Feedback About Our Story on the Transbay Tube

Plus no more anonymous web comments.



Alameda Magazine’s article on BART considering a second Transbay Tube contemplating a station in Alameda [“New Tube or Pipe Dreams?,” March], produced interesting comments on Facebook.


Nooooooooooooo, thank you! We’ve got a great thing going on here w/out it.

—Jenn Heflin



And the cost per net incremental rider on this extension will be how many gazillions of diverted tax dollars? Oh, that’s right—who needs to cost justify this?

—Fred Klaske



The business community through the Greater Alameda Business Association was discussing this as far back as 2000. At that point, it was proposed that BART build a repair station for BART on the base and that the city of Alameda would donate the land. It is apparent to everybody who lives on the west side or travels through that area to and from that some other means of getting across the estuary is absolutely necessary. I am happy that discussions have been opened in this regard. ... It is not going to go away.

—Deborah Spalla



If we are going to build up a community on the base land and expand as we are, BART may be a logical way a alleviate traffic congestion. It is now unbearable at 8:30 a.m. as it is.

—Billy Barack Davidson



Safety Compromised

While I understand the need for a “safer” bike path [“Bike Lane Backlash by the Beach,” January], I don’t understand why two lanes of traffic had to be removed. The bike path could have very easily (and probably much cheaper) gone in on the shore side of the existing path.? Now traffic will be stopped behind the bus traffic and (having currently driven Shoreline) closer than normal to car parking I think safety has been compromised.

—Chuck Wetteroth



Ban Anonymity

I just read Letters in the March issue. There are two letters on the subject of charter school teachers unionizing, which are BOTH anonymous. I’m writing you to protest your enabling them by agreeing to withhold their identities. They will typically whine that they need to protect their kids, which is B.S. That is emblematic of the problem with their hyper-focus on THEIR kids without regard to the detrimental impact of charters on the public system on which they depend for their existence. They are whiny cowards.

Mark Irons, Alameda

Editor’s Note: In fact, we banned anonymous comments on our web site, on which all those comments were originally posted, shortly after that exchange.