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 AA065253948; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 21:32:28 -0800 Return-Path: <Eyes4Hire@aol.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 AA145793925; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 21:32:05 -0800 Received: from imo15.mx.aol.com (imo15.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.5]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1a/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id VAA15405 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 21:32:04 -0800 (PST) From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis Received: from Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis by imo15.mx.aol.com (IMOv18.1) id QTSEa03538 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Sat, 13 Feb 1999 00:27:27 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <19485db1.36c50d3f@aol.com-DeleteThis> Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 00:27:27 EST To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis Subject: Re: Coyote Point Alert Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 236
In a message dated 2/12/99 4:36:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, SHiley@WSGC.com-DeleteThis
writes:
<< 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. >>
I think that we need all the sites we can get. Some people may still sail
Coyote even after the loss of the channel access, especially beginner to lower
intermediate sailors. The sport is growing in the South Bay as the high demand
for parking at 3rd Avenue shows. I think we will probably be able to fill as
many parking spots as we can find near any Peninsula launches on a day with
strong steady wind.
If the runways go in as proposed, they will cut off access to the channel all
the way down to the Coyote Point Marina. At this time, I have only heard of
one potential launch between the Coyote Point Marina and 3rd Avenue - Seal
Point. My understanding is that George Haye is working on a launch at Seal
Point and is making good headway as things stand (Thank you, George, and let
us know if more resources are in fact needed there).
I would say that noone should throw in the towel yet on anything. I suspect
that the developer could make some concessions that would help windsurfing and
have modest costs such as switching the 105' building (C) to the upwind side
of the property and replacing it with the 51.6' building (E) which is
currently farther upwind. As it stand the tallest building stands closest to
the launch areas.
We should not give up our efforts based on various conjecture. All we are
asking people for (so far) is time and energy. It is probably something many
of us can afford. I've been giving up my TV time for a couple of weeks now to
try and get the word out and understand the issue better. If you don't watch
TV and are nursing a baby between work and studying for your night school MBA
exam, then I understand your time is worth more than mine... otherwise let's
get out there and make our case and see what happens.
As for launches in the Coyote area that would be free from wind shadows on W
to NW winds, I have been exploring the possibility of new launches between
Coyote and Embassy Suites. There are some possibilities, but there are also
plenty of political complications. Fisherman's Park is the most likely
candidate, but there are issues regarding existing users (fisherman) and the
property owners who lease the property to the County Park system, Anza Pacific
Corporation. There is also a large parcel owned by the State of California
located just west of the 'gambling boat' property. The State is looking for a
Lessee for this property. Establishing launches at Fisherman's Park or on the
State of California property would be easiest to do when the properties are
being developed and moving through the planning process. The BCDC or the
Planning Commision could make launching improvements a condition of building.
The Burlingame City Planner has told me that any funds held for mitigation
projects have to be spent on mitigation projects within five years or returned
to the party that paid them. There are no current development plans moving
forward for the parcel which includes Fisherman's Park (301 Airport Boulevard)
or the State of California parcel. Whether these parcels get built on in the
near term is probably dependent upon how the Bay Area economy performs.
Peter
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:35:04 PST