At last week's Beer and Politics, I made some claims about how the Second + PCH development team is drastically overstating their open space (they claim approximately 5 acres of open space, or 49% of the project site). I have been asked to provide documentation substantiating my claims. No sweat; I should have done that anyway. I'm always left scratching my head when people offer "facts" then either can't or won't provide the supporting documentation....and then there I go making claims and not providing any back-up. Not acceptable. Apologies, and here goes....
The open space provision within SEADIP reads, "A minimum of thirty percent of the site shall be developed and maintained as usable open space (building footprint, streets, parking areas and sidewalks adjacent to streets shall not be considered usable open space. Bicycle and pedestrian trails not included within the public right-of-way may be considered usable open space)."
Following is the "Open Space Plan" from the DEIR (Figure II-17, clicking on the below will open it in a larger window).
As you can see from the Figure, to arrive at their 49% open space, they captured open space from the second and third stories of the development. These aspects fall within the "building footprint" and are to be excluded from open space determinations, pursuant to SEADIP. Excluding these "building footprint" items knocks the open space down to 34.58%, per the provided open space plan.
As you can also see in the plan, the "first story" open space includes open space associated with Marina View Lane, a street. Clearly streets aren't open space. Or at least it should be clear: streets are not open space. So the 34.58% needs to be reduced to reflect the removal of the Marina View Lane "open space."
In any event, 49% open space isn't in the ballpark of accurate, under SEADIP, as I asserted at Beer and Politics.
As an aside, this was also addressed in my comment letter on the Project's Draft EIR.