Received: from opus.hpl.hp.com (root@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis [15.0.168.176]) by jr.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id QAA29154 for <wind_talk_ls@jr.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 16:32:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com (hplms26.hpl.hp.com [15.255.168.31]) by opus.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id QAA16770 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 16:31:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from lukla.Sun.COM (lukla.Sun.COM [192.18.98.31]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id QAA09250 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 16:32:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from sunmail1.Sun.COM ([129.145.1.2]) by lukla.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA26801 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 17:32:23 -0700 (MST) Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com (jurassic.Eng.Sun.COM [129.146.83.130]) by sunmail1.Sun.COM (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1/ENSMAIL,v1.6.1-sunmail1) with ESMTP id QAA23067 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 16:32:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from eng.sun.com (jalama.Eng.Sun.COM [129.146.85.143]) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA28157 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 16:32:21 -0800 (PST) Sender: James.Paugh@eng.sun.com-DeleteThis Message-ID: <3887A93F.5CE3F43B@eng.sun.com-DeleteThis> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 16:33:03 -0800 From: Jim Paugh <jpaugh@eng.sun.com-DeleteThis> Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.71 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.8 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis Subject: Re: SFO References: <20000121001025.29379.qmail@web1404.mail.yahoo.com-DeleteThis> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Martin Frankel wrote:
>
> > This is such a typical end around. I can hear it
> > now, "well, we have already spent a million on the
> > specs (all which will push for the "build on the
> > bay
> > runway POV") we might as well just get going on the
> > project so we insure that the specification funding
> > is
> > well spent.
>
> They already spent one or two billion expanding the
> terminal, which will be largely wasted if they can't
> get more runways. I think this particular political
> maneuver has already happened. A million bucks is a
> drop in the bucket compared to the cost of the
> terminal and runways.
Wasn't a similar tactic used by CalTrans on the Devil Slide bypass? They
refused to look at building a tunnel, sighting the expense they had
already gone to getting plans for the bypass over Montara Mtn into
Pacifica. It finally ended up as a ballot measure in which they were
forced to consider a tunnel alternative (I think that's how it went).
There's going to be a lot of political momentum behind the SFO
expansion, it's going to be a tough train to derail!
~Jim
-- James M. Paugh email: Jim.Paugh@Sun.COM-DeleteThis Solaris Internet Engineering phone: (650) 786-5087 Sun Microsystems Inc. fax: (650) 786-6137
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 27 2002 - 12:23:45 PDT