Windsurfing Dismissed by Burlkingame Planning Commission

From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis
Date: Tue May 11 1999 - 10:04:51 PDT


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 AA244162848; Tue, 11 May 1999 10:14:09 -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 AA072412846; Tue, 11 May 1999 10:14:06 -0700
Received: from imo23.mx.aol.com (imo23.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.67]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1a/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id KAA06151 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 May 1999 10:14:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis
Received: from Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis (14417) by imo23.mx.aol.com (IMOv20) id cVGPa15866; Tue, 11 May 1999 13:04:52 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <c848063f.2469bd33@aol.com-DeleteThis>
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 13:04:51 EDT
Subject: Windsurfing Dismissed by Burlkingame Planning Commission
To: 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, harris4life@yahoo.com-DeleteThis, CoyoteSurf@aol.com-DeleteThis, bdow@cisco.com-DeleteThis, TFeldstein@grmslaw.com-DeleteThis, mtischler@mail.arc.nasa.gov-DeleteThis, lbauman@fostercity.org-DeleteThis, jrunge@netcom.com-DeleteThis, wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 214

The Burlingame Planning Commission voted 5-2 last night for certification of
the EIR which finds that the 301 Airport Boulevard project will have no
impact on windsurfing. They did not have any discussion with regard to making
a finding of significant impact and they did not have any discussion as to
the concern we have raised about the standard of significant impact being
insufficient.

Votes for certification:

Mike Coffey (new chairman/real estate broker)
Jerry Deal (stepped down as chairman last night)
David Luzuriage
Jerry Bojues
Ann Keighran

Votes against:

Stanley Vistica
Martin Dreiling (newly seated last night)

Apparantly actual certification will occur at the next meeting. I have a call
in to the City Attorney to confirm this. Commissioers Luzuriaga and Keighran
who made statements of concern about windsurfing two weeks ago had no
comments about windsurfing. Luzuriaga had been the first to suggest making a
finding of significant impact to windsurfing in the face of an EIR that
claimed there would be no impact.

Visitica and Dreiling did not initially make statement, but spoke after the
vote when Deal asked what their basis of opposition was. Both were concerned
about traffic and windsurfing impacts. Vistica also said that he expected
that a lawsuit would result from the decision as it related to windsurfing.

Coffey, the chair asked if the SFBA was ready to work with the developer for
the next two weeks to look for some compromise and I explained that the
developer appears to have made his best offer and it does little to improve
the situation given his insistance on retaining all proposed floor space and
his unwillingness to move or rotate buildings. The compromise proposed
involves reducing the height of buildings nearer Coyote and adding floors to
the buildings farther back.

There was a report prepared by the EIR consultant which was submitted since
the 4/26 planning meeting. I did not have time to fully read it and I will
have to find out if it is considered part of the EIR as it may bear on the
question of what was or was not addressed. It looks like we may have grounds
to challenge the EIR based upon the failure in looking at or disclosing
turbulence data in a way that allowed full public review.

In any event, the Planning Commission will have ultimate authority over what
happens once the EIR process is sorted out. They still seem to be calling for
"compromise" but my impression is that they are looking for a token. With the
exception of Commissioner Vistica, the Commissioners did not make any
statements or comments which would allow one to conclude that they had read
any of the recent letters from SFBA regarding alternatives designs and the
need for a standard of significant impact that deals with turbulence.

Peter



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:35:26 PST