IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v44y2017i1p10-32.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wind and the city: An evaluation of San Francisco’s planning approach since 1985

Author

Listed:
  • Hyungkyoo Kim
  • Elizabeth Macdonald

Abstract

In 1985, San Francisco adopted a downtown plan on ground-level wind currents intended to mitigate the negative effects of wind on pedestrians’ perceived comfort in public open spaces. The plan mandates that new buildings in designated parts of the city associated with high density or development potential be designed or adopt measures to not cause wind in excess of accepted comfort levels. This study examines whether and to what degree the plan has successfully shaped an urban form that mitigates wind by comparing the ground-level wind environment in 1985 and 2013. A series of wind tunnel tests found that during San Francisco’s windiest season when the westerly winds are prevalent, the overall mean wind speed ratio measured at 318 locations in four areas of the city dropped by 22%. However, there still exist many excessively windy places that are associated with specific urban form conditions, including streets oriented to have direct exposure to westerly winds, flat façades on high-rise buildings, and horizontal street walls where building façades align. Recommendations based on the findings include incorporating more tangible guidance on the built form conditions, expanding the plan’s reach to cover more parts of the city, and learning from strategies used elsewhere. By evaluating the urban form impacts of a wind mitigation policy that has been in place for 30 years, the research offers insights for other cities that have implemented or plan to adopt similar approach and sheds light on issues related to wind comfort in high-density urban areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Hyungkyoo Kim & Elizabeth Macdonald, 2017. "Wind and the city: An evaluation of San Francisco’s planning approach since 1985," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 44(1), pages 10-32, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:44:y:2017:i:1:p:10-32
    DOI: 10.1177/0265813515607474
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0265813515607474
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0265813515607474?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:44:y:2017:i:1:p:10-32. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.