FINAL REPORT
This document is intended for the sole use of the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you have received this in error, please notify us immediately. Accessible document formats provided upon request. ® RWDI name and logo are registered trademarks in Canada and the United States of America rwdi.com
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC
MARKET
EMERYVILLE, CA
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
RWDI # 2102642
July 29, 2022
SUBMITTED TO
Greg Hadsell
Principal
[email protected]
HDR
201 California St. Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
T: 415.850.6321
SUBMITTED BY
Timothy Wiechers, M.Sc.
Project Scientist
[email protected]
Hanqing Wu, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Senior Technical Director / Principal
[email protected]
Shelby Ness, CPHC®
Project Manager
[email protected]
RWDI – Head Office
600 Southgate Drive
Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 4P6
T: 519.823.1311
RWDI USA LLC
421 SW 6th Ave. Suite 450
Portland, OR 97205
T: 503.243.2556
Attachment 3C
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RWDI was retained to conduct a pedestrian wind assessment for the proposed Emeryville Public Market in Emeryville, CA (Image 1). RWDI has conducted several rounds of wind-tunnel testing for the project dating back to July 2019. This report provides the results for the latest massing option (Proposed configuration, as shown in Image 2B) and includes the results for the Existing and Alternate G (2020 FDP) configurations for reference purposes (Images 2A and 2C, respectively). Using local wind records (Image 3), the predicted wind hazard and comfort conditions are graphically depicted on site plans in Figures 1A through 2C, with the associated wind speeds listed in Table 1 for the Existing and Proposed configurations and in Table 2 for the Alternate G (2020 FDP) configuration.
These results are summarized as follows:
Wind Hazard Conditions:
• For the Existing configuration, wind speeds at the majority of locations are anticipated to comply with the wind hazard criterion. An exception is one location on the east side of the railroad tracks. • With the addition of the proposed project (i.e., Proposed configuration), wind speeds at all locations are expected to comply with the wind hazard criterion with the exception of the existing location on the east side of the railroad tracks which is anticipated to continue to exceed the wind hazard criterion 2 hours per year.
Positively, all above-grade areas assessed are predicted to meet the hazard criterion. • For all locations tested, the average wind speed exceeded for 1 hour per year is 24mph, which is 1 mph lower than the Existing configuration (Table 1).
• For the Alternate G (2020 FDP) configuration, wind speeds at all locations are expected to comply with the wind hazard criterion.
Wind Comfort Conditions:
• On an annual basis, wind speeds at 12 out of 57 test locations in the Existing configuration are expected to exceed the comfort criterion of 11 mph. Most of these locations are on the east side of the railroad tracks. • For the Proposed configuration, wind speeds at 28 out of 72 test locations are expected to exceed the comfort criterion.
• For the Alternate G (2020 FDP) configuration, wind speeds at 25 out of 55 test locations are expected to exceed the comfort criterion.
• Wind conditions on the pedestrian bridge over the railroad tracks and in all pedestrian areas east of the site, including the podium of the existing Emory Station West, will not be negatively impacted by the proposed project.
• A comparison to previously tested configurations is provided in Section 3.4.
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Description ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Objectives .............................................................................................................................................................. 1 BACKGROUND AND APPROACH .................................................................................................. 2
2.1 Wind Tunnel Study Model .............................................................................................................................. 2
2.2 Previous Wind Tunnel Tests .......................................................................................................................... 2
2.3 Meteorological Data ..........................................................................................................................................6
2.4 Planning Code Requirements ...................................................................................................................... 7 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................ 8
3.1 Existing Configuration .................................................................................................................................... 8
3.2 Proposed Configuration ................................................................................................................................. 8
3.3 Alternate G (2020 FDP) Configuration ......................................................................................................9
3.4 Comparison to Previous Tests ......................................................................................................................9
3.5 Wind Control Measures ...................................................................................................................................9 STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................... 10
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1A: Wind Hazard Conditions – Existing
Figure 1B: Wind Hazard Conditions – Proposed
Figure 1C: Wind Hazard Conditions – Alternate G (2020 FDP) Figure 2A: Wind Comfort Conditions – Existing
Figure 2B: Wind Comfort Conditions – Proposed
Figure 2C: Wind Comfort Conditions – Alternate G (2020 FDP)
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Pedestrian Wind Hazard and Comfort Results
Table 2: Pedestrian Wind Hazard and Comfort Results – Alternate G (2020 FDP)
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com Page 1
INTRODUCTION
Rowan Williams Davies & Irwin Inc. (RWDI) was retained to conduct a pedestrian wind assessment for the proposed Emeryville Public Market in Emeryville, CA. This report presents the project objectives, background and approach, and discusses of the results from RWDI’s assessment.
1.1 Project Description
The project (site shown in Image 1) is located on the east side of Shellmound Street between 63rd Street to the north and Powell Street to the south. The project involves the construction of two buildings, Parcel A, which is proposed to be a naturally ventilated garage, and Parcel B, which will be a 162 ft tall mixed-use building. An outdoor public space with a bike pavilion and dispersed landscaping is proposed between the two Parcels. The general surroundings are characterized by low to mid-rise buildings to the east and San Francisco Bay to the west.
1.2 Objectives
The objective of the study was to assess the effect of the proposed development on local conditions in pedestrian areas on and around the study site and provide recommendations for minimizing adverse effects, if needed. This quantitative assessment was based on wind speed measurements on a scale model of the project and its surroundings in one of RWDI’s boundary-layer wind tunnels. These measurements were combined with the local wind records and compared to appropriate criteria for gauging wind comfort and safety in pedestrian areas. The assessment focused on critical pedestrian areas, including building entrances, the outdoor public space, select balconies, and nearby sidewalks and walkways.
Image 1: Aerial View of Site and Surroundings (Photo Courtesy of Google™ Earth)
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com Page 2
BACKGROUND AND APPROACH
2.1 Wind Tunnel Study Model
To assess the wind environment around the proposed project, a 1:300 scale model of the project site and surroundings was constructed for the wind tunnel tests of the following configurations:
A – Existing: Existing site with existing surroundings, including the approved Wareham Research and Development building (Image 2A), and,
B – Proposed: Proposed project with existing surroundings, including the approved Wareham Research and Development building (Image 2B).
C – Alternate G (2020 FDP): Previously approved massing from 2019 with existing surroundings (Image 2C).
The wind tunnel model included all relevant surrounding buildings and topography within an approximately 1200 ft radius of the study site. The wind and turbulence profiles in the atmospheric boundary layer beyond the modelled area were also simulated in RWDI's wind tunnel. The wind tunnel models were instrumented with 56 and 72 specially designed wind speed sensors for the 2019 and current tests, respectively, to measure mean and gust speeds at a full-scale height of approximately 5 ft above local grade in pedestrian areas throughout the study site.
Wind speeds were measured for 36 directions in a 10-degree increment. The measurements at each sensor location were recorded in the form of ratios of local mean and gust speeds to the mean wind speed at a reference height above the model. The placement of wind measurement locations was based on our experience and understanding of the pedestrian usage for this site and reviewed by the project team.
2.2 Previous Wind Tunnel Tests
Testing was previously conducted for development proposals on the project site in 2019. The November 1, 2019 pedestrian wind study assessed numerous design options against the existing configuration. The results of this November 1, 2019 report addressed the existing conditions, two PDP alternatives and the currently approved Alternate G (2020 FDP). These results have been included for informational purposes. After the design options had been narrowed to Alternate G (2020 FDP), RWDI prepared a supplemental report for Alternate G (2020 FDP) and the existing EmeryStation building. To the extent permitted by the design, the sensors used for the study in these two previous reports were consolidated for assessment of this project, along with additional sensors in the proposed plaza and pedestrian bridge in order to assess wind impacts. As a result of design changes, there are differences between the sensor locations and numbering compared to the Existing and Proposed configurations in 2022. It may also be noted that the recently approved Wareham EmeryStation Overland Research and Development building was not included in the 2019 wind tunnel testing for the Alternate G (2020 FDP) configuration. However, since the building is located to the northeast of the project site and as the majority of prevailing winds originate from westerly directions, the impact of this building is expected to be local, and it is not expected to significantly alter the predicted wind conditions on the project site.
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com Page 3
Image 2A: Wind Tunnel Study Model – Existing Configuration
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com Page 4
Image 2B: Wind Tunnel Study Model – Proposed Configuration
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com Page 5
Image 2C: Wind Tunnel Study Model – Alternate G (2020 FDP) Configuration
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com Page 6
2.3 Meteorological Data
Wind statistics recorded at Metropolitan Oakland International Airport between 1989 and 2019 were analyzed for annual wind conditions. Image 3 graphically depicts the directional distributions of annual wind frequencies and speeds. Winds are frequent from the northwest through west-southwest directions throughout the year, as indicated by the wind rose. Strong winds of a mean speed greater than 15 mph measured at the airport (at an anemometer height of 33 feet) occur 11.5% of the time annually.
Wind statistics were combined with the wind tunnel data to predict the frequency of occurrence of full-scale wind speeds. The full-scale wind predictions were then compared with the appropriate criteria for pedestrian safety and comfort.
Wind Speed
(mph)
Probability
(%)
Calm 11.8
1-5 14.3
6-10 36.0
11-15 26.4
16-20 8.7
>20 2.8
Annual Winds
Image 3: Directional Distribution of Winds Approaching Metropolitan Oakland International Airport from 1989 to 2019
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com Page 7
2.4 Planning Code Requirements
Since the City of Emeryville does not have a wind significance threshold, due to the proximity of the Emeryville and Oakland, the City of Oakland’s requirements were used for the wind tunnel study. The City of Oakland considers a significant wind impact to occur if a project were to “create winds exceeding 36 mph for more than one hour during daylight hours of the year,” these are referred to as Wind Hazard exceedances. It is noted that the Marketplace EIR included the following significance threshold: if the exposure, orientation, and massing of a proposed structure can be expected to substantially increase ground-level winds in pedestrian corridors or public spaces near the project site. Since the ambient wind (undisturbed by buildings) in Emeryville seldom exceeds 36 mph, a project must substantially increase winds for this threshold to be exceeded.
In Oakland, a wind analysis needs to be done if the height of the project is 100 ft or greater (measured to the roof) and one of the following conditions exists:
• The project is located adjacent to a substantial water body (i.e., Oakland Estuary, Lake Merritt or San Francisco Bay).
• The project is in the downtown area.
Since the proposed project exceeds the 100 ft height and is adjacent to San Francisco Bay, it would be subject to the thresholds of significance if it were in subject to Oakland regulations.
The Planning Code defines these wind speeds in terms of equivalent wind speeds, and average wind speed (mean velocity), adjusted to include the level of gustiness and turbulence. Equivalent wind speeds were calculated according to the specifications in the City of Oakland Significant Wind Impact Criterion, whereby the mean hourly wind speed is increased when the turbulence intensity is greater than 15% according to the following formula:
.
where = equivalent wind speed
= mean pedestrian-level wind speed
= turbulence intensity
Wind Comfort
Although not applicable towards Significant Wind Impacts as defined by the City of Oakland, wind comfort speeds have been calculated for informational purposes. The comfort criteria are that wind speeds do not exceed 11 mph for more than 10% of the time during the year, when calculated for daylight hours, in substantial pedestrian use areas. A lower wind speed threshold of 7 mph may be considered for public seating areas where calmer wind conditions are ideal.
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com Page 8
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This section presents the results of the wind tunnel measurements analyzed in terms of equivalent wind speeds as defined by the equation in Section 2.3.
The wind hazard conditions for the Existing and Proposed configurations are graphically depicted on site plans in Figures 1A and 1B located in the “Figures” section of this report. Table 1, located in the “Tables” section, numerically presents these results and lists the predicted wind speed to be exceeded one hour per year at each location. The predicted number of hours per year that the wind hazard criterion (one-minute wind speed of 36 mph) is exceeded is also provided. A letter “e” in the last column of each configuration indicates the wind hazard exceedance.
The wind comfort results for the Existing and Proposed configurations are graphically depicted on site plans in Figures 2A and 2B, where locations have been color-coded according to the criteria of the 7 mph and 11 mph comfort categories explained in the Planning Code Requirements. This data is also numerically presented in Table 1. For all the measurement points, the equivalent wind speeds exceeded 10% of time are listed (please note that wind speeds will be below these values for 90% of the time). Each location is marked as a comfort exceedance if the 11-mph threshold is exceeded. A letter “e” in the last column of each configuration indicates a wind comfort exceedance.
For reference purposes, the wind hazard and comfort results for the Alternate G (2020 FDP) configuration is shown in Figures 1C and 2C with the associated wind speeds listed in Table 2.
The following is a detailed discussion of the suitability of the predicted wind conditions for each area of interest.
3.1 Existing Configuration
For the Existing configuration, the 1-hour per year wind hazard criterion is expected to be met for the majority of the locations assessed. An exception is Location 44, located on the east side of the railroad tracks (Figure 1A). For all locations tested, the average wind speed which is exceeded for 1 hour per year is approximately 25 mph (Table 1).
For all the 57 test locations, the average wind speed for 90% of the time is 10 mph (Table 1). Wind speeds at 12 test locations exceed the Planning Code's pedestrian comfort criterion of 11 mph (see Figure 2A). On average, winds exceed the comfort criterion 8% of the time when all test locations are considered.
3.2 Proposed Configuration
With the addition of the proposed project, the 1-hour per year wind hazard criterion is expected to be met at all test locations with the exception of the existing location (Location 44) on the east side of the railroad tracks (Figure 1B).
For all locations tested, the average wind speed exceeded for 1 hour per year is 24 mph, which is 1 mph lower than the Existing configuration and 2 mph lower than the Alternate G (2020 FDP) configuration (Table 1).
For the 72 test locations, the average wind speed for 90% of the time is 11 mph (Table 1). Wind speeds at 28 test locations exceed the Planning Code's pedestrian comfort criterion of 11 mph (see Figure 2B). On average, winds exceed the comfort criterion 10% of the time when all applicable test locations are considered. There is no negative wind impact of the project on the adjacent pedestrian bridge and all pedestrian areas across the railway tracks, including on the podium of the existing Emory Station West.
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com Page 9
Wind speeds on above-grade areas of the proposed project, including on the balconies, pavilion roof and the parking garage, were also measured and they are expected to meet the wind hazard criterion of 36 mph (Locations 58 through 72, in Figure 1B).
3.3 Alternate G (2020 FDP) Configuration
For the Alternate G (2020 FDP) configuration, the 1-hour per year wind hazard criterion is expected to be met at all test locations (Figure 1C). For all locations tested, the average wind speed exceeded for 1 hour per year is 26 mph (Table 2).
For the 55 test locations (Sensor 1 is covered by the Alternate G (2020 FDP) massing), the average wind speed for 90% of the time is approximately 11 mph (Table 2). Wind speeds at 25 test locations exceed the Planning Code's pedestrian comfort criterion of 11 mph (see Figure 2C). On average, winds exceed the comfort criterion approximately 12% of the time when all applicable test locations are considered.
3.4 Comparison to Previous Tests
As mentioned in the Executive Summary, RWDI has conducted several rounds of wind-tunnel testing for the project dating back to July 2019. Below is a table that summarizes the wind hazard and comfort conditions from select configurations of interest. Additional details and photographs of the configurations are provided in their respective reports previously issued by RWDI. It may be noted that differences between the sensor locations and numbering between the configurations exist and therefore this is not a direct comparison.
3.5 Wind Control Measures
Wind speeds may be further mitigated by the use of landscaping, wind screens or other techniques at grade and above-grade. Depending on design and placement, these methods may reduce the wind speeds to below the hazard speed. RWDI recommends discussing these options further as the design progresses.
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com Page 10
STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS
Limitations
This report entitled Emeryville Public Market (July 14, 2022) was prepared by Rowan Williams Davies & Irwin, Inc. (“RWDI”) for HDR (“Client”). The findings and conclusions presented in this report have been prepared for the Client and are specific to the project described herein (“Project”). The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on the information available to RWDI when this report was prepared.
The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report have also been made for the specific purpose(s) set out herein. Should the Client or any other third party utilize the report and/or implement the conclusions and recommendations contained therein for any other purpose or project without the involvement of RWDI, the Client or such third party assumes any and all risk of any and all consequences arising from such use and RWDI accepts no responsibility for any liability, loss, or damage of any kind suffered by Client or any other third party arising therefrom.
Finally, it is imperative that the Client and/or any party relying on the conclusions and recommendations in this report carefully review the stated assumptions contained herein and to understand the different factors which may impact the conclusions and recommendations provided.
Design Assumptions
RWDI confirms that the pedestrian wind assessment (the “Assessment”) discussed herein was performed by RWDI in accordance with generally accepted professional standards at the time when the Assessment was performed and in the location of the Project. No other representations, warranties, or guarantees are made with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the information, findings, recommendations, or conclusions contained in this Report.
This report is not a legal opinion regarding compliance with applicable laws.
The findings and recommendations set out in this report are based on the following information disclosed to RWDI.
Drawings and information listed below were received from HDR and used to construct the scale model of the proposed Emeryville Public Market in Emeryville, CA (“Project Data”).
File Name File Type
Date Received
(dd/mm/yyyy)
13-013_Parcel B Massing for analysis SketchUp 30/10/2019 10279661_EPMD_A_2021 Revit 13/06/2022
20220512_Public Market FDP update R6 PDF 14/06/2022
The recommendations and conclusions are based on the assumption that the Project Data and Climate Data are accurate and complete. RWDI assumes no responsibility for any inaccuracy or deficiency in information it has received from others. In addition, the recommendations and conclusions in this report are partially based on historical data and can be affected by a number of external factors, including but not limited to Project design,
PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY
EMERYVILLE PUBLIC MARKET
RWDI #2102642
JULY 29, 2022
rwdi.com Page 11
quality of materials and construction, site conditions, meteorological events, and climate change. As such, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report do not list every possible outcome.
The opinions in this report can only be relied up on to the extent that the Project Data and Project Specific Conditions have not changed. Any change in the Project Data or Project Specific Conditions not reflected in this report can impact and/or alter the recommendations and conclusions in this report. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the Client and/or any other third party reviewing the recommendations and conclusions in this report to contact RWDI in the event of any change in the Project Data and Project Specific Conditions in order to determine whether any such change(s) may impact the assumptions upon which the recommendations and conclusions were made.
HORTON STREET
59TH STREET
62ND STREET SHELLMOUND STREET MARKET STREET
EMORY STATION WEST
EXISTING
BUILDING
44 49 50
46 48
47 51 52 53
3 30
7 10 11
13 14 15
12 9
8 6
4 5
2 1
17 16
18 36
43 35
34 45
37 41 40
42 39
38 32
33 26
27 19
25 28
31 29
24 23
22 21
20 57
56 55
54 Emeryville Public Market - Emeryville, CA
Figure:
Approx. Scale:
Date Revised:
True North Drawn by: JD
0 50 100ft
Project #2102642 Jul. 12, 2022
1"=100'
HAZARD CATEGORIES:
LEGEND: SENSOR LOCATION:
Pass
Exceeded
Grade Level
Existing Configuration
Annual (January to December, 0:00 to 23:00)
Pedestrian Wind Hazard Conditions 1A
MITIGATION:
Existing Trees
Proposed Trees
Existing Planters
HORTON STREET
59TH STREET
62ND STREET SHELLMOUND STREET MARKET STREET
PARCEL A PARKING
GARAGE ABOVE REMOVED
FOR CLARITY OF SENSORS
PARCEL B
BUILDING
ABOVE
REMOVED
FOR
CLARITY OF
SENSORS
EMORY STATION WEST
PARCEL B
PAVILION
44 49 50
46 48
47 51 52 53
3 30
7 10 11
13 14 15
12 9
8 6
4 5
2 1
17 16
18 36
43 35
34 45
37 41 40
42 39
38 32
33 26
27 19
25 28
31 29
24 23
22 21
20 57
56 55
54 68
72 71
70 69
67 66
65 64
63 LEVEL 2
LEVEL 5
LEVEL 6
LEVEL 9
60 LEVEL 10
58 61
62 59
Emeryville Public Market - Emeryville, CA
Figure:
Approx. Scale:
Date Revised:
True North Drawn by: JD
0 50 100ft
Project #2102642 Jul. 12, 2022
1"=100'
Isometric View Parcel B Amenity Levels
Scale: 1"=120' Pavilion Rooftop Sensors / Parking Garage 1B
Proposed Configuration
Annual (January to December, 0:00 to 23:00)
Pedestrian Wind Comfort Conditions
COMFORT CATEGORIES:
LEGEND:
SENSOR LOCATION:
Grade Level
Pass
Existing
Parking Garage / Public Right
of Way / Emory Station West
Rooftop Level
MITIGATION:
Existing Trees
Proposed Trees
Existing Planters
SHELLMOUND STREET
59TH STREET
OVERLAND AVENUE HORTON STREET
59TH STREET
62ND STREET
63RD STREET MARKET STREET
63RD STREET EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING BUILDING
BUILDING ABOVE
REMOVED FOR
CLARITY OF
TERRACE LEVEL
SENSORS
LEVEL 6
48 49 50
46 47
56 55 54
53 52 51
45 44
36 37
43 41 40
42 39
38 32
34 35
33 26
27 19
25 28
31 30
29 24
23 22
21 20
18 17
16 15
8 7
6 5
4 3
14 13
9 2
10 11
12 Emeryville Public Market - Parcel B - Emeryville, CA Figure:
Approx. Scale:
Date Revised:
True North Drawn by: GRE
0 50 100ft
Project #1902969 Dec. 3, 2019
1"=100'
HAZARD CATEGORIES:
LEGEND: SENSOR LOCATION:
Grade Level
Pass
Exceeded
Pedestrian Wind Hazard Conditions
Alternate G
Annual
1C
Terrace Level Existing Landscaping
Proposed Landscaping
Solid Parapet
(2020 FDP)
HORTON STREET
59TH STREET
62ND STREET SHELLMOUND STREET MARKET STREET
EMORY STATION WEST
EXISTING
BUILDING
44 49 50
46 48
47 51 52 53
3 30
7 10 11
13 14 15
12 9
8 6
4 5
2 1
17 16
18 36
43 35
34 45
37 41 40
42 39
38 32
33 26
27 19
25 28
31 29
24 23
22 21
20 57
56 55
54 Emeryville Public Market - Emeryville, CA
Figure:
Approx. Scale:
Date Revised:
True North Drawn by: JD
0 50 100ft
Project #2102642 Jul. 12, 2022
1"=100'
COMFORT CATEGORIES:
LEGEND: SENSOR LOCATION:
Grade Level
1 - 7 mph
8 - 11 mph
> 11 mph
2A
Existing Configuration
Annual (January to December, 0:00 to 23:00)
Pedestrian Wind Comfort Conditions
Existing Trees
Proposed Trees
Existing Planters
MITIGATION:
HORTON STREET
59TH STREET
62ND STREET SHELLMOUND STREET MARKET STREET
PARCEL A PARKING
GARAGE ABOVE REMOVED
FOR CLARITY OF SENSORS
PARCEL B
BUILDING
ABOVE
REMOVED
FOR
CLARITY OF
SENSORS
EMORY STATION WEST
PARCEL B
PAVILION
44 49 50
46 48
47 51 52 53
3 30
7 10 11
13 14 15
12 9
8 6
4 5
2 1
17 16
18 36
43 35
34 45
37 41 40
42 39
38 32
33 26
27 19
25 28
31 29
24 23
22 21
20 57
56 55
54 68
72 71
70 69
67 66
65 64
63 LEVEL 2
LEVEL 5
LEVEL 6
LEVEL 9
60 LEVEL 10
58 61
62 59
Emeryville Public Market - Emeryville, CA
Figure:
Approx. Scale:
Date Revised:
True North Drawn by: JD
0 50 100ft
Project #2102642 Jul. 12, 2022
2B
1"=100'
COMFORT CATEGORIES:
LEGEND:
SENSOR LOCATION:
Grade Level
1 - 7 mph
8 - 11 mph
> 11 mph
Parking Garage / Public Right
of Way / Emory Station West
Rooftop Level
Proposed Configuration
Annual (January to December, 0:00 to 23:00)
Pedestrian Wind Comfort Conditions
Isometric View Parcel B Amenity Levels
Scale: 1"=120' Pavilion Rooftop Sensors / Parking Garage MITIGATION:
Existing Trees
Proposed Trees
Existing Planters
SHELLMOUND STREET
59TH STREET
OVERLAND AVENUE HORTON STREET
59TH STREET
62ND STREET
63RD STREET MARKET STREET
63RD STREET EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING BUILDING
BUILDING ABOVE
REMOVED FOR
CLARITY OF
TERRACE LEVEL
SENSORS
LEVEL 6
48 49 50
46 47
56 55 54
53 52 51
45 44
36 37
43 41 40
42 39
38 32
34 35
33 26
27 19
25 28
31 30
29 24
23 22
21 20
18 17
16 15
8 7
6 5
4 3
14 13
9 2
10 11
12 Emeryville Public Market - Parcel B - Emeryville, CA Figure:
Approx. Scale:
Date Revised:
True North Drawn by: GRE
0 50 100ft
Project #1902969 Dec. 3, 2019
1"=100'
COMFORT CATEGORIES:
LEGEND: SENSOR LOCATION:
Grade Level
1 - 7 mph
8 - 11 mph
> 11 mph
Pedestrian Wind Comfort Conditions
Alternate G
Annual
2C
Terrace Level Existing Landscaping
Proposed Landscaping
Solid Parapet
(2020 FDP)
Table 1: Pedestrian Wind Hazard and Comfort Conditions
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
Hours per
Year
Exceeding
Hours
Change
Exceeds
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
% of Time
Exceeding
Speed
Change
(mph)
Exceeds
1 Existing 24 0 - 10 5 -
Proposed 25 0 0 12 13 2 e
2 Existing 25 0 - 8 3 -
Proposed 25 0 0 12 13 4 e
3 Existing 27 0 - 9 4 -
Proposed 24 0 0 11 10 2
4 Existing 23 0 - 10 6 -
Proposed 19 0 0 9 3 -1
5 Existing 23 0 - 10 6 -
Proposed 28 0 0 12 15 2 e
6 Existing 29 0 - 11 10 -
Proposed 28 0 0 13 19 2 e
7 Existing 22 0 - 9 5 -
Proposed 32 0 0 15 27 6 e
8 Existing 26 0 - 9 4 -
Proposed 24 0 0 11 10 2
9 Existing 27 0 - 10 5 -
Proposed 27 0 0 12 15 2 e
10 Existing 24 0 - 9 4 -
Proposed 26 0 0 12 15 3 e
11 Existing 25 0 - 9 4 -
Proposed 21 0 0 10 4 1
12 Existing 26 0 - 10 6 -
Proposed 21 0 0 9 4 -1
13 Existing 22 0 - 9 3 -
Proposed 21 0 0 10 6 1
14 Existing 24 0 - 9 3 -
Proposed 16 0 0 7 0 -2
15 Existing 23 0 - 10 5 -
Proposed 17 0 0 6 1 -4
16 Existing 22 0 - 9 4 -
Proposed 20 0 0 10 5 1
17 Existing 24 0 - 11 10 -
Proposed 19 0 0 9 3 -2
Location Configuration
WIND HAZARD WIND COMFORT
rwdi.com Page 1 of 5
Table 1: Pedestrian Wind Hazard and Comfort Conditions
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
Hours per
Year
Exceeding
Hours
Change
Exceeds
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
% of Time
Exceeding
Speed
Change
(mph)
Exceeds
Location Configuration
WIND HAZARD WIND COMFORT
18 Existing 27 0 - 13 17 - e
Proposed 22 0 0 10 5 -3
19 Existing 19 0 - 8 2 -
Proposed 22 0 0 10 8 2
20 Existing 18 0 - 8 1 -
Proposed 15 0 0 6 0 -2
21 Existing 22 0 - 7 1 -
Proposed 24 0 0 12 13 5 e
22 Existing 25 0 - 9 3 -
Proposed 24 0 0 11 10 2
23 Existing 18 0 - 7 1 -
Proposed 22 0 0 10 5 3
24 Existing 23 0 - 9 5 -
Proposed 25 0 0 11 10 2
25 Existing 27 0 - 11 10 -
Proposed 27 0 0 11 10 0
26 Existing 23 0 - 9 4 -
Proposed 22 0 0 9 4 0
27 Existing 26 0 - 12 14 - e
Proposed 25 0 0 12 15 0 e
28 Existing 30 0 - 12 15 - e
Proposed 27 0 0 12 13 0 e
29 Existing 28 0 - 12 12 - e
Proposed 29 0 0 12 16 0 e
30 Existing 22 0 - 6 2 -
Proposed 29 0 0 13 18 7 e
31 Existing 25 0 - 8 3 -
Proposed 25 0 0 11 10 3
32 Existing 21 0 - 9 4 -
Proposed 18 0 0 8 2 -1
33 Existing 26 0 - 12 17 - e
Proposed 32 0 0 15 25 3 e
34 Existing 32 0 - 10 5 -
Proposed 21 0 0 8 2 -2
rwdi.com Page 2 of 5
Table 1: Pedestrian Wind Hazard and Comfort Conditions
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
Hours per
Year
Exceeding
Hours
Change
Exceeds
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
% of Time
Exceeding
Speed
Change
(mph)
Exceeds
Location Configuration
WIND HAZARD WIND COMFORT
35 Existing 31 0 - 10 6 -
Proposed 21 0 0 8 2 -2
36 Existing 28 0 - 12 14 - e
Proposed 25 0 0 10 7 -2
37 Existing 24 0 - 10 8 -
Proposed 32 0 0 14 19 4 e
38 Existing 27 0 - 12 14 - e
Proposed 34 0 0 15 27 3 e
39 Existing 24 0 - 11 10 -
Proposed 30 0 0 14 24 3 e
40 Existing 31 0 - 15 28 - e
Proposed 27 0 0 10 7 -5
41 Existing 33 0 - 15 22 - e
Proposed 19 0 0 8 1 -7
42 Existing 35 0 - 16 32 - e
Proposed 34 0 0 16 32 0 e
43 Existing 25 0 - 10 5 -
Proposed 20 0 0 8 2 -2
44 Existing 37 1 - e 17 36 - e
Proposed 38 2 1 e 17 32 0 e
45 Existing 26 0 - 11 10 -
Proposed 20 0 0 7 1 -4
46 Existing 31 0 - 15 28 - e
Proposed 31 0 0 14 23 -1 e
47 Existing 21 0 - 8 1 -
Proposed 19 0 0 8 1 0
48 Existing 21 0 - 10 5 -
Proposed 19 0 0 9 2 -1
49 Existing 23 0 - 10 5 -
Proposed 21 0 0 9 4 -1
50 Existing 18 0 - 7 1 -
Proposed 18 0 0 7 1 0
51 Existing 22 0 - 9 3 -
Proposed 21 0 0 10 6 1
rwdi.com Page 3 of 5
Table 1: Pedestrian Wind Hazard and Comfort Conditions
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
Hours per
Year
Exceeding
Hours
Change
Exceeds
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
% of Time
Exceeding
Speed
Change
(mph)
Exceeds
Location Configuration
WIND HAZARD WIND COMFORT
52 Existing 22 0 - 10 6 -
Proposed 20 0 0 10 4 0
53 Existing 21 0 - 10 5 -
Proposed 17 0 0 8 1 -2
54 Existing 25 0 - 11 10 -
Proposed 28 0 0 13 16 2 e
55 Existing 23 0 - 9 4 -
Proposed 30 0 0 14 23 5 e
56 Existing 24 0 - 8 3 -
Proposed 30 0 0 14 23 6 e
57 Existing 23 0 - 8 2 -
Proposed 24 0 0 10 5 2
58 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 20 0 0 10 5 7
59 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 22 0 0 10 4 7
60 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 29 0 0 7 3 4
61 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 19 0 0 5 0 2
62 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 18 0 0 6 1 3
63 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 28 0 0 13 18 10 e
64 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 26 0 0 12 15 9 e
65 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 19 0 0 8 2 5
66 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 17 0 0 8 1 5
67 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 21 0 0 9 4 6
68 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 27 0 0 12 14 9 e
rwdi.com Page 4 of 5
Table 1: Pedestrian Wind Hazard and Comfort Conditions
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
Hours per
Year
Exceeding
Hours
Change
Exceeds
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
% of Time
Exceeding
Speed
Change
(mph)
Exceeds
Location Configuration
WIND HAZARD WIND COMFORT
69 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 28 0 0 13 17 10 e
70 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 30 0 0 13 17 10 e
71 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 25 0 0 12 14 9 e
72 Existing - - - - - -
Proposed 22 0 0 10 7 7
Average
(mph)
Total Hours
Hours
Change
Total
Average
(mph)
Average (%)
Speed
Change
(mph)
Total
Existing 25 mph 1 Hr - 1 / 57 10 mph 8% - 12 / 57
Proposed 24 mph 2 Hrs 1 1 / 72 11 mph 10% 1 28 / 72
Notes: SUMMARY
Configurations
WIND HAZARD WIND COMFORT
1) Wind Hazard = Wind speeds exceeding 36 mph for ≥ 1 hour/year 2) Wind Comfort = Wind speeds exceeding 11 mph for ≥ 10% of the time rwdi.com Page 5 of 5
Table 2: Pedestrian Wind Hazard and Comfort Conditions - Alternate G (2020 FDP) Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
Hours per
Year
Exceeding
Hours
Change
Exceeds
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
% of Time
Exceeding
Speed
Change
(mph)
Exceeds
1 Alternate G (2020 FDP) - - - - - -
2 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 29 0 - 12 13 - e
3 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 21 0 - 9 4 -
4 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 22 0 - 10 7 -
5 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 26 0 - 12 13 - e
6 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 32 0 - 15 28 - e
7 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 31 0 - 15 27 - e
8 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 30 0 - 14 25 - e
9 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 29 0 - 12 13 - e
10 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 26 0 - 12 12 - e
11 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 30 0 - 13 18 - e
12 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 31 0 - 13 22 - e
13 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 33 0 - 15 28 - e
14 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 34 0 - 15 24 - e
15 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 27 0 - 12 14 - e
16 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 31 0 - 15 27 - e
17 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 20 0 - 9 4 -
18 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 22 0 - 10 7 -
19 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 24 0 - 11 10 -
20 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 26 0 - 11 10 -
21 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 19 0 - 9 2 -
22 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 30 0 - 11 10 -
23 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 24 0 - 10 5 -
24 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 30 0 - 12 11 - e
25 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 33 0 - 14 22 - e
Location Configuration
WIND HAZARD WIND COMFORT
rwdi.com Page 1 of 3
Table 2: Pedestrian Wind Hazard and Comfort Conditions - Alternate G (2020 FDP) Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
Hours per
Year
Exceeding
Hours
Change
Exceeds
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
% of Time
Exceeding
Speed
Change
(mph)
Exceeds
Location Configuration
WIND HAZARD WIND COMFORT
26 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 25 0 - 10 6 -
27 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 30 0 - 13 15 - e
28 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 24 0 - 10 7 -
29 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 32 0 - 13 19 - e
30 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 25 0 - 11 10 -
31 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 24 0 - 10 7 -
32 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 23 0 - 9 3 -
33 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 26 0 - 12 13 - e
34 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 20 0 - 8 1 -
35 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 23 0 - 10 7 -
36 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 27 0 - 11 10 -
37 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 25 0 - 10 8 -
38 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 29 0 - 13 14 - e
39 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 27 0 - 12 14 - e
40 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 29 0 - 13 19 - e
41 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 27 0 - 13 15 - e
42 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 34 0 - 15 32 - e
43 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 29 0 - 13 18 - e
44 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 35 0 - 16 32 - e
45 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 19 0 - 7 1 -
46 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 24 0 - 11 10 -
47 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 23 0 - 9 5 -
48 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 19 0 - 9 3 -
49 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 22 0 - 9 3 -
50 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 17 0 - 8 1 -
rwdi.com Page 2 of 3
Table 2: Pedestrian Wind Hazard and Comfort Conditions - Alternate G (2020 FDP) Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
Hours per
Year
Exceeding
Hours
Change
Exceeds
Wind
Speed
Exceeded
(mph)
% of Time
Exceeding
Speed
Change
(mph)
Exceeds
Location Configuration
WIND HAZARD WIND COMFORT
51 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 27 0 - 9 5 -
52 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 25 0 - 10 8 -
53 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 23 0 - 10 8 -
54 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 23 0 - 11 10 -
55 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 22 0 - 11 10 -
56 Alternate G (2020 FDP) 18 0 - 8 2 -
Average
(mph)
Total Hours
Hours
Change
Total
Average
(mph)
Average (%)
Speed
Change
(mph)
Total
Alternate G (2020 FDP) 26 mph 0 Hrs - 0 / 55 11 mph 12% - 25 / 55 Notes:
1) Wind Hazard = Wind speeds exceeding 36 mph for ≥ 1 hour/year 2) Wind Comfort = Wind speeds exceeding 11 mph for ≥ 10% of the time SUMMARY Configuration
WIND HAZARD WIND COMFORT
rwdi.com Page 3 of 3