1

Geomorphology of

Mission Creek and Bay:

Impact of Urbanization on a Stream and Estuary

Mary Brown

Geomorphology Seminar Spring 2007 May 18, 2007

ABSTRACT: Mission Creek, its salt marshes, and tidal estuary were significant landscape features in San Francisco until the 1870s, impacting the shape and extent of the city’s development. Rapid urbanization and economic pressure to develop creek, marsh and tidelands, beginning in the 1850s, encroached on the creek and tidal estuary. Over several decades, sand and debris were used to fill in the creek, marshes and bay; by the late 1870s Mission Creek was gone, its ravines and marshes filled in and waters enclosed by sewerage. The historic anthropogenic interventions to fill the marshes and culvert the stream are documented, as are the hazards these geomorphic disturbances had on subsequent urban development. GIS is utilized to document the expanding shoreline and rapid increases in early industrial development along the creek. A review of geotechnical reports from 1906 to 2006 reveal significant correlation between areas of “made” land and the magnitude of the earthquake-induced liquefaction.

2

Introduction

Mission Creek, its salt marshes, and tidal estuary were significant landscape

features in San Francisco until the 1870s, impacting the shape and extent of the city’s

development. Rapid urbanization and economic pressure to develop marsh and tidelands

beginning in the 1850s encroached on the creek and tidal estuary. Over several decades,

sand and debris were used to fill in the creek, marshes and bay; by the late 1870s Mission

Creek was gone, its ravines and marshes filled in and waters enclosed by sewerage. A

new canal was carved out of the bay and called Mission Creek, though this new creek

channel had no relation to the original path or outlet of the stream.

Many, including myself, were under the false impression that this one short

remaining section was a relic of the original creek that flowed inland 1.5 miles to a

location a few blocks away from the Mission Dolores. It is not. And though the tides still

ebb and flood through this ersatz channel, there is no visible evidence of the vast salt

marshes and tidal mud flats that once lined the creek and extended far beyond the shallow

bay. Twenty houseboats are still permanently moored in the Mission Creek channel;

though its north bank is now lined with newly constructed high-rise condos, recent

additions to Mission Bay’s biotechnology development. Despite its lack of authenticity as

a creek and encroaching vertical development, the houseboat community continues to

champion the creek and is currently utilizing creek restoration techniques to stabilize its

banks.

Figure 1 View of existing Mission Creek Channel (www.google/earth.com)

3

This paper will explore historic anthropogenic interventions to fill the marshes and

culvert the stream as well as the impacts these interventions had on subsequent urban

development. This two-part process of historical research and an investigation into the

ramification of these anthropogenic geomorphic effects highlights the urban hazards

resultant from the filling in of urban creeks and marshes. It’s an exploration into the

geomorphic response to urbanization and the impact on urbanized areas of this

geomorphic disturbance.

Methodology

Tracing the geomorphic history of Mission Creek entailed a significant amount of

archival research of primary documents including municipal reports, tidelands maps, state

legislation, and published channelization debates. Additionally, a review and comparison

of historic maps included the United States Coast Survey (USCS) maps from 1853, 1859,

and 1869. GIS was utilized to determine the changing stream channel width and to

compare the extent of creek and mashes. The number of structures adjacent to the creek

was counted for comparison between 1853, 1859, and 1869, as were potential

impediments to stream and tidal flow such as bridges.

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps were also consulted to determine land uses along

the former creek and marshes in the late 1900s. Historic drawings and photographs of

areas surrounding Mission Creek, both pre- and post-development were examined for

visible clues as to the creek’s extent and extent land uses. Finally, the Health Officer’s

report in San Francisco Municipal Reports were reviewed from 1871-1878 to uncover the

exact locations of the remaining creek and pond, as well as the discourse surrounding

creek and marsh fill.

Liquefaction from the filling in of Mission Creek and Mission Bay and impacts

from the 1906 earthquake were gathered from reports issued in the years immediately

following the 1906 quake. More recent hazards and geotechnical reports cover the 1989

Loma Prieta quake damage to Mission Creek area.

A Tidal Estuary

The mouth of Mission Creek empties into the vast tidal cove of Mission Bay, a

shallow crescent-shaped cove protected from the San Francisco Bay. The ebb and flow of

the tide symbiotically linked the creek and cove. Sediment and freshwater from the creek

4

were deposited in the cove marshes; likewise, tidal surges of saltwater flowed back up the

creek, creating salt marshes where high spring tides flooded the creek’s banks (Dow

1972). Lanzoni and Seminaria (2002) noted that at the geologic time scale, such tidal

estuaries are relatively recent and ephemeral features of the landscape. With time, the

deposition of sediment completely fills in the embayment; hence, it is an ephemeral

landform (Wright 1974). However, Lanzoni and Seminaria (2002 p1) also suggested that

current estuaries “tend toward an equilibrium condition” due to rising sea levels that

balance the rate of sediment accumulation.

Located between two prominent points (Steamboat Point to the north and Potrero

Point to the south), Mission Bay was created over 5,000 years ago, during a period of

rising sea levels. As the sea rose, the saltwater spread over 560 acres of tidal mudflat

(Olmsted 1986). An underwater ridge separated Mission Bay from the much deeper water

of the San Francisco Bay, at low tide the waters of Mission Bay reached a depth of only

one to two feet, creating a 260-acre shallow lagoon (Olmsted 1986). Surrounding the

lagoon was a 300-acre salt marsh, fed by higher spring tides and freshwater from

tributaries of Mission Creek (Olmsted 1986). These spring tides could reach over three

feet above the mean tide (Dow 1972). Extensive meandering tidal sloughs were carved by

inlets cut into marshlands.

The shallow depth of the lagoon allowed light to penetrate its waters, resulting in

abundant plant growth; this cycle of plant growth and decay led let to the formation of

layers of peat (Olmsted 1986). Sediment from the river and from the twice-daily tides

built up on top of the peat, creating salt marshes and islands within the lagoon, habitat for

cordgrass and pickleweed (Olmsted 1986). According to Olmsted (1986) this saltmarsh

landscape provided habitat for vast flocks of migratory and year-round birds.

Two processes were at work transporting sediment in this tide-dominated

landscape. Tidal wave action is particularly important in the outer portions of the estuary,

while freshwater fluvial processes controls upstream transport of sediment in the inner

portions of an estuary (Lanzoni and Seminaria 2002). However, according to Lanzoni

and Seminaria’s (2002 p2) research on the short-time scale equilibrium of tidal channels,

most of the sediment “received from the river ends up being transported and deposited by

tidal currents.”

5

Mission Creek

Spanish missionaries in 1776 described a spring-fed waterfall that fed Mission

Creek, as well as “fragrant manzanita and other plants and wild violets” along the banks

(as quoted in Olmsted 1986 p6). The 1.5 mile freshwater stream flowed down present-

day 18th Street in the Mission District, to its outlet in Mission Bay. Its watershed drained

nearly 8oo sq. miles (Alexander and Davidson 1872). Near its source, a small freshwater

pond (named Lago Dolores by the Spanish), fringed with willow trees was located within

the block bounded by present-day 18th, 19th, Valenica, and Mission Streets (Olmsted).

The earliest detailed survey of the area is an 1853 USCS map which shows Mission

Creek flowing from the pond along a sinuous path skirting the serpentine base of Potrero

Hill to empty into Mission Bay. At its widest point, the pond was approximately 230

meters wide and 500 meters in length (Brown 2007). Narrow bands of tidal salt marshes

lined the creek. The width of the creek and area of salt marshes increased significantly

(from an average of 30 meters) as the creek approaches the bay to 60 meters wide at its

mouth (Brown 2007). Small streams and springs (one of which produced 70,000 gallons/

day) fed the creek during its flow to the bay (Alexander and Davidson 1872, Mc Ilroy

1997). Twelve windmills are marked along the creek on the 1859 USCS map.

Rural to Urban Estuary

Pre-European populations and subsequent Mexican ranchers had little impact on

the morphology of Mission Creek and Mission Bay. However, San Francisco

experienced extraordinarily rapid urbanization and increases in population following the

discovery of gold in 1848. The population exploded from 457 inhabitants in 1847 to

nearly 30,000 at the end of 1849 (Olmsted 1986). As this burgeoning population grew, it

spread east towards the expansive salt marshes of Mission Bay and later, south towards

Mission Creek. The demand for waterfront land led to the filling in of various coves and

bays along the city’s waterfront. This rapid urbanization and speculative real estate

environment had a profound impact upon the form and function of Mission Creek, which

morphed dramatically, particularly in decades following 1849.

. A comparison of 1853 and 1859 USCS maps reveal significant increases in

agricultural lands developing in the marshlands and along the creek, particularly near the

pond and along the creek’s western bank. A new plank road crosses the marsh at Folsom

6

Street, bridges were built to cross the creek at 16th and Townsend Streets, and new

wharves protrude into the creek.

In 1854 the creek was declared a navigable stream “from its mouth as far as the

tide flows” by the state legislature (Sharpsteen 1942). It is unclear exactly how far

upstream the boats could travel, though according to a franchise contract, the bridge

crossing the creek at Potrero was required to provide for the unimpeded navigation

(Sharpsteen 1942). Shallow-bottom boats called scows were used to travel upstream

during high tides, navigation was described as:

“This creek ran with deep water at high tide as far as 16th Street, and small craft could sail as far as the old Mission Woolen Mill at 16th and Folsom. If you followed the creek out it would bring you around a group of Chinese vegetable gardens along its banks, around where 12th, 13th, and 14th” (As quoted in Mc Ilroy 1997, p53).

Numerous industries located close to Mission Creek to take advantage of the close

proximity to water transport.

Map 1 Increase in development within 200 meters from Mission Creek, from 1853 to 1859. Source: Brown 2007

7

Industry along the Creek

Early industrial development along Mission Creek focused primarily on wood and

lumber products (Walker 2004). Lumber from Northern California was shipped to large

depots along Mission Creek and distributed to smaller woodyards, planning mills, and

furniture makers along the creek (Walker 2004). Early manufacturing uses along the

creek bed included the manufacture of bricks from the clay mud of the creek bed, which

were then transported on scows along the creek (Olmsted 1986). Later, nuisance

industries such as butchers, breweries, and metal working industries were located on the

creek, far from the city center (Walker 2004). Offal from the butchers was dropped

directly into the creek, to be carried out to the bay by out-going tides.

Further upstream, non-industrial uses were found along the creek. In the late

1850s, the Willows, a beer-garden pleasure resort was developed along the willow-lined

creek and pond located near present day 18th and Valencia Streets. The Willows was

located in a depression “20 feet lower than its surroundings” (Olmsted 1986, p26). Swept

away during an 1861 flood, this site would prove prone to future natural hazards over the

coming 120 years.

Geographically, ship repair was ideally suited at Steamboat point, a point of

higher ground at the northern point of Mission Bay. Adjacent to the point was shallow

water (1-3 feet), that immediately dropped off to very deep water (20-30feet). This

allowed ships to be rolled on rail tracks built out into the shallow water, and hauled onto

shore for repair (Olmsted 1986).

A comparison using GIS determined that in 1853 there were 12 structures within

200 meters of both banks of Mission Creek, by the 1859 USCS, the number of structures

within 200 meters had increased 87% to 95 structures (Brown 2007). (See Map 1).

Direct comparison to the 1869 USCS map is difficult, as individual buildings are merged

with adjacent buildings on the same block; a rough estimate is at least 131 structures

within 200 meters from the creek, though this number vastly underestimates the actual

number of buildings.

Sanborn Fire Insurance maps of 1889 and 1900 reveal continued industrial land

uses along the site of the re-configured channel and along the former creek channel near

8

Division Street; however, lands uses shift towards residential on the site of the former

ravine and pond near 18th street.

Filling in the Creek and Bay

Less than five years after the start of the gold rush, plans were underfoot to fill in

and subdivide the shallow bay and marshes of Mission Bay; an 1853 map (Zakreski)

shows subdivided water lots filling in the entire cove. Filling in the bay accomplished

two tasks: the creation of made land for real estate speculation and the removal of

unwanted sand dunes from the central areas of the city. The northern part of Mission Bay

was filled beginning in 1859 using sand from a 100-foot sand hill on Townsend Street

(Olmsed 1986). Later, sand and dirt from Fourth, Fifth, and Sixths Streets was dumped

into the bay. Sand dunes were leveled and valleys filled in, creating what at the time was

described as a city that “has lost its former “lumpy” aspect, and now presents the

appearance of a level plain” (as quoted in the 1870 Langley City Directory, Olmsted

1986 p16). Steam paddies that leveled the sand hills were capable of moving 2,500 tons

per day (Hittell 1878). Over 5,000 acres of sand were leveled (Mc Ilroy 1997). In just 14

years, from 1859 to 1873, 450 acres of made ground was created in this former

marshland (Olmsted 1986).

Salt marshes along mission creek began to die off due to the filling in of mission bay,

which blocked the tides that “nourished them” (Dow 1972 p130). A key characteristic of

an estuary is its relatively free connection to the open sea (Wright 1974). Bay fill, and in

particular, the construction of a raised, railroad line (Long Bridge) which enclosed nearly

two-thirds of the opening to Mission Bay, cut off this access to the sea.

By the early 1870s Mission Creek had become the de-facto open sewer for the

Mission District. The sewerage from an estimated 80 blocks drained into the creek, the

resultant stench was described the City’s Health Officer:

“From away beyond Eighteen Street, where it originates in pond, down past 16th street, at its intersection with Harrison – the very recollection of which locality by a person who has visited it, is almost sufficient to sicken – to the outlet in Mission Bay, and even beyond, it smells to Heaven with a loudness and persistence that the strongest nostrils may not withstand, and the disinfectants of a metropolis could not remove.” (Gibbons 1873, Gibbons 1874 p 376-377)

In 1872 the state legislature approved an act to channelize the creek from Florida to

Seventh Street, and then from Seventh Street to the bay, for the purpose of drainage and

9

navigation (San Francisco City and County

1881). This act produced significant public

opposition and debate, specifically for its

proposed drainage function: “If we suppose

Mission Bay and the Immense watershed

draining into it, to be built up and densely

populated, as it doubtless will be in time,

and then suppose this drainage to be

discharged into Channel Street, this canal

would have to be filled with dredging

machines to remove the deposits from it”

(Alexander et al. c1872, p8-9). The plans

for a canal were modified to include both a

large sewer for drainage, and closer to the

bay, a canal for navigation.

By 1875, construction of the

Channel Street Sewer from Ninth Street to

18th Street had begun, much to the relief of

the City’s Health Officer, “Mission Creek, so filthy and disgusting, will then be

obliterated; the large pond between 18th and 19th Streets can be drained and the

contiguous low lands be also relieved” (Gibbons 1875 p303). By late 1877 the creek was

filled in (Mears 1877).

Although the bulk of the marshes were filled in by the 1870s, the process of

filling in the cove spanned from 1860 to 1910 (Olmsted 1986). Likewise, a review of

historic maps indicates filling in of the creek occurred first near the pond near its source.

The tidelands and water lots sale map of 1873 shows a narrow, straightened canal that

loosely followed the course of original creek (see Map 2). By 1878, this canal has

shortened to a section of Channel Street from Seventh Street to China Basin. This 200-

foot wide channel was and is a designated water way, and though it is sited in the middle

of what once was Mission Bay, it called now called Mission Creek.

Later bay fill included thicker rubble, left over from the grading of streets

(O’Rourke et al. 2006). Rock and dirt from the grading of the Second Street Cut in

Map 2 Detail from 1873 sale of water lot maps. Red circle indicates original mouth of creek. Blue circle indicates current start of channel.

10

SOMA was filled in the bay in 1869. Railroad lines built across the cove used 100,000

cubic yards of rock from the serpentine rock of Irish Hill to provide solid foundation for

the rail roadbed (Dow 1972). According to O’Rourke et al. (2006 p10), this rockier type

of fill is less prone to liquefaction and the “effects of the 1906 earthquake were less

intense on rubble-filled bay than sand-filled creeks.” Southern Pacific Railroad bought up

all the water lots of Mission Bay and by 1903 had filled in two-thirds of its water lot

holdings east of Long Bridge (Dow 1972). Informal garbage dumps along Seventh and

Eighth Streets near Berry Street from the 1870s to the 1890s also contributed to the bay

fill (Mc Ilroy et al. 1997). Debris from buildings destroyed in the 1906 earthquake and

fire were also dumped in the bay as fill (Dow 1972).

Borings made near the channel in 1983 determined that compressible bay mud

extended to depths of 40 to 130 feet, while sandy and clay soils overlying bedrock

extended to depths of 50-100 feet (Mission Bay, PD?). Layers of fill ranged from 0 to 57

feet, with an average fill depth of 18 feet and the average ground water depth was six feet

(San Francisco Planning Department 1986a).

According to channel cross sections taken in 1986, the depth of the creek channel

near its dead-end at Seventh Street is less than 10 feet. The depth increases to 15 feet at

the Fourth Street Bridge and 25 feet by Third Street Bridge (San Francisco Planning

Department 1986b). Tidal flushing of the existing creek channel is still most effective

during spring high tides, and circulation is weakest during neap tides (San Francisco

Planning Department 1986b).

Much of Mission Creek was filled with sand from the dunes that blanked much of

early San Francisco. Dune sand, according to O’Rourke et al. (2006), is loose, uniform

sand ideally suited to liquefaction. Mission Creek was filled in with dune sand by 1877

(O’Rourke 2006).

Geomorphic Hazards of Made Land

Early road and bridge development along the tidal marsh foreshadowed the

hazards of building upon “made” land. The earliest road connecting downtown San

Francisco to the Mission District was a wooden plank road was constructed in 1851.

Laying the planks proved a significant challenge where the road crossed the marsh. After

piles were driven to a depth of 80 feet without hitting solid ground, a system of cribbed

11

logs was developed to hold the planks. The road shook whenever traveled upon and

eventually sank five feet (Olmsted 1986). The planks on a second road on Folsom Street

floated away after a high tide overflowed the road in 1854 (Olmsted 1986).

Early San Francisco historian Joseph Hittell (1878 p432) described the salt marshes as

40-80 feet deep “subterranean lakes covered by a crust of peat moss, 8-10 feet thick.”

According to Hittell, after the sand was dumped atop the marsh to create streets, the

weight of the sand compacted the peat, and pushed the water to the surface. Iin the space

of a single day, the compaction of peat by filled in sand, could sink the land five or six

feet (Olmsted 1986). The marsh peat was solid enough to built a house upon, however, a

person “by swinging himself from side to side or jumping upon it, could give it a

perceptible shiver” (Hittell 1878 p433).

Subsidence of the former marshlands was a continued and well-known problem,

even before the 1906 earthquake. A 1902-1903 report by the San Francisco City Engineer

C.E. Grunsky noted that streets near the marsh subsided by .37 feet from 1901 to 1903

(Lawson and Reid 1908).

Earthquake-Induced Liquefaction

The instability of “made” land became abundantly clear after the 1906

earthquake. A preliminary report written immediately post-earthquake and fire

concluded:

“The most violent destruction of buildings, as everybody knows, was on the made ground. This ground seems to have behaved during the earthquake very much in the same was as jelly in a bowl…The filled in material and the swampy foundation upon which it rests behaved, in other words, as a mass superimposed upon the earth’s surface, rather than as a part of the elastic crust itself.” (Lawson 1906 p15)

This destruction was particularly apparent along the former path of Mission

Creek. Within a 4-block radius along upper Mission Creek and its feeder stream, Dolores

Creek, only one-third of buildings remained upright after the 1906 quake (O’Rourke et al.

2006). This area remained a hot spot during the 1987 Loma Prieta quake. Houses on Dore

Street, built on top of a sand-filled short branch of Mission Creek, closer to its mouth,

sank six to eight feet (Lawson and Reid 1908). The area with the most significant

subsidence and ground deformation, and corresponding loss of life, occurred at the filled-

in former ravine and creek bed located in between 19th/20th Streets and Valencia/Mission

12

Streets. The street sank 1.5 m into the sand filled ravine and the Valencia Hotel, sited

directly above, sank along too, drowning most of its 100-plus occupants (O’Rourke et al.

2006). (See Figure 2 below.) As Reid (1910) noted, the shaking of the earthquake

materially reduced the volume of sandy fill, leading in some cases to extreme subsidence.

Figure 2 Valencia Hotel after the 1906 sank into the former ravine located between Valencia and Mission. The 4-story hotel subsided to a one story. Source: www.sfpl.org

Lawson (1906 p238) noted the disparity between magnitude of intensity of the

filled Mission Creek and the adjacent bank of serpentine rock of Potrero Hill near the

creek’s mouth: “Here, along its margin, is found the most sudden transition from high to

low intensity that is anywhere encountered in the city.”

The filling in of Mission Creek also had a direct, significant impact on the extent

of the massive fires that devastated San Francisco immediately after the 1906 earthquake.

O’Rourke et al.’s (2006) maps of street subsidence, water pipe line breaks, and areas of

filled in creeks and waterfront demonstrate the remarkable correlation between made land

and ground infrastructure failure. Water pipeline breaks and street settlement are clearly

clustered around areas of filled in creeks, marshes, and waterfront. Two ruptured water

mains along the former creek channel near Valencia Street drained the College Hill

Reservoir of 43 million liters of water. This lack of water pressure prevented fire fighting,

13

and as a result, a significant portion of the Mission District was destroyed by fire

(O’Rourke 2006).

Figure 3 Pipeline breaks and street settlement following 1906 earthquake (O'Rourke 2006)

Lawson and Reid (1908 p240) observed that “land made by filling up spaces of

open water is less dangerous, on the whole, than land made by depositing a thin rigid

layer of filling upon a tract of marsh land.” However, they also note that portions of the

water lots were filled with broken rock from nearby hill, not just sand.

Mapping SF’s earthquake hazards zones has taken place over the past 100 years:

from Lawson and Reid’s (1908) map of earthquake intensity zones to O’Rourke, et al.’s

(2006) liquefaction hazard maps of Mission Creek and Mission Bay. (See Map 3 below.)

O’Rourke et al. (2006) compared maps of infrastructure damage and permanent ground

deformation from 1906 and 1987. Lawson and Reid’s (1908) earthquake intensity map

14

shows a clear correlation between levels of shaking intensity and areas of “made” ground

(filled in waterfront, covers, marshes, creeks and ravines). Lawson and Reid’s map is

early example of microzonation, an applied geomorphology technique championed in

Alexander’s (1991) contemporary article on urban geomorphological hazards

Map 3 Detailed view of subsidence of the filled-in ravine, creek and marshland after the 1906 earthquake. (O’Rourke et al. 2006)

Discussion

Over 150 years ago, the freshwater from Mission Creek and tidal wave action from

the shallow cove of Mission Bay formed an important merging of sea and land. Sediment

was transported by both fluvial and tidal processes. Neap tides played an important role

in overflowing the creek’s banks and depositing sediment. For several thousand years,

this estuary built up and outwards, and was one of series of coastal estuaries ringing the

San Francisco Bay. Now, an estimated 90% of San Francisco Bay’s tidal estuaries are

gone (Pettigrew 2003). Mission Creek, its marshes, and even the cove itself were

appropriated and filled in to create additional land during San Francisco’s rapid

urbanization. Public health concerns also contributed to the filling in of the creek. Today,

tides have very little impact on the landscape.

15

This research presented several challenges. In particular, the slight differences in

style of USCS maps from 1853, 1859, and 1869 precluded direct comparison. The

boundary of the 1853 map, for example did not extend far enough to include the entire

pond near 18th Street. Comparison between the three years was therefore limited to this

abbreviated boundary line. Also, structures from the 1869 coastal survey were not as

precisely delineated as in the two previous maps. This generalization of adjacent

buildings precluded precise counts of the increase in structures from 1859 to 1869.

The impacts of filling in the creek, marshes, and cove; however, are perfectly clear.

Earthquake-induced liquefaction and ground deformation is clearly most intensive in

areas of made lane, in particular, sand-filled ravines. Geotechnical reports from 1906 and

2006 conclude that ground deformation, damage to buried infrastructure, and structural

damage occurred most significantly in areas of “made” ground (Lawson 1906, O’Rourke

et al. 2006). Made ground composed of sand fill, rather than rock fill, was even more

susceptible to extreme shaking.

Early microzonation maps created by Lawson are an important tool to both document

past ground deformation and predict future earthquake impacts. Such microzonation

maps can be a useful planning tool to exclude inappropriate development in former creek

or marshlands.

16

References

Alexander, Barton Stone and George Davidson. c.1872. The proposed canal through Mission Creek and Channel Street, in Mission Bay, for navigation and drainage.

Alexander, David. 1991. Applied Geomorphology and the Impact of Natural Hazards on the Built Environment, Natural Hazards, v4, p57-80

Board of Tide Land Commissioners. 1873. Sale Map No. 12 Salt Marsh and Tidelands,

San Francisco Brown, Mary. 2007. Mission Creek Development 1853-1859. Map created May 15, 2007

for Geomorphology Seminar, San Francisco State University Dow, Gerald R. 1972. Bay Fill in San Francisco: A History of Change. San Francisco

State University Geography Master’s thesis. Gibbons, Henry. 1873. Health Officer’s Report, San Francisco Municipal Reports

1872/1873 Gibbons, Henry. 1874. Health Officer’s Report, San Francisco Municipal Reports

1873/1874 Gibbons, Henry. 1875. Health Officer’s Report, San Francisco Municipal Reports

1874/1875

Hittell, J.S. 1878. The History of San Francisco, and Incidentally of California, Bancroft and Co: San Francisco

Johnson, John Graver. 1907. The Mission Creek case in the Supreme court of the United States, October term, 1907. United Land Association, et. al., plaintiffs in error, vs. Lewis Abrahams, et al., defendants in error. Brief for plaintiffs in error. John G. Johnson [and] Charles A. Keigwin, attorneys for plaintiffs in error.

Lanzoni, Stefano and Giovanni Seminaria. 2002. Long-term Evolution and Morphodynamic Equilibrium of Tidal Channels, Journal of Geophysical Research, v107, no. CI, p1-13

Lawson, Andrew C. 1906. Preliminary report of the State Earthquake Investigation, May

31, 1906, Berkeley, CA Lawson, A.C. and H.F. Reid. 1908. The California Earthquake of April 18, 1906: Report

of the State Earthquake Investigation Commission, Vol. 1. published by the Carnegie Institution of Washington: Washington D.C.

Leopold, Luna B., Huppman, Reed, and Andrew Miller. 2005. Geomorphic Effect of

Urbanization in Forty-One Years of Observation. Reprinted from Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, v149, n3, September

17

Mc Ilroy, Jack; Praetzellis, Mary; Olmsted, Nancy; and Adrian Praetzellis. 1997. Vanished community : 19th-century San Francisco neighborhoods : from Fourth Street to Mission Creek and beyond : archaeological research design and treatment plan for the SF-80 Bayshore viaduct seismic retrofit projects, Report to Caltrans, September 1997

Mears, J.L. 1877. Health Officer’s Report, San Francisco Municipal Reports 1876/1877

O’Rourke, T.D.; Bonneau, A.L.; Pease, J.W.; Shi, P.; and Y. Wang. Liquefaction and Ground Failures in San Francisco. Earthquake Spectra, v22, no22, ps91-s112

Reid, Harry F. 1910. The Mechanics of the Earthquake Report of the State Earthquake Investigation Commission Volume 2:. Published by the Carnegie Institution of Washington: Washington, D.C.

San Francisco City and County. 1881. Description of public property, including Channel St. and Mission creek lands : with table of grades of the public streets, belonging to the city and county of San Francisco. Published by George Spaulding & Co.

San Francisco Planning Department. 1986a. Canal System: Mission Bay San Francisco. Report published September 1986

San Francisco Planning Department. 1986b. Wetlands / Playfields: Mission Bay, San

Francisco. Report published September 1986.

Sharpsteen, William Crittenden. 1941. Notes on Mission Bay and the Marshes and Creeks of the Rancho, California Historical Society Quarterly, Vol. XXI, No. 2

Walker, Dick. 2004. Industry Builds Out the City: The Suburbanization of Manufacturing in the San Francisco Bay Area 1850-1940. The Manufactured Metropolis, editor Robert Lewis, Temple University Press: Philadelphia p92-123

Wright, Frederick Fenning. 1974. Estuarine Oceanography, McGraw-Hill Book

Company: New York