinate activities at the new lab with him and his

34

aquarium. He proposed that a lecture hall seating about 150 would be a good idea as a venue for public education and lectures at City Dock. The only downside to the lab he felt would be if truck trips now moving cargo in and out of the warehouses at City Dock were shifted to Wilmington. Mr. Babbitt invited us to also present the proposal to the entire Wilmington Neighborhood Council and on June 25, 2008 Dr. Pieper and Dr. Fawcett made a presentation to the council. The en banc council further reinforced their interest in using the lab for expanded efforts in marine public education for the community. Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council Peter Warren and Vice-Chair Dean Pentcheff invited Dr. Pieper and Dr. Fawcett to make a similar presentation to the Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council on August 18, 2008. The full council was supportive of the overall proposal as were the other neighborhood councils. Some of the members were particularly enthusiastic about the educational opportunities that would derive from a research facility at City Dock instead of commercial activities. They were also positive about the potential of the site to generate additional jobs in San Pedro. There was some concern about traffic and parking near the lab but we explained that it would not be a major traffic generator by the nature of the work that is done there. San Pedro Chamber of Commerce, Economic Development Committee Dr. Pieper and Dr. Fawcett also made a presentation of the concept to the San Pedro Chamber of Commerce, Economic Development Committee at its June 10, 2008 meeting. Again, there was enthusiastic support for the concept of a marine lab facility at City Dock. Since we had already discussed the proposal with The San Pedro Bay Port Technologies Development Coalition, members of which are also members of this committee, the issues and opportunities of the proposal were familiar to many of the committee members. Their concerns were basically over the number and types of jobs that would be created at the lab; we indicated the current employment of the SCMI lab but indicated that there were both multiplier effects that the San Pedro and Wilmington communities would enjoy but also that a larger lab with more facilities would attract more funded research and that research would be transformed into more employment and business activity in the port communities. The magnitude of that impact would be a function both of the ultimate size of the lab and the research supported there. International Longshore and Warehouse Union Dr. Dominick Miretti of the ILWU and also East Los Angeles Community College offered a number of good suggestions about the potential of the lab to enhance public education. He suggested that there is inadequate attention to training of marine technicians in the region and that the lab could serve not only as a practical training ground for that enterprise but that the Los Angeles Community College District could also become a partner in research at the lab. Since the community college system is able to provide lower-division undergraduate education to talented but economically disadvantaged students, their participation in work at the City Dock

35

lab is an opportunity for all of the four-year university participants to seek out talented lower-division students for scholarship support and recruitment. From the perspective of the ILWU, the lab could also be a site for research directly impacting the working conditions of longshore and warehouse employees as well as providing a site for training for the ILWU. He felt that by being located in the port and having a higher profile and more facilities than on Terminal Island, the lab could conduct research on issues of importance to the workers moving the cargo in the busiest seaport in the U.S. Los Angeles Community College District Discussions with Larry Eisenberg, Executive Director, Facilities Planning and Development, for the Los Angeles Community College District generated a subsequent meeting with Dr. Linda Spink, President and Luis Rosas, Vice President for Academic Affairs at Los Angeles Harbor College. Dr. Spink and Mr. Rosas were particularly interested in two types of connections that Los Angeles Harbor College (LAHC) could develop with an expanded marine laboratory at City Dock. For students on an academic track at LAHC, City Dock would provide the opportunity for “hands on” marine science classes in their biology department. This is a real priority for the biology faculty at LAHC, especially considering the new classroom and lecture hall facilities that the college has recently occupied. Dr. Spink wants LAHC to be able to offer an expanded learning experience for these students and the City Dock facility would provide that capability to her faculty. For students on a vocational track, LAHC would be interested in exploring a marine technician curriculum with the condition that courses would be offered only if it appeared that there were jobs available in that field. She and Mr. Rosas declared that they would consult with their faculty and evaluate the job market. If it appeared that there were jobs for marine technicians, they might be interested in pursuing courses in this area that would coordinate with City Dock as the field portion of the curriculum. Two other aspects of engagement with LAHC are possible. First, the marine technician coursework may also overlap or intersect with an opportunity also to seek coordination with the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) for courses tailored to the ILWU community. Second, while the discussion over these curricula at LAHC were directed at that single campus, earlier discussions with Mr. Eisenberg revealed a potential for engaging students at other campuses of the Los Angeles Community College District on marine related topics. Thus, there is a potential for the City Dock site to serve other campuses of the district as well as LAHC.

36

Section 6

DESIGN ANALYSIS Located between the East Channel and the Main Channel in the Port of Los Angeles, the peninsula containing the City Dock site is an historic location. On the south is the historic Warehouse Number 1, a landmark. Adjacent to it on the southeast point is the San Pedro Pilot Station housing harbor pilots for the Port of Los Angeles. The former Westway chemical terminal on the east side of the peninsula is now being dismantled and will be restored to an environmentally clean development site, the anticipated users of which would be a facility for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and a research and development business park for emerging marine related environmental and technology companies. Signal Street, bisects the peninsula from north to south and rail lines parallel it for its entire length of almost half a mile. On the west side of Signal Street lie two large warehouses constituting approximately one half of the City Dock site. Overall, the two occupy a parcel of approximately 13 acres and the overall City Dock #1 site comprises approximately 28 acres. At the intersection of 22nd Street and Signal Street is Shed B-57, at Berth 57. Consisting of approximately 48,500 square feet (1.07 acres) of covered warehouse space, the building also includes an attached dilapidated office structure on its north side. The steel frame building appears upon casual inspection by licensed architects to be structurally sound, although useful only for storage and not for occupancy as a laboratory or for classrooms. A portion of the building is load restricted due to its support on pilings over water. South of the shed at Berth 57 is a much larger warehouse at Berths 58-59-60 of approximately 180,000 square feet of covered space (4.13 acres). This warehouse/transit shed also appears upon casual inspection to be structurally sound but is also constructed in a manner lending its use to storage or other industrial uses, excluding use as a laboratory or classroom building. A portion of this building is also load restricted due to piling support over water. Two architecture firms have prepared preliminary designs for the project: Gin Wong Associates in Los Angeles and the Los Angeles office of Leo A Daly Architects. Their designs are preliminary and will likely be modified as new information becomes available. However, the firms have worked diligently with USC and the SCMI board of directors to present a vision of how the site might look when redeveloped. They are included in this section. Design criteria for use as laboratory and classroom or industrial offices Overall design considerations at City Dock City Dock offers unique capabilities for marine research: proximity to the open ocean, alongside space for research vessels, a vast amount of land, proximity to services and businesses in San Pedro, good access to freeways for researchers and students and certainly an attractive waterfront site. To convert the site from its current use to marine research, education and other marine business related uses, however, designers and the port will need to evaluate how to manage the existing structures. There are probably three broad options: demolish the existing structures and

37

replace them with new construction; adaptively re-use some or all of the existing buildings; or a combination of demolition and preservation. Demolition of existing structures On the Westway chemical terminal site, demolition is not only the preferred option but the only option for modifying the existing use of the site. It appears that there is a structure within the chemical terminal that may be of historic interest or importance and, if so, its usefulness and importance will need to be evaluated. Nevertheless, for the balance of the site, demolition of all the storage tanks, concrete dikes and ancillary equipment will need to proceed along with remediation of soil and groundwater contamination before the site can be converted to other uses. The material that follows assumes that the chemical storage facilities on the Westway site will be demolished and that the site will be cleared for future uses. This visioning study anticipates that the site is best utilized for a NOAA facility because of the adjacent existing dock as well as space for marine environmental businesses needing a waterside location. Clearly, the size of the site offers great potential for these future uses. With respect to the transit sheds/warehouses at Berths 57-58-59-60, the cost of demolition and reconstruction must be evaluated in terms of the residual usefulness of the existing structures, the cost of demolition and reconstruction and a close evaluation of whether new construction would be able to replicate the features of the existing structures at a reasonable cost. Demolition of these structures also imposes a regulatory burden in that new construction following demolition will start a regulatory process anew. Thus, adaptive reuse of the existing physical site is likely to provide a more expeditious route to creation of new facilities. Moreover, the port will need to consider the historic value of the transit sheds to the community as noted below. Adaptive re-use of buildings Residents of the San Pedro community have advised that the warehouses hold considerable sentimental value for those who have worked and lived in the community for many years. Thus, the objective of the two designs contained in this report has been to adaptively re-use the existing buildings and convert them into the lab uses that we have outlined above. From a scientific perspective, the virtually unobstructed covered space offers advantages in terms of bringing heavy and bulky research gear out of the weather, for example, or providing a broad, unobstructed, secure area for staging of equipment prior to research cruises, which is a considerable advantage to seagoing researchers. If the buildings are adaptively reused, one option may be to construct a “building within a building” to house offices, labs and other inhabited spaces. Clearly, the sizes of these warehouses offer many opportunities for uses not contemplated at the current Fish Harbor facility. Specific design considerations Conversion of existing buildings to laboratory/classroom/office occupancy standards

38

In their current configuration, the transit sheds are not suitable for occupancy by laboratories, classrooms or offices. After inspection by two architecture teams, the consensus was that the existing wood frame office space at the north end of the Berth 57 transit shed is not amenable to re-use and should be demolished. Both design schemes see this elevation as critical to the laboratories as its public face to the community and the street. If adaptively re-used, two general approaches could be followed: one, the entire building could be upgraded to human occupancy standards including fire protection, Title 24 energy conservation, lighting and environmental standards. However, because of the height of the structures inside the building envelope, another alternative would be to meet basic safety (fire protection, earthquake standards and provision of utilities) for the entire building envelope but to construct within the existing sheds actual habitable spaces leaving some space in each shed for large scale equipment and staging to be conducted under cover but outside of the finished lab, classroom and office spaces. This design is characterized as a “building within a building” and secures the benefits of the large covered area but also provides habitable space for the traditional laboratory operations. Inclusion of labs adjacent to classrooms For academic users of the SCMI facility, classrooms would be a significant advantage over the current facility. The potential of classrooms adjacent to labs where lectures can evolve into demonstrations will greatly enhance the capability of the facility for teaching. This feature applies not only to university students but also to secondary school classes who may use the facility for occasional lectures and applies to virtually all scientific users of the facility. Inclusion of lecture halls Many of the community representatives responded in interviews that education is a high priority for them in a marine research facility, and not merely for students but for the public at large. One interviewee suggested that the facility should have at least one lecture hall that could accommodate 150 people. Telecommunications support An academic interviewee advised that at least one lecture hall should be wired for distance learning and two-way video conferencing. However, many suggested that the facility could best carry out its role of being a good public citizen in the community by including space for public lectures. Equally important, much of the seaborne robots communicate with a ground station to report findings and to “check in” with onshore managers. The facility will need state-of-the-art telecommunications capabilities for this and for other uses. In the modern scientific world, with researchers located at various parts of the globe, teleconferencing is becoming more important both to reduce travel costs and to facilitate cooperation and coordination on joint projects. The City Dock campus should be equipped with this capability. If the labs are engaged in research on port security, they will need adequate telecommunications support to advance that research as well.

39

An attractive façade greeting the public If a facility such as City Dock is to be seen as a valuable community resource, interviewees expressed the desire to “look like something we can be proud of.” Thus, the exterior façade should be carefully designed to promote that face to the public. Others suggested that the site itself looks so barren that it would be important to have good landscaping around the site and make it appear more than a warehouse. Parking Adequate parking is an issue not only to potential lab users but also to the public. One obstacle to that at present are the rail lines that parallel the warehouses. If they were removed, the parking potential of the parcels would be considerably enhanced as well as providing an opportunity for appropriate landscaping along Signal Street. As well, there should be parking space reserved for researchers who are at sea and need to leave their vehicles at the facility for an extended period of time. A NOAA laboratory at the site will also require parking for its researchers. This is a significant issue for the efficient operation of the laboratories. Wave tank Researchers have discussed with great enthusiasm the potential for siting a major wave study tank at the City Dock site. Large wave tanks improve the reliability of studies on tsunami as well as other studies such as coastal engineering and wave dynamics. Currently the largest tank in the U.S. is in Texas, a considerable distance for researchers working on phenomena in the Pacific Ocean. Moreover, a large wave tank at the City Dock site would be a saline as opposed to fresh water facility, further enhancing the results obtained. Researchers report that a tank of significantly large dimension would be welcomed not only by the academic but also the consulting engineering community and, if built, would be a major improvement on those facilities currently available around the country. One possibility is to utilize a portion of the East Channel slip as a site for this facility, although no definite decision as to a location on the City Dock site has been made. The cost of such a facility will doubtless require federal funding for construction and probably for operation as well. Researchers find the City Dock especially exciting because of the large size of the site, the ability to use seawater and the multiple users that would take advantage of the facility. Some of the most advanced work on tsunami is currently underway at USC and this facility would greatly enhance that work with benefits to coastal areas around the world. Master planning of the site should remain cognizant of the unique potential of the site for this use. Public use of the site The south end of Berth 60 offers a unique opportunity for the public. Because of its ample view opportunities, the site could be developed for some form of public access to permit the public to view the main channel and harbor entrance. One of the sketch designs envisions the form of a ship’s prow with windows and perhaps a restaurant to permit viewing of the harbor. A suggestion from one of our interviewees was that the facility might include space for a dockworker’s museum, documenting the history of cargo movement in the harbor and

40

acknowledging the contributions of dockworkers to the success of the harbor. If that were included, it might be located adjacent to this public end of Berth 60. One of the sketches included in this section envisions that as a design element. Public Pedestrian Promenade Promenade The plan for the San Pedro waterfront envisions a continuous pedestrian and bicycle promenade from Cabrillo Beach to the cruise ship terminal at Swinford Street and Harbor Boulevard. Extending the promenade through a marine laboratory facility will pose special challenges since the active waterfront of a lab will be utilized on a routine basis by forklifts, cranes and other heavy equipment in use at unpredictable intervals. The challenge is to locate the promenade in such a manner as to maintain public access without impeding the work that is necessary at a marine laboratory. The activities on the research wharf will pose special challenges to the designers as they seek to route public access along a safe route in this area of the port. However, to the extent possible, the design ideally would provide the public with a sense of the research underway at City Dock and would permit a continuous flow to the promenade. Westway site As with the wave tank, the Westway site provides other opportunities for facilities on the City Dock site. If a NOAA laboratory were located at City Dock and the federal government sought to build its own building, a portion of the Westway site is probably the most likely location without disturbing the existing warehouse buildings. NOAA’s main West Coast research vessel the NOAA ship David Starr Jordan, is 171 feet in length but is likely to be replaced in the near future with a vessel similar in size to a US Coast Guard medium endurance cutter with a length of between 210 and 270 feet5. The existing 600-foot long dock on the main channel at Berth 71 could easily accommodate multiple vessels of that size in much the same manner as the US Coast Guard moors their vessels across the main channel adjacent to the US Coast Guard Station on Terminal Island. Discussions with NOAA’s executives from the Southwest Region of the National Marine Fisheries Service, currently housed in Long Beach, emphasize that they could very well utilize a waterside location for their staff, but that the facilities would also be ideal for other NOAA departments needing a waterside location. In that vein, they see a facility at City Dock being utilized not only for NMFS but also for other NOAA line offices such as the National Ocean Service. The waterside location will also permit development of laboratory facilities that are difficult to manage where they are now located. NOAA officials responsible for space needs estimate that approximately 120 staff members would use a facility at City Dock of 50,000 square feet. Co-locating other NOAA offices at City Dock would expand that estimate. Because of the size of the staff, the sketch site plan that follows also designates a portion of the site for outside storage of equipment and parking. Vessel mooring

5 The NOAA global class research vessel, Ronald H. Brown, is 274 feet in length.

41

One of the most significant advantages of the City Dock site for researchers is their ability to host large marine research vessels dockside and adjacent to the warehouses where equipment will be stored. Design of the facility must preserve this advantage for it is one of the primary reasons that the City Dock site is attractive to the research community, many of whom now must transport research equipment to other distant ports such as San Diego to load equipment on the research vessels. The University National Oceanographic Research Laboratory System (UNOLS) supports marine research with a variety of ships whose operations are funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the U.S. Navy, NOAA and NASA. Among the fleet are three vessels homeported on the West Coast between 274 and 279 feet in length, although vessels of this class, the “global” class can and do sail from either coast. Within the UNOLS fleet, 13 research vessels are 168 feet or longer. Moreover, when built, this facility will also be capable of supporting research vessels of other nations or those operated by private industry. Thus the City Dock site with a nominal alongside water depth of 40 feet and a wharf that is more than 2,000 feet in length provides both the university and industrial research community with a critically needed capability in Los Angeles Harbor. The site is well suited as well to welcome the public for those times when ships are capable of hosting an open house, another aspect of the marine education mission that the site can provide. Common uses An advantage of co-located laboratories operated by various institutions is that there are common uses used by each but that need not be duplicated in each facility. For example, a single machine shop would benefit all parties. Such a shop exists in the current SCMI laboratory and work is accomplished there on equipment belonging to each of the partner institutions in SCMI. Classrooms and lecture rooms have a similar quality since they will not be in constant use by one institution and can be managed for the benefit of all participants in the lab complex. A filtered, running seawater system is essential to all of these laboratories yet there is nothing to be gained by building and managing multiple seawater systems. For that reason, consideration should be given in design to locating these features such that all parties using the facility will have convenient access to them. (See the section on organizational structure for comments on management of these common features). Security Equipped with the most modern scientific equipment, these laboratories will need to be designed with the latest in premises security. Moreover, security is essential for protection of scientific data present on the site. This is another common use issue that will need to be resolved as the lab(s) become operational. Business Park/Incubator With cutting edge marine science located at the City Dock site, it may be possible to commercialize some of those new innovations. Licensees of those discoveries or other businesses involved in marine research and development may need waterside space to further their research. In those cases, it is conceivable that some of the space in the existing transit sheds may be ideal for such use and the conceptual site plan that follows acknowledges that space may

42

be utilized by private enterprise in this manner in the existing transit sheds. For other projects, it is possible that purpose-built facilities could be constructed on the main channel on either side of the proposed NOAA offices and laboratory building. It is also possible that existing space in the steel-reinforced concrete building, Warehouse 1, could be used for business research and development. While space is not so ample as to support most manufacturing facilities, nevertheless, the location of the site adjacent to a suite of major marine laboratories provides a unique opportunity for high technology marine businesses working in the harbor. Architectural Sketches The sketches on the following pages were prepared to provide a physical vision of the City Dock proposals. They present visions of adaptive reuse of the existing transit shed warehouses at Berths 57-58-59-60 and include a plan view depicting potential site locations for the various labs at City Dock. SCMI’s project architect, the Los Angeles office of the firm, Leo A Daly, has provided the initial drawings. Additional sketches by the Los Angeles based architecture firm, Gin Wong Associates follow the Daly plans and sketches. Both firms worked with USC and SCMI to develop these architectural concepts for the site on a pro bono basis. While they represent somewhat differing approaches to the site, nevertheless, they have responded to guidance and comments from both the author and officials of SCMI. The drawings, however, represent concepts rather than finished designs and are intended as devices to encourage discussion about the various visions for use of the site.

43

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

City Dock Perspective View Toward South Along Signal Street Warehouse 1 in Distance

© 2008 Gin Wong Associates

53

City Dock Perspective View toward South © 2008 Gin Wong Associates

54

City Dock Perspective View toward Northeast Showing POLA Warehouse 1 And Potential for Public Use Space at South End of Berth 60

© 2008 Gin Wong Associates

55

City Dock Perspective View toward East Showing POLA Warehouse 1 And Potential Use of Former Westway Terminal at Berths 70-71 on Main Channel

© 2008 Gin Wong Associates

Section 7

BUSINESS PLAN AND FUNDING The following section sets out some preliminary construction costs as a first step in addressing the question of funding this large project. By estimating the costs on what might be termed a beginning phase of the project, we can extrapolate to the cost of more extensive uses of the site, particularly uses involving adaptive reuse of the existing transit sheds. Funding for this project is an independent issue but the initial cost estimates are a starting point from which we can discuss sources of funding. The second part of this discussion will be focused upon likely sources of funding and the approximate magnitude of the funding required. Construction costs This section considers building costs using Berth 57 as a baseline. For additional adaptive reuse of the transit shed at Berth 58-59-60, unit costs are expected to be similar. In the case of B-58-59-60, the building is currently divided into three sections with fire doors separating each. Architects examining the space have asserted that it is possible to renovate the building one bay at a time, if necessary. The costs are divided into parts: bringing the existing transit shed(s) into code compliance for occupancy; tenant improvements (interior renovations) and exterior renovation costs. What follows are very preliminary estimates of baseline construction costs, necessary to gauge order of magnitude costs for portions of, and the entire project. However, the project should be evaluated by a full-scale design analysis including detailed cost estimates as a next step. Upgrade costs To bring the shell of B-57 into code compliance and to prepare the site so that interior improvements can be made will include the following:

1. Building structural upgrade (48 ksf @ $75/sf) $3,600,000 2. Upgrade existing exterior walls (26 ksf @ $150/sf) $3,900,000 3. Upgrade existing roof (48.5 ksf @ $10/sf) $ 485,000 4. Replace existing flooring (48.5 ksf @ $9/sf) $ 436,500 5. Exterior site work/landscaping (80 ksf @ $50/sf $4,000,000 6. Demolishing the existing B-57 façade $ Unknown 7. Construction of a new front addition (~8,000 sf) $ Unknown 8. Construction of a new front canopy (~4,500 sf) $ Unknown

Total upgrade estimate $12,421,500 Upgrade estimate per square foot $ 256

57

Tenant improvement (interior and habitability) costs Tenant improvement costs (interior renovation) include the following:

1. Lecture hall ($250/sf) 2. Teaching labs ($425/sf) 3. Temperature controlled storage ($425/sf) 4. Conference room ($250/sf) 5. Cubicles for graduate students ($250/sf) 6. Administrative offices ($250/sf) 7. Restrooms ($250/sf) 8. Storage ($250/sf)

Estimated interior renovation tenant improvement costs per square foot $ 335

Tenant improvement costs (new construction) include the following:

1. Machine shop/wood shop/dive-tech shop ($300/sf) 2. Warehouse ($300/sf) 3. Research van storage area ($300/sf)

Estimated new construction costs per square foot $ 180

Exterior renovation costs:

1. Seawater tanks ($150/sf) 2. Seawater distribution system (unknown) 3. Covered patio for outdoor classes ($150/sf) 4. Parking (unknown) 5. Dock improvements for small boats (unknown)

Estimated new construction costs per square foot $ 150

As an example:

Laboratory facilities (25,000 sf @ $335/sf) $8,375,000 Shops as new construction (10,000 sf @ $180/sf) $1,800,000 Exterior renovation (5,000 sf @ $150/sf) $ 750,000

TOTAL $10,925,000

These costs include contingencies but exclude important items such as a saltwater distribution system, parking and dock improvements for small boats.

58

In general, upgrade costs for the transit sheds to make them habitable for research and student occupancy will be in excess of $250 per square foot for all of the transit sheds. Beyond that, the tenant improvement costs vary depending upon the type of facilities required by the university communities. Laboratory space is the most expensive element of this and beyond relatively straightforward lab space, costs are likely to escalate depending upon the special needs of each lab. Lecture halls, offices, conference rooms and restrooms, in other words, habitable space not requiring expensive mechanical assets, will each cost in the range of $250 per square foot. These costs do not include a new lobby and entrance vestibule on the north end of the building. As noted, the existing office space fronting on 22nd Street is woefully out of building code compliance as well as being functionally obsolete. Since the north face of Berth 57 would be the formal entrance to the facility, the designers who have evaluated the project emphasize that it is important to rebuild an entrance that not only is prominent but also serves as a welcoming feature to the entire facility. It is likely that overall management of the facility would be located in this area as well, perhaps, as public displays of marine science, technology and policy. Likewise this is most likely the logical place for a large lecture hall, one that would be used for public lectures and meetings. Operational Costs At its Fish Harbor laboratory, SCMI is charged ground rent of $20,000 per year for the laboratory site and the adjacent machine shop, warehouse and storage site, a preferential rate based on the not-for-profit and educational use of the property. The facility is charged another $18,720 per year for the auxiliary parking lot on the west side of Seaside Avenue, a commercial rate. The ground rent at the laboratory is negotiated with SCMI based upon its not-for-profit and educational status as well as the fact that it is a coastal dependent use whose activities are consistent with maintaining good environmental quality in the port. At the City Dock site, while formal discussions of ground rent are premature at this time, the port’s real estate staff reports that, as of November 2008, “we estimated that the monthly rent for the land upon which Warehouse 57 stands including requisite land for warehouse operations, the office area, and the wharf is $121,720 per month. It appears that Port contribution per warehouse (+/-) on acre would amount to approximately $12-$15M and forgone rent in the amount of $1.44M/year.” The calculations are for commercial use of the Berth 57 warehouse as distinct from a not-for-profit educational use. A workable agreement between SCMI and the port would acknowledge that the educational, scientific and community role of the project as well as a long-term expectation of residency in the port be factored into any financial agreement between the parties. Those discussions can be pursued once the parties identify the scope of the project. Funding The City Dock project, because of its recent conceptualization, is not budgeted in a capital projects plan at any of the universities that are the most likely participants. As we are now just becoming aware of the financial magnitude of the project, these complex institutions have not had time to incorporate funding scenarios into their long-range plans. This study is designed to

59

assist them in developing such plans as well as providing a rough cost estimate to extramural sources of funding. SCMI is the leaseholder of record on the existing property in Fish Harbor. As a consortium of ten universities, each pays a share of its annual costs. The 2008-9 budget of SCMI is $1.337 million with $38,460 dedicated to ground rent for the existing site and a leased parking lot on the west side of Seaside Avenue. There is a small residual balance in its budget but no capital projects plan or budget. Berth 57 Bringing the shell of B-57 to code compliance will cost in the range of $12-$15 million. Beyond that, with some gaps in the estimates, we can expect the tenant improvements to add another $10-$12 million once the building shell is renovated. Shell renovation costs cannot be well staged so the shell itself would need to be refurbished as a whole. However, some of the interior improvements might be staged as funding is available. Construction cost estimates may be therefore somewhat lower if the entire 48,500 square feet of space is not built out at one time. Thus, for a completed project at B-57, the current total cost estimate is between $22-$27 million. Berths 58-59-60 Using the cost estimates for B-57, each 60,000 sf bay of the larger transit shed could be brought up to code (minus tenant improvements) at a cost of $15-$16 million. Tenant improvement costs would depend upon the needs of a tenant. NOAA laboratory Discussions with the regional NOAA office have been productive. The staff currently numbers ~120 FTE and is growing. Based on the staffing and needs of that office, it is conceivable that a building of 50,000 sf would be needed to accommodate the growing staff. While the regional staff is interested in the potential of the site, and while the leadership of NOAA is aware of the proposed marine research use of the site, no commitment has been made by NOAA to include such a project in its capital improvement plans. The project remains a viable option but since it will require congressional appropriation of funds, a good deal of work remains to be done in terms of proposing that NOAA formally support such a project and that Congress approve funding for it. Moreover, since the project would be an important federal asset in the district of Representative Jane Harman, any such discussion should begin with her office. Funding Options Given the state of the economy, both nationally and in California, prospects of directly funding a new facility such as this appear dim at best. However, the need for a lab facility to address these pollution and global climate change issues is critical and the region is endowed with talented researchers who are already conducting this research, albeit in facilities that are inadequate. With the need clearly evident and the research capability at hand, the challenge is to identify a funding mechanism that can meet this need.

60

Option 1: Leased facilities from a non-port, non-university entity One option would be to approach a developer specializing in projects such as this and negotiate a long-term lease on a laboratory facility. The advantage of this approach is the limited capability of the universities to support a large capital project in the short run and the willingness of a developer to build such a facility given a long-term commitment from the tenant. Absent the need for up-front funding, the lab could be built expeditiously and be put into service. Management of the facility would need to be negotiated between the developer and the tenants but that is a routine lease negotiation matter. The disadvantages have to do with the loss of the tenants’ control over the facility where they are lessees, not owners. The California State University may have restrictions against such an arrangement. The other major disadvantage is the developer’s control over the rent charged to the universities. If demand for the facilities increases over time and the facilities remain fully utilized there is little problem but if demand for use diminishes and the universities have a long-term lease, how will they manage that under-use? The other complication may be that a developer could permit an adjoining use that would limit or restrict the use of that portion of the facility devoted to the university research community. Control over the facility becomes an important issue here. Option 2: Direct funding by one of the partners in SCMI Still another option would be for one of the science partners to take on the fiscal responsibility for funding all or a portion of lab space and perhaps to sub-lease space to other university tenants. This option might be satisfactory if SCMI was the partner that was able to obtain the required funding. Since SCMI is the overall entity in the Fish Harbor location, were it to secure funding for the entire project, the existing partners are accustomed to working within the SCMI structure and it is conceivable that this arrangement would be satisfactory to all. It is less likely to be satisfactory were the partner taking the responsibility other than SCMI. The advantage of this arrangement is that it is only a slight variation of the current institutional relationship at SCMI. Since the parties are all mutually invested in the advancement of the facility, it would be an enhancement of the existing system. There might be a downside to this arrangement for a future tenant that was not a part of the SCMI partnership. However, that is a matter that could be resolved by negotiations with a new tenant. The other potential liability is the same as noted in the previous two cases, a decline in use by one or more of the tenants and replacement by a user whose activities may inhibit the existing functioning of the lab. Option 3: Extramural funding of laboratory buildings Marine research funding from government sources is common but funding for laboratory construction is far less so. While there are at times federal grant programs to fund so-called “bricks and mortar,” most often providing the physical space for research is viewed as the

61

responsibility of the applicant university. To some extent federal, and more often private philanthropic, funding of structures becomes the lynchpin for conducting advanced research. It is notable that, without adequate laboratory facilities, grants for research itself are rarely made. Thus, extramural funding is often the key to building an advanced research enterprise. The advantage of such funding is that the relationship between the research community and the grantor can be relatively uncomplicated, especially when compared to a more commercial arrangement as discussed in Option 1 above. However, there is great demand from universities for funding support, especially for capital construction, and for each grantor, including the federal government, there are many applicants. Option 4: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) federal stimulus funding Because of its traction as an issue not only for the U.S. but globally, climate change research and its attendant issues of sea level change, diminution of marine protein sources, marine pollution and study of coastal processes, marine laboratories have become particularly important for our understanding of these phenomena. The Los Angeles region, with more than 30 major universities and research institutes is unique in its focus on the impact of the ocean on our urban coast and the concurrent impact of urbanization on the coastal waters. Yet, there are only a handful of small marine research laboratories in the region. Faculty members conducting important marine research are growing at these renowned universities but are limited to a few labs, often with inadequate facilities, as noted above. With the intense interest in these marine and climatological phenomena, the region is wasting a valuable talent pool with a lack of adequate facilities. Moreover, as the federal government seeks to stimulate the nation’s economy and also give attention to environmental issues, providing funding for an advanced marine research facility is consistent with both goals. If economic stimulus funding can be identified as eligible for such funding, both the construction and operation phase of the project would have economic benefits. The construction phase would provide regional benefits in terms of construction jobs and the operation phase would provide ongoing employment benefits, especially as the laboratory expands its operations. Those jobs would likely be drawn from the labor pool in the harbor communities near the laboratory site and would most likely attract workers from San Pedro, Wilmington, Harbor City, and Long Beach. The magnitude of labor demand will be dependent upon the size of the new laboratory operation and the activities carried out there. Possible sources of federal stimulus funding The federal government reports (via the ARRA website, www.recovery.gov) that $126 billion will be devoted to infrastructure and science. Included are funds to agencies and departments whose missions include research, environmental protection and energy technology development. Allocations among federal departments and criteria for applying for funds have yet to be developed but are expected to be rolled out quickly. A few of the anticipated opportunities are:

62

• The U.S. Department of Energy will receive funds for research and development of new energy technologies, presumably including biofuel development.

• The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) will receive $610 million

under ARRA. According to the government’s website, “The agency will use the funds for programs that support U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness, key factors in spurring economic growth.”

• The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) received $830 million.

The government announcement states, “The agency will use the funds, equivalent to 20 percent of NOAA's 2008 budget, for projects that protect life and property and conserve and protect natural resources.”

Economic stimulus funding is likely to be highly sought after by many worthwhile projects. However, this laboratory complex offers unique features to marine researchers working on the most critical climatological issues of our time and, in fact, may provide one of the very best sites in the nation to study the effects of climate change on a major urban area. The focus of work envisioned here will examine marine food sources, marine pollution, remote sensing of changes in the marine environment and a large and unique facility to support both coastal and deep-sea research in these fields. Both researchers and the institutions involved will need to be aggressively involved in explaining the value of the research in order to enhance the prospects of successfully securing funding under this scenario but the site offers opportunities not found in other parts of our nation. Option 5: Other federal sources of laboratory construction funding Research grants rarely provide funding for capital construction yet some facility is required for the research to proceed. In this case, the unique quality of marine research demands that facilities be available to support the work. As noted, often marine researchers in the Los Angeles region either conduct research in their laboratories, making the best with the available resources and then travel to a coastal site to either deploy equipment or to load it on federally supported research vessels. The SCMI facility is too small to support but a few researchers, too small to store their seagoing research equipment and inaccessible to many vessels in the University National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) research fleet. Thus, to create a suitable laboratory with alongside space for research vessels and to facilitate federally funded marine research, one very viable option is to solicit support through various capital construction programs of the federal government for laboratory development. Two of the paths to funding under the annual appropriation are first, that an agency puts adequate funds into its budget to support laboratory capital construction. Locating the opportunity, having plans and cost estimates in hand and being ready to apply quickly when the funding is announced is a fundamental strategy for receiving funds in this manner. The other approach is to work with the office of a congressional representative willing to add an earmark to an existing piece of legislation to support the proposed project. Given recent statements by President Obama that he does not favor earmark funding, the likelihood of success using this approach is, at least in the short term, doubtful.

63

Option 6: Direct funding from the State of California At the time of this writing, the State of California is deeply in debt and it is conceivable that it may be years before the crisis in the California budget is resolved. However, we must not discount the state’s role as a potential source of funding, especially for lab facilities for the California State University. Envisioning City Dock as a site for a southern California laboratory complex similar to the Moss Landing Marine Laboratory in Monterey, the state will have a responsibility and role in funding those facilities. The prospects for such funding may seem bleak in early 2009 but SCMI is already supporting eight southern California Cal State campuses with vastly meager facilities than the state has provided to the seven Cal State campuses that share Moss Landing. As well, there is at least one possible funding source in the 2009-2010 time frame. Proposition 84 provided funds for Nature Education Centers around the state. The fund has $100 million to spend and is likely to grant between $3-$5 million in the next two years. As well, there may be additional funding available through other state programs such as the Ocean Protection Council. It is also likely that there will be future state bond funds to support environmental research and protection and, in the long term, these may be likely sources of support for later stages of the City Dock project. It is likely that no single approach will be sufficient to provide the funding to make the City Dock Marine Research and Development Park a reality. But, because there are multiple funding options, SCMI, its partner institutions and the Port of Los Angeles have alternatives for securing funding to this important enterprise. We also now have some broad cost outlines for bringing the project to reality, estimates that will need to become more precise as the partners agree on the nature of the project. However, this preliminary step provides a starting point, a foundation from which the details of the project can begin to emerge.

64

Section 8

CONCLUSIONS City Dock promises enormous benefits to the marine science community in southern California. The vastness of the site, proximity to the open ocean, waterside access for boats and researchers, a location that is not only historic but embedded in an historic, seagoing community, support of the host, the busiest commercial seaport in the U.S. and a well-established need expressed by a interviews with dozens of academic researchers, business leaders, community groups and public officials, all lead to the conclusion that City Dock is a site at which marine science can thrive. At the outset, the Port of Los Angeles and the Annenberg Foundation urged SCMI to take a wide view of the potential of this site, an admonition that has driven the work of the past 18 months. From interviews and presentations with civic and citizens groups to scores of interviews with marine researchers, the picture came into focus of a site that could host not only multiple marine research laboratories and facilities hosting researchers working at the cutting edge of marine science but also serve as an effective link between the research community and the residential community of the harbor. With sufficient interest from the business community, the site might even host new businesses utilizing research developed in the adjacent laboratories. But, for the southern California region, numbering more than 10 million residents in Los Angeles County alone, the prospect of a research complex supporting examination of marine phenomena from the global scale to the regional, and with a cadre of highly respected researchers whose backgrounds are already replete with international reputations for just such work, this site with its multi-dimensional capabilities is uniquely suited to meeting their growing needs. In dozens of conversations with researchers, a consistent message came through, “we can only do our best work when we have a lab facility that allows us regular, unimpeded access to our subject—the ocean.” Descriptions of hauling tons of research gear from Los Angeles campuses to San Diego to meet with a research vessel, and then perhaps forgetting a critical piece of gear necessitating a break-neck race back to Los Angeles to corral the missing component, made the case all that more compelling. Similar descriptions of remote sensing vehicles launched through the kindness of a local recreational harbormaster and then a malfunction in the vehicle requiring recovery from the ocean, retrieval of the equipment and a trip back to campus to repair a broken component followed by a return trip to the harbor to re-launch, all made the case for a large, comprehensive waterside lab all the more compelling. Moreover, the need heard almost universally from researchers was that, with ample space, their already rich capabilities could be enhanced. Biofuels from algae is just one example: the experiments needed to refine the process demand space unavailable on our urban campuses. This study has focused on four questions: is there a need for expanded marine research laboratory facilities in the region; if such laboratory facilities were built, would the community support such a project; how would such a project be designed; and how could it be funded? In addition, the study has provided background on marine research in Los Angeles Harbor demonstrating that a new project such as this is a continuation of at least a century of similar work in the harbor region. It also has provided background on the existing laboratory complex in the harbor, now shared by ten universities on a site of only 1.32 acres. The Port of Los

65

Angeles has envisioned a site that could be used by multiple research facilities including the California State University, USC, Occidental College, UCLA, NOAA and possibly other regional institutions needing similar facilities including the California Institute of Technology, Loyola Marymount University, other California State University campuses, UC Irvine, the Los Angeles Community College District and secondary schools in the area. Moreover, its use would not be restricted to educational institutions. Industrial users with a need for research and development facilities could similarly be accommodated in the ample covered space now available at the site. Using the expertise of faculty members now engaged in this research at the California State University, USC and Occidental College, the cadre of specialists now making use of the limited lab capabilities at the current SCMI Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory as well as others whose research is now limited to campus locations because of the lack of facilities at that lab, the report has explored the diverse ways in which a new laboratory complex could facilitate their research, especially where large amounts of secure, covered space is necessary to optimize their efforts. Through dozens of in-depth interviews, they told of work that engages the most basic aspects of global climate change to air and water pollution studies, cutting edge research to advance the technology of both finfish and molluskan aquaculture, remote sensing to detect both organisms and pollution in large swaths of the marine environment, and remote sensing directed at port security. The site even presents sufficient space to envision building a huge wave tank to study the impact of tsunami at scales previously impossible in a research setting. If built, a tank of that size would be useful to industry and to the coastal engineering community as well, to explore shoreline processes, erosion, sea level rise and other global climate change phenomena. Two distinguished architectural firms assisted in envisioning the design section of the study: Gin Wong Architects and Leo A Daly Architects. Their sketches are preliminary in nature but give a vision of how the site might be configured to accommodate labs starting with the initial phase of moving the existing SCMI facilities to City Dock. When the Westway site at Berths 70-71 is cleaned and ready for other uses, the location may be suitable as a waterside laboratory for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or other compatible use. Based on interviews with local stakeholders, it is clear that the community is interested in adaptive reuse of the existing transit shed warehouses at Berths 57 and 58-59-60. The architects focused both their cost estimate and designs on preserving and reusing those historic structures. Differing research as well as space needs will undoubtedly dictate multiple labs on the site, each built to support the unique needs of its faculty. For that reason, it is likely that a single-design will likely be overcome by the specialized needs of different types of research. Moreover, since the study contemplates labs used by both public and private universities, organizationally it will probably be most suitable to house separate laboratories on the site. Nevertheless, there are common functions that would apply to all users. For example, a filtered saltwater system should be a common feature. Likewise, classrooms, distance-learning facilities and lecture halls should be built in common. Similarly, the machine shop, woodshop, boat support and harbormaster facilities would be best operated in common. SCMI is a collaboration of ten universities with a fourteen-year history of working with one another and with the Port of Los Angeles. With that as background, and envisioning a marine research complex with multiple institutions as lab operators and partners, SCMI as an organization is in the best position to represent the

66

consortium. In that respect, this study recommends that SCMI accept the role of negotiating entity with the Port. As the lab complex is built out, with multiple laboratories and partners, SCMI’s role will likely evolve, becoming the facility manager for all of these common functions and representative of the complex. As the first tenant of the site, SCMI will also retain the corporate memory for construction of later phases of the facility. The vision of the lab complex is compelling because of the scientific advances that researchers report they will be able to achieve with new and expanded space. What remains is the task of funding such an enterprise. Initial—and very preliminary—estimates are that the first phase of the project—renovation and adaptive reuse of the transit shed at Berth 57—will require between $25-$27 million6 to achieve a lab facilitating the move of SCMI and supporting the needs envisioned by the faculties of the eight Cal State campuses that are SCMI partners. Phase 1 and subsequent phases of development will require detailed design and construction cost estimates as a subsequent task in the feasibility process. The report contemplates seven sources of funding. Of the seven, perhaps three are most promising. Federal economic stimulus funding would not only provide construction jobs for the conversion of the transit sheds but a completed lab would also effectively respond to an expressed national need to better understand the mechanisms of global climate change and develop remediation strategies. If completed with the public outreach facilities envisioned by the community, the facility will also serve to better educate the public about their relationship to the marine environment and to global climate change processes. The second is direct federal funding of lab facilities. This is an ongoing role of the federal government even when economic conditions are not so dire. Federal laboratory grants are made often to universities and a grant to SCMI, as the representative of its partner institutions would be consistent with that precedent. Further, the collaborative nature of SCMI promotes inter-institutional communication so critical in undertaking advanced marine research. The third option is to secure funding from one or more philanthropic donors. Many university facilities are funded in this manner because the philanthropic community understands that research funds from the federal government are most often directed toward research rather than “bricks and mortar” or capital construction. Yet, without the facilities, important research cannot proceed. Examples of major marine laboratories funded by private philanthropy are many. For example, the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute, funded by the David and Lucille Packard Foundation; the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego, initially funded by Ellen Browning Scripps; the Hopkins Marine Laboratory of Stanford University developed with funding from Mrs. Mark Hopkins of San Francisco; the Kerckhoff Marine Laboratory of the California Institute of Technology in Corona del Mar funded by William G. Kerckhoff of Los Angeles; the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, funded by Thomas Lamont, a Wall Street banker and the Henry L. and Grace Doherty Charitable Foundation; and the USC Philip K. Wrigley Marine Science Center on Santa Catalina Island funded by the Wrigley Foundation.

6 Landside costs only: excludes the costs of all dock modifications, new floats, ramps, other equipment and facilities to support the fleet of vessels that will be moored at the laboratory.

67

Exemplary work in marine science is now being conducted in the region in less than adequate facilities. This report is but a glimpse of the powerful case that the marine science academic community in the region can make to take maximum advantage of a new facility such as that envisioned by the Port of Los Angeles. Thus, this is an outline of how the City Dock site could be used by academia, public agencies, the public and perhaps private industry to advance marine science in southern California. It is the first step in articulating how the City Dock site can best be used to that purpose. With multiple parties, diverse research interests, various institutional environments and yet a consistent message that marine research facilities need to be improved in the Los Angeles region, both for scientists as well as the public, the challenge to all is to make a commitment to cooperate to make the City Dock Marine Research and Development Park a reality. Only by collaboration, cooperation, probably a good deal of compromise and much good will on the part of all parties will this become a reality. Yet, the needs are clear, enthusiasm for the project is unprecedented and with a shared commitment to make City Dock a reality, this is a project that can transform the region.

68

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 SCMI board of Directors................................................................................................... 69 Appendix 2 SCMI Institutional Organization Chart.............................................................................. 70 Appendix 3 SCMI Management Organization Chart ............................................................................ 71 Appendix 4 Existing space inventory at the SCMI Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory.............................. 72 Appendix 5 Estimate of space needs in a redeveloped marine laboratory, California State University, Ocean Studies Institute .......................................................... 74 Appendix 6 Estimate of space needs in a redeveloped marine laboratory, University of Southern California ..................................................................................... 77 Appendix 7 Interviewees and Presentations (partial list)....................................................................... 79 Appendix 8 Port of Los Angeles Marine Research Institute Opportunity Site brochure ........................ 82

69

APPENDIX 1

SCMI BOARD OF DIRECTORS (AS OF MARCH 2009)

Dr. Daniel J. Pondella III – Chairman, SCMI Board of Directors

Assistant Professor of Biology and Director, Vantuna Research Group Moore Laboratory of Zoology

Occidental College

Dr. Laura Kingsford - Vice-President, SCMI Board of Directors Professor of Biology and Dean, College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics,

California State University, Long Beach

Dr. Douglas E. Hammond - Secretary-Treasurer, SCMI Board of Directors Professor of Earth Sciences

University of Southern California

Dr. Donal Manahan – Member, SCMI Board of Directors Professor of Biological Sciences and Director, Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies

University of Southern California

Dr. Steven Murray – Member, SCMI Board of Directors Professor of Biology and Dean, College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics

California State University, Fullerton

Dr. Jerry N. Stinner – Member, SCMI Board of Directors Professor of Biology and Dean, College of Science and Mathematics

California State University, Northridge

Dr. Chris Lowe – Member, SCMI Board of Directors Professor of Biology and Chairman, California State University Ocean Studies Institute

California State University, Long Beach

Dr. Larry G. Allen – Interim Executive Director and Member, SCMI Board of Directors Professor of Biology

California State University, Northridge

Dr. James Moffett – Alternate Member, SCMI Board of Directors Professor of Biological Sciences University of Southern California

As of 01 September 2008, Dr. Larry G. Allen has replaced the long-time SCMI director, Dr. Richard Pieper. Dr. Allen is currently professor of biology at California State University, Northridge and assumes duties as SCMI lab director concurrent with his university duties. He was previously the chair of the biology department at Northridge. Dr. Pieper will continue his association with SCMI as a research associate and will pursue ongoing research at the laboratory.

70

APPENDIX 2

SOUTHERN CALIFORIA MARINE INSTITUTE INSTITUTIONAL ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE

71

APPENDIX 3

SOUTHERN CALIFORIA MARINE INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE

MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE OF SCMI

Dr. Larry G. Allen Director

Tom Chavez Asst. Director

Dan Warren Ops & Scheduling

Coordinator

Carrie Wolfe Research and

Education Coordinator

SCMI Board of Directors

R/V Yellowfin J. Cvitanovitch, Captain

R/V Sea Watch Dennis Dunn, Captain

Wm. Maggio Port Engineer

72

APPENDIX 4

SCMI EXISTING SPACE INVENTORY JANUARY 2009

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MARINE INSTITUTE Fish Harbor Marine Laboratory

Existing Facilities Inventory 2008 SCMI Main Building (square feet) First Floor User Type Size Admin staff Office 130 Admin staff Office 130 Admin staff Office 132 Gen use Copy room 240 Gen use Dry stores 190 Gen use Work room/mech 240 Gen use Wet lab 120 Gen use Restroom men 150 Gen use Restroom women 150 General Classroom/lab 405 Research Office/lab 415 Research Office/lab 726 Total first floor 3028 Second Floor User Type Size Admin staff Office 132 Admin staff Office 120 Admin staff Office 200 Gen use Library 120 Gen use Conf room 160 Research Office 160 Staff Office 160 Research Office 160 Research Lab 285 Research Lab 254 Research Lab 254 Research Lab 254 Classroom 700 Tank room (230 sq. ft.) Total second floor 2959 TOTAL MAIN BUILDING 5987 Shop Building Shop 1860 Tech office Electrical 300 Tech office Wood 210 Tech office Techs with restroom 435 TOTAL SHOP AND TECH OFFICES 2805

73

WAREHOUSE & VAN STORAGE Warehouse 2,400 Storage Nets & misc 160 Storage Van #1 Parts and supplies 160 TOTAL COVERED STORAGE 5,120 TOTAL SQUARE FEET (inside space) 13,912 SITE DIMENSIONS (sq. ft.) Lab building and parking lot 19,550 Warehouse, shop and staging area 26,600 West parking lot (40x280) 11,200 TOTAL LAND 57,350 Present SCMI Dock Space Sea Watch 65' SCMI (USC) Yellowfin 76' SCMI (CSU) Cuddy 20' SCMI (CSU) 3 - whalers 17-18' SCMI (2-CSU, I-USC) Proteus 53' USC Harmony 35' USC Vibrio 20' USC Boat Donation Program (as of 4/17/06): 10 boats 25'-40' SCMI

74

APPENDIX 5

City Dock #1 Project

Marine Research Complex California State University Estimated Needs Analysis

(draft of 073108)

# Description Alt.

Metric Sq. Ft. Gross

Laboratories

1.1 Teaching lab I; specimen prep 1,800

1.2 Teaching lab; living organisms 1,800

1.3 Faculty research laboratories

1.31 Faculty research lab 1 1,000

1.32 Faculty research lab 2 1,000

1.33 Faculty research lab 3 1,000

1.34 Faculty research lab 4 1,000

1.35 Faculty research lab 5 1,000

1.4 Faculty offices

1.41 Faculty office 1 150

1.42 Faculty office 2 150

1.43 Faculty office 3 150

1.44 Faculty office 4 150

1.45 Faculty office 5 150

1.5 Graduate research laboratory 2,400

1.6 Undergraduate research area 2,000

1.7 Wet lab for handling projects with seawater 4,000

1.8 Temperature controlled room 400

1.9 Cold and walk-in freezer room 500

1.10 Computer room/library 1,000

1.11 Instrumentation room 1,000

Sub-total (labs and research offices) 20,650

Storage/Staging

2.1 Storeroom 300

2.2 Net storage 400

2.3 Outside storage 5,000

75

2.4 Storage for cargo containers (8'x20" each) 640

2.5 Workroom 300

2.6 Warehouse 2,400

Sub-total 9,040

Support Facilities

3.1 Director's office 200

3.2 Secretary/reception area 130

3.3 Associate director's office 150

3.4 Fiscal officer and files 175

3.5 Operations office 130

3.6 Maintenance office 130

3.7 Education/external funded research space 130

3.8 Marine technicians offices

3.81 Technician office 100

3.82 Technician office 100

3.83 Technician office 100

3.84 Technician office 100

3.9 Copy/fax/computer service area 240

3.1 Machine shop 3,500

Sub-total 5,185

Teaching and Outreach Facilities

4.1 Outside classroom (covered) 2,000

4.2 Auditorium/lecture hall (100 seats, theatre style) 2,220

4.3 Conference room 500

4.4 Public interpretive center: tanks and displays (jointly with the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium 4,000

4.5 Museum 1,000

Sub-total 9,720

Additional Facilities/Features

76

5.1 Seawater system and tanks 5,000

5.2 Restrooms

5.21 Shower, locker and restroom adjacent to dive locker (male) Unk. 750

5.22 Shower, locker and restroom adjacent to dive locker (female) Unk. 750

5.23 Restrooms (2 per gender) 600

5.3 Dive locker (storage and fresh water washdown of dive gear) to be located on water side of facility 500

5.4 Air-fill compressor area 150

Sub-total 7,750

Vessel Support Facilities

6.1 Shore power for four slips accommodating research vessels from 65' to 90' DOCK SPACE

6.2 Space for mooring of other small boats at floating docks (approx. 600 lineal feet of dock space) DOCK SPACE

6.3 Space for transient large research vessels (500' to 1,000' of dock space) [Duplicated in Appendix 2] DOCK SPACE

Sub-total 0

Space Estimate (less unknowns listed above) 52,345

77

APPENDIX 6

City Dock #1 Project Marine Research Complex

USC Potential Lab Space Estimate (draft of 081808)

# Description Sq. Ft. Biology Engineering Laboratories 1.1 Chemistry lab (shared) 1,375 688 688

1.11 Special purpose secure lab w/access to chem lab (Moffett) 200 100 100

1.12 Special purpose secure lab w/access to chem lab (Nealson) 200 200

1.13 Special purpose secure lab w/access to chem lab 200 100 100

1.14 Special purpose secure lab w/access to chem lab 200 200

1.2 Animal physiology lab (shared) 1,375 1,375 1.3 Aquaculture lab (shared) 2,000 2000 1.31 Aquaculture lab (Hedgecock & Kiefer) 30,000 30,000 1.4 Microbiology lab (shared) 500 500 1.5 Molecular biology lab (shared) 1,375 1375

1.6 Marine robotics lab (Sukhatme & Jones shared) 2,500 1,250 1,250

1.8 Wave tank 1.81 Wave tank control lab 1,000 1000 1.82 Wave tank lab 2,000 2000 1.9 Lab supplies/storage 500 250 250 1.10 Cold storage room (shared) 1,000 1000 1.11 Constant temperature rooms 1.111 Constant temperature room (shared) 100 100 1.112 Constant temperature room (shared) 100 100 1.113 Constant temperature room (shared) 100 100 1.114 Constant temperature room (shared) 100 100 1.12 Incubator room (shared) 500 500 1.13 Industrial gas storage

1.14 Liquid N2 Storage Sub-totals 45,325 39,938 5388 Storage/Staging

2.1 Research van storage (10 vans @ 160 sf ea footprint) 1,600 1320 480

2.2 Portable radiological lab (1 @ 160 sf) 160 80 80

2.3 General staging for pre-cruise gear checkout and post-cruise sorting and cleaning 5,000 2,500 2500

2.4 Wave tank support space 5,000 5,000 Sub-totals 11,760 3900 8060

78

Support Facilities 3.1 Lab director's office 250 3.11 Clerical support area for lab administration 400 3.12 Conference room 400 200 200 3.2 10 shareable offices 1,000 500 500 3.21 Wave tank staff offices 2000 3.3 Clerical support 500 250 250 3.4 20 cubicles for grad students 3.5 50 individual lockers for students 3.6 Sleeping quarters for four (men) 3.7 Sleeping quarters for four (women) 3.8 Shower room and toilet (men) 3.9 Shower room and toilet (women)

3.10 Dive locker (storage and fresh water washdown of gear)

3.11 Kitchen Sub-totals 2550 950 2950 Teaching and Outreach Facilities

4.1 Classrooms with full electronic support for presentation and remote learning

4.11 Classroom (25 students) 4.12 Classroom (25 students) 4.13 Classroom (25 students) 4.14 Classroom (25 students) 4.2 Lecture hall (150 seats) Sub-total Additional Facilities/Features

5.1 Running and filtered seawater system through the facility

5.11 Filtering room 150 5.12 Holding tank room 500

5.13 Equipment room (pumps and electrical controls)

5.2 Promenade through the site or building (approx 2,400 ft long by 6-8 ft wide)

Sub-total 650

SPACE ESTIMATE (less unknown listed above) 59,635 44,788 16398

COMMUNITY Camilla Townsend San Pedro Chamber of Commerce Herb Zimmer San Pedro Chamber of Commerce Bill Lyte Harbor Association of Industry & Commerce Gwen Butterfield Butterfield Consultants and Harbor Association of Industry & Commerce Lou Baglietto Butterfield Consultants and Harbor Association of Industry and Commerce Elizabeth Warren FuturePorts James Preston Allen Random Lengths Joe Gatlin Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council Dan Dixon Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council Jack Babbitt Wilmington Neighborhood Council Wilmington Neighborhood Council (full Council)

Peter Warren Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council (full Council) San Pedro Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee William F. Lyte Technoplex Group Eric Natwig New West Partners, Inc. Todd C. Pennington Bovis Lend Lease, Inc. Jenny Chavez, Esq. Asst. Chief Deputy Councilwoman Janice Hahn 15th District City of Los Angeles Presentation before the full membership of FuturePorts RADM Jerry Aspland Former President California Maritime Academy ACADEMIC Presentation before the Ocean Studies Institute (California State Univ.) Board of Directors

Presentation before the Southern California Marine Institute (SCMI) Board of Directors Prof. Larry Allen Marine Biology California State University, Northridge Prof. Laura Kingsford Marine Biology California State University, Long Beach Prof. Dan Pondella Marine Biology Occidental College Dr. Linda Spink President Los Angeles Harbor College Luis M. Rosas Vice President of Academic Affairs Los Angeles Harbor College Bobby McNeel Vice President, Economic Development & Workforce Education Los Angeles Harbor College Prof. Douglas Capone Marine Biology USC Prof. Linda Duguay Marine Biology USC

APPENDIX 7 INTERVIEWS AND PRESENTATIONS (Partial List)

80

Prof. David Caron Marine Biology USC Prof. Suzanne Edmands Marine Biology USC Prof. Katrina Edwards Marine Geobiology USC Prof. Jed Fuhrman Marine Biology USC Prof. Andy Gracey Marine Biology USC Prof. Dennis Hedgecock Marine Biology USC Prof. David Hutchins Marine Biology USC Prof. Burt Jones Oceanography USC Prof. Dale Kiefer Marine Biology USC Prof. Donal Manahan Marine Biology USC Prof. James Moffett Marine Biology USC

Prof. Sergio Sanudo-Wilhelmy Biogeochemistry USC Prof. Astrid Schnetzer Marine Biology USC Prof. Neal Sullivan Marine Biology USC Prof. Eric Webb Marine Biology USC Prof. Weibke Ziebis Biogeochemistry USC Prof. Will Berelson Geochemistry USC Prof. David Bottjer Geochemistry USC Prof. Douglas Hammond Earth Sciences USC Prof. Kenneth Nealson Biogeochemistry USC Prof. J. P. Bardet Environmental Engineering USC Prof. Costas Sioutas Environmental Engineering USC

Prof. Costas Synolakis Coastal Engineering USC Prof. Urbashi Mitra Electrical Systems Engineering USC Prof. James Moore Systems Engineering USC Prof. Geoff Spedding Aerospace Engineering USC Prof. Adam Fincham Aerospace Engineering USC Prof. Gaurav Sukhatme Electrical Systems Engineering USC Prof. Gen Giuliano Urban Planning USC Prof. James Haw Chemistry USC Prof. Kevin Cannariato Chemistry USC Prof. Mata Mataric Computer Science USC Prof. Michael Quick Biology USC

81

James McElwain, AIA College of Letters, Arts & Sciences USC Linda Rock Viterbi School of Engineering USC Angus Mccoll Viterbi School of Engineering USC Prof. Tony Michaels Marine Biology USC Sandy Avarenga Marine Science Magnet Coordinator San Pedro High School GOVERNMENT John Dunnigan Administrator NOAA, National Ocean Service Rod McInnis Regional Administrator NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region

Dr. Mark Helvey Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region Anthony G. Morton Deputy Regional Administrator NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region Robert S. Hoffman Asst. Regional Administrator, Habitat Conservation NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region Julie Champlin-Gonzales Executive Officer Operations, Management & Information Division NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region Mike McBride Assistant Chief Enforcement Division California Department of Fish & Game

Eric Dockter Facilities Chief California Department of Fish & Game DESIGN Millard Lee, AIA Partner Gin Wong Associates Young Kimm Gin Wong Associates Brian Kite, AIA Partner Leo A Daly Architects Victor R. DeSantis Leo A Daly Architects Bill Bruneau, AIA Leo A Daly Architects Enrique Cabello, AIA Leo A Daly Architects Hraztan Zeitlian, AIA, LEED Leo A Daly Architects Anet Willingham Heery International Doug Graham, AIA Stratus/Heery International