Today is the start of the Lunar New Year and is the year of the dragon. Here is a nice story from The Mercury about the way that different Asian folks celebrate the new year, in case your go to was just to call the Lunar New Year the “Chinese New Year.”
#1 Daughter is already looking forward to receiving her red envelope, the money promptly goes into her little bank account which has amassed quite a bundle given that we haven’t given her access to ever spend anything out of it.
Apparently, Lawrence Berkeley Lab is supposed to announce today which city it will locate its second campus in, hopefully Alameda can get some good news this Lunar New Year. Fingers crossed!
So this year may you and your families be healthy and prosperous!
Advertisement
Lauren, where did you hear the announcement was today?
Comment by Denise Shelton — January 23, 2012 @ 7:33 am
Richard Bangert had a tweet about it yesterday.
Comment by Lauren Do — January 23, 2012 @ 7:35 am
Chuc Dung Dam Lab!
Comment by Jack Richard — January 23, 2012 @ 8:56 am
Looks like Richmond is LBL’s pick, boo!
Comment by Lauren Do — January 23, 2012 @ 9:12 am
And from Alameda Patch, the Press Release from LBL.
Comment by Lauren Do — January 23, 2012 @ 9:16 am
Well now we have room for the largest food truck event in the area, that big vacant parking lot where LBL would have been. We already have the largest Antique show in the area once a month why not feed all of those people while they are here. Maybe people will take a look at the Hornet after they eat. Hopefully they won’t interfere with my daily walk.
Comment by John P. — January 23, 2012 @ 9:36 am
Hey John P… can you think of anything else ***BIG*** coming this way? Anyone?
Comment by Jack B. — January 23, 2012 @ 9:41 am
Tips on celebrating Chinese New Year. http://www.wikihow.com/Celebrate-Chinese-New-Year
Comment by Mike McMahon — January 23, 2012 @ 9:41 am
(@Jack : You’re not getting near my wine cellar. A selection of fine wines will be proffered.)
Chteau Lafite Rothschild Pauillac 1996 should do the trick.
Comment by Jack Richard — January 23, 2012 @ 9:46 am
Jack R, please refresh my memory re: wine on the line?
Comment by Jack B. — January 23, 2012 @ 9:58 am
Jack R,
6.Is it possible that the no-cost conveyance finally happened because the Lab project was on the horizon? I know not everybody in Washington knows each other, but the timing is propitious. A little early for the happy dance, but I’m betting Jack a bottle of fine vino Alameda gets “labbed.” Good point about the Navy’s benefit, by the way Lauren. You are such a smarty pants
Comment by Denise Shelton — January 18, 2012 @ 9:33 am
Comment by Jack Richard — January 23, 2012 @ 10:44 am
Failing to get the Lab was definitely not for lack of trying. And the effort on the part of city staff to identify a highly desirable, ready-to-go 40+ acres will not have been in vain. At least the bad news came now, and not after the city burned through the $225,000 http://alamedasun.com/local-and-hometown/9147-city-lands-grant-to-study-base in planning money for the Point from the federal government.
Comment by Richard Bangert — January 23, 2012 @ 10:47 am
Needed major league instead of the high school style effort by the City. Brutal.
Comment by New Year Baby — January 23, 2012 @ 10:49 am
9. Snap! We drank that one last night. We’ve got some others. What’s your preference, red or white?
Comment by Denise Shelton — January 23, 2012 @ 11:16 am
For a different take on the meaning of “The Year of the Dragon” http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/2012/01/23
Comment by David Forbes — January 23, 2012 @ 12:38 pm
post #7, Jack.B Hell yeah, Americas Cup. We need a temporary dock so people can come over to our big food truck parking lot extravaganza.
Comment by John P. — January 23, 2012 @ 1:21 pm
City’s press release on not getting LBL second campus, essentially says was a good effort and allowed the no-cost conveyance to become a reality.
Comment by Lauren Do — January 23, 2012 @ 2:00 pm
#1 learns fast..LOL
Hong Bao Na Lai!
Comment by John — January 23, 2012 @ 2:57 pm
14
Red, but I already have more than I’ll ever drink so just snap another good one open and think of valentines past.
Comment by Jack Richard — January 23, 2012 @ 3:21 pm
How the heck did that gravitar link to my name? I’ve never heard of it.
Comment by Jack Richard — January 23, 2012 @ 3:26 pm
Those signs to “support” the lab should have been Blue & Gold [obviously], not cityofoakland green. And they maybe should have used words like : “Lawrence”, “Berkeley”, “National”, or “LBNL” that gave the reader some idea of what they meant. So many people here don’t even get the difference between LBNL & LLNL.
What a weak & generic effort! Next time, I hope JOtt solicits more community input before spending the money.
Comment by vigi — January 23, 2012 @ 5:16 pm
I think Jennifer Ott and the City did a fine job of showing the Lab folks we were serious about wanting the Lab here. They worked their tails off and unfortunately it did not succeed. Please let’s not trash them. The choice had to do more with proximity to existing facilities and to major arterials than anything else.
Comment by Kate Quick — January 24, 2012 @ 7:30 am
We also had great proximity to facilities and to major arterials. Our City’s presentation though was all hat, no cattle. Damn shame such an opportunity was wasted.
Comment by DRM — January 24, 2012 @ 7:55 am
We were the furthest away from the existing lab. To get here you had to go through the tube or over bridges. It had nothing to do with Jennifer Ott or our city. I doubt the color of a sign defeated us.
Comment by John P. — January 24, 2012 @ 8:48 am
DRM, I don’t think we wasted anything. We came together as a community, which we hadn’t been able to do for many years, gave it our best shot, and it didn’t happen. We are not in close proximity to major arterials – the tube and bridges are major inhibitors to access to the Point. We didn’t own the land in the way the Richmond site was owned by the people looking to expand, so no promise of “free rent”, etc. was necessary for them there. I think the fact that we were on the short list for so long is to our credit as we had to overcome some quite serious drawbacks in the minds of the lab people. I think we should thank Jennifer and the City Manager’s staff and the Council for doing all they could politically and leave it at that. Let us move on.
Comment by Kate Quick — January 24, 2012 @ 11:44 am
“all hat,no cattle”, what the hell does that mean???. This isn’t Texas Rick.
Comment by John P. — January 24, 2012 @ 12:56 pm
Mare Island has done it without a LBNL.
The City of Vallejo even with a Bankruptcy under their belt and recieved their property the same time we did keeps moving forward. Mare Island has done it without a LBNL.
The former Shipyard consisted of approximately 5,636 acres. The developable portions of the Island amounts to approximately 1,400 acres, leaving almost 4,200 acres for parks, open space and recreational opportunities. The Navy has currently transferred over 3,966 acres to the City and the City is in active negotiations to transfer the remaining acreage. The City has, in turn, transferred all but 98 acres to developers and the State of California. The City of Vallejo and our development partners are forging ahead with development of the Island’s job producing area. Mare Island is well on it’s way to becoming a vibrant, balanced, new neighborhood of Vallejo that will offer places to work, shop, live and enjoy the significant historic, educational, open space and recreational opportunities.
The educational component of our reuse plan has not been neglected. Touro University operates its main medical school on Mare Island with an enrollment of over 1400 full-time students in 2010. The Vallejo City Unified School District also has facilities on the Island.
Today the Island is home to more than 85 businesses, nearly 2,000 jobs and 3 million square feet of occupied commercial space. Additionally, Touro University educates over 900 full time students at their campus. Lennar Mare Island has entitlements for over 7 million square feet of industrial/office product (with a workable inventory of approximately 5.5 million square feet).
Comment by John — January 25, 2012 @ 2:30 am