Received: from opus.hpl.hp.com (opus-fddi.hpl.hp.com) by jr.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA280580317; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 12:45:17 -0800 Return-Path: <kirk@hpmsd3.sj.hp.com-DeleteThis> Received: from hpmsd3.sj.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with SMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA049780311; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 12:45:11 -0800 Received: from sjs0p138.sj.hp.com by hpmsd3.sj.hp.com with SMTP (1.38.193.4/15.5+IOS 3.22) id AA19349; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 12:45:10 -0800 Message-Id: <365B1AD5.7A6B@hpoclrf.sj.hp.com-DeleteThis> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 12:45:09 -0800 From: Kirk Lindstrom <kirk@hpmsd3.sj.hp.com-DeleteThis> Reply-To: kirk@hpmsd3.sj.hp.com-DeleteThis Organization: CSSD R&D - Hewlett Packard X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.03 (WinNT; I) To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis Subject: Re: Oyster Point/Flying Tigers Threatened References: <199811241954.LAA14356@scv3.apple.com-DeleteThis> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
These plans forget that Washington DC had a similar problem
and made a new airport out in the boonies, Dulles, and this provided
growth on the corridors leading to the airport. SF could put a new
airport out in the sticks off a Bart route like Pleasanton....Antioch,
etc.
Nice area and lots of open space that will not require filling in
the Bay. We need to encourage growth out there rather than filling
in every green space in the Penninsula with high density housing...
I vote NO on all SFO expansion plans.
regards
Kirk out
Ed Scott wrote:
>
> Assuming that the diagrams on p. 18A of today's Mercury News are
> accurate, it appears that Plan Alternate F2 for expansion of SFO's
> runways will effectively destroy Oyster Point/Flying Tigers as a
> windsurfing location. Plan F2 extends one new runway from the
> northeastern edge of SFO's field (near the fuel tanks/United hanger) out
> approximately 2.2 miles in a northeast direction. The new runway will
> enclose the existing Flying Tigers cove where the best windsurfing is,
> and cuts across the area where the best reaches are, just outside the
> cove.
>
> Plan Alternate BX preserves the access to the cove from the water and
> does not cut across the existing reaches. Coincidentally, Plan BX is
> proposed to cost $200 million less than Plan F2 and will fill in less bay.
>
> Also, in case either of these plans go forward, I think you can pretty
> much write off downwinders from Oyster to points south on the Peninsula.
> The good news is that you will end up on a runway if you become becalmed
> or breakdown at Tigers and go downwind. I also wouldn't be surpised if
> either of these plans poses a severe navigation hazard.
>
> Just thought I'd mention it in case anyone knows what input we can give
> and to what authority at what time. I think if this goes forward, we
> should oppose Alternate Plan F2 in any way we can.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Ed
--"There is more to life than increasing its speed." - Gandhi +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Kirk Lindstrom - CSSD Product R&D | Hewlett-Packard Co. M/S: 90UA | | Engineer/Scientist, Hardware | Wireless Semiconductor Division | |------------------------------------| | | kirk_lindstrom@sj.hp.com-DeleteThis | | | Kirk Lindstrom / HP0100/UX | 370 W. Trimble Rd. | | ph 408 435 6404 | fax 408 435 6286 | San Jose, CA 95131-1096 | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 05 2013 - 02:03:11 PST