Coyote Point - Pls help by sending email to protect access

Post general kiteboarding discussion topics here!
User avatar
tgautier
Regular
Regular
Posts:359
Joined:Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:32 pm
Contact:
Re: Coyote Point - Pls help by sending email to protect acce

Post by tgautier » Tue Jan 10, 2012 10:21 pm

email sent

amir
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor
Posts:165
Joined:Tue Jul 19, 2005 1:00 pm
Location:Oakland, CA
Contact:

Re: Coyote Point - Pls help by sending email to protect acce

Post by amir » Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:48 pm

Monday, January 16, 2012

Re: Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report for 300 Airport Boulevard Development Project

Maureen Brooks, Planning Manager, City of Burlingame
Community Development Department
Planning Division
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010-3997
Fax: (650) 696-3790
Email: mbrooks@burlingame.org


Dear Ms. Brooks,

The Potential Wind Conditions in the Bay East of the Proposed 300 Airport
Boulevard Development, Burlingame, California (Appendix I) of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for 300 Airport Boulevard does not adequately address the impact of the prevailing winds for boards sailing at Coyote Point shoreline due to the proposed development.

The summary of the Appendix I states:

In summary the project would not result in a reduction of 10% or more in wind speeds at "irreplaceable launching and landing sites", "primary board sailing areas" or "large portions of transit routes". Project impacts on recreational boardsailing in the vicinity of the project site would be less-than-significant.

This conclusion is not based on the study of the proposed design of 300 Airport Boulevard, yet is confidentially stated as fact. There is no specification of the assumptions and verifications between the general study (based on a completely different design) and the proposed development, which is 57% larger. In an apparent contradiction, the mitigation measure does state:

Since wind impacts are design specific, project-level analysis, consisting of scale-model testing in a wind tunnel, should be required for the 350 Airport Boulevard site if or when an application is submitted to the City of Burlingame.

I am in complete agreement that further study is required. As a Senior Engineering Specialist with an academic and professional focus in the study of fluid dynamics and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation, I have developed a wind flow simulation in collaboration with my colleague B.R., Ph. D, of the potential impact on board sailing at Coyote Point to show that the conclusions of the DEIR are incorrect.

Additionally, I am an avid kiteboarder with eight years experience sailing in the San Francisco Bay. I have sailed at Coyote Point, Ocean Beach, 3rd Avenue, Crissy Field, Berkeley, Stinson Beach, Waddell Creek, San Leandro and many other locations. This wide ranging experience provides me a feel for the wind and the obstructions affecting the wind at each launch site.

Coupling my professional knowledge and sailing experience, we generated a three-dimensional computer model of the site plan 4 buildings and a parking lot generated from Figure 2-5: 300 Airport Boulevard Site Plan and Figure 2-6: 300 Airport Boulevard Building Sections and Elevations of the DEIR is used as the input to the simulation using the commercially available software ANSYS Fluent. CFD is commonly used in a variety of fluid flow simulations in industry to design city infrastructure, automobiles, airplanes and many other applications.

The Coyote Point and proposed development simulation assesses a wind speed of 20 knots or 23 miles per hour from the West Northwest (WNW), which is the highest percentage (24.6%) wind direction as documented in Appendix I of the DEIR. The wind speed is that of ideal conditions at this site. Noting that the Bayfront Specific Plan community wind standards state,

A reduction of 10% or more in wind speeds at irreplaceable launching and landing sites, or a reduction in wind speed of 10% or more over large portions of transit routes or primary board sailing areas would be judged a significant adverse impact.”

A 10% wind reduction would be 18 knots or 20.7 miles per hour. Figure 1 shows the results of the wind shadow created by the proposed development. The contours of velocity magnitude are colored such that colors of yellow, green and blue indicate regions with a wind velocity below 20.7 miles per hours. These regions would be judged a significant adverse impact to board sailing. Figure 2 is an overlay of the simulation results, 300 Airport Boulevard Site Plan, and the results of the previous study of the site plan taken from Figure 3: Cumulative Wind Impact of Appendix I of the DEIR. The magnitude of the wind at the launch sites is reduced by as much as 50%, which is five times the reduction that would be judged significant. All three of the board sailing launch sites are within the wind-shadow and would be unusable. Noting that this simulation is only for a direction out of the WNW and that Coyote Point has wind out of the west and northwest, additional simulations would show that the extent of the wind shadow would be greater.

Figure 1: Contours of Velocity Magnitude (mph) of 300 Airport Boulevard Site Plan
Figure 1-Contours of Velocity Magnitude (mph) of 300 Airport Boulevard Site Plan.jpg
Figure 1-Contours of Velocity Magnitude (mph) of 300 Airport Boulevard Site Plan.jpg (280.28KiB)Viewed 2803 times
Figure 2: Overlay of Contours of Velocity Magnitude (mph) of 300 Airport Boulevard Site Plan, Board Sailing Launch Sites, Satellite Map and Swim Zone.
Figure 2-Contours of Velocity Magnitude (mph) of 300 Airport Boulevard Site Plan Overlay.jpg
Figure 2-Contours of Velocity Magnitude (mph) of 300 Airport Boulevard Site Plan Overlay.jpg (604.85KiB)Viewed 2803 times
These results are quite reasonable considering that the project site has a maximum building height of 144 feet and the launch sites are approximately 1,400 feet from the site boundary. The distance from the launch to the site is about 10 times the building height. The turbulent region behind buildings and other obstacles can extend to 20 times the height. In addition, the width of the building elevations from the northwest is approximately 750 feet wide and would cast a wind shadow of about 1000 feet wide when the wind is from the WNW.

These results show that the proposed development would end board sailing at Coyote Point shoreline as the wind would be reduced by such an extent that sailors would be unable to leave the shoreline to access the greater bay.

In addition, Appendix I does not address any changes to recreational board sailing since 1989. The sport of kiteboarding has dramatically increased in popularity in the bay area. The DEIR states that “there are no specific criteria for minimum wind speeds to support ‘good’ sailing.” This is simply not true as sailing equipment does require a minimum wind speed to begin sailing. Given the conditions in the Bay area and advances in sailing equipment, the minimum speed is approximately 15 miles per hour.

Appendix I also does not adequately address unintended consequences due to the proposed development. Regardless of any wind flow study by CFD or wind tunnel, the affects of any impact to the Coyote Point shoreline must be addressed. Coyote Point is the only site in the bay area with excellent sailing, a playground, lessons and concessions proved by Board Sports School, parking, and warm showers. As a parent, this is the most family friendly location to go sailing. The DEIR does not address how to compensate the public and local businesses if this excellent recreation area is degraded by the proposed development.

Personally, I feel that the San Francisco Bay area has an unfortunate history destroying the beautiful natural resource that is the Bay. For decades, developers filled in the bay or used it as a dumping ground. Fortunately, most of this damage was stopped, but not without permanent repercussions to the bay. Today, many cities in the bay have restored wetlands once filled with trash and concrete. One such example is the Hayward Regional Shoreline. Wetlands have been rehabilitated and the San Francisco Bay Trail winds thought the region for the public to enjoy the wildlife and restored natural resource. The DEIR does address improvements to the Bay Trail between Coyote Point and Anza Lagoon, but the large size of the proposed commercial development are in direct contrast with the intent of restoring the bay.

At a minimum the proposed development and EIR must address these concerns. A computer simulation using CFD must be used to address the final design of 300 Airport Boulevard. In my professional opinion, the design would need to be modified such that there is no impact to the recreational activities at Coyote Point shoreline

Please contact me with any questions regarding my comments or the wind study presented.

Sincerely,

Amir, P. E.
Last edited by amir on Wed Oct 18, 2017 9:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
le noun
Old School
Old School
Posts:1645
Joined:Sat May 21, 2011 11:12 am
Contact:

Re: Coyote Point - Pls help by sending email to protect acce

Post by le noun » Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:54 pm

=D>
well said and done!
Kites: 2020 F-One Bandit: 10m.
Board: 2018 F-One Slice 5'1 Surf/Foil convertible
Harness: Manera Union.
Wetsuit: Manera 5/4 X10D

User avatar
ramsey
Resident
Resident
Posts:776
Joined:Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Coyote Point - Pls help by sending email to protect acce

Post by ramsey » Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:59 am

what ever happened with this?

amir
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor
Posts:165
Joined:Tue Jul 19, 2005 1:00 pm
Location:Oakland, CA
Contact:

Post by amir » Thu Jan 26, 2012 12:30 pm

There's a little info about the meeting on the iwindsurf link. I sent my letter in but haven't heard anything.

Rob
Regular
Regular
Posts:492
Joined:Thu Oct 15, 2009 2:10 pm
Contact:

Re: Coyote Point - Pls help by sending email to protect acce

Post by Rob » Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:15 pm

There building a Dunkin donuts .

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests