Received: from opus.hpl.hp.com by jr.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA260336551; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:29:20 -0700 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 AA202796532; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:28:52 -0700 Received: from imo16.mx.aol.com (imo16.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.6]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1a/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id OAA23566 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:28:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis Received: from Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis (14380) by imo16.mx.aol.com (IMOv20) id 1YJJa09411; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:24:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <86f2f375.2450eda2@aol.com-DeleteThis> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:24:50 EDT Subject: COYOTE: 4/26 Planning Commission To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis, atomic1@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis, harris@synopsys.com-DeleteThis, bob@quake.net-DeleteThis, geohaye@hotmail.com-DeleteThis, ROBBERSON.BILL@epamail.epa.gov-DeleteThis, Randyboz@aol.com-DeleteThis, karinaoc@earthlink.net-DeleteThis, OConnor.Karina@epamail.epa.gov-DeleteThis, WHITEHAB@pab27a.ssd.loral.com-DeleteThis, harris4life@yahoo.com-DeleteThis, CoyoteSurf@aol.com-DeleteThis, whitehair.bob@icarus.ssd.loral.com-DeleteThis, bdow@cisco.com-DeleteThis, TFeldstein@grmslaw.com-DeleteThis, mtischler@mail.arc.nasa.gov-DeleteThis, lbauman@fostercity.org-DeleteThis, jrunge@netcom.com-DeleteThis, DTLow911@aol.com-DeleteThis, kdoerr@pacbell.net-DeleteThis, mnowicki@ricochet.net-DeleteThis, edward@vistapost.com-DeleteThis, RedKen2@aol.com-DeleteThis, WindyYet@aol.com-DeleteThis Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 214 Reply-To: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis
The Burlingame Planning Commission plans on considering finalization of the
EIR re. Coyote on Monday 4/26. Bob Indig, SFBA webmaster is working hard on
scanning in portions of the 279 page Response to Comments in which the
consultant for the City responded to our concerns. It appears that none of
our concerns were considered important enough to require any revision to the
EIR. The City position is still that there will definitely be no impact to
windsurfing based on their wind-tunnel test.
Downloads now available are-
List of Revisions to the Recirculated Draft EIR and list of commenting
parties (2.4 meg adobe acrobat file):
Letters of Clement Wang and SFBA regarding concerns and the answers of the
consultant including Master Response re. Windsurfing issues (13.5 meg adobe
acrobat file):
and http://www.sfba.org/73-127.pdf.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:35:16 PST