V. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND IMPACTS J. WIND AND SHADOW

V. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND IMPACTS J. WIND AND SHADOW INTRODUCTION This section addresses the potential impacts of the 2004 Housing Element and 2009 Housing Element policies related to wind and shadow. The San Francisco Planning Code contains provisions pertaining to wind and shadow minimization. Because wind and shadow contribute substantially to the San Francisco environment and can be highly susceptible to an impact from development, these issues are analyzed as part of CEQA review in San Francisco. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Wind Wind impacts are generally caused by large building masses extending substantially above neighboring buildings, and by buildings oriented such that a new large wall catches a prevailing wind, particularly if such a wall includes little or no articulation. Long-term wind data in San Francisco is available from historical wind records from the U.S. Weather Bureau weather station located above the old Federal Building at 50 United Nations Plaza. Table V.J-1 shows that average wind speeds are greatest in the summer and least in the fall. Winds also exhibit a diurnal variation with the strongest winds occurring in the afternoon, and lightest winds occurring in the early morning. Table V.J-1 Seasonal Wind Direction Frequency and Average Speed in Knots (%) Prevailing Wind January April July October Annual Direction Freq Speed Freq Speed Freq Speed Freq Speed Freq Speed North 12.5 7.9 2.2 11.0 0.3 6.0 3.3 6.6 5.0 7.2 North-northeast 1.3 5.6 0.7 6.1 0.3 6.8 0.7 6.6 0.8 6.0 Northeast 4.5 5.3 1.3 4.7 1.1 7.4 2.2 5.8 1.9 5.6 East-northeast 1.4 6.3 0.6 4.8 0.2 5.1 0.8 5.1 0.8 5.6 East 11.9 4.8 2.6 4.5 0.1 3.9 4.8 4.5 4.8 5.0 East-southeast 2.1 6.4 0.3 5.2 0.1 2.5 0.6 5.8 0.8 5.8 Southeast 9.1 6.4 2.4 7.8 0.2 5.0 3.7 6.6 4.2 6.8 South-southeast 2.8 5.6 0.3 3.8 0.1 3.0 1.3 9.0 1.2 6.4 South 6.7 5.0 4.2 7.1 1.1 4.9 4.5 7.5 4.1 6.4 South-southwest 1.0 4.8 0.4 4.1 0.1 3.0 1.7 12.8 0.9 8.6 Southwest 4.5 8.0 7.7 9.2 15.6 10.1 7.8 9.1 9.3 9.3 West-southwest 1.0 5.9 1.7 7.7 1.2 8.1 2.8 8.8 2.4 8.6 West 13.2 7.2 43.0 10.9 53.0 13.1 34.6 9.1 35.7 10.9 West-northwest 7.5 11.1 20.7 14.1 14.9 14.5 15.2 10.9 13.8 12.7 Northwest 11.5 7.7 9.3 10.7 10.7 11.4 10.8 8.5 10.0 9.7 North-northwest 1.2 5.7 0.6 10.8 0.6 8.5 0.5 7.5 0.7 8.3 Calm 1 7.7-2.1-0.3-4.6-3.7 - Page V.J-1

Table V.J-1 Seasonal Wind Direction Frequency and Average Speed in Knots (%) Prevailing Wind January April July October Annual Direction Freq Speed Freq Speed Freq Speed Freq Speed Freq Speed TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 The calm category represents the percent of time during the month when wind conditions are calm and no prevailing wind direction is discernable. Source: Market and Octavia Neighborhood Plan, Final EIR, Adopted September 2007, at page 4-142. Original Source: U.S. Weather Bureau data collected at the U.S. Weather Bureau station above the old Federal Building in United Nations Plaza; Donald Ballanti, 2004. Winds in the City occur most frequently from the west to northwest directions, reflecting the persistence of sea breezes. Wind direction is most variable in the winter. 1 The approach of winter storms often results in southerly winds. Although not as frequent as westerly winds, these southerly winds are often strong. The strongest winds in the City are typically from the south during the approach of a winter storm. Winds vary at pedestrian levels within a city. In San Francisco wind strength is generally greater, on average, along streets that run east-west as buildings tend to channel westerly winds along these streets. 2 Streets running north-south tend to have lighter winds, on average, due to the shelter offered by buildings on the west side of the street. Within the City, the streets systems north of Market Street and portions of the systems south of Market Street (including those in the Mission District, Potrero Hill, Mission Bay, and Central Waterfront) are mainly on a north/south and east/west grid. However, portions of the street systems south of Market Street (including those in South of Market, South Beach, Bayview Hunters Point, and Visitacion Valley) are mainly northwest/southeast and southwest/northeast, which results in a less predictable pattern of wind variation at the pedestrian level. The Planning Department evaluates potential wind impacts on a project-level basis. The Planning Department generally refers to the wind hazard criterion (discussed further below under Regulatory Setting) to determine the significance for CEQA purposes and to evaluate wind effects of new development in all areas of the City. Any new building or addition that would cause wind speeds to exceed the hazard level of 26-mph-equivalent wind speed (as defined in the Planning Code) more than one hour of any year must be modified and is subject to the relevant wind hazard criterion. 3 Buildings below 85 feet generally do not have the potential to affect wind speeds. Buildings that extend in height above surrounding development have more impact than those of similar height to surroundings. Figure IV-4 is a generalized Citywide Height Map that shows the locations where allowable heights could exceed 85 feet. 1 2 3 Market and Octavia Neighborhood Plan, Final EIR, Adopted September 2007, at page 4-141. Id. "Equivalent wind speed" is defined as an hourly mean wind speed adjusted to incorporate the effects of gustiness or turbulence on pedestrians. San Francisco Planning Code Section 148(b). Page V.J-2

Shadow Shading is an important environmental issue because the users or occupants of certain land uses, such as residential, recreational/parks, churches, schools, outdoor restaurants, and pedestrian areas have some reasonable expectations for direct sunlight and warmth from the sun. These land uses are termed shadow-sensitive. For a discussion of parks and open space in San Francisco, refer to Section V.K (Recreation). Shadow lengths are dependent on the height and size of the building or object from which they are cast and the angle of the sun. The angle of the sun varies with respect to the rotation of the earth (i.e., time of day) and elliptical orbit (i.e., change in seasons). The longest shadows are cast during the winter months and the shortest shadows are cast during the summer months. In the City, the presence of the sun s warming rays is essential to enjoying open space. This is because climatic factors, including ambient temperature, humidity, and wind, often combine to create a comfortable climate only when direct sunlight is present. Therefore, the shadows created by new development nearby can critically diminish the utility of the open space. This is particularly a problem in the Downtown area and in adjacent neighborhoods, where there is a limited amount of open space, pressure for new development, and zoning controls that allow tall buildings. Neighborhoods that experience shading issues include the Downtown area and many of the adjacent areas, including Civic Center, Nob Hill, Financial District, Mission Bay, and South of Market. Together these areas could accommodate approximately 12 percent of the City s pipeline housing units and approximately five percent of the overall capacity for new housing within the City. 4 Refer to Figure IV-4 in Section IV. Project Description, which shows the Citywide Height Map. The City of San Francisco is densely developed with urban uses. As discussed in Section V.K (Recreation), the City is served by over 200 neighborhood park, recreation, and open space facilities. These facilities are considered shadow-sensitive. In general, all applications for new construction or additions to existing buildings above 40 feet in height must be reviewed to determine whether a project would cast additional shadows on properties under the jurisdiction of, or designated to be acquired by the Recreation and Park Department. The Planning Department staff develops a shadow fan diagram that shows the maximum extent of the shadows cast by a proposed building throughout the year, between one hour after sunrise and one hour before sunset. If the shadow fan indicates a project shadow does not reach any property protected by Planning Code Section 295 (the sunlight ordinance), no further review is required. If the shadow fan shows that a project has potential to shade such properties, further analysis is required. 4 This calculation used the entire Downtown District to represent the Civic Center, Nob Hill, and Financial District areas. The aforementioned areas do not encompass the entire Downtown District. Therefore, the percentage of pipeline housing units and overall capacity that are in areas with shading issues are likely overstated. Page V.J-3

REGULATORY SETTING Federal / State No federal or state regulations related to wind and shadow are applicable to the proposed Housing Elements. Local San Francisco General Plan As part of the City s goal to create and preserve high-quality public open spaces, the Recreation and Open Space Element of the General Plan includes a policy to preserve sunlight in public open spaces, particularly in downtown districts and in neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the downtown core, where there is a limited amount of open space, where there is pressure for new development, and where zoning controls allow tall buildings. But the problem of new shadow potentially exists wherever tall buildings near open space are permitted. San Francisco Planning Code The San Francisco Planning Code contains a number of provisions to reduce wind currents in the City and ensure sunlight in parks and on sidewalks. Wind Section 148 Planning Code Section 148 establishes two comfort criteria and one hazard criterion for assessing wind impacts of projects in San Francisco. The comfort criteria are based on pedestrian-level wind speeds that include the effects of turbulence and are known as equivalent wind speeds. Section 148 of the Planning Code establishes an equivalent wind speed of seven miles per hour (mph) for seating areas and 11 mph for areas of substantial pedestrian use. New buildings and additions to buildings may not cause groundlevel winds to exceed these levels more than 10 percent of the time year round between 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM. If existing wind speeds exceed the comfort level, new buildings and additions in these areas must be designed to reduce ambient wind speeds to meet the requirements. Section 148 and Section 249 (c)(9) also establish a hazard criterion, which is an equivalent wind speed of 26 mph for a single full hour, not to be exceeded more than once during the year. New buildings in governed areas cannot exceed this standard. To provide a comfortable wind environment for people in San Francisco, development projects would be subject to specific comfort criteria. The Planning Code specifically outlines these criteria for areas that typically experience wind exceedances, specifically the Downtown Commercial (C-3) District and each of the following special use districts: Folsom and Main, Van Ness Avenue, and South of Market [Sections 249.1(b)(2), 243(c)(9), 263.11(c)]. These criteria are shown in Table V.J-2. Page V.J-4

Table V.J-2 San Francisco Planning Code Wind Criteria for Specific Areas Special Use District Section Requirement Folsom and Main Residential/Commercial Special Use District Van Ness Special Use District South of Market RSD 40- X/85-B Height District 249.1(b)(2) 243(c)(9) 263.11(c) New buildings and additions to existing buildings shall be shaped, or other wind-baffling measures shall be adopted, so that the developments will not cause ground-level wind currents to exceed, more than 10 percent of the time year-round, between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., the comfort level of 11 m.p.h. equivalent wind speed in areas of substantial pedestrian use and seven m.p.h. equivalent wind speed in public seating areas. The term "equivalent wind speed" shall mean an hourly mean wind speed adjusted to incorporate the effects of gustiness or turbulence on pedestrians. (A) New buildings and additions to existing buildings shall be shaped, or other wind baffling measures shall be adopted, so that the development will not cause year-round ground level wind currents to exceed, more than 10 percent of the time, between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., the comfort level of 11 m.p.h. equivalent wind speed in areas of pedestrian use and seven m.p.h. equivalent wind speed in public seating areas. When pre-existing ambient wind speeds exceed the comfort levels specified above, the building shall be designed to reduce the ambient wind speeds in efforts to meet the goals of this requirement. (B) An exception to this requirement may be permitted but only if and to the extent that the project sponsor demonstrates that the building or addition cannot be shaped or wind baffling measures cannot be adopted without unduly restricting the development potential of the building site in question. (i) The exception may permit the building or addition to increase the time that the comfort level is exceeded, but only to the extent necessary to avoid undue restriction of the development potential of the site. (ii) Notwithstanding the above, no exception shall be allowed and no building or addition shall be permitted that causes equivalent wind speeds to reach or exceed the hazard level of 26 m.p.h. for a single hour of the year. (C) For the purposes of this Section, the term "equivalent wind speed" shall mean an hourly wind speed adjusted to incorporate the effects of gustiness or turbulence on pedestrians. New buildings or additions subject to this Section shall be shaped, or other wind baffling measures shall be adopted, so that the development will not cause ground level wind currents to exceed, more than 10 percent of the time year-round, between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., the comfort level of 11 m.p.h. equivalent wind speed in areas of substantial pedestrian use and seven m.p.h. equivalent wind speed in public seating areas. When pre-existing ambient wind speeds exceed the comfort level, the building or addition shall be designed to reduce the ambient wind speeds to meet the requirements. Page V.J-5

Shade/Shadow Section 146(a) Planning Code Section 146(a) includes sunlight access criteria to allow direct sunlight to reach sidewalk areas of designated streets during critical hours of the day. In the case of sidewalks, the critical hours are considered to be the hours around noon. The Code designates 18 streets within the project area (all near the Downtown) as subject to Section 146(a). Individual new development projects within the project site must comply with Section 146(a) requirements, or obtain an allowable exception under Section 309 of the Planning Code. Section 146(c) Planning Code Section 146(c) includes sunlight access criteria to reduce substantial shadow impacts on public sidewalks in the C-3 Districts other than those protected by Section 146(a). New buildings and additions to existing structures must minimize any substantial shadow impacts in the C-3 (Downtown) Districts not protected under Subsection (a), as long as this can be accomplished without the creation of unattractive building design and the undue restriction of development potential. Section 147 Planning Code Section 147 states that new buildings and additions to existing buildings in C-3, South of Market Mixed Use, and Eastern Neighborhoods Mixed Use Districts where the building height exceeds 50 feet shall be shaped, consistent with the dictates of good design and without unduly restricting the development potential of the site in question, to reduce substantial shadow impacts on public plazas and other publicly accessible spaces other than those protected under Section 295. Section 295 Section 295 of the Planning Code, the Sunlight Ordinance, was adopted through voter approval of Proposition K in November 1994 to protect certain public open spaces from shadowing by new structures. Section 295 prohibits the issuance of building permits for structures or additions to structures greater than 40 feet in height that would shade property under the jurisdiction of, or designated to be acquired by, the Recreation and Park Commission, during the period from one hour after sunrise to one hour before sunset on any day of the year. An exception is permitted if both the Planning and Recreation and Park Commissions determine that the shadow would have an insignificant impact on the use of such property. All of the open spaces in the City under Recreation and Park Department control are now protected by the Section 295. Private open spaces that are required under the Planning Code as part of an individual development proposal are not protected by Section 295. Page V.J-6

IMPACTS Significance Thresholds The proposed Housing Elements would normally have a significant effect on the environment if they would: Alter wind in a manner that substantially affects public areas; or Create new shadow in a manner that substantially affects outdoor recreation facilities or other public areas. Evaluation As discussed previously, the 2004 Housing Element and 2009 Housing Elements would not change the land use objectives and policies in the City s area and redevelopment plans. According to Part I of the 2009 Housing Element (Data and Needs Analysis), the City has available capacity to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) as determined by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). Therefore, the rezoning of land uses is not required. To meet the City s share of the RHNA, the proposed Housing Elements aim to do the following: 1) preserve and upgrade existing housing units to ensure they do not become dilapidated, abandoned, or unsound, and 2) provide direction for how and where new housing development in the City should occur. With respect to the latter, the 2004 Housing Element encourages new housing in Downtown and in underutilized commercial and industrial areas. The 2004 Housing Element also encourages increased housing in neighborhood commercial districts and mixed-use districts near Downtown. On the other hand, the 2009 Housing Element encourages housing in new commercial or institutional projects and accommodating housing through existing community planning processes. WS-1: The proposed Housing Elements would not alter wind in a manner that substantially affects public areas. (Less than Significant) New construction could result in wind impacts if new housing would be constructed in a manner that would increase ground-level wind speeds. Typically, new development greater than 85 feet in height could potentially affect ground level wind speeds. Buildings that would result in wind speeds that exceed the hazard criterion of 26 miles per hour (mph) for one hour of the year would result in a significant wind impact. 2004 Housing Element Analysis The following 2004 Housing Element policies could result in the exposure of people to wind impacts by encouraging new development to build to maximum allowable height and bulk, potentially increasing building height and mass, thereby altering ground-level wind speeds. Page V.J-7

Direct growth to certain areas of the City. 2004 Housing Element Policy 1.1: Encourage higher residential density in areas adjacent to downtown, in underutilized commercial and industrial areas proposed for conversion to housing and in neighborhood commercial districts where higher density will not have harmful effects, especially if the higher density provides a significant number of units that are affordable to lower income households. Set allowable densities in established residential areas at levels which will promote compatibility with prevailing neighborhood scale and character where there is neighborhood support. Implementation Measure 1.1.1: A Citywide action plan (CAP) should provide a comprehensive framework for the allocation of higher density, mixed-use residential development in transit-rich areas with stable urban amenities in place. In these areas, specific CAP strategies should include: higher densities and reduced parking requirements in downtown areas or through a Better Neighborhoods type planning process; pedestrian-oriented improvements to enhance the attractiveness and use of transit. Policy 1.2: Encourage housing development, particularly affordable housing, in neighborhood commercial areas without displacing existing jobs, particularly blue-collar jobs or discouraging new employment opportunities. Implementation Measure 1.2.1: The Planning Department will develop proposals in neighborhood commercial districts (NCDs) well served by transit to strengthen their functions as a traditional town center for the surrounding residential districts. Policy 2.1: Set allowable densities in established residential areas at levels which will promote compatibility with prevailing neighborhood character. Policy 2.2: Encourage higher residential density in areas adjacent to downtown, in underutilized commercial and industrial areas proposed for conversion to housing and in neighborhood commercial districts where higher density will not have harmful effects, especially if the higher density provides a significant number of units that are permanently affordable to lower income households. Page V.J-8

2004 Housing Element Policy 1.3: Identify opportunities for housing and mixed-use districts near downtown and former industrial portions of the City. Implementation Measure 1.3.1: Downtown areas and areas subject to a Better Neighborhoods type planning process will be expected to absorb major office and residential developments over the next decade. Planning and zoning code changes should include floor-to-area ratio exemptions. These development bonuses would be conferred only incases where in return the development will provide major public benefits to the community. Implementation Measure 1.3.2: The Planning Department will introduce zoning changes in the traditionally industrial eastern parts of the City. The areas under study are: Mission, South of Market, Showplace Square/Potrero Hill, Bayview Hunter s Point, and Visitacion Valley. Housing, especially affordable housing, will be encouraged in former industrial areas where residential neighborhoods are established and urban amenities are in place or feasible. Policy 1.4: Locate in-fill housing on appropriate sites in established residential neighborhoods. Policy 1.6: Create incentives for the inclusion of housing, particularly permanently affordable housing, in new commercial development projects. Policy 1.2: Facilitate the conversion of underused industrial and commercial areas to residential use, giving preference to permanently affordable housing uses. Implementation Measure 1.1.3: Inclusion of housing in Downtown. Policy 1.4: Locate in-fill housing on appropriate sites in established neighborhoods. Page V.J-9

2004 Housing Element Implementation Measure 1.6.2: The Planning Department and the Redevelopment Agency will propose increasing height limits, eliminating density requirements and modifying off-street parking requirements in the Transbay/Rincon Hill Redevelopment survey areas. The Mid-Market redevelopment survey area will be rezoning to include mixed-use residential areas and reduced residential parking requirements. Implementation Measure 1.6.4: The Planning Department will update the Land Use Element to define areas for mixed-use development focused along transit corridors that are determined to be served by sufficient and reliable transit. Implementation Measure 1.8.1: The Board of Supervisors has introduced Planning Code amendments to allow secondary units in new buildings that are in close proximity to neighborhood commercial districts and public transit. Implementation Measure 2.4.2: As part of the Planning Department s current citywide action plan, planning efforts in the eastern neighborhoods of the City, where housing exists in commercial and industrially zoned districts, should address housing retention as new policies and zoning are established. Mixed use should be encouraged where appropriate. Implementation Measure 4.1.4: The City will work to identify underutilized, vacant, and Brownfield sites that are publicly or privately owned and suitable for affordable housing development. TH City will work with for profit and non-profit housing developers to acquire these sites for permanently affordable housing. Implementation Measure 1.1.1: Aggressive pursuit of development opportunities [on] underused public sites. Implementation Measure 1.1.4: In-fill housing on vacant or underused sites. Page V.J-10

Promote increased density-related development standards 2004 Housing Element Implementation Measure 4.1.6: Permanently affordable housing sites will be especially sought out in places where transportation and existing amenities are in place. Policy 11.6: Employ flexible land use controls in residential areas that can regulate inappropriately sized development in new neighborhoods, in downtown areas and in other areas through a Better Neighborhoods type planning process while maximizing the opportunity for housing near transit. Implementation Measure 11.6.1: The City will continue to promote increased residential densities in areas well served by transit and neighborhood compatible development with the support and input from local neighborhoods. Policy 1.1: Encourage higher residential density in areas adjacent to downtown, in underutilized commercial and industrial areas proposed for conversion to housing and in neighborhood commercial districts where higher density will not have harmful effects, especially if the higher density provides a significant number of units that are affordable to lower income households. Set allowable densities in established residential areas at levels which will promote compatibility with prevailing neighborhood scale and character where there is neighborhood support. Policy 12.5: Relate land use controls to the appropriate scale for new and existing residential areas. Policy 2.1: Set allowable densities in established residential areas at levels which will promote compatibility with prevailing neighborhood character. Policy 2.2: Encourage higher residential density in areas adjacent to downtown, in underutilized commercial and industrial areas proposed for conversion to housing and in neighborhood commercial districts where higher density will not have harmful effects, especially if the higher density provides a significant number of units that are permanently affordable to lower income households. Page V.J-11

2004 Housing Element Implementation Measure 1.1.1: A Citywide action plan (CAP) should provide a comprehensive framework for the allocation of higher density, mixed-use residential development in transit-rich areas with stable urban amenities in place. In these areas, specific CAP strategies should include: higher densities and reduced parking requirements in downtown areas or through a Better Neighborhoods type planning process; pedestrian-oriented improvements to enhance the attractiveness and use of transit. Implementation Measure 1.3.1: Downtown areas and areas subject to a Better Neighborhoods type planning process will be expected to absorb major office and residential developments over the next decade. Planning and zoning code changes should include floor-to-area ratio exemptions. These development bonuses would be conferred only in cases where in return the development will provide major public benefits to the community. Policy 1.6: Create incentives for the inclusion of housing, particularly permanently affordable housing, in new commercial development projects. Implementation Measure 1.6.2: The Planning Department and the Redevelopment Agency will propose increasing height limits, eliminating density requirements and modifying off-street parking requirements in the Transbay/Rincon Hill Redevelopment survey areas. The Mid-Market redevelopment survey area will be rezoning to include mixed-use residential areas and reduced residential parking requirements. Implementation Measure 1.1.3: Inclusion of housing in Downtown (allowing housing to exceed permitted Floor-Area- Ratios [FARs] in C-3-G and C-3-S Districts). Policy 1.3: Create incentives for the inclusion of housing, particularly permanently affordable housing, in new commercial development projects. Page V.J-12

2004 Housing Element Policy 1.7: Encourage and support the construction of quality, new family housing. Implementation Measure 1.7.1: In response to the increasing number of families in San Francisco, the Planning Department will develop zoning amendments to require a minimum percentage of larger family units ranging from two to four bedrooms, in new major residential projects. The Planning Department will also propose eliminating density requirements within permitted building envelopes in downtown areas and areas subject to a Better Neighborhoods type planning process to maximize family units constructed. Policy 1.8: Allow new secondary units in areas where their effects can be dealt with and there is neighborhood support, especially if that housing is made permanently affordable to lower income households. Implementation Measure 1.8.1: The Board of Supervisors has introduced Planning Code amendments to allow secondary units in new buildings that are in close proximity to neighborhood commercial districts and public transit. Implementation Measure 1.8.3: Ongoing planning will propose Planning Code amendments to encourage secondary units where appropriate. Policy 4.4: Consider granting density bonuses and parking requirement exemptions for the construction of affordable housing or senior housing. Policy 1.5: Allow new secondary units in areas where their effects can be dealt with and there is neighborhood support, especially if that housing is made permanently affordable to lower income households. Policy 7.3: Grant density bonuses for construction of affordable or senior housing. Page V.J-13

2004 Housing Element Implementation Measure 4.4.1: The Planning Department will look at establishing uniform density bonus standards and equal requirements for affordable and senior housing development. Until then, affordable and senior housing will continue to be granted density bonuses and reduced parking requirements on a case-by-case basis. Policy 4.5: Allow greater flexibility in the number and size of units within established building envelopes, potentially increasing the number of affordable units in multi-family structures. Policy 11.6: Employ flexible land use controls in residential areas that can regulate inappropriately sized development in new neighborhoods, in downtown areas, and in other areas through a Better Neighborhoods type planning process while maximizing the opportunity for housing near transit. Implementation Measure 11.6.1: The City will continue to promote increased residential densities in areas well served by transit and neighborhood compatible development with the support and input from local neighborhoods. Policy 11.7: Where there is neighborhood support, reduce of remove minimum parking requirements for housing, increasing the amount of lot area available for housing units. Implementation Measure 11.7.1: The Planning Department will work to reduce parking in older neighborhoods through a Better Neighborhoods type planning process with the support and input from local neighborhoods. Policy 2.3: Allow flexibility in the number and size of units within permitted volumes of larger multi unit structures, especially if the flexibility results in creation of a significant number of dwelling units that are permanently affordable to lower income households. Policy 12.5: Relate land use controls to the appropriate scale for new and existing residential areas. Page V.J-14

2004 Housing Element Policy 11.8: Strongly encourage project sponsors to take full advantage of allowable building densities in their housing developments while remaining consistent with neighborhood character. Policy 11.9: Set allowable densities and parking standards in residential areas at levels that promote the City s overall housing objectives while respecting neighborhood scale and character. Policy 2.1: Set allowable densities in established residential areas at levels which will promote compatibility with prevailing neighborhood character. As shown above, the 2004 Housing Element promotes housing in commercial (Policies 1.1, 1.6) and industrial (Policies 1.1, 1.3) areas, neighborhood commercial districts (Policy 1.2 and Implementation Measure 1.2.1), housing near the Downtown (Policies 1.1, 1.3 and Implementation Measure 1.3.1) and along transit corridors (Policies 1.6, 11.6 and Implementation Measures 1.1.1, 1.6.4, 1.8.1, 4.1.6, and 11.6.1). The 2004 Housing Element also encourages new housing through on-going and future community planning processes (Policies 1.1, 11.6 and Implementation Measures 1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.6.2, and 2.4.2) and on underutilized, vacant, surplus lands and on Brownfield sites (Implementation Measure 4.1.4). The 1990 Residence Element similarly directs growth to commercial and industrial areas, neighborhood commercial districts, the Downtown and on infill development sites, although to a lesser degree than the 2004 Housing Element. The 2004 Housing Element also advocates for housing in community plan areas and along transit corridors, both of which are policies that were not included in the 1990 Residence Element. Policies that direct growth to certain areas of the City could increase the amount of new housing occurring in those areas, thereby resulting in new development built to maximum allowable height and bulk, potentially increasing building height and mass, and altering ground-level wind speeds. The 2004 Housing Element promotes increased building densities more so than the 1990 Residence Element. The 2004 Housing Element promotes increased density in certain areas of the City (Policy 1.1 and Implementation Measure 1.1.1, 1.8.1 and 11.6.1) and promotes density bonuses (Policy 4.4 and Implementation Measures 1.3.1 and 4.4.1) and the elimination of density requirements (Policy 1.6 and Implementation Measures 1.6.2 and 1.7.1). The 2004 Housing Element also encourages increased density by promoting reduced parking requirements (Policies 4.4, 11.7, 11.9 and Implementation Measures 1.1.1, 1.6.2, 4.4.1, 11.7.1), support for secondary units (Policy 1.8 and Implementation Measures 1.8.1 and 1.8.3) and flexible building envelopes (Policies 4.5 and 11.6). Increased density standards could result in more units within a given building envelope, which could be partially achieved by the construction of multi-family housing built to maximum allowable height and bulk limits, potentially increasing building height and mass, and altering ground-level wind speeds. 2004 Housing 11.6 and 11.8 could encourage project sponsors to build to maximum building heights allowed by the Planning Code. 2004 Housing 11.8 advocates for Page V.J-15

community planning processes to accommodate growth. Some strategies that could be considered may include increasing height limits. While the planning process itself would not have direct effects related to wind, specific development criteria proposed through such a process could affect wind patterns. The effects of development or increased height limits on ground level wind speeds are development-specific. A determination of wind impacts would be made at a project level, based on an analysis of ground-level wind currents, as specific development proposals or proposals to change allowable height and bulk are made. For instance, at the project level, project proponents could be required to utilize building forms that would minimize the creation of surface winds near the base of buildings. Ground-level wind accelerations are controlled by exposure (a measure of the extent that the building extends above surrounding structures into the wind stream), massing (slab-shaped buildings have greater potential for wind acceleration effects than do buildings with unusual shapes, round faces, or where accompanied by appropriate setbacks), and orientation. These factors would be evaluated on a project-byproject basis. 2004 Housing 11.8 encourages full buildout of projects to the maximum allowable building envelope. While this does not change allowable heights, the encouragement of fullbuildout could encourage buildings to be constructed to the maximum allowable building height. Similar to 2004 Housing 11.6, this policy could potentially impact wind speeds in areas of the city that experience wind exceedances. However, as with 2004 Housing 11.6, individual projects would be subject to review regarding wind impacts as well as subject to applicable Planning Code requirements that mitigate wind impacts. Regarding 2004 Housing Element Implementation Measure 1.6.2, increased height limits and elimination of density requirements have been studied as part of the Transbay/Rincon Hill Area Plan. The Transbay/Rincon Hill Area Plan EIR concluded that full-buildout development in the plan area could result in wind impacts related to pedestrian-comfort criterion at nine public locations in the area. One of these locations could also experience wind hazard criterion exceedances. However, the Transbay/Rincon Hill Area Plan EIR concluded that during the environmental review process for individual projects, potential wind effects would be considered, including through wind tunnel testing, and if wind hazard exceedances occurred, design modifications or other project-tailored mitigation measures would be required, such as articulation of building sides and softening of sharp building edges, to mitigate or eliminate these exceedances. The Mid-Market redevelopment area has been studied in an EIR as well. Several buildings over 100 feet in height could be planned in the Mid-Market planning area, which contains some of the most windy locations in the City. Within and near the Mid-Market planning area, wind speed has been found to be at times unpleasant and even hazardous. As with the Transbay/Rincon Hill Area Plan, the Mid-Market EIR noted that wind evaluation would be required as part of building design and review for specific projects and projects would not be approved without mitigation for hazardous wind effects. The Mid-Market Plan is currently on hold. While, the 2004 Housing Element encourages projects to be developed to their maximum height and bulk allowances and, in certain areas, encourages greater height limits, a key strategy for meeting the City s housing goals is to maintain the City s existing housing stock. The following 2004 Housing Element Page V.J-16

policies discourage demolition and encourage the maintenance of the City s existing housing stock, thereby reducing the amount of new housing required to meet the City s housing needs and subsequent wind-related impacts resulting from development at maximum allowable height and bulk limits, potentially increasing building height and mass. Discourage demolition and improve existing housing supply. Promote preservation of residential buildings. 2004 Housing Element Policy 2.1: Discourage the demolition of sound existing housing. Policy 3.3: Maintain and improve the condition of the existing supply of public housing. Policy 3.6: Preserve landmark historic residential buildings. Implementation Measure 3.6.6: The Planning Department will encourage property owners to use preservation incentives to repair, restore, or rehabilitate historic resources in lieu of demolition. These include federal tax credits for rehabilitation of qualified historical resources, Mills Act property tax abatement programs, the State Historic Building Code, and tax deductions for preservation easements. Policy 3.1: Discourage the demolition of sound existing housing. Policy 5.4: Maintain and improve the existing supply of public housing. Policy 5.5: Preserve landmark historic residential buildings. As shown above, the 2004 Housing Element proposes policies that discourage demolition and promote the maintenance of existing public housing (including Policies 2.1, 3.3, and 3.6) to a degree similar to the 1990 Residence Element, which could reduce the amount of new housing required to meet the City s housing needs. The preservation of existing housing retains reduces the need for new development to maximum allowable height and bulk limits, thus altering ground-level wind speed impacts. The 2004 Housing Element would not in and of itself result in the construction of substantially taller buildings. The required environmental review for any changes in land use controls would analyze potential impacts to ground-level wind speeds. Furthermore, wind impacts are project-specific and individual projects would be subject to the Planning Department s procedures requiring modification of any new building or addition that exceeds the wind hazard criterion. New residential development would be required to comply with the previously discussed regulations, including Sections 147, 148, 243(c)(9), 249.1(b)(2), and 263.11(c) of the San Francisco Planning Code. Therefore, the 2004 Housing Element would have a Page V.J-17

less than significant impact with respect to the alteration of wind patterns that could exceed the City s hazard criterion. 2009 Housing Element Analysis In general, the 2009 Housing Element includes policies that direct growth primarily through community planning processes, but also includes policies that direct housing to commercial areas and sites that are near transit. Overall, the 1990 Residence Element promotes increased density within the same allowable densities on a broader, citywide, scale to a greater extent than the 2009 Housing Element. However, there are two areas under which the 2009 Housing Element promotes greater density. These include the following themes: increased density for affordable housing projects; and increased density as a strategy to be pursued through the community planning process. The following 2009 Housing Element policies could result in the exposure of people to wind impacts by encouraging new development to maximum allowable height and bulk limits, potentially increasing building height and mass and thereby altering ground-level wind speeds. Direct growth to certain areas of the City. 2009 Housing Element Policy 1.1: Focus housing growthand the infrastructure necessary to support that growth- according to community plans. Complete planning underway in key opportunity areas such as Treasure Island, Candlestick Park and Hunters Point Shipyard. Policy 1.3: Work proactively to identify and secure opportunity sites for permanently affordable housing. Policy 1.6: Consider greater flexibility in the number and size of units within established building envelopes in community plan areas, especially if it can increase the number of affordable units in multi-family structures. Policy 1.7: Consider public health objectives when designating and promoting housing development sites. Implementation Measure 1.1.2: Pursuit of housing development opportunities in neighborhood and area plans. Policy 1.1: Promote development of permanently affordable housing on surplus, underused and vacant public lands. Policy 2.5: Allow flexibility in the number and size of units within permitted volumes of larger multi-unit structures, especially if the flexibility results in creation of a significant number of dwelling units that are permanently affordable to lower income households. Policy 12.1: Assure housing is provided with adequate public improvements, services and amenities. Page V.J-18

2009 Housing Element Policy 1.8: Promote mixed use development, and include housing, particularly permanently affordable housing, in new commercial, institutional or other single use development projects. Policy 4.6: Encourage an equitable distribution of growth according to infrastructure and site capacity. Policy 10.3: Support state legislation and programs that promote environmentally favorable projects. Policy 12.1: Encourage new housing that relies on transit use and environmentally sustainable patterns of movement. Policy 12.2: Consider the proximity of quality of life elements, such as open space, child care and neighborhood serves, when development new housing units. Policy 13.1: Support smart regional growth that locates new housing close to jobs and transit. Policy 13.3: Promote sustainable land use patterns that integrate housing with transportation via transit, pedestrian, and bicycle modes. Implementation Measure 3: Consistent with the SFMTA s Climate Action Plan, MOH shall work with MTA to identify Muni sites that can serve as potential housing sites. Policy 1.3: Create incentives for the inclusion of housing, including permanently affordable housing in commercial developments. Policy 12.1: Assure housing is provided with adequate public improvements, services and amenities. Page V.J-19

2009 Housing Element Implementation Measure 4: The Mayor s Office of Housing (MOH) shall continue to actively pursue surplus or underused publicly-owned land for housing potential, working with agencies not subject to the Surplus Property Ordinance such as the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, SFUSD and the Municipal Transportation Agency to identify site opportunities. City agencies shall continue to survey their properties for affordable housing opportunities or joint use potential. Implementation Measure 6: To further smaller scale TOD opportunities, Planning and MTA shall evaluate smaller surplus MTA-owned sites (typically surface parking lots) and identify barriers towards their redevelopment, such as Planning Code issues, neighborhood parking needs and communities sentiment. Implementation Measure 8: Planning, Redevelopment and Mayor s Office of Economic and Workforce Development (MOEWD) should complete long range planning processes already underway: Japantown, Glen Park, the Northeast Embarcadero Study, the Bayview Hunters Point Plan, Candlestick/ Hunters Pont, India Basin shoreline community planning process, Treasure Island, and Hunters Point. Implementation Measure 14: Planning staff shall prioritize support for projects which are located within a reasonable walking distance of stops along major transit lines, including BART, Muni rail lines and Muni s 24-hour Rapid Network. Implementation Measure 1.1.1: Aggressive pursuit of development opportunities [in] underused public sites. Implementation Measure 1.1.4: In-fill housing on vacant or underused sites. Page V.J-20

2009 Housing Element Implementation Measure 74: The City shall coordinate with regional entities to complete the necessary planning document for SB 375, including a Sustainable Community Strategy which promotes sustainable growth; and corresponding updates to the Housing, Recreation and Open Space, and Land Use Elements of the General Plan. Implementation Measure 80: In development of new community plans, Planning shall include mixeduse design standards for both residential and commercial buildings. Implementation Measure 85: Planning shall ensure community plans for growth are accompanied by capital plans and programs to support both the hard and soft elements of infrastructure needed by new housing. Implementation Measure 90: Planning and SFMTA should coordinate housing development with the ongoing Transit Effectiveness Project. Implementation Measure 94: Regional planning entities such as ABAG shall continue to prioritize regional transportation decisions and funding to smart local land use policies that link housing, jobs and other land uses, including focusing on VMT reduction. The City shall encourage formalization of state policy that similarly prioritizes transportation and infrastructure dollars for smart growth areas such as San Francisco, rather than geographic allocation. Implementation Measure 7.7.1: Acquisition and improvement of open space; facilities and public environmental improvements in six neighborhood strategy areas; street improvements; parking facilities in neighborhoods; transit and street improvements. Page V.J-21

Promote increased density-related development standards 2009 Housing Element Implementation Measure 97: On a local level, the City shall prioritize planned growth areas such as Better Neighborhoods, other Area Plans or Redevelopment Areas for regional, state, and federal bond and grants, especially for discretionary funding application processes such as the State s Prop 1C. Policy 1.4: Ensure changes to land use controls are proposed through neighborhood-supported community planning processes. Policy 1.5: Consider secondary units in community plans where there is neighborhood support and when other neighborhood goals can be achieved, especially if that housing is made permanently affordable to lowerincome households. Policy 1.6: Consider greater flexibility in number and size of units within established building envelopes in community plan areas, especially if it can increase the number of affordable units in multi-family structures. Policy 7.5: Encourage the production of affordable housing through process and zoning accommodations, and prioritize affordable housing in the review and approval processes. Policy 2.1: Set allowable densities in established residential areas at levels which will promote compatibility with prevailing neighborhood character. Policy 2.2: Encourage higher residential density in areas adjacent to downtown, in underutilized commercial and industrial areas proposed for conversion to housing and in neighborhood commercial districts where higher density will not have harmful effects, especially if the higher density provides a significant number of units that are permanently affordable to lower income households. Policy 1.5: Allow new secondary units in areas where their effects can be dealt with and there is neighborhood support, especially if that housing is made permanently affordable to lower income households. Implementation Measure 1.1.3: Inclusion of housing in Downtown (allowing housing to exceed permitted Floor-Area- Ratios [FARs] in C-3-G and C-3-S Districts). Policy 7.3: Grant density bonuses for construction of affordable or senior housing. Page V.J-22