Coyote Wind Block Calcs / Fishermans Park

From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis
Date: Wed Feb 03 1999 - 10:43:20 PST


Received: from opus.hpl.hp.com (opus-fddi.hpl.hp.com) by jr.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA058477614; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 10:47:06 -0800
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 AA077677612; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 10:46:52 -0800
Received: from imo22.mx.aol.com (imo22.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.66]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1a/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id KAA26997 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 10:46:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis
Received: from Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis by imo22.mx.aol.com (IMOv18.1) id DQOIa01428; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 13:43:20 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <379c084b.36b898c8@aol.com-DeleteThis>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 13:43:20 EST
To: bjames@exponent.com-DeleteThis, wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
Cc: ATOMIC1@WORLDNET.ATT.NET-DeleteThis, harris@Synopsys.COM-DeleteThis, bob@quake.net-DeleteThis, geohaye@hotmail.com-DeleteThis, ROBBERSON.BILL@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV-DeleteThis, Randyboz@aol.com-DeleteThis, MStokowski@QuadraMed.com-DeleteThis, karinaoc@earthlink.net-DeleteThis
Subject: Coyote Wind Block Calcs / Fishermans Park
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 205

WIND DATA

I have talked with Meg Monroe, the City Planner for Burlingame. She is very
helpful. She suggested that the best way to get any raw data from the wind
study would be to contact Marty Abell at ESA . I have a call in to him to see
what is available. Maybe I need to read the report again, but it looks like
they gathered data of turbulence/gustiness but did not analyze that data for
their report:

>From page 7 of the technical memorandum prepared by ESA:

>By measuring both the mean wind speeds and corresponding turbulence
intensities, high >wind speeds and gustiness (changes in wind speed over short
periods of time) could be >determined.

MITIGATION / FISHERMAN'S PARK

I talked with Meg Monroe about Fisherman's Park. It is a San Mateo County
Park. The land is owned by the State of California and it the end portion of
the larger parcel that runs west to the creek. The holder of the lease on the
larger parcel established the park in cooperation with the County. The park
looks to hold 60+ cars but is generally under utilized. The hours are 9 am to
5 pm and a gate is locked at 5 pm. The primary users are fisherman who night
not welcome new users if they feel that our use interferes with theirs.
 
See map:
http://terraserver.microsoft.com/GetTilesByXY.asp?XId=5430&YId=3468&TileX=5&Ti
leY=1&SrcId=1&ImgDate=07/10/1993&DSize=0

Meg Monroe did not think that the City of Burlingame could/would push a
developer of one property to make improvement on a different property they did
not own. On the other hand, if we find that a significant impact to
windsurfing exists and come to a deadlock with the developer (likely since
there are no easy on site mitigations beyond moving or redesigning buildings),
I think the developer might be interested in voluntarily coming in on a group
effort to add windsurfing access at Fisherman's Park.

Access at Fisherman's park would basically require a ramp and extended hours
for the park. San Mateo Parks and Rec would need to be convinced that the
benefits are worth extending park hours. The BCDC would have to approve the
ramp. In a perfect world I'd like to see a floating dock like at Berkeley
Marina that gets you 50' offshore into deeper water and more wind, but I
understand that BCDC has major concerns about docks vs. ramps and there are
maintenance issues. The north frontage has about a 10' sheer drop to the
water, so a ramp would involve a lot of concrete. I'd appreciate any info from
people intimate with the 3rd Avenue experience relative to the BCDC (and maybe
a contact name?). If nothing happens in the near term, park improvements and
rebuilding of the frontage would likely be required of a developer building on
the larger parcel that extends west down to the creek. It might be years
before that development occurs. Three major development plans for the parcel
have already come and gone.

Peter



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