Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with SMTP (1.37.109.8/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA01995; Wed, 14 Sep 1994 21:00:07 -0700 Return-Path: <westes@usc.com-DeleteThis> Received: from uucp2-b.netcom.com by hplms26.hpl.hp.com with SMTP (1.36.108.4/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1S) id AA04019; Wed, 14 Sep 1994 21:00:34 -0700 Received: from localhost by netcomsv.netcom.com with UUCP (8.6.4/SMI-4.1) id UAA07188; Wed, 14 Sep 1994 20:46:00 -0700 Received: by usc.com (NX5.67d/NX3.0M) id AA03033; Wed, 14 Sep 94 20:45:19 -0700 From: Will Estes <westes@usc.com-DeleteThis> Message-Id: <9409150345.AA03033@usc.com-DeleteThis> Subject: Re: 3rd ave To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 20:45:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <9409150122.AA06224@mri.com-DeleteThis> from "Geoff Boehm" at Sep 14, 94 06:31:16 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2467
'Geoff Boehm says:'
> What we have to realize is that such concerns are valid. It would be
> nice if we could think of a way to alleviate those concerns, but the
> truth is that we can't - because whenever they decide to take back the
> parking, they WILL have a fight. So they aren't going to be receptive
> to any improvements, even if there is no cost, because that will only
> make us want to hold on to the parking that much harder.
>
> ...
>
> It seems our only real hope of a solution is to make them feel secure
> that they can take the land back at any time, and then hope that it's a
> long time before they do. One way to do that might be to lease the
> property at a low rate - then it's a business transaction with a fixed
> timespan. Then it's real clear that we are paying for a privilege that
> can be revoked on short notice, and we can only hope they don't sell it.
Does anyone know what the city wants to sell this land for, and what is the
exact area covered? I'm wondering if the lease rate on this would be low
enough that we could convince Vela to relocate its facility to that park
and pay the rental during the Summer? It seems that with some relatively
low capital investments, you could do some wonderful things to create a
really first-rate windsurf park:
- add space for food vendors/trucks, and other windsurf vendors, to show up
on weekends (you could charge these slightly extra as a rental fee)
- add outdoor showers for gear and bodies
- add real bathrooms
- windsurf rentals on-site from Vela
- a small watch tower and jet-ski for rescues, maybe also manned by Vela
- lawns to rig on
If Vela were collecting the parking lot fees, and then doubling its rental
business by virtue of the increased convenience of having full rigs on the
beach, would this cover the monthly lease on this land plus the
amortization costs of the capital improvements? With the sort of facility
I am describing, I also think that you double the traffic on weekends.
Objectively, Third Avenue is a better place to sail than Coyote, except at
low tide. The only reason that some people avoid Third is because it is
slightly more rugged access. The bathrooms and shower situation at Coyote
suck. Someone should use this situation with Third as an opportunity to go
into business against Coyote, and let private enterprise do its thing.
-- Thanks, Will Estes Internet: westes@usc.com-DeleteThis U.S. Computer Saratoga, CA 95070
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:28:06 PST