The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SF PUC) is investigating the feasibility of daylighting historical urban creeks to mitigate flooding and combined sewer overflows in an attractive and multi-functional way in San Francisco. Yosemite Creek in southeastern San Francisco’s McLaren Park has been identified as a potentially feasible site in which to pilot a daylighting project, which could provide insight into other San Francisco projects and/or into a citywide daylighting policy. Drawing upon lessons learned from similar creek daylighting projects in similar cities elsewhere - as enumerated in Part I (Smith 2007) - Part II recommends a demonstration daylighting program in McLaren Park, sized to contain the 100 year storm. Clear goals and incorporation of monitoring and maintenance costs into the initial budget will be critical to the ability of the project to both inform future projects and adapt over time to meet goals over the long term.

The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission is investigating the feasibility of daylighting historical urban creeks to mitigate flooding and combined sewer overflows in an attractive and multi-functional way in San Francisco. Examining the successes and shortcomings of existing creek daylighting projects in similar cities elsewhere in the world can provide valuable insight for potential future daylighting projects in San Francisco. The following daylighting projects share similar hydrologic, geographic, and/or urban characteristics with San Francisco: Berkeley, El Cerrito, and Albany, California; Seattle, Washington; and Zurich, Switzerland. In general, the projects in the United States were initiated by citizens, while in Zurich a city-wide daylighting program was the primary impetus. The projects reviewed tended to be located in the most economically, politically, or geographically feasible areas, representing “low-hanging fruit.” They were most often sized to accommodate the 100 year storm event. Capital costs ranged from $30-3,000 per linear foot. Community acceptance varied, but generally increased over time. In the US examples, a general lack of sufficient monitoring and maintenance pervaded

This article explores the historical development of wastewater management planning in two cities: San Francisco and London. Both cities constructed their municipal sewerage networks in the late 1800s, and both cities designed these networks as combined systems, which carry storm water and sewer water in the same pipes. Due to differences in political and public attitudes towards sewage management and to the relative status of engineers versus scientists, London and San Francisco followed different processes in the development of municipal sewer systems. While London entertained a science-based approach that yielded innovative ideas in biological sewage treatment, San Francisco retained a traditional engineering approach that favored sewage conveyance over treatment. Though both cities eventually adopted similar combined sewer systems that have left challenging urban infrastructure planning legacies, London’s experimental methods a century ago provide a useful model for infrastructural problem-solving today, as planners attempt to accommodate growing urban populations with infrastructure solutions that achieve multiple public benefits. San Francisco and London are both ripe for new wastewater planning experiments that expand upon nineteenth century British notions of biological treatment, incorporating ecological, social, and economic benefits into municipal wastewater management.