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 SAA22484 for <wind_talk_ls@jr.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:26:09 -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 SAA06464 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:25:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com-DeleteThis [206.184.139.15]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id SAA13973 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:26:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from cathyb (dynamic29.pm01.san-mateo.best.com [205.149.174.29]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with SMTP id SAA20285; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:16:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:27:42 -0800 Message-ID: <01BF6E74.5B964660.cathyb@baylock.com-DeleteThis> From: Cathy Baylock <cathyb@baylock.com-DeleteThis> To: "'Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis'" <Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis>, "billrx@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis" <billrx@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis>, "harris@synopsys.com-DeleteThis" <harris@synopsys.com-DeleteThis>, "bob@quake.net-DeleteThis" <bob@quake.net-DeleteThis>, "geohaye@hotmail.com-DeleteThis" <geohaye@hotmail.com-DeleteThis>, "Randyboz@aol.com-DeleteThis" <Randyboz@aol.com-DeleteThis> To: "karinaoc@earthlink.net-DeleteThis" <karinaoc@earthlink.net-DeleteThis>, "Robberson.Bill@epamail.epa.gov-DeleteThis" <Robberson.Bill@epamail.epa.gov-DeleteThis>, "OConnor.Karina@epamail.epa.gov-DeleteThis" <OConnor.Karina@epamail.epa.gov-DeleteThis>, "harris4life@yahoo.com-DeleteThis" <harris4life@yahoo.com-DeleteThis>, "CoyoteSurf@aol.com-DeleteThis" <CoyoteSurf@aol.com-DeleteThis>, "bdow@cisco.com-DeleteThis" <bdow@cisco.com-DeleteThis> To: "TFeldstein@grmslaw.com-DeleteThis" <TFeldstein@grmslaw.com-DeleteThis>, "mtischler@mail.arc.nasa.gov-DeleteThis" <mtischler@mail.arc.nasa.gov-DeleteThis>, "jrunge@netcom.com-DeleteThis" <jrunge@netcom.com-DeleteThis>, "jmcgrath@portoakland.com-DeleteThis" <jmcgrath@portoakland.com-DeleteThis>, "lstanley@stanleyrose.com-DeleteThis" <lstanley@stanleyrose.com-DeleteThis>, "ErikRog@aol.com-DeleteThis" <ErikRog@aol.com-DeleteThis> To: "buck@velaresorts.com-DeleteThis" <buck@velaresorts.com-DeleteThis>, "RedKen2@aol.com-DeleteThis" <RedKen2@aol.com-DeleteThis>, "AIRBOYD1@aol.com-DeleteThis" <AIRBOYD1@aol.com-DeleteThis>, "david@windcall.com-DeleteThis" <david@windcall.com-DeleteThis>, "carlyle@savesfbay.org-DeleteThis" <carlyle@savesfbay.org-DeleteThis>, "jameslord@pacbell.net-DeleteThis" <jameslord@pacbell.net-DeleteThis> To: "cems1@earthlink.net-DeleteThis" <cems1@earthlink.net-DeleteThis>, "Berteva50@aol.com-DeleteThis" <Berteva50@aol.com-DeleteThis>, Clem <clem.wang@altavista.com-DeleteThis>, Peter Liu <peter@windsurfers.net-DeleteThis>, Gerry <gerry_owen@hp.com-DeleteThis>, Gary <ggbsf@earthlink.net-DeleteThis> To: "nmackisoc@yahoo.com-DeleteThis" <nmackisoc@yahoo.com-DeleteThis>, "happynewyear@earthlink.net-DeleteThis" <happynewyear@earthlink.net-DeleteThis>, "Vitalize@aol.com-DeleteThis" <Vitalize@aol.com-DeleteThis>, "MStokowski@evokesoft.com-DeleteThis" <MStokowski@evokesoft.com-DeleteThis>, "epstein@legalnet.com-DeleteThis" <epstein@legalnet.com-DeleteThis>, "taxwind@ad.com-DeleteThis" <taxwind@ad.com-DeleteThis> To: "sewing@nbn.com-DeleteThis" <sewing@nbn.com-DeleteThis>, "wndrider@hooked.net-DeleteThis" <wndrider@hooked.net-DeleteThis>, "wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis" <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis> Subject: RE: Coyote Point/301 Airport Blvd Developement Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:18:33 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Encoding: 45 TEXT
Hi Peter,
At the Planning Commission Meeting Monday the 31st of January, the question
was posed by the Chairman of the Planning Commission if 301 Airport is
subject to their review now that the developer claims there are no
variances. A letter sent to the planning commission apparently intimated
that this project is no longer in their purview because of their lack of
variances. The City Planner answered that this project is still subject to
review due to its scope. She did not use the exact words "CEQA", but I'm
sure this was what she meant. You may want to call Meg to request all
recent correspondence from Dan Levin and Glenborough.
cathyb-----Original Message-----
From: Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis [SMTP:Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis]
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 5:16 PM
To: billrx@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis; harris@synopsys.com-DeleteThis; bob@quake.net-DeleteThis;
geohaye@hotmail.com-DeleteThis; Randyboz@aol.com-DeleteThis; karinaoc@earthlink.net-DeleteThis;
Robberson.Bill@epamail.epa.gov-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; jrunge@netcom.com-DeleteThis;
jmcgrath@portoakland.com-DeleteThis; lstanley@stanleyrose.com-DeleteThis; ErikRog@aol.com-DeleteThis;
buck@velaresorts.com-DeleteThis; RedKen2@aol.com-DeleteThis; AIRBOYD1@aol.com-DeleteThis;
david@windcall.com-DeleteThis; carlyle@savesfbay.org-DeleteThis; jameslord@pacbell.net-DeleteThis;
cathyb@baylock.com-DeleteThis; cems1@earthlink.net-DeleteThis; Berteva50@aol.com-DeleteThis; Clem; Peter
Liu; Gerry; Gary; nmackisoc@yahoo.com-DeleteThis; happynewyear@earthlink.net-DeleteThis;
Vitalize@aol.com-DeleteThis; MStokowski@evokesoft.com-DeleteThis; epstein@legalnet.com-DeleteThis;
taxwind@ad.com-DeleteThis; sewing@nbn.com-DeleteThis; wndrider@hooked.net-DeleteThis;
wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
Subject: Coyote Point/301 Airport Blvd Developement
The developer of the 301 Airport Blvd project which will place new
buildings
between the prevailing winds and the windsurfing launch at Coyote Point
Park
is in the process of resubmitting plans.
It looks like the most likely date for the Planning Commission hearing on
approval/denial is ** MARCH 13th **
The developer has made some kind of modifications to reduce the number of
variances needed, but as far as I know they have not reduced the size or
height of the buildings. The developer resubmitted last week, but the City
kicked the plans back due to a problem with on site traffic circulation.The
estimate of a March 13th hearing is based on the developer resubmitting the
plans during the next week or so.
Peter
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 27 2002 - 12:23:47 PDT