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 AA179192394; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 18:53:14 -0800 Return-Path: <harris@Synopsys.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 AA132362382; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 18:53:02 -0800 Received: from hamachi.synopsys.com (hamachi-8.synopsys.com [146.225.8.26]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1/8.9.1/HPLabs Relay) with ESMTP id SAA08740 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 18:53:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from javelin.synopsys.com (javelin.synopsys.com [146.225.100.38]) by hamachi.synopsys.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA12268 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 18:48:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from synopsys.com (dhcp-146-225-75-38.synopsys.com [146.225.75.38]) by javelin.synopsys.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA08384 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 18:49:28 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <365B6E1F.B8E8991F@synopsys.com-DeleteThis> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 18:40:31 -0800 From: Greg Harris <harris@Synopsys.COM-DeleteThis> Organization: Synopsys X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.03 [en] (WinNT; I) To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis Subject: Re: Oyster Point/Flying Tigers Threatened References: <199811242216.OAA60544@bluedini.engr.sgi.com-DeleteThis> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
It also appears that SFO is trying to appease any groups that have
complaints about the runway expansion. I agree, I don't want them to
expand, however, I think there may be more powerful forces behind
airport expansion than the windsurfing lobby. If they're willing to
scratch our backs, or give us a nice new big launch or something, I
might be more willing to say it's OK.
I'd also like to know if anyone knows the answer to Ed's original
question. I want to know who, when, what, where to give my input. I
think the SFBA is the logical point of contact, but I don't know who is
doing what. Is there anyone from there who will comment?
btw, as I see all these cases come up about losing/having sites damaged
is making me think $20 for a SFBA membership is a REAL good idea.
Greg
Martin Frankel wrote:
>
> Kirk, you make a good point, but San Francisco Int'l just spent 2 or 3
> billion expanding their terminal. In that light I think the runway
> expansion is almost inevitable.
>
> Of the two site plans in the SJ Mercury, neither looks good for
> windsurfing. If the new north-south runway is built west of the
> existing pair, then Oyster Point loses. If it's built east, then the
> new east-west runway and its landing light pier might interfere with
> reaches from Coyote.
>
> On the other hand, from looking at a map, neither case looks like it
> would be more than an inconvenience. There are other situations on
> the bay (Coyote construction, Seal Point, Crissy renovations,
> Berkeley, Treasure Island access, etc) where I believe windsurfers
> stand to gain or lose much more, and have a much greater chance of
> having an significant voice.
>
> --
> Martin Frankel |||| mdf@sgi.com-DeleteThis |||| (650)933-6191
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 05 2013 - 02:03:12 PST