X-OldHeader: From mchapman@synopsys.com-DeleteThis.com Fri Jun 1 09:53:33 2001 Return-Path: <mchapman@synopsys.com-DeleteThis.com> Received: from opus.labs.agilent.com (root@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com [130.29.244.179]) by jr.labs.agilent.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/8.9.3 AgilentLabs Workstation) with ESMTP id JAA12016 for <wind_talk_ls@jr.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Fri, 1 Jun 2001 09:53:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from msgbas1.cos.agilent.com (msgbas1.cos.agilent.com [130.29.152.58]) by opus.labs.agilent.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/8.9.3 AgilentLabs Workstation) with ESMTP id JAA09520 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Fri, 1 Jun 2001 09:53:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hamachi.synopsys.com (hamachi.synopsys.com [204.176.20.26]) by msgbas1.cos.agilent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F17F1758 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Fri, 1 Jun 2001 10:53:24 -0600 (MDT) Received: from maiden.synopsys.com (maiden.synopsys.com [146.225.100.170]) by hamachi.synopsys.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA04682 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Fri, 1 Jun 2001 09:53:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from synopsys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maiden.synopsys.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA29610 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Fri, 1 Jun 2001 09:54:53 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mchapman@synopsys.com-DeleteThis.com Message-ID: <3B17C888.F6FE17F4@synopsys.com-DeleteThis.com> Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 09:53:28 -0700 From: Matt Chapman <mchapman@synopsys.com-DeleteThis.com> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686) X-Accept-Language: en To: wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com Subject: Re: Bill gives San Mateo County say in SFO expansion References: <F146NqS6MT0Du8fiZO10000fc36@hotmail.com-DeleteThis.com>
On the news the other night they reported that a much higher
percentage of peninsula residents were now willing to fund a
new bridge/tunnel across the bay (than they saw in a similar
study from 10 years ago.)
One of the bridge proponents described a scenario where you
could check in at the SFO terminal even if your flight was out
of Oakland. I got the impression the two airports could in a
sense become one airport, with two separate terminals.
Cost was still an issue, but I guess if you subtract what it'll
cost for new runways at SFO, the bridge gets a lot cheaper.
Plus commuters can use it, not just planes.
The bridge (or tunnel) would land somewhere near SFO and OAK.
- Matt
Manuel P wrote:
>
> another opportunity, another challenge...
> read all about it:
>
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/05/31/MNL104935.DTL
>
> see you out there... (hopefully soon)
> -manuel prieto
>
> "Navigare necesse est"
> [To sail is necessary]
> [Naviguer est necessaire]
> [Navegar es necesario]
> - Gnaeus Pompeius
> msprieto@hotmail.com-DeleteThis.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 02:10:12 PST