Re: Danger: SFO runway expansion ahead

From: George Haye (geohaye@hotmail.com-DeleteThis)
Date: Tue Nov 24 1998 - 19:08:26 PST


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 AA186703358; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 19:09:19 -0800
Return-Path: <geohaye@hotmail.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 AA135353356; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 19:09:16 -0800
Received: from hotmail.com (f302.hotmail.com [207.82.251.215]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1/8.9.1/HPLabs Relay) with SMTP id TAA09236 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 19:09:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 26283 invoked by uid 0); 25 Nov 1998 03:08:28 -0000
Message-Id: <19981125030828.26282.qmail@hotmail.com-DeleteThis>
Received: from 206.111.131.56 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 19:08:26 PST
X-Originating-Ip: [206.111.131.56]
From: "George Haye" <geohaye@hotmail.com-DeleteThis>
To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
Subject: Re: Danger: SFO runway expansion ahead
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 19:08:26 PST

a few thoughts:
1. Seals
2. Coyotes, Tigers, and Oysters
** I have not sailed Tigers and Oysters much. But, I want to protect
them very, very much. We need all of the access we can get. Even if I
don't get involved with Tigers and Oysters (choosing Seals and Coyotes
instead), we still must protect all of them.
1. Seal Point --> I keep getting e-mails from people wanting to write
letters and learn more about Seal Point. Call of the Wind/Mike Godsey
put my e-mail address in a wind-forecast page, I think, that went out to
all of their customers. I'm glad people are interested. ----> I'm
sending a letter to 2M Associates right now with the following idea: A
200 car lot would be well-used a Seal Point. If the final plans do not
include a 200 car lot, but instead perhaps a 125-car lot, then I would
urge that a specfic area be left available for expansion of the parking
lot (to 200 cars...) when it becomes apparant that the expansion is
necessary. Looking into the future, it is clear to me that this day will
come, if not within 2 years, then within 5 or 10 years. Even if it's 25
years from now -- let's allow room for growth. "We need it." Who knows
how many of our fine windsurf spots will get kicked in the head over the
next few years.
2. Coyote/Tigers/Oyster --> Dan Farmer is right on. **KEY** to any
diagram of the runways, we must draw in and add to any numbers
describing the "length" of the runways -- the doggone birdcages (piers
with lights)! These will block access to a even more of the Bay than the
concrete fill alone will. Does anyone know exactly how long the current
birdcages are? That is absolutely critical to our view of the situation.
It appears that we are looking a getting our reaches cut off very early
after leaving the beach at Coyote. Coyote Point will become the new
Foster City Lagoon. To me that is more than an inconvenience.
   But, we cannot frame this as a windsurfer vs. airport/population
issue, or we'll go nowhere. Damage to existing WINDSURFING access to the
wide-open Bay, however, is ANOTHER negative impact that must be added to
everyone's list (Sierra Club, BCDC, Save the Bay, BayKeeper). The list
already contains, among others: damage to fisheries (there are fish and
crustaceans who will suffer), damage to water quality (less mixing.
we'll have a cesspool of spent airline fuel and water fouled with all
types of *&^%.), also damage to the Bay's aesthetics. No amount of South
Bay land swapping can help ANY of these issues.
   High speed ferries from SFO to Oakland Airport for connecting
flights, or for any flights. A new airport in the Livermore area
("LIVER-MORE" -- where MORE people are going to be LIVING -- that's
where the population's going to be growing the fastest, why not put the
airport there.) These ideas make sense. Filling the Bay must not
continue... Not just for windsurfing's sake (although that's reason
enough for me).
   If we want to make a difference, we need to argue our own cases, but
we must also become active with groups: SFBA of course, but we need to
be thinking about Save the Bay, BayKeeper, maybe the Sierra Club. We
need to learn about the BCDC (any permit for bay fill must be approved
by them.)
   From what I understand, the public likely will not be asked to vote
on this issue. Our 'vote' will be whatever influence we can exert on the
public permitting and studying process.
   The issue is becoming intense now, and it could be a long, long
fight. 99.99% of the opponents to the airport expansion will be
non-windsufers. They will be happy to have another item to place on the
"Negative Effects" list. We must work with them.
   Cities like Foster City, San Mateo, Redwood City stand to gain a ton
in terms of lower airplane noise and higher 'quality of life'. Almost
every bay area business will support the expansion. But we have many,
many folks on our side too.

-George Haye
geohaye@hotmail.com-DeleteThis

----Original Message Follows----
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 15:31:03 -0800
Reply-To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
From: Dan Farmer <danf@juniper.net-DeleteThis>
To: Multiple recipients of list <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>
Subject: Danger: SFO runway expansion ahead

This morning there is an article in the SF Chronicle about the proposed
SFO runway expansion... It starts on the front page, but the
interesting bit is the set of maps on page A9. The Mercury News has
similar maps on the back of Section A.I hate sounding like an alarmist,
but I am alarmed.

                THIS PROPOSAL WILL KILL COYOTE POINT.

          Oyster Point/Flying Tigers could also be ruined.

First, Coyote Point:

The maps in the paper don't show Coyote Point, but you can get the right
perspective by pointing your web browser to

                     <<http://badger.parl.com>

Either point and click on the maps or select the San Mateo quadrangle
from the pull-down and then click on the Northwest quarter-quadrangle.
This should show a satellite photo including the runways and Coyote
Point Park near the right edge. The dark stuff is the forest on the
hill and the shoreline to the left is our launch spot. ASD is in the
corner at the left end of the beach. If you get geeky and use a ruler
and a calculator, you can scale the maps in the paper and eyeball where
the new runways will be in the photo on your screen. The two proposals
have the same location for the SE end of the new runway.

When I did the scaling of the runway expansion and added the birdcage of
lights from the existing runways (from the photo), it looked grim! The
birdcage would extend off the photo. I think it will take a very
northerly day to get past the birdcage and get back in again. One
could still sail out about one and a half miles before hitting the
runway. I think that's about where the first buoy is today. About
where the swell gets less confused and the wind gets steadier. That's
why I think it will kill Coyote Point as a windsurf spot.

Next, Oyster/Tigers:

In regards to the one-intersection proposal, Ed Scott wrote earlier:
"Plan F2 extends one new runway from the northeastern edge of SFO's
field (near the fuel tanks/United hanger) out approximately 2.2 miles in
a northeast direction. The new runway will enclose the existing Flying
Tigers cove where the best windsurfing is, and cuts across the area
where the best reaches are, just outside the cove." I think that sums
it up.

Bottom Line:

We need to make major efforts if we want to keep Coyote Point sailable.
It seems worthwhile, since there aren't enough spots around with
100-space parking lots to handle the weekend crowds of sailors. This
winter seems to be shaping up as a lot of work just to keep sailing at
my usual spot. I hope many of my fellow sailors will join me in working
to defeat this proposal. I don't like politics, but that's how this
will be decided. Randy Anderson of the SFBA has been in these
situations before, but lot's of people will need to help.

<paraindent><param>out,out,out,out,out</param>

______________________________________________________________________________

Dan Farmer danf@juniper.net-DeleteThis

</paraindent>Mechanical Design Engineer voice: 650-526-8007

<paraindent><param>out</param>Juniper Networks fax: 650-526-8001

</paraindent><paraindent><param>out,out,out,out,out</param>385 Ravendale
Drive

</paraindent>Mtn. View, CA 94043

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 05 2013 - 02:03:12 PST