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 AA142361637; Tue, 11 May 1999 21:00:37 -0700 Return-Path: <peteru@earthlink.net-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 AA150221629; Tue, 11 May 1999 21:00:29 -0700 Received: from gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net (gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.85]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1a/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id VAA10093 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 May 1999 21:00:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [153.36.254.151] (1Cust151.tnt1.sfo3.da.uu.net [153.36.254.151]) by gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA25429 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 May 1999 20:58:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <v03007800b35eace738a5@[153.37.9.202]> In-Reply-To: <3738E67C.C6EEA39E@ix.netcom.com-DeleteThis> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 21:01:53 -0700 To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis From: Peter Uehlin <peteru@earthlink.net-DeleteThis> Subject: Re: Windsurfing Dismissed by Burlkingame Planning Commission
How can a Real Estate Broker be elected as Chairman? I'm sure he has vested
interests. I've lived in Burlingame for the past five years and it seems as
though every development project has been approved, no matter the
consequences. Maybe we should pass the collection plate and hire an
attorney.
-Pete
>What about an "informational picket" at the place of business for the new
>chairman?
>
>
>Jonathan Hahn wrote:
>
>> > Yes - it was a rather depressing evening. One of the strangest
>>things that
>>
>> I also think the results are depressing but are they that unexpected?
>> It reminds me of the efforts of some friends who organized to
>> preserve burrowing owl habitat in the mountain view area east of
>> 101; the field in question was the area that they're building the
>> new Microsoft campus on (@ 101 & Shoreline). Does anyone really
>> think that kind of development would be halted due to environmental
>> concerns unless it's beyond the control of the city to allow it
>> (i.e. prohibited due to state or federal law)?
>>
>> So I'd be surprised if a $$ transaction was materially changed due
>> to such "intangible" reasons. But then I wonder if the loss of a
>> resource could be made tangible. If the developer and city damage,
>> destory, or make unusable a natural resource, can they be held
>> liable? Would this be something the BDCD or the Sierra Club Legal
>> Defense Fund or some similar organization might get involved in?
>>
>> -jon
>
>--
>best regards
>Kirk Lindstrom
>Editor Suite101.com - Personal Finance and Investing
>http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/investing
>Writer/Analyst - Financial Savvy Investment Newsletter
>http://pweb.netcom.com/~kirk_69/SavvyPromo/WhatLetter2Buy.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:35:27 PST