Coming soon …
Can’t say I’m disappointed to see this go down in flames. If there was anything that captured the pandering attitude of the Council, this is the best example. I’m surprised they didn’t add a new kitchen sink to the long list of projects that were being considered for funding.
Compare this to what the San Jose and San Diego city councils have achieved:
Residents of San Diego and San Jose voted overwhelmingly to cut the pension benefits they give city workers. And they did so in a way governments traditionally avoid: moving to cut not just the benefits of future hires, but also those of current city workers, whose pensions generally have much stronger legal protections than those of private-sector workers.
Is it too much to ask the Council to address critical issues such as pension benefits as a priority?
I saw one of these pedicabs on Park St very recently and been wanting to look it up. Very cool, especially if you have folks visiting.
Alameda Pedicab, locally owned and operated, brings the “pedicab experience” to Silicon Valley, the San Francisco peninsula, the South Bay and East Bay, and in particular to the quaint alleys, bustling downtown area, Victorian neighborhoods and South Shore of Alameda, as well as to the aircraft carrier “Hornet”, Mariner Square Drive and Ferry Terminal areas (per request).
From the NYT
About 3.7 million Americans live within a few feet of high tide and risk being hit by more frequent coastal flooding in coming decades because of the sea level rise caused by global warming, according to new research. The new research calculates the size of the population living within one meter, or 3.3 feet, of the mean high tide level, as estimated in a new tidal data set from the NOAA. In the lower 48 states, that zone contains 3.7 million people today, the papers estimate, a figure exceeding 1 percent of the nation’s population.
The land below the 3.3-foot line is expected to be permanently inundated someday, possibly as early as 2100, except in places where extensive fortifications are built to hold back the sea. One of the new papers calculates that long before inundation occurs, life will become more difficult in the low-lying zone because the rising sea will make big storm surges more likely.
Starting in 2013, taxpayers will have to comply with a law that prevents property owners from deducting some property taxes on their income tax returns.
Federal and state laws generally limit the real estate deduction to ad valorem taxes, which are calculated as a percentage of the property’s assessed value. Any tax that is a flat amount per property or benefits a specific property is generally not deductible. There are some minor exceptions, however, and property tax statements do not spell out which charges are not deductible.
Until this year, almost everyone, including tax preparers, ignored this law and deducted 100 percent of property taxes.
Interesting to see the FTB choose a property tax statement from Alameda to illustrate the deductible and non-deductible taxes :)
This is a good start, the next steps are to ensure the replacements are “reasonably” mature trees and not twigs. That and to ensure that similar snafus don’t occur again.
The City failed to notify the general public recently that the 2nd phase of the Streetscape Project on Park Street would begin with the immediate removal of the trees between Lincoln Ave and Webb Ave and from Central to San Jose. There is no excuse; this was a mistake. The sight of tree-less stretches of Park Street shocked and dismayed many, many Alamedans as they were going about their regular routine on the street. We acknowledge that people were justifiably angry with City Hall for this unwelcome surprise.
The “after” visuals look good, but the question still remains: could this have been achieved without the destruction of the mature trees?
It was depressing to walk around Park St last evening. Many people stopped by to read the condolence messages that were displayed on the pathetic looking stumps that serve as a reminder of the carnage.
There is no dispute that the plan to remove all the trees between Central and Encinal was explicitly mentioned in the staff report and voted 5-0 by the City Council. I’m sure the staff reports contain some very fine prose, but I don’t know if reading them is the first thing most Alamedans think of when they wake up every morning.
The bigger questions are:
- Why wasn’t there a taped notice on each of the trees announcing the imminent removal (as is usually done elsewhere)?
- Did the City fear a backlash if there was an advance notification?
- Was it really necessary to remove several mature trees? It will be another decade or so (atleast) before we have anything close to the majestic canopies that were brutally felled.
- What part of Alameda is Spanish for “grove of poplar trees” or “tree-lined avenue” wasn’t clear to the City Council?
As many of you may have noticed, the walls are covered with soot from the automobile exhaust and are slowly turning pitch black in many places.
Turns out it is not a simple matter of just hosing down the walls. The runoff has to be collected and disposed off separately to meet the EPA standards, ie: they cannot let the runoff into the storm water drain as it will eventually enter the bay. Unlike the Caldecott tunnels, the Alameda tubes do not have the ability to divert the runoff into the sewer drain (this also explains why the Caldecott walls are much cleaner). As a result of the additional costs, CalTrans is deferring the cleanups.
I suspect that if more people complain, CalTrans will act. As it currently stands, the tubes are not a great advertisement for Alameda. You can also reach CalTrans at 510-286-0315.
There’s been a lot of chatter about how the 25mph limit is no longer strictly enforced. In my own (admittedly) unscientific observations, I often see cars speeding on Lincoln Ave, Otis Dr as well as on Webster St (as they exit the tube). This is especially bad at the intersection of Stargell and Webster as cars try to beat the light in both directions, often jumping the red light.
In checking with APD, looks like there were approx 1400 speeding tickets issued between Jan-Aug 2010 vs approx 860 for the same period this year. That is correct, your eyes were not deceiving you. The number of speeding tickets has dropped nearly 40% over the past year.
APD promptly responded to my request for clarification. To paraphrase the response: the drop is due to a significant staffing reduction in the Traffic Unit (3 three officers and a sergeant were lost due to injury, and 2 positions were lost in the most recent round of budget cuts). The traffic unit has gone from 6 motorcycle officers plus a sergeant to one officer and one sergeant. This is a temporary setback and they are working to fix it.
I look forward to having the traffic unit back in full strength so they can start (re)enforcing the speed limits.