Coyote Point: Developer Looking at Aerodynamic Buildings

From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis
Date: Thu Aug 05 1999 - 08:55:33 PDT


Received: from opus.hpl.hp.com by jr.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA298428839; Thu, 5 Aug 1999 09:01:44 -0700
Return-Path: <Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis>
Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA041558829; Thu, 5 Aug 1999 09:00:29 -0700
Received: from imo14.mx.aol.com (imo14.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.4]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1a/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id JAA11414 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 5 Aug 1999 09:00:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis
Received: from Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis by imo14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v22.4.) id 1NPTa23990 (4242); Thu, 5 Aug 1999 11:55:33 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <a7838c67.24db0df5@aol.com-DeleteThis>
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 11:55:33 EDT
Subject: Coyote Point: Developer Looking at Aerodynamic Buildings
To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis, Robberson.Bill@epamail.epa.gov-DeleteThis, OConnor.Karina@epamail.epa.gov-DeleteThis, harris4life@yahoo.com-DeleteThis, geohaye@hotmail.com-DeleteThis, CoyoteSurf@aol.com-DeleteThis, harris@synopsys.com-DeleteThis, bob@quake.net-DeleteThis, atomic1@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis, bdow@cisco.com-DeleteThis, TFeldstein@grmslaw.com-DeleteThis, mtischler@mail.arc.nasa.gov-DeleteThis, bjames@exponent.com-DeleteThis, Randyboz@aol.com-DeleteThis, MStokowski@quadramed.com-DeleteThis, carlyle@savesfbay.org-DeleteThis
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 22

Dan Levin, a VP for Glenborough Partners showed up at the Planning Commission
special meeting last night. He unveiled conceptual plans for a new building
design which is intended to significantly reduce the impacts on wind quality.
He indicated that they have looked at 3 different configurations using the
new building designs. He told the Planning Commission that wind tunnel tests
commissioned by Glenborough show that the new designs result in no
significant impacts to the wind and possibly even some level of improvement
in areas. Glenborough retained the wind tunnel at U.C. Davis, same wind
tunnel that conducted tests for the environmental impact report. Levin spoke
of wind impacts in terms of turbulence levels, so the changes he was speaking
of were not based on only looking at velocity changes as was done in the
environmental impact report.

The new building configuration is an oval shaped building which sits at an
angle so that it is between a narrow side to the wind orientation and a wide
side to the wind orientation. I think the buildings sit closer to narrow side
to the wind, but clear plans were not distributed. The are triangular
extensions off the side of the building directly on the upwind (west) and
downwind (east) sides. The upwind point seems intended to divide the wind and
feed it onto the curved sides of the building. The downwind point is at the
spot where the wind flows would ideally reconnect once past the building.

The first plan presented was 3 buildings of 7 storys with no building on the
SE corner of 301 Airport Boulevard property, the corner nearest the ASD shop
and upwind launch.

The #1 alternative is a 480,000 square foot project using 4 buildings of 4
storys each which radiate from the center of the lot to each of the four
corners in an 'x' configuration.

The #2 alternative is a 480,000 square foot project using 3 buildings of 5
storys each with omission of the building in the SE corner (same footprint as
the 3 buildings of 7 stories)

Comments by Planning Commissioners indicated that there is still opposition
to a 636,000 s.f. project based on traffic concerns. The Commission seemed to
indicate that the 480,000 s.f. size could be acceptable if the project
addresses other concerns they have. Most of the Commissioners want to see
some amentities like restaurant/deli, child care, dry cleaning in the
development. Commissioners are hoping for a plan that reduces traffic impacts
by giving workers on the bay side of the freeway reasons not to drive back
and forth over the freeway. A couple of Commissioners also indicated that
they wanted the development to connect to the community which could mean a
restaurant or deli near the Coyote Point side of the property that would be
easily visible and accesible from the public right of way.

The developer requested an additional special planning session which will be
on 8/25/99 @ 7:30p.m at Burlingame City Hall. The developer wanted to have
three weeks to refine the approach based on Commission comments. The
developer did not provided the new wind tunnel data at the meeting. Clearly,
we will want to see the new data and evaluate the results. There is still a
question of whether we will get the results directly from the developer or
through the Planning department once the information is formally submitted.

Peter Thorner
San Francisco Boardsailing Association
Coyote Point Committee



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:35:58 PST