RE: Coyote Point Alert

From: Stephen Hiley (SHiley@WSGC.com-DeleteThis)
Date: Fri Feb 12 1999 - 16:18:52 PST


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 AA185715747; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 16:29:08 -0800
Return-Path: <SHiley@WSGC.com-DeleteThis>
Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA243745742; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 16:29:02 -0800
Received: from wsgc-bh.wsgc.com (wsgc-bh.wsgc.com [198.93.40.66]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1a/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id QAA07087 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 16:29:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by wsgc-bh.wsgc.com (8.8.8/8.6.11) id QAA13428 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 16:18:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sfexfax1.wsgc.com(199.87.10.241) by wsgc-bh.wsgc.com via smap (4.1) id xma013385; Fri, 12 Feb 99 16:18:51 -0800
Received: by sfexfax1.wsgc.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id <1GZ1Q3XC>; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 16:18:54 -0800
Message-Id: <294B00DB40B2D0119AA900A02461F56702D56BB5@SFEXSVR1>
From: Stephen Hiley <SHiley@WSGC.com-DeleteThis>
To: "'wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis'" <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>
Subject: RE: Coyote Point Alert
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 16:18:52 -0800
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Could someone provide directions to ASD and city hall for us
out-of-town'ers?

On this topic, Assuming that we can make a case for "significant impact" by
other measures:
Considering that the money/power/influence behind the SFO runway project,
it seems likely that the runway expansion will go forward. And with that
goes the loss of Coyote for windsurfing. With that in mind, would we be
better off in the long run by pressing the developers of this office complex
for compensatory measures such as improving near-by sites rather than
modifications to their structure (also a long-shot)? ... just a thought.

> ----------
> From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis[SMTP:Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis]
> Reply To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 1999 8:04 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Coyote Point Alert
>
> Windsurfers,
>
> We are nearing our last chance to have our say about development upwind of
> Coyote Point Park on the San Francisco Bay. The development plan calls for
> five buildings on the drive-in property located at 300 Airport Boulevard.
> The
> tallest building (105' tall plus another 10' of mechanical sheds) will be
> located at the southeast corner of the property, closest to the launch
> areas.
> The City of Burlingame has released a study which concludes that the five
> structures have no significant impact on windsurfing.
>
> The City Planning Commision is now taking comments from the public (this
> means
> you!). A Plannning Commision meeting open to the public will be held on
> Monday, February 22nd at 7:00 pm. and letters may be sent to the City
> Planner
> up until March 8, 1999.
>
> What you can do:
>
> 1. Read the recirculated draft environmental impact report (RDEIR)
>
> The City has had a wind-tunnel study conducted by a consulting firm. The
> study
> sets its own standard for 'significant impact' and then concludes that the
> wind-tunnel tests prove no significant impact. Anyone with a degree of
> technical ability should read the RDEIR so that you can make intelligent
> comments on the assumptions and methods (Although we still want you at the
> Planning Commmision meeting even if it does look like a foreign language
> to
> you!)
>
> You can find a link to the RDEIR and updates by George Haye who has worked
> diligently to bring this project to the attention of the community at:
>
> http://www.sfba.org/coyote_status.htm
>
> You will need Adobe Acrobat to read the online copy of the RDEIR. We also
> plan
> to have a printed copy of the RDEIR at most windsurfing shops by Saturday,
> February 13th ( ASD, Windsurf Bicycle Warehouse, Helm, City Front,
> Berkeley
> Windsurfing, Boardsports Marin & Berkeley ). If you are an SFBA member,
> look
> for your alert card in the mail.
>
> 2. Come to the Planning Commission meeting on February 22nd @ 7 pm
>
> Burlingame City Council Chambers
> 501 Primrose Road
> Burlingame, CA 94010
>
> The Planning Commission will take testimony from the public. They will
> likely
> expect testimony to relate to information in the EIR, so the more you've
> read,
> the better prepared you will be to make an impression.
>
> 3. Come to ASD before the Planning Commission meeting on February 22nd @ 6
> pm
>
> ASD/Advanced Surf Design
> 302 Lang Road
> Burlingame, CA 94010
>
> We will have a meeting at ASD one hour before the public meeting to
> deliver
> updates and developments. Everyone is encouraged to attend this meeting as
> well.
>
> 4. Sent your comments to the City Planner:
>
> City of Burlingame Planning Department
> Attention: Meg Monroe, City Planner
> 501 Primrose Road
> Burlingame, CA 94010
>
> Comments must be received by March 8, 199 at 5:00 p.m. Please sent your
> comments earlier as so that the City Planner will have more time to read
> them
> and incorporate them into the final EIR.
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> - -
>
> A few questions that have been posed:
>
> The consultant's report proposes the following standard for define a
> 'significant adverse impact' to windsurfing:
>
> "A reduction of 10% or more in wind speeds at irreplacable launching and
> landing sites, or a reduction in wind speed of 10% or more over large
> portions
> of transit routes or primary board sailing areas..."
>
> If you have a problem with this definition let the City know.
>
> - Should the standard account for gusts or turbulence from buildings?
>
> - Is the increased differential between the wind velocity in the channel
> vs.
> the wind velocity at the beach more important that just looking at changes
> in
> wind velocity measured on the inside? Will people have to rig bigger to
> get
> out and end up sailing more overpowered?
>
> - The standard allows for reductions of wind in excess of 10% in transit
> areas
> if they do not cover "large portions." Does that mean that there still
> might
> be localized holes that can leave you in the water?
>
> - Does the use of the term "irreplacable launch sites" allow for the beach
> near ASD to be excluded from the 10% maximum wind loss that the Coyote
> Park
> Point Beach would enjoy?
>
> Remember, If this definition of "significant adverse impact" is accepted,
> it
> may be drawn upon in the future by other planners and consultant.
>
> Please keep your eyes open for a follow on e-mail summarizing more
> of the concerns that readers of the report have pointed out to date.
>
> Peter Thorner
> (415) 454-3522
> (510) 547-4422
> eyes4hire@aol.com-DeleteThis
>
> additional contact:
>
> Greg Harris
> (650) 694-8173
> harris4life@yahoo.com-DeleteThis
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:35:04 PST