Archive for May, 2007

Sour beans, Emeryville?

May 31, 2007

The new Peet’s roasting plant in Alameda has just opened in Bay Farm Island. I couldn’t help but notice the two very divergent views expressed by Emeryville and Alameda. First the sour beans comment from Emeryville:

“I’m not sure the plant is a great asset for us,” said Emeryville’s director of planning and building, Charles Bryant. “But we definitely want to keep the Peet’s headquarters. Having the employees here is more valuable than having the beans.”

Alameda couldn’t be more thrilled.

“It’s a real coup for us,” said Lisa Goldman, Alameda’s deputy city manager, of the Peet’s move. “They needed space to grow, and we could provide the space they need. We’re all pretty excited.”

Why Peet’s will never be another Starsucks:

“We don’t want to put a Peet’s on every street corner,” he said. “I’d rather have 100 percent of the business of the 10 percent of people who consider themselves real coffee lovers, than try to compete for the other 90 percent.”


Mayors Climate Protection Agreement

May 21, 2007

The Climate Protection Agreement which was adopted at the June 2005 Conference of US Mayors, commits participating cities to take the following actions:

Strive to meet or beat the Kyoto Protocol targets in their own communities, through actions ranging from anti-sprawl land-use policies to urban forest restoration projects to public information campaigns;

Urge their state governments, and the federal government, to enact policies and programs to meet or beat the greenhouse gas emission reduction target suggested for the United States in the Kyoto Protocol — 7% reduction from 1990 levels by 2012; and

Urge the U.S. Congress to pass the bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation, which would establish a national emission trading system

Over 514 cities have signed on, but Alameda is not on the list 😦 Anybody know what’s stopping us?

Can Lennar be trusted?

May 5, 2007

As is well known by now, the city has selected Lennar and Catellus as joint developers for Alameda Point. However, two recent reports in the local press do not inspire confidence in Lennar’s capabilities.

In March, the Chronicle reported a lawsuit against Lennar:

A development firm building 1,600 new homes at the old Hunters Point Naval Shipyard has allowed clouds of toxic construction dust to escape from the site, exposing neighbors and schoolchildren to potentially harmful, airborne asbestos, two company executives say.

The allegations are particularly troubling, given that Alameda Point has its own share of toxic materials that need cleaning up before any construction activitiy can commence.


Look who’s moving to Alameda!

May 4, 2007

The recent issue of Alameda Magazine profiles some of the newest residents of Alameda and some of their reasons for relocating here. None of which should be a surprise for us current residents 🙂

Among other things, Alameda continues to draw buyers because of the variety of houses available. “We have a diverse inventory of housing, everything from Victorians to newer construction,’’ says Pagones. “The schools are very important, and, geographically, [Alameda is] located in the center of the Bay Area. That makes it an easy commute.’’

More proof that the revitalization of Park St and other areas is having a positive effect:

“Another story you would hear a lot over the years was people coming to Alameda and finding that the shopping had improved and that Alameda had improved, and the secret was getting out. Well, the secret is out now’’

A majority of Alamedans choose to relocate within the island, confirming that Alamedans know a good thing when they see it!

Real estate agents say the majority of Alameda buyers are already Alameda residents… Even in a new development such as Bayport, more than half of the buyers so far have been Alameda residents, according to sales figures.

Power Content Label

May 4, 2007

Another reason to live in Alameda: clean green power from Alameda Power & Telecom!

As the table indicates, 85% of our electricity is generated from renewable resources (53% from the “eligible renewal” category and 32% from large hydroelectric sources). This compares very favorably with PG&E (30%) and the state wide average of 36%.

Energy Resources AP&T PG&E California
Eligible Renewable 53% 13% 5%
-Biomass and waste 8% 4% <1%
-Geothermal 44% 3% 4%
-Small hydroelectric 1% 4% <1%
-Solar <1% <1% 0%
-Wind 0% 2% <1%
Coal 5% 2% 29%
Large hydroelectric 32% 17% 31%
Natural gas 9% 44% 35%
Nuclear <1% 23% <1%
Other <1% 1% 0%