Jump to content


News from SF Embarcadero...


  • Please log in to reply
5434 replies to this topic

#1901 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,200 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:14 PM

Will be interesting to hear Dalton's reaction. My guess, he'll be grumpy

#1902 pjfranks

pjfranks

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,679 posts
  • Location:i'm loving it
  • Interests:wtf is one warning points?

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:16 PM

This only takes Piers 30/32 and seawall lot 330 off the table (granted they were significant component of the original plan), but Piers 27/29 and 28 and 26 remain.

A decision to use Pier 80 for team bases throughout AC34 does not impact Pesky Peskin's lawsuit.

Not the first time he's filed a petition for writ of mandate based on CEQA to block a development.

He filed a similar one for the Treasure Island Development in July of 2011, that is still in court. You can read the lengthy case history for that one here:

http://webaccess.sft...S=-ACPF11511452


Will those approvals now go through okay or are they open to further dispute?

#1903 kiwi_jon

kiwi_jon

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,623 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:17 PM

Actually, you can't help but admire LE for calling their bluff and just saying hell with em. Less headache he doesn't need.

what they could have had....
Posted Image


Did ACEA call a bluff or was it a back down?

Why would you call a bluff before the vote tomorrow when the result of the vote is unknown.

I would suspect that ACEA's/Larry's lawyers went through Waterfront Watch/Peskins suit and found that it had validity and that would have delayed construction to the point that it no longer became viable to meet the 2013 deadline.

By the way what will be the difference between a tent/container city on pier 30-32 and the same tent/container city on pier 80.

#1904 Dixie

Dixie

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,690 posts
  • Location:SF

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:18 PM

From the Mayor's Office - the official word:




*** PRESS RELEASE ***




MAYOR LEE & AMERICA’S CUP EVENT AUTHORITY ANNOUNCE CONSOLIDATED VENUE PLAN FOR 34TH AMERICA’S CUP







San Francisco, CA—Mayor Edwin M. Lee and the America’s Cup Event Authority (ACEA) announced today a consolidated venue plan for the 34th America’s Cup, removing Piers 30-32 for use during the America’s Cup events, consolidating all racing teams at Pier 80 and build a race village at Pier 27-29.




“We are excited to host the 34thAmerica’s Cup, one of the world’s greatest international sporting events, in San Francisco and benefit from the jobs and economic impacts that come with it,” said Mayor Lee. “This consolidated venue plan with the teams at Pier 80 will ensure we are ready for races this year and in 2013 and brings new investment and improvements to our City’s Southern waterfront.”




“We want to thank the Mayor, his staff and the City of San Francisco for their incredible support and efforts working with us to make our collective goal of a remarkable race a reality. We believe that these changes will further the progress towards our collective goal while maintaining major investments in City Infrastructure,” said America’s Cup Event Authority Board Member Stephen Barclay. “We look forward to continuing our work with the Mayor and the City and delivering all the benefits this race will bring.”




The additional development at Pier 80 in Dogpatch and the Bayview will mean millions of dollars in improvements and job opportunities in one of the City’s most underserved areas. The infrastructure improvements and long-term development rights associated with the Event Authority’s investments, originally proposed for team bases at Piers 30-32, will now no longer be necessary for races in 2012 and 2013.




The America’s Cup World Series races will be held in San Francisco from August 11 – 19 and August 27 – September 2, 2012. The Louis Vuitton Cup, the America’s Cup Challenger Series, will be held in San Francisco from July 4 – September 1, 2013 and the America’s Cup Finals will be held September 7 – 22, 2013.



#1905 Mariner

Mariner

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,509 posts
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:19 PM

This only takes Piers 30/32 and seawall lot 330 off the table (granted they were significant component of the original plan), but Piers 27/29 and 28 and 26 remain.

A decision to use Pier 80 for team bases throughout AC34 does not impact Pesky Peskin's lawsuit.

Not the first time he's filed a petition for writ of mandate based on CEQA to block a development.

He filed a similar one for the Treasure Island Development in July of 2011, that is still in court. You can read the lengthy case history for that one here:

http://webaccess.sft...S=-ACPF11511452


Must be a sad sorry existence impeding progress for a living huh?

#1906 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:21 PM

Has Peskin got what he wanted?


Nope - Instead of an 'improved' deal he's got NO deal at all.

Like mentioned above:

Peskin's lawsuit is now basically toast unless he plans to pursue stopping the CST too.
Much of ADM's (highly improbably anyway) BOFD evaporated
About 1500 pages of CEQA work just got tossed to the wind and has no basis for court challenges
All the construction workers, engineers and architects lost out on at least $80M in projects to work!
Condo resales revenues? Gone
Local hire ordinances arguments? Umm - Who's left to hire now?

While:
The AC still has a place to host the bases. The races and the TV and the spectating (except for at old, abandoned Peskin Point) will happen just as good as before.


It's not the ideal for anyone but you could see it coming from a mile away. Like Barclay warned Avalos again last week: Time and patience had run out. Avalos, and then Peskin, kept pressing anyway and so now it's gone and those guys are left to pick up the broken political and financial pieces in the fallout. Not Larry's problem!

#1907 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,752 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:22 PM

http://maps.google.c...2,66.35,,0,0.35

And this is what they're left with...



Nothing like reserving potentially the highest-value real estate in the "City by the Bay" for decaying parking lots!

#1908 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:25 PM

Has Peskin got what he wanted?


The deal for the Port is gone. He got nothing of what he wanted and looks a bit greedy and stupid at the moment, but that's ok. The pigeon scalper is still celebrating the "request" to have Watch's attorney fees paid. Since he's probably the one that came up with 50 plus defendant's, all of which were apparently served, he now looks like a butt head that ran up the bills unnecessarily.

#1909 pjh

pjh

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,846 posts
  • Location:San Francisco

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:28 PM


http://maps.google.c...2,66.35,,0,0.35

And this is what they're left with...

Nothing like reserving potentially the highest-value real estate in the "City by the Bay" for decaying parking lots!

Most of it isn't used for a parking lot any longer since a semi-trailer truck broke through the surface a few years ago. It's mostly just slowly falling into the Bay.

#1910 DA-WOODY

DA-WOODY

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,108 posts
  • Location:I'm in Sunny..-. Warm..& ..Dry San Diego . and your not :-)
  • Interests:Prime + 1 3/4

    COUGARS COUGARS & More COUGARS

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:29 PM

well for people who can't do anything positive it at least gets their name some ink

#1911 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:37 PM

Did ACEA call a bluff or was it a back down?


That's a pretty stupid question in that poor excuse of a brain, Porta Potty.

Even you should be able to answer your own question Posted Image

#1912 pjfranks

pjfranks

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,679 posts
  • Location:i'm loving it
  • Interests:wtf is one warning points?

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:41 PM


Has Peskin got what he wanted?


Nope - Instead of an 'improved' deal he's got NO deal at all.

Like mentioned above:

Peskin's lawsuit is now basically toast unless he plans to pursue stopping the CST too.
Much of ADM's (highly improbably anyway) BOFD evaporated
About 1500 pages of CEQA work just got tossed to the wind and has no basis for court challenges
All the construction workers, engineers and architects lost out on at least $80M in projects to work!
Condo resales revenues? Gone
Local hire ordinances arguments? Umm - Who's left to hire now?

While:
The AC still has a place to host the bases. The races and the TV and the spectating (except for at old, abandoned Peskin Point) will happen just as good as before.


It's not the ideal for anyone but you could see it coming from a mile away. Like Barclay warned Avalos again last week: Time and patience had run out. Avalos, and then Peskin, kept pressing anyway and so now it's gone and those guys are left to pick up the broken political and financial pieces in the fallout. Not Larry's problem!

Can the event now go ahead on time without further problems?
Does this mean that all the long term deals for reconstruction are off?




#1913 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:48 PM



Has Peskin got what he wanted?


Nope - Instead of an 'improved' deal he's got NO deal at all.

Can the event now go ahead on time without further problems?
Does this mean that all the long term deals for reconstruction are off?


Don't sound so despondent.

Try posting about the racing instead :)




#1914 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:52 PM



Has Peskin got what he wanted?

Nope - Instead of an 'improved' deal he's got NO deal at all.

Can the event now go ahead on time without further problems?
Does this mean that all the long term deals for reconstruction are off?

The mayor's statement refers to "a race village at Pier 27-29" and so presumably some work will be done to the existing structures there. But it's nothing like what the P30/32 and SWL330 projects would have been - all new construction from the foundations on up.

Guess we'll have to wait on the new docs to see the down-scaled plans, due apparently 2 weeks from now. Maybe it will include DDA's on just those piers, maybe not.

edit: oops, no that's the CST so unlikely to be any DDA's around that either

#1915 krispy kreme

krispy kreme

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,113 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 10:59 PM

Did ACEA call a bluff or was it a back down?

Why would you call a bluff before the vote tomorrow when the result of the vote is unknown.

Typically someone with dev. project would have polled the BOS to find out which way they were planning on voting. Perhaps they discovered that the BOS was likely to vote the agreement down. Or perhaps they wanted to just pin prick them a bit by removing revenue opportunities. Kind of a slow water drip sort of torture. It does send a message....

I would suspect that ACEA's/Larry's lawyers went through Waterfront Watch/Peskins suit and found that it had validity and that would have delayed construction to the point that it no longer became viable to meet the 2013 deadline.

By the way what will be the difference between a tent/container city on pier 30-32 and the same tent/container city on pier 80.



#1916 krispy kreme

krispy kreme

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,113 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 11:07 PM


Has Peskin got what he wanted?


Nope - Instead of an 'improved' deal he's got NO deal at all.

Like mentioned above:

Peskin's lawsuit is now basically toast unless he plans to pursue stopping the CST too.
Much of ADM's (highly improbably anyway) BOFD evaporated
About 1500 pages of CEQA work just got tossed to the wind and has no basis for court challenges
All the construction workers, engineers and architects lost out on at least $80M in projects to work!
Condo resales revenues? Gone
Local hire ordinances arguments? Umm - Who's left to hire now?

While:
The AC still has a place to host the bases. The races and the TV and the spectating (except for at old, abandoned Peskin Point) will happen just as good as before.


It's not the ideal for anyone but you could see it coming from a mile away. Like Barclay warned Avalos again last week: Time and patience had run out. Avalos, and then Peskin, kept pressing anyway and so now it's gone and those guys are left to pick up the broken political and financial pieces in the fallout. Not Larry's problem!

Where to start with how wrong this is....
Peskin's petition involved ALL of the EIR - including the CST. He is certainly free to amend his petition and eliminate references to Piers 30/32/seawall 330.
The EIR has not been 'tossed in the wind'
People will be required to perform construction at the CST/Pier 29, architects and engineers will be hired.

#1917 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 11:24 PM


Peskin's lawsuit is now basically toast unless he plans to pursue stopping the CST too.

Where to start with how wrong this is....
Peskin's petition involved ALL of the EIR - including the CST. He is certainly free to amend his petition and eliminate references to Piers 30/32/seawall 330.
The EIR has not been 'tossed in the wind'

Perhaps you missed the bold. Yes, I agree.

At various sites:
--

SF waterfront plans for America's Cup scaled back


PAUL ELIAS Associated Press Published: February 27, 2012


SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Organizers of sailing's most prestigious event are dramatically scaling back plans to renovate San Francisco's dilapidated waterfront.

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee announced Monday that two little-used piers near the city's downtown will no longer be refurbished to house America's Cup sailing teams. Instead, all teams will be located on a single pier in an industrial part of San Francisco a couple of miles from the city center.

Lee says the change won't affect the number of race days or alter the planned course with views of the city's skyline.

He says the original plan was scratched because it was too complex to complete the planned renovations in time for the races this summer and next year.

--



#1918 Asymptote

Asymptote

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,573 posts
  • Location:Seattle

Posted 27 February 2012 - 11:26 PM

TC sez:

"Seriously, who thinks that a pier can be nice ? most of north American harbours have been been turned ugly with piers that not useful and wether with old warehouse or new building they are just an eyesore and, if nobody want it the city should just dismantle it.

When I am in an harbour I like to watch the sea, not ugly piers and constructions. "

And so, with out those nasty piers to help get on and off those things called "boats" or "ships" just exactly is it that makes it a "harbor"?

That's right, you just run your Hobie 14 up on the beach and impress the chicks.

You are an idiot. Everyone here thinks you're an idiot. But carry on. We like idiots.


#1919 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 11:41 PM

Did ACEA call a bluff or was it a back down?
Why would you call a bluff before the vote tomorrow when the result of the vote is unknown.


For sure it is not bluff. ACEA made a strategic retreat in order to try to win the battle tomorrow, the vote.

#1920 K38BOB

K38BOB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,533 posts
  • Location:Bay Area

Posted 27 February 2012 - 11:42 PM


Did ACEA call a bluff or was it a back down?
Why would you call a bluff before the vote tomorrow when the result of the vote is unknown.


For sure it is not bluff. ACEA made a strategic retreat in order to try to win the battle tomorrow, the vote.


The vote tomorrow is postponed.... Alvos wanted more time...now he has it. Be careful what you wish for....

#1921 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 11:47 PM


Did ACEA call a bluff or was it a back down?
Why would you call a bluff before the vote tomorrow when the result of the vote is unknown.


For sure it is not bluff. ACEA made a strategic retreat in order to try to win the battle tomorrow, the vote.


There is no deal to vote on tomorrow. It got tossed overboard before the SFBOS even got to decide it.

--


America’s Cup development deal thrown overboard

Date: Monday, February 27, 2012, 1:44pm PST - Last Modified: Monday, February 27, 2012, 3:35pm PST

America’s Cup officials eliminated a major portion of their agreement with San Francisco, cutting out plans to rehabilitate Piers 30-32, which would have served as a base for racing teams during the 2013 event.

The race officials also gave up rights to a nearby plot of land bounded by Bryant and Beale streets and the Embarcadero, where the America’s Cup planned to build condos at some time in the future.

San Francisco won the rights to the America’s Cup more than a year ago in large part because the city offered long-term development rights to several piers and other waterfront sites. In exchange, the America’s Cup had agreed to make at least $55 million in improvements to various piers.

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee announced the development rights changes Monday, a day before the Board of Supervisors was scheduled to make a critical vote on the city’s development agreement with the America’s Cup. Although many City Hall observers thought the agreement would get approved, it was not considered a sure thing.

In light of the changes, the supervisor vote on the development agreement was put off. It is unclear when it might be rescheduled -- or whether any development rights will be part of any new deal.

Lee said that the 2013 America’s Cup -- along with a series of preliminary races Aug. 11 to Sept. 2 this year -- will still take place as planned on San Francisco Bay.

America’s Cup and city officials were locked in talks all weekend to hammer out a finished version of a real estate deal that has evolved many times since the basic framework was approved more than a year ago.

America’s Cup officials said that the cost to rehab Piers 30-32 -- estimated at $80 million -- and a tight time frame led them to back away from that site.

“The time, the cost, it all factored in,” said Stephen Barclay, an America’s Cup board member who was the lead negotiator with San Francisco.

“I feel good about it. It’s the right decision,” Barclay said.

Teams that participate in the America’s Cup can use Pier 80 as a base, race officials said. Oracle Racing, the team owned by Oracle Corp. CEO Larry Ellison, has its base and design facilities on Pier 80 now.

Lee said that plans for an America’s Cup Village, a collection of shops, eateries and viewing space for the races, will still be at Piers 27-29.

Last week a group including former San Francisco Board of Supervisor Aaron Peskin sued to stop preparations for the 2013 America’s Cup until another environmental review is performed. Lee said the development rights changes were not related to that lawsuit.

--




#1922 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 11:48 PM

TC sez:

"Seriously, who thinks that a pier can be nice ? most of north American harbours have been been turned ugly with piers that not useful and wether with old warehouse or new building they are just an eyesore and, if nobody want it the city should just dismantle it.

When I am in an harbour I like to watch the sea, not ugly piers and constructions. "

And so, with out those nasty piers to help get on and off those things called "boats" or "ships" just exactly is it that makes it a "harbor"?

That's right, you just run your Hobie 14 up on the beach and impress the chicks.

You are an idiot. Everyone here thinks you're an idiot. But carry on. We like idiots.

All big ships are now in new harbours, we don't need any more these old piers dating from the last century. Docks are much more efficient for yachts.

Have you even had a look at other continents harbours ? Is your horizon limited to Seattle ? Clueless.

#1923 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 11:50 PM



Did ACEA call a bluff or was it a back down?
Why would you call a bluff before the vote tomorrow when the result of the vote is unknown.


For sure it is not bluff. ACEA made a strategic retreat in order to try to win the battle tomorrow, the vote.


There is no deal to vote on tomorrow. It got tossed overboard before the SFBOS even got to decide it.

America's Cup development deal thrown overboard

Date: Monday, February 27, 2012, 1:44pm PST - Last Modified: Monday, February 27, 2012, 3:35pm PST

America's Cup officials eliminated a major portion of their agreement with San Francisco, cutting out plans to rehabilitate Piers 30-32, which would have served as a base for racing teams during the 2013 event.

The race officials also gave up rights to a nearby plot of land bounded by Bryant and Beale streets and the Embarcadero, where the America's Cup planned to build condos at some time in the future.

San Francisco won the rights to the America's Cup more than a year ago in large part because the city offered long-term development rights to several piers and other waterfront sites. In exchange, the America's Cup had agreed to make at least $55 million in improvements to various piers.

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee announced the development rights changes Monday, a day before the Board of Supervisors was scheduled to make a critical vote on the city's development agreement with the America's Cup. Although many City Hall observers thought the agreement would get approved, it was not considered a sure thing.

In light of the changes, the supervisor vote on the development agreement was put off. It is unclear when it might be rescheduled -- or whether any development rights will be part of any new deal.

Lee said that the 2013 America's Cup -- along with a series of preliminary races Aug. 11 to Sept. 2 this year -- will still take place as planned on San Francisco Bay.

America's Cup and city officials were locked in talks all weekend to hammer out a finished version of a real estate deal that has evolved many times since the basic framework was approved more than a year ago.

America's Cup officials said that the cost to rehab Piers 30-32 -- estimated at $80 million -- and a tight time frame led them to back away from that site.

"The time, the cost, it all factored in," said Stephen Barclay, an America's Cup board member who was the lead negotiator with San Francisco.

"I feel good about it. It's the right decision," Barclay said.

Teams that participate in the America's Cup can use Pier 80 as a base, race officials said. Oracle Racing, the team owned by Oracle Corp. CEO Larry Ellison, has its base and design facilities on Pier 80 now.

Lee said that plans for an America's Cup Village, a collection of shops, eateries and viewing space for the races, will still be at Piers 27-29.

Last week a group including former San Francisco Board of Supervisor Aaron Peskin sued to stop preparations for the 2013 America's Cup until another environmental review is performed. Lee said the development rights changes were not related to that lawsuit.


OK, then it's a half victory (or loss, depending )
Do you think Peskin can file a new suit, as Fubaru was saying ?

#1924 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,211 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 11:52 PM

hope no well meaning environmentalist finds that any chemicals are or are about to transfer into the waters of the bay with falling pier pices

any chance creosote or some other nasty stuff was used over the years

might need to remove the bio hazard before it spreads further Posted Image

still not ruling out the mess moving to DAGO at the last minute

could the AC-45 been a dry run to test the climate for a modern AC in me hood ??


I hope not as they keep pointing out SD as a failure . The poor attendance numbers for that event has been used as a negative selling point for the SF ney sayers since it happened.

#1925 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 27 February 2012 - 11:55 PM



Did ACEA call a bluff or was it a back down?
Why would you call a bluff before the vote tomorrow when the result of the vote is unknown.


For sure it is not bluff. ACEA made a strategic retreat in order to try to win the battle tomorrow, the vote.


The vote tomorrow is postponed.... Alvos wanted more time...now he has it. Be careful what you wish for....

You know I hope for a boat race, so the more this shit will go away the best it will be for the AC.
And I think that Peskin stinks. Amazing to know that he represented Telegraph Hill dwellers to forbid parties and booze in the harbour.

#1926 Te Kooti

Te Kooti

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,436 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 12:09 AM




Has Peskin got what he wanted?

Nope - Instead of an 'improved' deal he's got NO deal at all.

Can the event now go ahead on time without further problems?
Does this mean that all the long term deals for reconstruction are off?

The mayor's statement refers to "a race village at Pier 27-29" and so presumably some work will be done to the existing structures there. But it's nothing like what the P30/32 and SWL330 projects would have been - all new construction from the foundations on up.

Guess we'll have to wait on the new docs to see the down-scaled plans, due apparently 2 weeks from now. Maybe it will include DDA's on just those piers, maybe not.

edit: oops, no that's the CST so unlikely to be any DDA's around that either


In 1992 I flew over to SD to "cover" the AC for a sailing magazine.

Interviewed Cayard in his office atop a container.

In those days most "bases" (or "compounds") consisted of tents and containers (bit like 21st century post-earthquake Christchurch).

Was it so bad?

Put the buoys in the water and fire the start gun.

Why does the Excited States now wish to engage in so much posturing and hyperbole?

#1927 K38BOB

K38BOB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,533 posts
  • Location:Bay Area

Posted 28 February 2012 - 12:26 AM

Put the buoys in the water and fire the start gun.

Why does the Excited States now wish to engage in so much posturing and hyperbole?


Was that your original position?? I heard so much about Fremantle basin/harbour, Auckland Viaduct, Valencia darsena etc..



#1928 Monster Mash

Monster Mash

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,739 posts
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 28 February 2012 - 12:57 AM

These latest developments are making the recent dredging and makeover @ Alameda NAS a bit more relevant.

#1929 K38BOB

K38BOB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,533 posts
  • Location:Bay Area

Posted 28 February 2012 - 01:05 AM

These latest developments are making the recent dredging and makeover @ Alameda NAS a bit more relevant.


Those are on schedule to plan as communicated

Attached File  Homecoming.jpg   53.98K   19 downloads


#1930 DA-WOODY

DA-WOODY

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,108 posts
  • Location:I'm in Sunny..-. Warm..& ..Dry San Diego . and your not :-)
  • Interests:Prime + 1 3/4

    COUGARS COUGARS & More COUGARS

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:00 AM


Could be interesting, what Lee says at P80.

This from a tweet by someone
--

Doug SovernSources tell me deal will be announced 2 move #AmericasCup from Piers 30-32 to different pier, reducing infrastructure cost & $ risk to City



Live Web-Cast ???


Not live but ...........................................




#1931 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:12 AM

Great link.

It's pretty obvious they will talk about a potential AC35, but down the road once the BOS has had a chance to digest the fallout, after they have reconsidered just how 'lucrative' those effing piers actually are.

#1932 Surf City Racing

Surf City Racing

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,158 posts
  • Location:Santa Cruz

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:27 AM

Mayor Lee is a shining star in San Fiasco politics. I think that he gets it.

Nice one K38:

Posted Image

#1933 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:30 AM

^ Brilliant! :)

Only way Peskin Point could be labelled any better, would be in red graffitti paintbrush.

#1934 Andrew S

Andrew S

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 130 posts
  • Location:St. Pete, FL

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:32 AM

I think the comment in the vid to the effect that "there may not be enough room at pier 80 for all the teams, so a few of them may have be at the end of the race village" is significant- perhaps AC45 teams on pier 80, then when the four big cats come out, they fit on piers 26-29?!

#1935 CheekyMonkey

CheekyMonkey

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 242 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:05 AM

The best laid plans of mice and men...

Personally, as long as the races are still held, I'll be happy. There's no way to screw that up, right? Does the Pest-in faction have a flotilla ready to blockade them? We'll see.


Those who don't understand how the City could squander an opportunity to do something with the piers now have a first hand illustration of its usual dysfunction.

For others, it is merely a reaffirmation that a good portion of the SF electorate, or at least their representatives, will readily accept blight over any form of development that doesn't fit their notion of the right kind of development. They'd rather stare at a hole in the ground, or a empty, rotting building than see something productive.

"Highest and best use" translates to "fits only my personal political stance, ethos or liking."

#1936 Tony-F18

Tony-F18

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,368 posts
  • Location:+31

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:31 AM

A real shame they will move to Pier 80, which seems about as unattractive to tourists as it gets.
You cant even walk there from Pier 27.

#1937 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:45 AM

Feel free to give Aaron Peskin a call to congratulate him on his lawsuit an how many jobs he lost - 415 986-7094. He seems to understand calling people up drunk and threatening them, but I wouldn't necessarily recommend it unless you're with one of the local unions.

You may want to also ask him if his wife, land use attorney Nancy Shanahan, has any thoughts on the matter.

#1938 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:45 AM

At least some SF citizen are smarter that the OR idiots who want the city to spend 110 millions into eyesore piers not necessary for a boat race.

The city was going to spend it? Damn, just how many times do you intend to prove your idiocy?

I swear, you could get elected in SF!

#1939 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:45 AM

The best laid plans of mice and men...

Personally, as long as the races are still held, I'll be happy. There's no way to screw that up, right? Does the Pest-in faction have a flotilla ready to blockade them? We'll see.


Those who don't understand how the City could squander an opportunity to do something with the piers now have a first hand illustration of its usual dysfunction.

For others, it is merely a reaffirmation that a good portion of the SF electorate, or at least their representatives, will readily accept blight over any form of development that doesn't fit their notion of the right kind of development. They'd rather stare at a hole in the ground, or a empty, rotting building than see something productive.

"Highest and best use" translates to "fits only my personal political stance, ethos or liking."


At least some SF citizen are smarter that the OR idiots who want the city to spend 110 millions into eyesore piers not necessary for a boat race.

That is Naples, how many piers can you see ? is it going to prevent them from having a boat race ?

Attached Files



#1940 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:52 AM

New by KL
--

A View of Peskin Point

"Hearty congratulations to those who thought that Mr. Ellison, because he is rich, should just give the Port a makeover. We look forward to your ideas on how to get the job done now."

#1941 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:54 AM

TC your ignorance continues to amaze me.

You get more stupid with every post.

#1942 MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,692 posts
  • Location:33.98.n 118.45. w

Posted 28 February 2012 - 05:15 AM



Did ACEA call a bluff or was it a back down?
Why would you call a bluff before the vote tomorrow when the result of the vote is unknown.


For sure it is not bluff. ACEA made a strategic retreat in order to try to win the battle tomorrow, the vote.


There is no deal to vote on tomorrow. It got tossed overboard before the SFBOS even got to decide it.

--


America's Cup development deal thrown overboard

Date: Monday, February 27, 2012, 1:44pm PST - Last Modified: Monday, February 27, 2012, 3:35pm PST

America's Cup officials eliminated a major portion of their agreement with San Francisco, cutting out plans to rehabilitate Piers 30-32, which would have served as a base for racing teams during the 2013 event.

The race officials also gave up rights to a nearby plot of land bounded by Bryant and Beale streets and the Embarcadero, where the America's Cup planned to build condos at some time in the future.

San Francisco won the rights to the America's Cup more than a year ago in large part because the city offered long-term development rights to several piers and other waterfront sites. In exchange, the America's Cup had agreed to make at least $55 million in improvements to various piers.

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee announced the development rights changes Monday, a day before the Board of Supervisors was scheduled to make a critical vote on the city's development agreement with the America's Cup. Although many City Hall observers thought the agreement would get approved, it was not considered a sure thing.

In light of the changes, the supervisor vote on the development agreement was put off. It is unclear when it might be rescheduled -- or whether any development rights will be part of any new deal.

Lee said that the 2013 America's Cup -- along with a series of preliminary races Aug. 11 to Sept. 2 this year -- will still take place as planned on San Francisco Bay.

America's Cup and city officials were locked in talks all weekend to hammer out a finished version of a real estate deal that has evolved many times since the basic framework was approved more than a year ago.

America's Cup officials said that the cost to rehab Piers 30-32 -- estimated at $80 million -- and a tight time frame led them to back away from that site.

"The time, the cost, it all factored in," said Stephen Barclay, an America's Cup board member who was the lead negotiator with San Francisco.

"I feel good about it. It's the right decision," Barclay said.

Teams that participate in the America's Cup can use Pier 80 as a base, race officials said. Oracle Racing, the team owned by Oracle Corp. CEO Larry Ellison, has its base and design facilities on Pier 80 now.

Lee said that plans for an America's Cup Village, a collection of shops, eateries and viewing space for the races, will still be at Piers 27-29.

Last week a group including former San Francisco Board of Supervisor Aaron Peskin sued to stop preparations for the 2013 America's Cup until another environmental review is performed. Lee said the development rights changes were not related to that lawsuit.

--




Posted Image

so what happened to the DONE DEAL

Posted Image

#1943 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 05:19 AM




Did ACEA call a bluff or was it a back down?
Why would you call a bluff before the vote tomorrow when the result of the vote is unknown.


For sure it is not bluff. ACEA made a strategic retreat in order to try to win the battle tomorrow, the vote.


There is no deal to vote on tomorrow. It got tossed overboard before the SFBOS even got to decide it.

--


America's Cup development deal thrown overboard

Date: Monday, February 27, 2012, 1:44pm PST - Last Modified: Monday, February 27, 2012, 3:35pm PST

America's Cup officials eliminated a major portion of their agreement with San Francisco, cutting out plans to rehabilitate Piers 30-32, which would have served as a base for racing teams during the 2013 event.

The race officials also gave up rights to a nearby plot of land bounded by Bryant and Beale streets and the Embarcadero, where the America's Cup planned to build condos at some time in the future.

San Francisco won the rights to the America's Cup more than a year ago in large part because the city offered long-term development rights to several piers and other waterfront sites. In exchange, the America's Cup had agreed to make at least $55 million in improvements to various piers.

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee announced the development rights changes Monday, a day before the Board of Supervisors was scheduled to make a critical vote on the city's development agreement with the America's Cup. Although many City Hall observers thought the agreement would get approved, it was not considered a sure thing.

In light of the changes, the supervisor vote on the development agreement was put off. It is unclear when it might be rescheduled -- or whether any development rights will be part of any new deal.

Lee said that the 2013 America's Cup -- along with a series of preliminary races Aug. 11 to Sept. 2 this year -- will still take place as planned on San Francisco Bay.

America's Cup and city officials were locked in talks all weekend to hammer out a finished version of a real estate deal that has evolved many times since the basic framework was approved more than a year ago.

America's Cup officials said that the cost to rehab Piers 30-32 -- estimated at $80 million -- and a tight time frame led them to back away from that site.

"The time, the cost, it all factored in," said Stephen Barclay, an America's Cup board member who was the lead negotiator with San Francisco.

"I feel good about it. It's the right decision," Barclay said.

Teams that participate in the America's Cup can use Pier 80 as a base, race officials said. Oracle Racing, the team owned by Oracle Corp. CEO Larry Ellison, has its base and design facilities on Pier 80 now.

Lee said that plans for an America's Cup Village, a collection of shops, eateries and viewing space for the races, will still be at Piers 27-29.

Last week a group including former San Francisco Board of Supervisor Aaron Peskin sued to stop preparations for the 2013 America's Cup until another environmental review is performed. Lee said the development rights changes were not related to that lawsuit.

--




Posted Image

so what happened to the DONE DEAL

Posted Image

So what happened to your "the event will be cancelled and everyone will go to prison" BS ?

Their isn't enough humble pie to shove down your throat - loser.

Tell us again about your grand master plan to save the cup from all the "evil doers" with your meaningless AC trust bullshit and your tax ID, which my dog could get.



#1944 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 05:42 AM

TC your ignorance continues to amaze me.

You get more stupid with every post.

How many piers need for a boat race ? Why do you want to help vulture promoters willing to get $ 110 M for building ciment blocks ?

Posted Image

#1945 MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,692 posts
  • Location:33.98.n 118.45. w

Posted 28 February 2012 - 05:47 AM


TC your ignorance continues to amaze me.

You get more stupid with every post.

How many piers need for a boat race ? Why do you want to help vulture promoters willing to get $ 110 M for building ciment blocks ?

Posted Image


Posted Image

oryc has suffered a huge loss today --and the mob seems to be poor losers

evilsin was too greedy and sf said --NO

the numbers were as illegal as the proposed project

cheers

#1946 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 05:54 AM



TC your ignorance continues to amaze me.

You get more stupid with every post.

How many piers need for a boat race ? Why do you want to help vulture promoters willing to get $ 110 M for building ciment blocks ?

Posted Image


Posted Image

oryc has suffered a huge loss today --and the mob seems to be poor losers



Try again loser - Peskin and Avalos got greedy and were left with nothing.

I'm celebrating the downfall of SF political BS, and losers like you being in the middle of it. Event cancelled eh ? How about your credibility being cancelled.

Did you solve the little financial issue you created with your 50 defendants ? How's Aaron doing with the legal bill ?

Who is picking up the tab on your bad advice ?

#1947 K38BOB

K38BOB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,533 posts
  • Location:Bay Area

Posted 28 February 2012 - 06:36 AM

Mayor Lee is a shining star in San Fiasco politics. I think that he gets it.

Nice one K38:

Posted Image


Kimball's latest

#1948 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,211 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 06:51 AM


Mayor Lee is a shining star in San Fiasco politics. I think that he gets it.

Nice one K38:

Posted Image


Kimball's latest


So as Kimble reports the New York ACWS race has been dropped? I guess they don't need those small market towns anyway .

#1949 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,211 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:04 AM

The second half of the Barclay interview from Scuttlebutt .

Scuttlebutt News:

Stephen Barclay - Fulfilling the vision


It was announced on New Year's Eve - December 31, 2010 - that the America's Cup was coming to San Francisco in 2013. While this was the home of defender Oracle Racing and Golden Gate Yacht Club, the announcement was preceded by an international search of cities and aggressive rounds of negotiating.

So there was relief when the venue for the 34th Match became official, and a hope that the attention could turn back toward the competition, toward the sailing.

So why then, over a year later, have the America's Cup Event Authority (ACEA) and the City returned to the negotiation table? It turns out that there remains one huge hurdle... on Tuesday, February 28th. Scuttlebutt editor Craig Leweck spoke with Oracle Racing COO Stephen Barclay to get an update:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Barclay: The host and venue agreement is a document that had been signed by three parties that describers the terms upon which the Cup was awarded to San Francisco. However, a couple of sections within that document refer to a piece of work that needed to take place in 2011 to turn what effectively was a Heads of Agreement into long term leases, short term venue leases, development rights... all those sorts of things on the piers that we will spend money to upgrade.

We are going to spend $55 million - latest count is now $80+ million - before the Cup starts on upgrading Piers 30-32 to bring them to a state where they can host the Cup on them. And in return, the City and Port cannot go into its general fund and write out a check. What they have to do is give us rental streams off those piers to pay back the money over time. The government is unable to legally gift away anything, in other words, the amount of money we spend on the piers has to equal the amount of money we get back. So that is, in a nutshell, what happened and what the deal is.


So if you have an agreement with the city, why has there been so much resistance in the local press?

Stephen Barclay: In the last month or six weeks, all the noise has been around an 11-person Board of Supervisors that is basically getting a second chance at sanctioning the deal when they meet on February 28th. Some of these people come from one side of the political spectrum and some come from the other side, which translates to one group supporting what is trying to be achieved, and the other group is not. And various different publications have captured the point of view that they want to put forward. So all this noise has gotten louder and louder as we have approached the final vote this Tuesday.


Why has there been so much focus on the negotiations with the City? This is supposed to be, after all, a sailing competition.

Stephen Barclay: I think that San Francisco is a unique city. The environmental process that we went through is extraordinary robust. People that want to have a say, can have a say. A lot of cities around the world may say that they listen to those groups, but in San Francisco they really listen to them. And there must be a well thought out response to those people.

So all this attention, I think, is a result of a city that has these processes that are robust, that have had us jump through a whole lot of hoops. And when combined with today's expansive online and print media, it has gotten the whole community thinking about it.

I should add though, that the story about the property and environmental side of things has taken over for what I believe to be the bigger story, which is how the America's Cup was awarded to San Francisco, and what a great event it will be on the Bay with hundreds of thousands of people being able to watch the races. And part of that is the way in which the event authority will be reimbursed has a property component. This has been portrayed as a property development project, which clearly it is not.


Piers 30-32 is what will require the investment ($80+ million) and nine months of construction. How huge is this vote?

Stephen Barclay: If Piers 30-32 isn't ready by when it is supposed to be, which is January 1, 2013, then the teams that are coming will need to find other places around the bay to base themselves. And there are locations around the bay to do that.

But a bigger issue is if we do not have an acceptable agreement with the City for the use of Piers 30-32. If this were to happen, the concept of our event plan would be compromised. And we need to think about that. We would need to think about the implications of having all the teams spread around the Bay.

That's not the sort of event that we really want to have. This is a fundamental part of what we had planned in San Francisco is for there to be a village for the public on 27-29, all the team bases line like pit row on 30-32, and a series of linkage between those two hubs that create interest along the wharf. We wanted the public to have this unprecedented access to the team bases. And if the public can't have that, well, we would really need to think about that.

If we don't get the needed approval on 30-32 this Tuesday, which is what we will need to be able to start and finish the construction on time, we would need to sit down with all the stakeholders and explain the situation we have gotten ourselves in, and discuss the next steps. We need to bring together all the teams, the City, the sponsors.

But we are quite optimistic on Tuesday; we think there is a pretty good chance of getting the (approval) vote. It is a simple majority, 6 out of 11. But I am reading the same news reports as everyone else is reading (about the concern over the project), so it could be close.

The good story is how the piers get reinvigorated for future generations of San Franciscans, and how the races on the water get filmed by the helicopters showing the backdrop of the City, and how the entire experience affects the sailing kids of the future when they see it. Just like we were all impacted by the various major sporting events that we witnessed as children. These are the positives that are getting lost.

So the fork in the road is February 28th, where we either get the vote or we don't. If we get the vote, the final hurdle then becomes the construction permit which is due to come out I think on either the 10th or 15th of March. And once that happens, all lights are green. We start the construction project, and that goes on until the first of January 2013. The vote on Tuesday also signifies that the City cannot exercise any rights to terminate hosting the event, so therefore it enables the event planning to move forward with all the sponsors that have been sitting on the sidelines. So now the sponsors can commit. This vote on Tuesday is really the green light in a lot of areas.


What if an agreement cannot be reached on Piers 30-32, does the possibility exist that the 34th America’s Cup will not occur in 2013 in San Francisco? Or would it occur with a delay?

Stephen Barclay: We are optimistic of a yes vote on Tuesday.


So let's say the agreement gets approved on Tuesday, and you spend the money to stabilize Piers 30-32 for the 2013 Match. There remain plenty of unknowns beyond that.

Stephen Barclay: The work that will be done in upgrading Piers 30-32 is only enough to be able to hold the event. And part of the host and event agreement that was signed in December 2010 has included in it a scenario where if Oracle Racing does win, then what would happen with subsequent defenses. There is a provision to enable us to hang on to 30-32 to use them again for the 35th America's Cup. However, it is not defined how long a period it would be between the upcoming event and the next one, if there were to be another defense.


#1950 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:09 AM




TC your ignorance continues to amaze me.

You get more stupid with every post.

How many piers need for a boat race ? Why do you want to help vulture promoters willing to get $ 110 M for building ciment blocks ?

Posted Image


Posted Image

oryc has suffered a huge loss today --and the mob seems to be poor losers



Try again loser - Peskin and Avalos got greedy and were left with nothing.

I'm celebrating the downfall of SF political BS, and losers like you being in the middle of it. Event cancelled eh ? How about your credibility being cancelled.

Did you solve the little financial issue you created with your 50 defendants ? How's Aaron doing with the legal bill ?

Who is picking up the tab on your bad advice ?


Fact is that Larry had to withdraw in order to save a SF venue. Why do you want to build condos for a boat race ?

You had been criticizing RAK and now you are the apologist of the same in SF, hypocrit . :)

#1951 MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,692 posts
  • Location:33.98.n 118.45. w

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:13 AM

The second half of the Barclay interview from Scuttlebutt .

Scuttlebutt News:

Stephen Barclay - Fulfilling the vision


It was announced on New Year's Eve - December 31, 2010 - that the America's Cup was coming to San Francisco in 2013. While this was the home of defender Oracle Racing and Golden Gate Yacht Club, the announcement was preceded by an international search of cities and aggressive rounds of negotiating.

So there was relief when the venue for the 34th Match became official, and a hope that the attention could turn back toward the competition, toward the sailing.

So why then, over a year later, have the America's Cup Event Authority (ACEA) and the City returned to the negotiation table? It turns out that there remains one huge hurdle... on Tuesday, February 28th. Scuttlebutt editor Craig Leweck spoke with Oracle Racing COO Stephen Barclay to get an update:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Barclay: The host and venue agreement is a document that had been signed by three parties that describers the terms upon which the Cup was awarded to San Francisco. However, a couple of sections within that document refer to a piece of work that needed to take place in 2011 to turn what effectively was a Heads of Agreement into long term leases, short term venue leases, development rights... all those sorts of things on the piers that we will spend money to upgrade.

We are going to spend $55 million - latest count is now $80+ million - before the Cup starts on upgrading Piers 30-32 to bring them to a state where they can host the Cup on them. And in return, the City and Port cannot go into its general fund and write out a check. What they have to do is give us rental streams off those piers to pay back the money over time. The government is unable to legally gift away anything, in other words, the amount of money we spend on the piers has to equal the amount of money we get back. So that is, in a nutshell, what happened and what the deal is.


So if you have an agreement with the city, why has there been so much resistance in the local press?

Stephen Barclay: In the last month or six weeks, all the noise has been around an 11-person Board of Supervisors that is basically getting a second chance at sanctioning the deal when they meet on February 28th. Some of these people come from one side of the political spectrum and some come from the other side, which translates to one group supporting what is trying to be achieved, and the other group is not. And various different publications have captured the point of view that they want to put forward. So all this noise has gotten louder and louder as we have approached the final vote this Tuesday.


Why has there been so much focus on the negotiations with the City? This is supposed to be, after all, a sailing competition.

Stephen Barclay: I think that San Francisco is a unique city. The environmental process that we went through is extraordinary robust. People that want to have a say, can have a say. A lot of cities around the world may say that they listen to those groups, but in San Francisco they really listen to them. And there must be a well thought out response to those people.

So all this attention, I think, is a result of a city that has these processes that are robust, that have had us jump through a whole lot of hoops. And when combined with today's expansive online and print media, it has gotten the whole community thinking about it.

I should add though, that the story about the property and environmental side of things has taken over for what I believe to be the bigger story, which is how the America's Cup was awarded to San Francisco, and what a great event it will be on the Bay with hundreds of thousands of people being able to watch the races. And part of that is the way in which the event authority will be reimbursed has a property component. This has been portrayed as a property development project, which clearly it is not.


Piers 30-32 is what will require the investment ($80+ million) and nine months of construction. How huge is this vote?

Stephen Barclay: If Piers 30-32 isn't ready by when it is supposed to be, which is January 1, 2013, then the teams that are coming will need to find other places around the bay to base themselves. And there are locations around the bay to do that.

But a bigger issue is if we do not have an acceptable agreement with the City for the use of Piers 30-32. If this were to happen, the concept of our event plan would be compromised. And we need to think about that. We would need to think about the implications of having all the teams spread around the Bay.

That's not the sort of event that we really want to have. This is a fundamental part of what we had planned in San Francisco is for there to be a village for the public on 27-29, all the team bases line like pit row on 30-32, and a series of linkage between those two hubs that create interest along the wharf. We wanted the public to have this unprecedented access to the team bases. And if the public can't have that, well, we would really need to think about that.

If we don't get the needed approval on 30-32 this Tuesday, which is what we will need to be able to start and finish the construction on time, we would need to sit down with all the stakeholders and explain the situation we have gotten ourselves in, and discuss the next steps. We need to bring together all the teams, the City, the sponsors.

But we are quite optimistic on Tuesday; we think there is a pretty good chance of getting the (approval) vote. It is a simple majority, 6 out of 11. But I am reading the same news reports as everyone else is reading (about the concern over the project), so it could be close.

The good story is how the piers get reinvigorated for future generations of San Franciscans, and how the races on the water get filmed by the helicopters showing the backdrop of the City, and how the entire experience affects the sailing kids of the future when they see it. Just like we were all impacted by the various major sporting events that we witnessed as children. These are the positives that are getting lost.

So the fork in the road is February 28th, where we either get the vote or we don't. If we get the vote, the final hurdle then becomes the construction permit which is due to come out I think on either the 10th or 15th of March. And once that happens, all lights are green. We start the construction project, and that goes on until the first of January 2013. The vote on Tuesday also signifies that the City cannot exercise any rights to terminate hosting the event, so therefore it enables the event planning to move forward with all the sponsors that have been sitting on the sidelines. So now the sponsors can commit. This vote on Tuesday is really the green light in a lot of areas.


What if an agreement cannot be reached on Piers 30-32, does the possibility exist that the 34th America's Cup will not occur in 2013 in San Francisco? Or would it occur with a delay?

Stephen Barclay: We are optimistic of a yes vote on Tuesday.


So let's say the agreement gets approved on Tuesday, and you spend the money to stabilize Piers 30-32 for the 2013 Match. There remain plenty of unknowns beyond that.

Stephen Barclay: The work that will be done in upgrading Piers 30-32 is only enough to be able to hold the event. And part of the host and event agreement that was signed in December 2010 has included in it a scenario where if Oracle Racing does win, then what would happen with subsequent defenses. There is a provision to enable us to hang on to 30-32 to use them again for the 35th America's Cup. However, it is not defined how long a period it would be between the upcoming event and the next one, if there were to be another defense.


MM

thanks for posting that

this part from above seems to be --stalled now --

/// The vote on Tuesday also signifies that the City cannot exercise any rights to terminate hosting the event, so therefore it enables the event planning to move forward with all the sponsors that have been sitting on the sidelines. So now the sponsors can commit. This vote on Tuesday is really the green light in a lot of areas. ///


the deal is changed and that hearing cancelled indefinitely


it will interesting to see the spin on the delays and back to square one --


including all the other applications state and federal still --'' pending '' Posted Image

cheers

#1952 tomtom

tomtom

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 210 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 09:34 AM





This is good news for the schedule, let Peskin and Telegraph Hill justify their obstructionist position with the Port as to why the piers will be left to fall into the SF Bay.


Dang, what will Peskin & Avalos have left to argue about now? And, will this dropped-ball piers fiasco help Peskin, when he tries to unseat SFBOS chair David Chiu later this year? Lol

Avalos's last statement on this was that while he said he understood both sides of the issue (sure he did) he just needed a little more time. He now has as much time as he could possibly want, just no cash and no developer.

Cut off their nose despite their face.

Their should be an "Occupy Telegraph Hill" movement right about now.



It's "to spite their face". But otherwise I completely agree.

Others thought the same, for your reference;


de·spite

[dih-spahyt] Show IPA

preposition, noun,verb,

-spit·ed,

-spit·ing.

preposition1.in spite of; notwithstanding.





Yes. despite does exist, just not in this context:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutting_off_the_nose_to_spite_the_face

#1953 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 04:08 PM

I think the comment in the vid to the effect that "there may not be enough room at pier 80 for all the teams, so a few of them may have be at the end of the race village" is significant- perhaps AC45 teams on pier 80, then when the four big cats come out, they fit on piers 26-29?!


I'd think the 72's will be housed on pier 80 and piers 26-28 will be used for overflow with the AC45's.

#1954 pjfranks

pjfranks

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,679 posts
  • Location:i'm loving it
  • Interests:wtf is one warning points?

Posted 28 February 2012 - 04:53 PM



#1955 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 05:12 PM

Back to sailing, this is from Feb 24



#1956 Art Vandelay

Art Vandelay

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 118 posts
  • Location:San Francisco

Posted 28 February 2012 - 06:37 PM

Attached File  AC Village.jpg   231.89K   63 downloads



Attached File  AP House.jpg   290.86K   70 downloads


And why would someone who lives there, keep buying the same house from their own trust?

http://sf.blockshopp...046/224_filbert

#1957 Monster Mash

Monster Mash

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,739 posts
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 28 February 2012 - 06:38 PM

Oracle Racing COO Stephen Barclay dodged the question by Scuttlebutt editor Craig Leweck when asked if the event would be held in San Francisco without Piers 30-32. Said Barclay last Friday, "If we don't get the needed approval on 30-32 this Tuesday, we would really need to think about that. That's not the sort of event that we really want to have. This is a fundamental part of what we had planned in San Francisco."

Bitch Slap
F#ck Barclay and his big bully attitude.

#1958 K38BOB

K38BOB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,533 posts
  • Location:Bay Area

Posted 28 February 2012 - 06:47 PM

Oracle Racing COO Stephen Barclay dodged the question by Scuttlebutt editor Craig Leweck when asked if the event would be held in San Francisco without Piers 30-32. Said Barclay last Friday, "If we don't get the needed approval on 30-32 this Tuesday, we would really need to think about that. That's not the sort of event that we really want to have. This is a fundamental part of what we had planned in San Francisco."

Bitch Slap
F#ck Barclay and his big bully attitude.


Don't forget that the teams were in town over the weekend for a meeting- things change

#1959 Monster Mash

Monster Mash

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,739 posts
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 28 February 2012 - 06:52 PM


Oracle Racing COO Stephen Barclay dodged the question by Scuttlebutt editor Craig Leweck when asked if the event would be held in San Francisco without Piers 30-32. Said Barclay last Friday, "If we don't get the needed approval on 30-32 this Tuesday, we would really need to think about that. That's not the sort of event that we really want to have. This is a fundamental part of what we had planned in San Francisco."

Bitch Slap
F#ck Barclay and his big bully attitude.


Don't forget that the teams were in town over the weekend for a meeting- things change



True

#1960 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,211 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:01 PM


Oracle Racing COO Stephen Barclay dodged the question by Scuttlebutt editor Craig Leweck when asked if the event would be held in San Francisco without Piers 30-32. Said Barclay last Friday, "If we don't get the needed approval on 30-32 this Tuesday, we would really need to think about that. That's not the sort of event that we really want to have. This is a fundamental part of what we had planned in San Francisco."

Bitch Slap
F#ck Barclay and his big bully attitude.


Don't forget that the teams were in town over the weekend for a meeting- things change


Perhaps they finally have a count on who is actually going to show up and decided they didn't really need all that space after all ?

#1961 Monster Mash

Monster Mash

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,739 posts
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:03 PM



Oracle Racing COO Stephen Barclay dodged the question by Scuttlebutt editor Craig Leweck when asked if the event would be held in San Francisco without Piers 30-32. Said Barclay last Friday, "If we don't get the needed approval on 30-32 this Tuesday, we would really need to think about that. That's not the sort of event that we really want to have. This is a fundamental part of what we had planned in San Francisco."

Bitch Slap
F#ck Barclay and his big bully attitude.


Don't forget that the teams were in town over the weekend for a meeting- things change


Perhaps they finally have a count on who is actually going to show up and decided they didn't really need all that space after all ?


Who is they?

#1962 pjfranks

pjfranks

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,679 posts
  • Location:i'm loving it
  • Interests:wtf is one warning points?

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:10 PM




Oracle Racing COO Stephen Barclay dodged the question by Scuttlebutt editor Craig Leweck when asked if the event would be held in San Francisco without Piers 30-32. Said Barclay last Friday, "If we don't get the needed approval on 30-32 this Tuesday, we would really need to think about that. That's not the sort of event that we really want to have. This is a fundamental part of what we had planned in San Francisco."

Bitch Slap
F#ck Barclay and his big bully attitude.


Don't forget that the teams were in town over the weekend for a meeting- things change


Perhaps they finally have a count on who is actually going to show up and decided they didn't really need all that space after all ?


Who is they?


Occupy SF?

#1963 K38BOB

K38BOB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,533 posts
  • Location:Bay Area

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:28 PM

SF Biz Times link
America’s Cup development deal thrown overboard


#1964 Monster Mash

Monster Mash

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,739 posts
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:36 PM

Strategic retreat?
Its all good though, now they can back to hosting/running the AC.

#1965 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:44 PM

Strategic retreat?
Its all good though, now they can back to hosting/running the AC.

Totally agree - "we don't need no stinkin piers", and Peskin gets a big political black eye as an added bonus.

#1966 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:58 PM

Will be interesting to see if the new arrangement includes more space on P80 than what we've seen diagrammed so far.

#1967 kadyca

kadyca

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,068 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 08:10 PM

The question is, are we in front of a combined effort from wealthy business men hating Larry, or in front of different independant groups mad at Oracle way of controlling everything ?


As I've been telling you all from the beginning, its the Telegraph Hill Dweller's Assoc. that doesn't want anyone doing anything that might change their precious views.

They don't give a shit if it means that the piers will crumble into the bay and be completely unusable by anyone. In fact, they would actually prefer that. And they were certainly never going to let Larry have the right to build anything there.

Leave it SF to fuck it all up for us regular folks.

#1968 Mariner

Mariner

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,509 posts
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 28 February 2012 - 08:12 PM

Back to sailing, this is from Feb 24




Add the f'ing wardrobe girl at the dock to the OR foreigners team...

#1969 pjh

pjh

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,846 posts
  • Location:San Francisco

Posted 28 February 2012 - 08:25 PM


The question is, are we in front of a combined effort from wealthy business men hating Larry, or in front of different independant groups mad at Oracle way of controlling everything ?


As I've been telling you all from the beginning, its the Telegraph Hill Dweller's Assoc. that doesn't want anyone doing anything that might change their precious views.

They don't give a shit if it means that the piers will crumble into the bay and be completely unusable by anyone. In fact, they would actually prefer that. And they were certainly never going to let Larry have the right to build anything there.

Leave it SF to fuck it all up for us regular folks.

Certainly the Telegraph Hill Dweller's Assoc. is fun to hate, but they weren't the problem this time. You can't see piers 30/32 from Telegraph Hill, even if you go to the top of Coit Tower.

#1970 kadyca

kadyca

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,068 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 09:29 PM



The question is, are we in front of a combined effort from wealthy business men hating Larry, or in front of different independant groups mad at Oracle way of controlling everything ?


As I've been telling you all from the beginning, its the Telegraph Hill Dweller's Assoc. that doesn't want anyone doing anything that might change their precious views.

They don't give a shit if it means that the piers will crumble into the bay and be completely unusable by anyone. In fact, they would actually prefer that. And they were certainly never going to let Larry have the right to build anything there.

Leave it SF to fuck it all up for us regular folks.

Certainly the Telegraph Hill Dweller's Assoc. is fun to hate, but they weren't the problem this time. You can't see piers 30/32 from Telegraph Hill, even if you go to the top of Coit Tower.


But the issue was that for Larry/ACEA to recoup what they were going to have to pay to refurbish 30/32, they were going to development rights to pier 29. That was what initially got the THDA riled up.

Again, they don't want anything interfering with their views, and precisely because 30/32 is not directly in their view, they don't give a rat's ass about it, so they were certainly will to fuck all of us in District 6 to preserve their little world.

#1971 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 10:27 PM


At least some SF citizen are smarter that the OR idiots who want the city to spend 110 millions into eyesore piers not necessary for a boat race.

The city was going to spend it? Damn, just how many times do you intend to prove your idiocy?

^^^^
You Spinboy ans Sailorboy are pretty quick at insulting people, but your ignorance is amazing:


America's Cup: What the Hell Just Happened?
By Joe Eskenazi Tue., Feb. 28 2012 at 1:35 PM Posted ImageWait -- this is getting interesting!​In around an hour's time, the Board of Supervisors would have likely approved a sprawling America's Cup development plan that would have committed the city to reimbursing Larry Ellison's Event Authority up to $136 million -- perhaps into the 22nd century.

#1972 nav

nav

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,395 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 10:28 PM

Nonetheless, Lee and organizers insisted Monday that none of the 50 or so race days leading up to the final weekend of racing in September 2013 or the planned course around Alcatraz island......


Not according to the graphics, or.....?

#1973 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 11:18 PM




The question is, are we in front of a combined effort from wealthy business men hating Larry, or in front of different independant groups mad at Oracle way of controlling everything ?


As I've been telling you all from the beginning, its the Telegraph Hill Dweller's Assoc. that doesn't want anyone doing anything that might change their precious views.

They don't give a shit if it means that the piers will crumble into the bay and be completely unusable by anyone. In fact, they would actually prefer that. And they were certainly never going to let Larry have the right to build anything there.

Leave it SF to fuck it all up for us regular folks.

Certainly the Telegraph Hill Dweller's Assoc. is fun to hate, but they weren't the problem this time. You can't see piers 30/32 from Telegraph Hill, even if you go to the top of Coit Tower.


But the issue was that for Larry/ACEA to recoup what they were going to have to pay to refurbish 30/32, they were going to development rights to pier 29. That was what initially got the THDA riled up.

Again, they don't want anything interfering with their views, and precisely because 30/32 is not directly in their view, they don't give a rat's ass about it, so they were certainly will to fuck all of us in District 6 to preserve their little world.

The Telegraph Hill Dweller are for sure a gang of assholes, they have an infamous story of controling city decisions. However I think it would be a right decision to scrap a few old piers. SF is a nice city and would look much nicer without these eyesore piers that are not relevant anymore. If you visit europeans old cities you will see how they have been to preserve their original harbour.

As far as who is behind those attacks it is difficulty to say. Some Teleg dwellers hating Larry because he obliged them to cut their tree? because they were suied by him ? because they simply don't want the piers in their view ? These guys know other influent people in NY and maybe even in Switzerland.

Difficult to know if it is a conspiration or independant groups mad at Larry's way of "All or Nothing".

#1974 Tony-F18

Tony-F18

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,368 posts
  • Location:+31

Posted 28 February 2012 - 11:28 PM

Maybe they never really wanted pier 30-32 in the first place and it was a nice decoy for plans with P80 and P27, classic foot-in-the-door tactics.

#1975 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 11:37 PM



At least some SF citizen are smarter that the OR idiots who want the city to spend 110 millions into eyesore piers not necessary for a boat race.

The city was going to spend it? Damn, just how many times do you intend to prove your idiocy?

^^^^
You Spinboy ans Sailorboy are pretty quick at insulting people, but your ignorance is amazing:

America's Cup: What the Hell Just Happened?

And one of the things that article has correct, is what I have been trying to explain to you.

"And while the Event Authority is paying legal tender to facilitate this work, it's being paid back via decades worth of rent credits for the spruced-up waterfront properties."

The way it often gets written and then mis-understood, means people including you think the city was going to hand money over in a traditional 'real' sense. Again, the real money spent would have come from the developer - not the city - which was my point.

The only reason for trying to re-explain this to you, is because there likely will be more of the same kind of arrangement, even in the 'new deal.'

#1976 pjfranks

pjfranks

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,679 posts
  • Location:i'm loving it
  • Interests:wtf is one warning points?

Posted 28 February 2012 - 11:57 PM




At least some SF citizen are smarter that the OR idiots who want the city to spend 110 millions into eyesore piers not necessary for a boat race.

The city was going to spend it? Damn, just how many times do you intend to prove your idiocy?

^^^^
You Spinboy ans Sailorboy are pretty quick at insulting people, but your ignorance is amazing:

America's Cup: What the Hell Just Happened?

And one of the things that article has correct, is what I have been trying to explain to you.

"And while the Event Authority is paying legal tender to facilitate this work, it's being paid back via decades worth of rent credits for the spruced-up waterfront properties."

The way it often gets written and then mis-understood, means people including you think the city was going to hand money over in a traditional 'real' sense. Again, the real money spent would have come from the developer - not the city - which was my point.

The only reason for trying to re-explain this to you, is because there likely will be more of the same kind of arrangement, even in the 'new deal.'

Rent credits have a positive cash value to Ellison and a no cash value to the taxpayer.

#1977 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 11:59 PM




At least some SF citizen are smarter that the OR idiots who want the city to spend 110 millions into eyesore piers not necessary for a boat race.

The city was going to spend it? Damn, just how many times do you intend to prove your idiocy?

^^^^
You Spinboy ans Sailorboy are pretty quick at insulting people, but your ignorance is amazing:

America's Cup: What the Hell Just Happened?

And one of the things that article has correct, is what I have been trying to explain to you.

"And while the Event Authority is paying legal tender to facilitate this work, it's being paid back via decades worth of rent credits for the spruced-up waterfront properties."

The way it often gets written and then mis-understood, means people including you think the city was going to hand money over in a traditional 'real' sense. Again, the real money spent would have come from the developer - not the city - which was my point.

The only reason for trying to re-explain this to you, is because there likely will be more of the same kind of arrangement, even in the 'new deal.'

First, the question was about the amount and I was under the $ 136 M estimate.

Second, why do presume I don't understand the mechanism ? I already explained it, whether is comes from the city or from tax credits, the results remains the same. Different pockets, same wallet.

Third, if SF finally signs a deal, I hope they ask for a waiver against lawsuits.

#1978 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 12:11 AM

Rent credits have a positive cash value to Ellison and a no cash value to the taxpayer.

Well that's just a little disingenuous too, since the idea is that LE (or whoever) would spend tens of millions to develop Port property, then try to recoup all that money invested, by somehow using it to generate money. The cash vaue to the developer comes not in checks from the city or port, but from in that value generated - condo or office tenants, for example.

What some in SF like to think, is that LE would or should just build out the Port's properties on his own dime, just give it to SF, even pay to have the right to do that. Like as in "Hey, the guy is rich and he wants to have a boat race here, so even if the city did benefit by spending on the races then that want should cost him." Well obviously Larry feels he has better places to put money...

You can see some of that thinking in this oped: http://www.sfbg.com/...ricas-cup-re-do

I realize that, if the attendance figures are anywhere near what's projected, the city will still wind up millions of dollars to the good.

But I still don't understand: Why are we paying Ellison to hold his race here? Yeah, it will bring tourists to the city -- but as former Sup. Aaron Peskin points out, we don't pay the Navy to bring Fleet Week and the Blue Angels to town. If anything, we should be charging these folks for the right to use so much public property for their own commercial gain.


#1979 Asymptote

Asymptote

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,573 posts
  • Location:Seattle

Posted 29 February 2012 - 12:18 AM





At least some SF citizen are smarter that the OR idiots who want the city to spend 110 millions into eyesore piers not necessary for a boat race.

The city was going to spend it? Damn, just how many times do you intend to prove your idiocy?

^^^^
You Spinboy ans Sailorboy are pretty quick at insulting people, but your ignorance is amazing:

America's Cup: What the Hell Just Happened?

And one of the things that article has correct, is what I have been trying to explain to you.

"And while the Event Authority is paying legal tender to facilitate this work, it's being paid back via decades worth of rent credits for the spruced-up waterfront properties."

The way it often gets written and then mis-understood, means people including you think the city was going to hand money over in a traditional 'real' sense. Again, the real money spent would have come from the developer - not the city - which was my point.

The only reason for trying to re-explain this to you, is because there likely will be more of the same kind of arrangement, even in the 'new deal.'

First, the question was about the amount and I was under the $ 136 M estimate.

Second, why do presume I don't understand the mechanism ? I already explained it, whether is comes from the city or from tax credits, the results remains the same. Different pockets, same wallet.

Third, if SF finally signs a deal, I hope they ask for a waiver against lawsuits.



Wrong again....Rent credits are not tax credits. And you can not effectively waive a right to sue.

Two more swings and misses.


#1980 TheFlash

TheFlash

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,542 posts
  • Location:San Francisco Bay
  • Interests:Rum

Posted 29 February 2012 - 12:18 AM

face it - there is a group of folks in the city who'd like to see the piers go away - yet they don't want to pay for it. Assuming the "just say no" crowd continues along their merry way, Pier 30/32 will look like the berkeley pier soon enough.

#1981 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 12:32 AM

Wrong again....Rent credits are not tax credits. And you can not effectively waive a right to sue.

Yep BadAssymptote, rent credits add up to the tax credits and come from the same wallet. For the rest you could have listened to last BoS meeting and see what the city was asking for.
Any way your dream deal was scrapped because it made nonsense, it looks like you are the only one with SWS to defend it now. :D

#1982 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 12:59 AM


Wrong again....Rent credits are not tax credits. And you can not effectively waive a right to sue.

Yep BadAssymptote, rent credits add up to the tax credits and come from the same wallet. For the rest you could have listened to last BoS meeting and see what the city was asking for.
Any way your dream deal was scrapped because it made nonsense, it looks like you are the only one with SWS to defend it now. :D


Nothing in your post is either accurate or factual, and is certainly not worth any effort to clarify with you of all idiots.

What I posted previously still holds true, you become more ignorant with each successive post.Posted Image

#1983 MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,692 posts
  • Location:33.98.n 118.45. w

Posted 29 February 2012 - 01:00 AM

America's Cup Give-A-Way to Larry Ellison Cancelled, Hurray ...
By sfcitizen
America's Cup Give-A-Way to Larry Ellison Cancelled, Hurray – Leave Us Give Thanks to Aaron Peskin and Joe Eskenazi. Tweet. Appears as if the independent works of Democratic Party Leader Aaron Peskin and SFWeekly Writer Joe ...
Posted Image

#1984 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 01:11 AM

Nothing in your post is either accurate or factual, and is certainly not worth any effort to clarify with you of all idiots.

What I posted previously still holds true,


You told Alameda was your plan B, I have no doubt it still holds true.

Do plan another fail in SF ? and do you think you can save face with Alameda ? :huh:

#1985 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 01:15 AM


Nothing in your post is either accurate or factual, and is certainly not worth any effort to clarify with you of all idiots.

What I posted previously still holds true,


You told Alameda was your plan B, I have no doubt it still holds true.

Do plan another fail in SF ? and do you think you can save face with Alameda ? :huh:


You become more ignorant with each successive post.Posted Image

#1986 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 01:18 AM

from a tweet, taking about a discussion by the BOS this afternoon,

@olivaglobal: City staff to determine new #americascup work cost & real estate needed to cover. Will be heard by Board 3pm Mar 20. Avalos apologized.

#1987 MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,692 posts
  • Location:33.98.n 118.45. w

Posted 29 February 2012 - 01:23 AM



Nothing in your post is either accurate or factual, and is certainly not worth any effort to clarify with you of all idiots.

What I posted previously still holds true,


You told Alameda was your plan B, I have no doubt it still holds true.

Do plan another fail in SF ? and do you think you can save face with Alameda ? :huh:


You become more ignorant with each successive post.Posted Image


T-C you have to excuse sw soiler --he is still in shock after the done deal caved in --SO HIS DUMBASS is more apparent

and is suffering from AGONY OF DEFEAT Posted Image

#1988 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 02:00 AM

SWS gets to watch AC34 in his favorite waters.

Who's the real loser here? ;)

#1989 Surf City Racing

Surf City Racing

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,158 posts
  • Location:Santa Cruz

Posted 29 February 2012 - 02:14 AM

SWS gets to watch AC34 in his favorite waters.


From the upstairs floor of his favorite yacht club, which overlooks the racecourse.

#1990 MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,692 posts
  • Location:33.98.n 118.45. w

Posted 29 February 2012 - 02:19 AM

SWS gets to watch AC34 in his favorite waters.

Who's the real loser here? ;)


evilsin is the real loser for trying to commit more illegal actions -using loser 2 ggyc to be the front

and there is no ac34 the plan and deal isnt happening

but ggyc has 2 lawsuits against them --so thats a win -win Posted Image

#1991 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 02:23 AM


SWS gets to watch AC34 in his favorite waters.


From the upstairs floor of his favorite yacht club, which overlooks the racecourse.

Or from his home... Or from his own frkkin race boat!

:)

#1992 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 02:46 AM

sucks,

--
Piers 30-32 will go back on the surplus heap of orphan infrastructure projects looking for new investors, a task that will be even harder now that Ellison's hard bargainers determined it couldn't pencil out.
--
http://www.sfgate.co...eed=rss.opinion

#1993 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 02:56 AM

Speak of a major blow:


In an instant, a $100 million-plus event dropped to a sailing race with a budget of $15 million.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.co...L#ixzz1njg5MNh1


#1994 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 02:56 AM

same link,
--The overall outcome was a disappointment for Mayor Ed Lee, who did his best to sound positive about the smaller-scale race plans. It happened on the same day that Salesforce, a fast-growing software firm, said it was postponing plans for a new four-building home in the Mission Bay area.
--

tough town to try generate business in, will be the message to those who matter

#1995 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,179 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 02:58 AM

SWS gets to watch AC34 in his favorite waters.

Who's the real loser here? ;)


Do you even know if the race will be held in SF ?

Back to square one :

The city and Ellison's team are due to negotiate a new deal over the next few weeks. It won't be easy but it's worth trying to salvage an opportunity to parlay the America's Cup into a waterfront legacy that involves more than memories.

This article appeared on page A - 11 of the San Francisco Chronicle


Read more: http://www.sfgate.co...L#ixzz1njgbayaA


#1996 MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,692 posts
  • Location:33.98.n 118.45. w

Posted 29 February 2012 - 03:07 AM


SWS gets to watch AC34 in his favorite waters.

Who's the real loser here? ;)


Do you even know if the race will be held in SF ?

Back to square one :

The city and Ellison's team are due to negotiate a new deal over the next few weeks. It won't be easy but it's worth trying to salvage an opportunity to parlay the America's Cup into a waterfront legacy that involves more than memories.

This article appeared on page A - 11 of the San Francisco Chronicle


Read more: http://www.sfgate.co...L#ixzz1njgbayaA


thats the real question and good one T-C --will the cat race happen --

mayor said they have a new deal but will negotiate for weeks Posted Image

they been negotiating for 1 1/2 years and got nothing but 2 good lawsuits against them

ggyc / oryc might be at minus square 1 -- and 2 courts Posted Image

#1997 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,981 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 03:41 AM

aren't meaningless lawsuits just so pants-wetting exciting?? ;)

AC34 will happen with full force, watch and enjoy

#1998 DA-WOODY

DA-WOODY

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,108 posts
  • Location:I'm in Sunny..-. Warm..& ..Dry San Diego . and your not :-)
  • Interests:Prime + 1 3/4

    COUGARS COUGARS & More COUGARS

Posted 29 February 2012 - 04:01 AM

aren't meaningless lawsuits just so pants-wetting exciting?? ;)

AC34 will happen with full force, watch and enjoy


perhaps in DAGO ..................... perhaps

#1999 Surf City Racing

Surf City Racing

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,158 posts
  • Location:Santa Cruz

Posted 29 February 2012 - 04:43 AM


aren't meaningless lawsuits just so pants-wetting exciting?? ;)

AC34 will happen with full force, watch and enjoy


perhaps in DAGO ..................... perhaps


Naw, Wood. It's going to happen here. All of the negativity put out into the world by MSP, TC and others is eclipsed by my positivity toward making the event happen.

#2000 MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,692 posts
  • Location:33.98.n 118.45. w

Posted 29 February 2012 - 05:12 AM



aren't meaningless lawsuits just so pants-wetting exciting?? ;)

AC34 will happen with full force, watch and enjoy


perhaps in DAGO ..................... perhaps


Naw, Wood. It's going to happen here. All of the negativity put out into the world by MSP, TC and others is eclipsed by my positivity toward making the event happen.


your confusing negativity with a legal process --and the losing side who tried to circumvent legal procedures of those process [s]

and you dont understand the ''event'' or what it is yet --but go ahead and run with the evilsin positive side --Posted Image

and those 2 lawsuits against them

it might get you some coin for your ''press work ''




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users