Re: t.i., local sailors and safe the bay,

From: Richard Zimmerman (windrider@ProtectOurBay.com-DeleteThis.com)
Date: Wed May 23 2001 - 14:46:30 PDT

Next message: David Nelson: "Re: t.i., local sailors and safe the bay,"
Previous message: Manuel P: "t.i., local sailors and safe the bay,"
In reply to: Manuel P: "t.i., local sailors and safe the bay,"
Next in thread: David Nelson: "Re: t.i., local sailors and safe the bay,"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:46:30 -0700
Subject: Re: t.i.,  local sailors and safe the bay, 
From: Richard Zimmerman <windrider@ProtectOurBay.com-DeleteThis.com>
To: <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>
Message-ID: <B7317DC6.62AB%windrider@ProtectOurBay.com-DeleteThis.com>
In-Reply-To: <F66nkFyVXFfLFr9PTAN00011963@hotmail.com-DeleteThis.com>

Here's the article from the San Jose Mercury on the San Francisco Charter
Amendment that would give voters in SF the right to vote on the runways.

If you live in SF, call, or write your Supervisor and support this one. It
gives us a real chance to stop the runways and Save Coyote.

C.WRITE THE SUPERVISORS in San Francisco and urge them to co-sponsor Peskin
and Ammiano's charter amendment proposal. Chris Daly has already agreed to
be a co-sponsor. We want to urge all the supervisors to support this
opportunity for voters to have a voice on projects that propose to fill in
large amounts of the Bay. The full Board of Supervisors will be voting in
July on whether to put this charter amendment on the November ballot. Each
supervisor can be contacted at: City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place,
Room 244, San Francisco, CA 94102-4689. They can each be contacted by
email as well:

S.F. supervisors propose vote on bay-fill projects
BY RENEE KOURY <mailto:rkoury@sjmercury.com-DeleteThis.com>
San Jose Mercury News
San Franciscans would get to vote on a highly contested proposal to fill
part of San Francisco Bay to create room for more airport runways, under a
charter amendment introduced Monday to the city's board of supervisors.
Environmentalists immediately hailed the proposal by supervisors Aaron
Peskin and Tom Ammiano. It would for the first time give voters the power to
accept or reject city-proposed projects that require filling more than 100
acres of San Francisco Bay.
Though the airport runway project is not specifically named in the charter
amendment, it was a major impetus for the supervisors and environmentalists.

``The powers that be are moving heaven and earth to move that dirt into the
bay,'' Peskin said Monday. ``It's a matter of fair play to see that voters
have a voice in the decision-making. I'm confident that my colleagues would
want voters to have a say in a project of this magnitude. Hopefully it will
start a real dialogue on how to improve air travel without sacrificing the
bay.''
About one-third of the bay has been filled to accommodate development over
the past 200 years. If the airport runway project moves forward, it would
require filling about two square miles more -- about the size of Golden Gate
Park, or four times the size of Treasure Island.
That apparently would be the largest single filling of the bay ever done,
said David Lewis, executive director of Save the Bay, one of the largest
activist groups seeking to halt filling.
``We are the city by the bay,'' he said. ``The bay is essential to our
quality of life. . . . Now the airport commission is considering the largest
filling of the bay in generations. We are here to ensure that people have a
vote and the bay has a voice.''
The proposed amendment needs six board votes by July 23 to put it on the
November ballot. Passage would require the approval of a majority of voters.
If it becomes law, bay-fill projects would need a majority approval of city
voters to proceed.
Currently, state and federal agencies decide whether to allow bay filling.
Activist groups have long tried to hold sway by lobbying the Bay
Conservation and Development Commission, the state agency that must approve
projects that propose to fill the bay.
State, federal and local airport officials say the runway expansion is vital
to relieving chronic delays that give San Francisco Airport one of the worst
on-time records in the nation. Without better and faster air traffic, the
economies of the Bay Area and the state could suffer, airport officials
contend.
One of six alternatives
Sill, spokeswoman Kandace Bender said the airport welcomes a possible vote
by San Franciscans on the runway expansion proposal. She emphasized that the
bay-fill plan is only one of six alternatives for alleviating delays; others
involve capping or restricting flights in and out of the hub.
``The runway project is the people's project,'' Bender said. ``It's been our
contention from the beginning that as many voices as possible should be
involved in this. We've been looking at this for three years and we still
have six alternatives. They are all moving forward with equal
consideration.''
The bay-fill plan is still undergoing environmental review.
The airport commission is expected to evaluate the studies this fall and
vote later on whether to make the bay-fill project its top choice.
If it does, the plan would then undergo public hearings before a variety of
regulatory agencies, including the Bay Conservation and Development
Commission, some members of which have already voiced support for filling
the bay. It would also require approval of the city's mayor-appointed
Airport Commission, but not a vote of the board of supervisors or the city's
electorate.
Election possible
However, the proposed charter amendment would trigger an election, which
Peskin says would be the only mechanism for giving San Francisco voters a
direct say in the huge project.
Last month, a $400,000 study by Charles River Associates of Boston, an
aviation consulting firm, recommended either building more runways or
limiting flights. It said airport flights are already limited by fog and bad
weather, yet the demand for flights is expected to double in the next 20
years. Limiting flights would require an act of Congress, and could result
in higher ticket prices and loss of hundreds of daily flights, the report
said.
But Peskin -- a member of a bay swimming club who has made the watery trek
from the Embarcadero to Aquatic Park -- said he was unconvinced that filling
the bay is the only solution to improving air travel.
He suggested pooling resources with other counties to augment landing and
takeoff sites, and linking airports with mass transit.
``Every time we hear a developer say it's essential to fill the bay to get a
project done, they always find another way to do it,'' he said.

Contact Renee Koury at rkoury@sjmercury.com-DeleteThis.com <mailto:rkoury@sjmercury.com-DeleteThis.com> or
(415) 394-6878.

--------
Learn about SFIA's Plan to fill the Bay <http://www.ProtectOurBay.com> at my
web site <windrider@ProtectOurBay.com-DeleteThis.com>

Remember, It's not San Francisco's Bay!

> From: "Manuel P" <msprieto@hotmail.com-DeleteThis.com>
> Reply-To: wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com
> Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:34:49 -0700 (PDT)
> To: Multiple recipients of list WIND_TALK <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>
> Subject: t.i., local sailors and safe the bay,
>
>
> hi everyone,
> this post is longer than i wished, but then again i post rarely:
>
> 1 - treasure island report,
>
> i went back to t.i. yesterday for the first time since last fall. after a
> few warm 3rd sessions i must have forgotten about the famous line "my
> coldest winter was summer in..." well, i've been reminded. not like that
> took away from the fun. angel island reading was 25mph.
>
> i was nicely overpowered at #175 on a hunk-of-plastic 85 liter hy-fly board
> and my 5.2. gaastra wave. the ebb yielded solid roller sets and, for those
> who haven't sailed there yet, it's possible to take on these ramps at a near
> beam reach, with little or no pinching). afterwards, met the only 3 other
> sailors enjoying all this bliss.if only hadn't gotten my butt quicked by the
> gusts as i ventured away from shore, it would have been perfect.
>
> all of that left me thinking; if enough of you show interess, if we can get
> a small group of volunteers together, and if the SFBA could pitch in a bit,
> maybe we could throw enough concrete on the upwind side of the launch to
> avoid having to go in under the wind shadow... what do you think?
>
> 2- besides solid winds, the people that sail this bay make s.f. the great
> windsurfing region it is. i am one of those sailors who don't often have the
> time to hang out after the drives and the long sessions. but everytime i've
> made the effort, it's been a rewarding experience. and as a bonus the
> traffic was even better as i drove home later ;-)
>
> 3- on the save the bay front, my wife mentioned hearing about the bay fill
> project going on a ballot. anyone has news on this? this might be a crucial
> time for our efforts.
>
> well, i guess that's it.
> cheers,
>
> -manuel prieto
>
> "Navigare necesse est"
> [To sail is necessary]
> [Naviguer est necessaire]
> [Navegar es necesario]
> - Gnaeus Pompeius
> msprieto@hotmail.com-DeleteThis.com
>
>
>

Next message: David Nelson: "Re: t.i., local sailors and safe the bay,"
Previous message: Manuel P: "t.i., local sailors and safe the bay,"
In reply to: Manuel P: "t.i., local sailors and safe the bay,"
Next in thread: David Nelson: "Re: t.i., local sailors and safe the bay,"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 02:10:12 PST