ROSIE THE RIVETER / WWII HOME FRONT
NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK
City Council Briefing
NPS Role, Responsibility & Authority
Focus on Shipyard No. 3 & SS Red Oak Victory
City of Richmond, California
BRIEFING OVERVIEW
Key Questions Addressed
1 How was the park (including Shipyard No. 3) established as a "partnership park"? 2 What are the benefits of Shipyard No. 3 as a National Register District and part of the NHP? 3 What does the NPS General Management Plan direct for Shipyard No. 3 and the Red Oak Victory? 4 What is NPS' preference for location of the SS Red Oak Victory? 5 What is NPS' responsibility and authority regarding properties within the National Historical Park? 1 ESTABLISHMENT
& COOPERATIVE FRAMEWORK
Key Legislation & Resolutions
FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE FOUNDATION
P .L. 105-355 (1998)
Authorized feasibility study to determine
if Richmond's WWII sites warranted
National Park designation. Study
concluded the collection of historic
structures is "nationally significant."
P .L. 106-352 (2000)
Established the Rosie the Riveter/WWII
Home Front National Historical Park.
Authorizes cooperative agreements;
requires GMP be jointly developed with
the City. NPS owns no land or buildings.
Key Provisions of P .L. 106-352:
• Establishes the park to preserve nationally significant WWII Home Front resources • Requires General Management Plan (GMP) to be jointly developed and approved by City • Authorizes NPS cooperative agreements for interpretation and technical assistance • Authorizes NPS acquisition from willing sellers: child development centers, worker housing, Kaiser Field Hospital, Fire Station 67A
• Prohibits NPS funds for operation, maintenance, or preservation of SS Red Oak Victory SHIPYARD NO. 3 HISTORIC PROPERTY
DESIGNATIONS
1997
City Council Resolution 203-97
Authorized submittal of Shipyard No. 3 for National Register and California Historic Landmark 2000
National Register of Historic Places
Shipyard No. 3 listed as National Register Historic District (April 2000) 2000
California Historical Landmark #1032
State recognition of shipyard's significance to California and U.S. history 2000
National Historical Park Established
P.L. 106-352 incorporates Shipyard No. 3 as core resource within the park General Plan 2030 (Element 15): commits the City to "full development of the National Historical Park" by protecting historic resources, implementing the NPS General Management Plan, and advancing "Shipyard #3 redevelopment" as a designated "catalytic” project.
CITY RESOLUTIONS SUPPORTING PARTNERSHIP
Council actions reinforcing City's commitment to NPS partnership and historic preservation:
Res. 203-97 Dec 1997
Initiated National Register / CA Landmark process for Shipyard No. 3 Res. 129-99 Jul 1999 Committed City to NPS partnership
Res. 46a-00 /
64-00
Mar-Apr
2000 Shipyard 3 development compatible w/ preservation & public access Res. 61-01 May 2001 City commitment to Red Oak Victory rehabilitation & preservation Res. 100-07 Sep 2007 Adaptive reuse of Shipyard 3 consistent with GMP; stewardship obligation Res. 25-09 Apr 2009 City approval of NPS GMP; concurrence with Alternative B Res. 16-11 Mar 2011 Optimize economic and cultural benefit; ref. to Res. 8-09, 100-07 Res. 73-19 Jul 2019 Approved Cooperative Management Agreement with NPS 2 BENEFITS OF NATIONAL PARK
Economic, Cultural & Community Value
ECONOMIC BENEFITS
Direct Economic Impacts
• Heritage tourism revenue from Bay
Area and national visitors
• Visitor spending at local businesses,
restaurants, lodging
• National and international spotlight
on Richmond
• Job creation in tourism and
hospitality sectors
Secondary Economic Impacts
• Multiplied effect of park spending
on local goods and services
• Support for park construction and
maintenance services
• Catalyst for adaptive reuse and
revitalization projects
• Investment attraction for
surrounding areas
$3.3 million in economic output in local gateway economies (the sum of the direct and secondary effects)
CULTURAL & COMMUNITY BENEFITS
Historic Preservation
• Protects nationally
significant WWII
resources
• Preserves only
surviving Kaiser
shipyard
• Maintains authentic
industrial landscape
• Guides compatible
development
Community Identity
• Celebrates Richmond's
WWII contribution
• Honors diverse
workforce stories
• Connects generations
to history
Education & Access
• NPS interpretation &
programming
• Living history for
residents & visitors
• Integration with
schools & institutions
• Public waterfront
access
3 NPS GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
DIRECTIVES
Shipyard No. 3 & SS Red Oak Victory (2009)
GMP ALTERNATIVE B (ADOPTED)
Jointly adopted by NPS and City of Richmond (2009)
Core Directives for Shipyard No. 3:
• Defines Shipyard No. 3 as a "Historic Engagement Area" • Historic structures managed to retain WWII-era appearance • Visitors can explore WWII sites and structures to experience the scale, diversity, and complexity of the American home front story
• Some interiors rehabilitated to illustrate WWII shipyard uses; others continue contemporary uses
• Balances historic preservation with contemporary port operations • Historic Engagement Area may be enlarged over 25 years based on needs and Port goals GMP DIRECTIVES: SS RED OAK VICTORY
Alternative B Direction:
• Retains SS Red Oak Victory at Berth 6A (now Basin 5)
• Highlights the ship's role in conveying scale and significance of wartime shipbuilding
• Ship is central interpretive resource for telling the WWII Home Front story • Visitors can explore the ship as part of the historic shipyard ensemble Interpretive Context
The ship is part of a historic ensemble that includes not only the vessel, but the extant structures of Shipyard No. 3 — six buildings (four repurposed and in active use), the graving basins, and the whirley crane. This ensemble conveys the authentic setting of WWII shipbuilding.
4 NPS PREFERENCE FOR
RED OAK VICTORY LOCATION
NPS PREFERENCE
Rationale for Maintaining Current Location at Shipyard No. 3 • Ship is part of historic ensemble including extant Shipyard No. 3 structures • Location provides authentic context — visitors experience a WWII shipyard setting • Bay Trail and Canal Boulevard extend to southern tip of Shipyard No. 3 • Location offers adequate parking
• Interested in continued pursuit of General Plan Policy NP1.2 (Access to Resources) o Support the expansion of transportation options;
o Prioritize access by public transit, bicycling and walking NPS Authority on Location:
NPS expressed an interpretive preference for ship location in the park GMP and incorporated in Richmond’s General Plan. However, NPS may not direct physical management or relocation — that authority rests with City/RMA as owners.
5 NPS RESPONSIBILITY & AUTHORITY
Cooperative Framework Under P .L. 106-352
RESPONSIBILITIES: Shipyard 3, ROV
City of Richmond / Port
• Ownership and primary stewardship of
Shipyard No. 3 assets
• Prevent demolition by neglect
(Municipal Code 6.02)
• Ensure development compatible with
historic preservation
• Maintain public access
• Implement GMP commitments
National Park Service
• Interpretation and education
• Technical assistance on preservation
• Joint planning and review within
cooperative agreement framework
• Collaborate with City to implement GMP
• Consulting party for federal
undertakings
NPS MAY NOT: spend appropriated funds to
operate, maintain, or preserve the ROV
NHPA SECTION 106
When Section 106 Applies
• When a federal “undertaking” is involved
(federally- funded, -permitted, -licensed, -
approved)
o Must identify historic properties;
assess effects; consult with SHPO,
tribes, other parties; and resolve
adverse effects
What Section 106 Does NOT Do
• Give NPS regulatory authority over City-
owned assets
• Require City/RMA to seek NPS approval
for non-federal actions
TOGETHER
• Supporting the stewardship of this nationally significant landscape • Ensuring the public can experience the WWII Home Front story • Confirm preservation and access commitments under existing policy • Evaluate how future actions align with plans and partnership agreements
AD.1 Contract with Liftech
Consultants for Planning and
Design Services for the Relocation
of the SS Red Oak Victory
Charles Gerard
Port Director
April 28, 2026
Recap of Questions from February 3rd
• Can the Port move the ship without Richmond Museum
Association (RMA) consent?
• Yes, the Port can decide on the ship move.
• RMA is supportive of the study, but are they supportive of moving the ship?
• Like the Port, RMA wants to understand the cost and effort required (permits, etc.) before making that decision.
• What would the timeline look like to move the ship?
• Assuming a funding path is identified, approximately five (5) years for planning, permitting, construction, and ship move logistics.
Red Oak Provided: Cost-Benefit Analysis
Annual Revenue
Generating Activity
Current
Location
(2025)
Ford Point Location
(Estimate)
Notes or other relevant data…
Visitors $21,000 $400,000 to $600,000 20,000 to 30,000 for the first 3 years. This is predicated on $20 a visitor
Store Sales $15,0000 $100,000 to $150,000 Store sales historical average is 25% of Admissions.
The ROV currently is at 65%
Community/Private
events
$42,000 $100,000 Increase due to change of location and increased Marketing
Development/Grants
and Fundraising
75,0000 $350,000 Funds from Federal, State, and relevant Foundations, individual donations, and Business entities
TOTALS $153,000 $950,000 to $1,200,000 These estimates are modeled on Rosie the Riveter Museum attendance whose attendance ranges from
40,000 to 60,000
THANK YOU
Charles Gerard
Port Director, Port of Richmond CA
[email protected]
+1 510 829 2253
23