Our speaker last night mentioned Richard Moe's talk on preservation and sustainability. The San Francisco Chronicle reported on it. Moe made some interesting points about older buildings and energy efficiency:
"Buildings designed before the widespread use of electricity feature transoms, high ceilings, and large windows for natural light and ventilation, as well as shaded porches and other features to reduce solar gain....
"According to a formula produced for the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, about 80 billion BTUs of energy are embodied in a typical 50,000-square-foot commercial building. If you tear the building down, all that embodied energy is wasted.
"What's more, demolishing that same 50,000-square-foot commercial building would create nearly 4,000 tons of waste....
"Once the old building is gone, putting up a new one in its place takes more energy, of course, and it also uses more natural resources and releases new pollutants and greenhouse gases into our environment. ... It is estimated that constructing a new 50,000-square-foot commercial building releases about the same amount of carbon into the atmosphere as driving a car 2.8 million miles. ..."
Jon Carroll, “Searching for Bernard,” SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, April 8, 2008, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/08/DDUE1008UQ.DTL
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Sunday, April 6, 2008
B-Town’s Silent Majority
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/news/to_move_and_protect/Content?oid=444009
According to an Internet survey on KitchenDemocract.org, nearly 87 percent of
The Public Commons for Everyone Initiative has several proposals for controlling the homeless problems in
Another initiative that may be most significant in affecting homeless behavior is the mayor’s plan to ban smoking in commercial districts. Studies have shown that homeless people are more likely to smoke. Therefore, this initiative may result in forcing many of the homeless off Telegraph and Shattuck Avenues. Interesting, this initiative met with the least resistance from homeless rights activists.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
When the homeless lose or abandon stuff, it gets frozen
Here’s an interesting article about abandoned possessions left by the homeless.
Berkeley not only tolerates its homeless people, it also takes good care of their stuff when they abandon it in shopping carts. The city of Berkeley stores abandoned shopping carts left by the homeless in a huge container for up the 90 days. The items in the container are refrigerated at a temperature of 0 to 6 degrees Fahrenheit.
In 2003, Berkeley bought the 40-foot-long, 8-foot-wide refrigerated container for $8,200 because public works officials complained that the shopping carts, which were then stored at the city's outdoor corporation yard, were vermin-infested. The city needed a place to put the container, so it signed a five-year, $61,500 lease with Caltrans for land under the University Avenue overpass at Interstate 80.
Why does the city store the abandoned shopping carts? Deputy City Attorney Matthew Orebic asserted that the city is abiding state law, which requires storage of lost goods. He concedes, however, that it is unclear whether the law applies to unattended shopping carts because they may not be lost. Given the lack of clarity, the city opted to do what was safe and fair, that is, to make sure that it are not violating any laws and to be fair to homeless persons.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/16/BAGKF9S21N1.DTL
Berkeley not only tolerates its homeless people, it also takes good care of their stuff when they abandon it in shopping carts. The city of Berkeley stores abandoned shopping carts left by the homeless in a huge container for up the 90 days. The items in the container are refrigerated at a temperature of 0 to 6 degrees Fahrenheit.
In 2003, Berkeley bought the 40-foot-long, 8-foot-wide refrigerated container for $8,200 because public works officials complained that the shopping carts, which were then stored at the city's outdoor corporation yard, were vermin-infested. The city needed a place to put the container, so it signed a five-year, $61,500 lease with Caltrans for land under the University Avenue overpass at Interstate 80.
Why does the city store the abandoned shopping carts? Deputy City Attorney Matthew Orebic asserted that the city is abiding state law, which requires storage of lost goods. He concedes, however, that it is unclear whether the law applies to unattended shopping carts because they may not be lost. Given the lack of clarity, the city opted to do what was safe and fair, that is, to make sure that it are not violating any laws and to be fair to homeless persons.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/16/BAGKF9S21N1.DTL
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Solutions to homeless problem hard to find
Every winter, Key West sees a large increase in its homeless population and the call for action takes on a more desperate tone. The city often claims it is unfairly burdened by vagrants who panhandle on the streets and sleep on the beaches. The same sunny weather that drives the crucial winter tourism rush also attracts an inordinate number of homeless from the snow-blown streets of northern cities.
The city made major efforts in the last year to push the homeless from public areas, including the city's last stretches of wetlands, but has run up against a wall. A no-panhandling law went into effect for the Duval Street strip and Mallory Square, severing a main source of sustenance for homeless and leading to a number of arrests. Though the panhandling ban may be considered a success, a new law banning homeless from camping in wetlands has gathered dust for months. The city cannot enforce the ban, which would effectively eliminate the last safe area for the homeless, without risking a major lawsuit. Miami and Orlando have both been sued for barring the homeless from life-sustaining activities such as sleeping in public. The courts ruled in favor of plaintiffs who argued that the cities must provide an alternative for homeless that are roused from sleep.
So the city has been struggling to create a "Safe Zone" where the homeless could go and not be bothered by authorities. Such camps are not popular with the public and few are willing to allow one in their neighborhood.
The road ahead will likely be long and difficult, as it has been for years.
Travis James Tritten, Solutions to homeless problem hard to find, KeyNews.com, http://www.livableoldtown.com/solution_to_homeless.htm.
The city made major efforts in the last year to push the homeless from public areas, including the city's last stretches of wetlands, but has run up against a wall. A no-panhandling law went into effect for the Duval Street strip and Mallory Square, severing a main source of sustenance for homeless and leading to a number of arrests. Though the panhandling ban may be considered a success, a new law banning homeless from camping in wetlands has gathered dust for months. The city cannot enforce the ban, which would effectively eliminate the last safe area for the homeless, without risking a major lawsuit. Miami and Orlando have both been sued for barring the homeless from life-sustaining activities such as sleeping in public. The courts ruled in favor of plaintiffs who argued that the cities must provide an alternative for homeless that are roused from sleep.
So the city has been struggling to create a "Safe Zone" where the homeless could go and not be bothered by authorities. Such camps are not popular with the public and few are willing to allow one in their neighborhood.
The road ahead will likely be long and difficult, as it has been for years.
Travis James Tritten, Solutions to homeless problem hard to find, KeyNews.com, http://www.livableoldtown.com/solution_to_homeless.htm.
Letters to the Editor, Daily Planet
Here are some excerpts from The Berkeley Daily Planet’s Letters to the Editor that provide various perspectives on the development of downtown. It illustrates some unique angles and viewpoints that developers most likely face when handling projects in Berkeley:
“It is indeed alarming to witness the dominoes falling in
“It seems that every edition of the Planet brings forth another letter from another technophobe decrying the cell phone towers proposed for the UC Storage building . . .I understand that conservatives fear change; different religions, different types of people, new buildings, and new technologies are all pretty scary until you get to know them better.” Fred Massell
“Letters to the Editor,” The Berkeley Daily Planet, January 11, 2008, available at: http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2008-01-11/article/28904.
J. CheungThe Berkeley City Council Wakes Up and the Daily Planet Hates It
An interesting article appeared in the Berkeley Daily Planet on Friday, March 28th (yes, I admit it, I have the Daily Planet bookmarked and I read the online version every day. It’s good for a laugh, if nothing else!), concerning a study of regarding matters that could have great impact on the downtown area.
The article, “Council Approves Controversial $40K Height-Profit Study,” begins with an odd recounting of what appears to be an even stranger occurrence, the performance of a song lauding Berkeley’s efforts to reduce its waste stream. From this unconventional jumping off point, however, the article gets down to the heart of the matter. Well, actually, that’s not true. It next describes a tax initiative to fund a new warm-water aquatic facility for seniors, and then documents the adoption of a “non-controversial” measure regarding condo conversions in the city, a measure that will “streamline the conversion process,” whatever that means in this bureaucratic nightmare of a city.
Finally, after covering these other matters, the article takes up the issue that the headline announces: the Height-Profit study. By a 6-1 vote, the Council approved spending $40,000 “for a study of the relationship between building height and developer profits.” After DAPAC rejected a staff proposal to undertake such a study, which will determine the economic viability of DAPAC’s proposed density adjustments to the downtown area, the Planning Commission took the issue directly to the City Council, which authorized the study. The lone ‘nay’ vote, Councilmember Dona Spring, would seem to have already undertaken her own economic analysis, claiming that this study is merely an end-run by developers seeking to build “point towers” around the normal funding process, and predicting that “they’ll say it’s unprofitable unless they go to 18 stories.”
While the Daily Planet’s coverage of the issues surround DAPAC can hardly be said to have shown themselves worthy of the vaulted Fox News tag-line, “fair and balanced,” this article seems particular offensive. After proclaiming how “controversial” the study is, the Planet decides to cover a few other matters before the city council before delving into the subject at hand, and then deigns to cover only the opinion of the sole opposing vote to the measure, hinting at a pro-developer slant to the Council’s decision in the process with the term “developer profits.” Fair coverage would have included a statement from a supporting Councilmember, and framed the greater issues surrounding the proposed density adjustment by considering the possible beneficiaries of high-rise towers in the area beyond the developers themselves.
The benefits of the newly approved study are self-evident: it will give the Council objective economic information regarding the realistic viability of the DAPAC proposal, which the Council can then use to modify the proposal as it sees fit. If the study finds DAPAC’s proposal economically viable for developers it could ease the plan’s adoption by allowing an up-or-down vote on the plan as it stands. If the study finds the plan uneconomical, however, the Council will at least have information on what height levels will be required for developers to turn a profit on new projects in the downtown area, allowing the subsequent debate to, at a minimum, be predicated on realistic assumptions. Considering Mayor Bates’ assurances that Berkeley has plenty of money in its budget, spending $40,000 on this study seems reasonable when its benefits are considered, especially given the enormous impact that the DAPAC plan stands to have. The Daily Planet’s brief, obscure, and one-sided coverage, however, leaves the reader with a sense of distrust for the Council and for the plan in general, and thereby does the city a great disservice.
Judith Scherr, Council Approves Controversial $40K Downtown Height-Profit Study, THE BERKELEY DAILY PLANET, Mar. 28, 2008, available at http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2008-03-28/article/29579.
The article, “Council Approves Controversial $40K Height-Profit Study,” begins with an odd recounting of what appears to be an even stranger occurrence, the performance of a song lauding Berkeley’s efforts to reduce its waste stream. From this unconventional jumping off point, however, the article gets down to the heart of the matter. Well, actually, that’s not true. It next describes a tax initiative to fund a new warm-water aquatic facility for seniors, and then documents the adoption of a “non-controversial” measure regarding condo conversions in the city, a measure that will “streamline the conversion process,” whatever that means in this bureaucratic nightmare of a city.
Finally, after covering these other matters, the article takes up the issue that the headline announces: the Height-Profit study. By a 6-1 vote, the Council approved spending $40,000 “for a study of the relationship between building height and developer profits.” After DAPAC rejected a staff proposal to undertake such a study, which will determine the economic viability of DAPAC’s proposed density adjustments to the downtown area, the Planning Commission took the issue directly to the City Council, which authorized the study. The lone ‘nay’ vote, Councilmember Dona Spring, would seem to have already undertaken her own economic analysis, claiming that this study is merely an end-run by developers seeking to build “point towers” around the normal funding process, and predicting that “they’ll say it’s unprofitable unless they go to 18 stories.”
While the Daily Planet’s coverage of the issues surround DAPAC can hardly be said to have shown themselves worthy of the vaulted Fox News tag-line, “fair and balanced,” this article seems particular offensive. After proclaiming how “controversial” the study is, the Planet decides to cover a few other matters before the city council before delving into the subject at hand, and then deigns to cover only the opinion of the sole opposing vote to the measure, hinting at a pro-developer slant to the Council’s decision in the process with the term “developer profits.” Fair coverage would have included a statement from a supporting Councilmember, and framed the greater issues surrounding the proposed density adjustment by considering the possible beneficiaries of high-rise towers in the area beyond the developers themselves.
The benefits of the newly approved study are self-evident: it will give the Council objective economic information regarding the realistic viability of the DAPAC proposal, which the Council can then use to modify the proposal as it sees fit. If the study finds DAPAC’s proposal economically viable for developers it could ease the plan’s adoption by allowing an up-or-down vote on the plan as it stands. If the study finds the plan uneconomical, however, the Council will at least have information on what height levels will be required for developers to turn a profit on new projects in the downtown area, allowing the subsequent debate to, at a minimum, be predicated on realistic assumptions. Considering Mayor Bates’ assurances that Berkeley has plenty of money in its budget, spending $40,000 on this study seems reasonable when its benefits are considered, especially given the enormous impact that the DAPAC plan stands to have. The Daily Planet’s brief, obscure, and one-sided coverage, however, leaves the reader with a sense of distrust for the Council and for the plan in general, and thereby does the city a great disservice.
Judith Scherr, Council Approves Controversial $40K Downtown Height-Profit Study, THE BERKELEY DAILY PLANET, Mar. 28, 2008, available at http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2008-03-28/article/29579.
Seniors moving into the city
Hey all,
There is a good article in today's SF Chron discussing the increasing numbers of seniors who are moving back to the city after their kids have left home.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/02/HO04VNAM8.DTL
Josh
There is a good article in today's SF Chron discussing the increasing numbers of seniors who are moving back to the city after their kids have left home.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/02/HO04VNAM8.DTL
Josh
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)