Title
Public Hearing to consider a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the General Plan Housing Element and associated zoning amendments to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the period 2023-2031, affirmatively further fair housing, and maintain consistency with State Law
Body
To: Honorable President and
Members of the Planning Board
From: Andrew Thomas, Planning, Building and Transportation Director
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Alameda (City) has completed a draft update to the Housing Element of the General Plan and a comprehensive set of zoning amendments to affirmatively further fair housing and accommodate the 5,353 unit Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the 2023-2031 Housing Element cycle. Both documents are available for public review at www.alameda2040.org <http://www.alameda2040.org> and www.alamedaca.gov <http://www.alamedaca.gov>.
On August 25, 2022, the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) found that the draft Housing Element is in substantial compliance with State Housing Law. HCD also referenced the proposed zoning amendments, and emphasized that they are critical to compliance. The HCD letter and community comments on the draft Housing Element and zoning amendments are attached as Exhibit 1.
Staff is recommending that the Planning Board approve the draft resolution recommending City Council approval of the Housing Element and associated zoning amendments.
BACKGROUND
State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Government Code) requires that the City update its General Plan Housing Element every eight (8) years. The 2023-2031 Draft Housing Element was prepared with the benefit of community, advisory board, and City Council input and discussion at 25 public workshops over the course of the two year preparation period. The Planning Board alone held approximately seventeen (17) public workshops. In addition, workshops on the draft Housing Element were held by the City Council, the Commission on Persons with Disabilities, the Transportation Commission, and the Historical Advisory Board. Guidance was also provided by HCD throughout the process and in a November 2021 letter addressing the conflicts between State Fair Housing Law and Article 26 of the City Charter, attached as Exhibit 2.
On May 25, 2022, the City submitted the draft Housing Element to HCD for its review. In July, HCD reached out to the City with a number of questions about the draft Housing Element. Based upon those questions, staff revised the draft Housing Element to include additional information and analysis. On August 12, 2022, the City published the changes on the City website and requested public comment on those changes. The City received three comment letters during the public review period, and based upon those comments, staff made additional minor changes to the Housing Element and zoning amendments, which were discussed in the September 12, 2022 Planning Board staff report.
On September 12, 2022, based upon review of additional public comments, the Planning Board identified a list of additional amendments that the Board would like to consider before forwarding the Housing Element to the City Council for final consideration.
DISCUSSION
The objective of the Housing Element update and accompanying zoning amendments is to ensure that the Housing Element and Zoning Ordinance comply with State Law, which will enable the City to avoid the consequences of non-compliance. Failure by the City to comply with State Housing Element Law subjects the City to the risk of:
• Loss of local land use control and approval of housing projects by the State (e.g., Gov. Code, §§ 65589(d)(5)(B), 65750 et seq; Camp v. Mendocino (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 334);
• Loss of State funding for open space, transportation, and affordable housing;
• State mandated fines, which escalate in size, until the City adopts a conforming Housing Element (Gov. Code, §§ 65589.5(k)(1)(B) and 65589.5(l); and
• Lawsuits against the City for failure to comply with State law.
To avoid the consequences of non-compliance, the Housing Element and zoning ordinance amendments must:
• Accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) by ensuring that the General Plan Housing Element and zoning ordinance enable construction of 5,353 housing units over the next 8 year Housing Element cycle; and
• Affirmatively further fair housing by removing regulatory barriers that serve to segregate the community or impose barriers to access to certain types of housing. (Gov. Code, § 65583(c)(5).)
A Balanced Compromise Plan. The Housing Element and zoning amendments achieve a balance between the requirements of State Law to accommodate the RHNA and affirmatively further fair housing and the goals of the Alameda community as articulated at the Housing Element public workshops.
• NAS Alameda Priority Development Area - 39%. In response to community desires to maximize the use of Alameda Point and the former Naval lands to accommodate the RHNA, approximately 39% of the RHNA is accommodated in the City’s NAS Alameda Priority Development Area (PDA), which includes 24% of the units at Alameda Point and 15% at other surplus federal lands in the PDA such as the Housing Authority’s North Housing Project, the Habitat for Humanity project, and Carmel’s project adjacent to Coast Guard housing on Singleton Avenue.
• Northern Waterfront PDA - 24%. Vacant and underutilized lands in the Northern Waterfront PDA accommodates approximately 24% of the RHNA on sites such as Encinal Terminals, Alameda Marina, the former Pennzoil Site, the Housing Authority site on Eagle Street at Tilden Avenue, and underutilized sites on Clement Avenue and Mariner Square Drive.
• Shopping Centers, Park Street and Webster Street Commercial Corridors - 27%. Shopping center sites, such as South Shore Center, Harbor Bay, and Alameda Landing accommodate 19% of the RHNA, and the Park Street District and Webster Street District commercial corridors accommodate approximately 8% of the RHNA.
• Residential Districts - 10%. In response to community desires to minimize development within existing neighborhoods, only 10% of the RHNA is accommodated through in-fill development in the R-1 through R-6 Districts on existing residential properties. Approximately 7% of that in-fill is provided by the existing accessory dwelling unit program (approximately 50 units per year). The additional 3% is accommodated by zoning amendments to allow residential property owners to add additional units within existing residential buildings. The residential districts include over 16,000 parcels on over 2,500 acres or residentially zoned land.
A Fair Housing Plan. Fair housing requirements require that the City affirmatively further fair housing by taking meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity. To affirmatively further fair housing, the draft Housing Element and zoning amendments include:
• Form Based Regulations. Emphasize and reinforce form based regulations (e.g. height limits, lot coverage limits, etc.) and remove provisions that act to create barriers to access to housing for lower income and middle income households or to individuals that may require daily assistance or a specific housing type.
• Equal Regulation. Apply the form-based requirements (e.g. height, lot coverage, and setback) equally to all housing types in each zoning district. Likewise, housing types (e.g. single family housing, multifamily housing, shared housing, transitional housing, supportive housing, and assisted living housing) are regulated equally.
• Remove Barriers to Affordable Housing. Remove regulations that prohibit the most affordable housing types, such as the prohibition of construction of multifamily housing (three or more units in a building) and the citywide density limitation on residential densities over 21 units per acre (three or more units on a 5,000 square foot lot). These prohibited housing types are the most affordable housing types. Prohibiting them creates a barrier to access to housing in Alameda for households with lower incomes. (For more information, see Exhibit 2, November 2021 letter from HCD.)
Final Revisions.
The draft Housing Element includes a number of recent changes in response to public comments received since August 25, 2022 draft Housing Element, which was the draft reviewed by HCD. In response to public comments and Planning Board member suggestion, the following revisions have been made to the draft Housing Element since August 25th:
Page 7. Corrected grammar in last sentence. Revise to read as follows. “All comments received during the comment period were carefully considered. Based upon the review of those comments, a number of revisions were made to the draft Element before sending the Element to HCD for review.”
Page 10 Opportunity Zone Map. Replace Opportunity Map with a version that better depicts the Alameda city boundaries.
Page 10 Policy H-4 Affordable Housing. Add new action to read as follows:
• Apply for Federal and State funds for infrastructure improvements to support development of affordable housing.
Page 19 Program 4 Residential District Zoning Amendments. First sentence. Fixed typo. Revised number to match same number on page E-14.
Page 24. Program 8 Affordable Housing Incentives and Waivers. Add new action bullet to read as follows:
• Local Bond Measure. Hold public hearings before the Planning Board in 2023 to provide a forum for a public discussion of the merits of placing a local bond measure on the ballot to help fund affordable housing in Alameda. Planning Board to make a recommendation to the City Council for Council consideration by January 2024.
Page 28. Program 13 Tenant Protections. Rephrase program action statement as follows: “Continue to enforce just cause eviction regulations to reduce displacement and enforce anti-discrimination regulations.”
Page 30 Program 17 Neighborhood Revitalization. Add new action to read as follows:
• Accessory Dwelling Units. Consider changes to the Substantial Rehabilitation Program to create below market rate loans to lower income homeowners for the creation of accessory dwelling units.
Page B-6 Program 2.3 Affordable Housing Fees. Add sentence to Implementation Status to read as follows: “The funds collected are used to support the creation of Affordable Housing by the Community Development Department and the Alameda Housing Authority.”
Page B-16 Program 10.1. Add sentence to implementation Status to read as follows: “The parking amendments also establish maximum parking requirements to reduce vehicle miles travelled, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and encourage mode shift in Alameda. “
Page D-43 Figure D-15 Source. Revise to read: “Home Owners Loan Corporation 1935-1940”
Page F-12. Off Street Parking Regulations. Add sentence to first paragraph. “The parking amendments also establish maximum parking requirements to reduce vehicle miles travelled, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and encourage mode shift in Alameda. “
Page F-17 Universal Design Ordinance. Add new sentence at end of discussion of waivers for townhomes. “Every residential project that includes townhomes since adoption of the Ordinance has required waivers from the 100% visit ability standard.”
Page E-5 Table E-2. Fixed addition for subtotals in table.
Revisions not recommended.
There were several revisions suggested at the September 12, 2022 Planning Board workshop that staff is not recommending.
Remove Program 4: Residential District Zoning Amendments. The Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS) and Alameda Citizens Task Force (ACT) would like the Planning Board to remove the Program 4 residential district zoning amendments from the Housing Element.
Staff does not recommend removing Program 4’s residential zoning amendments. The residential zoning amendments are critical to affirmatively furthering fair housing. They remove the R-District’s prohibitions on multifamily housing and the prohibitions on residential densities above one unit per one unit per 2,000 square feet in all Alameda residential districts. As described in the November 2021 HCD, these regulations are fundamentally contrary to fair housing because they prohibit housing types that are affordable to lower income households. Removing Program 4 will jeopardize State certification. HCD’s letter of November 2021 highlights the fair housing problems with Measure A, and the HCD letter of August 25, 2022 references the importance of Program 4 and the associated zoning amendments for State certification.
Establish a new prohibition on building with 5 or more units. AAPS and ACT would like the Planning Board to replace the Measure A prohibition on buildings with 3 or more units with a new prohibition on buildings with 5 or more units in all residential districts. Staff cannot recommend this amendment. Prohibiting buildings with 5 or more units raises all of the same fair housing issues as a prohibition on buildings with 3 or more units. It is a prohibition on the construction of the most affordable types of housing.
Remove Program 4 because the Housing Element and Zoning Amendments are “excessive”. AAPS and ACT argue that Program 4 can be eliminated because the Housing Element and zoning amendments to facilitate housing are “excessive” and will result in citywide housing production in excess of the RHNA requirement. Staff disagrees.
HCD does not believe that the Housing Element and zoning amendments are excessive. During the 90 day HCD review period, HCD questioned whether the zoning amendments will be sufficient to ensure 5,353 units in 8 years. To reassure HCD, staff added text to Program 22 Annual Review and Monitoring introducing a ”Mid Term Evaluation” at year 4. (See page 34 of the Housing Element). If the City is not meeting its housing targets, the Planning Board and City Council will need to hold public hearings to decide what additional zoning limitations need to be lifted or new programs introduced to increase housing production. Of course, if the annual reports show that Alameda is exceeding its annual RHNA obligations, that information can be used to make the findings for a zoning amendment to reduce housing production in one or more areas without jeopardizing the City’s ability to meet its 5,353 unit target.
Remove Program 4 because HCD did not require other cities to do citywide zoning amendments to achieve certification. AAPS and ACT argue that HCD has certified Housing Elements for other cities without requiring a citywide zoning amendment, therefore, Alameda should not have to do a citywide zoning amendment and therefore, the Planning Board should remove Program 4.
Alameda’s zoning amendments must be citywide, because the Measure A prohibitions on multifamily housing (more than 2 units per building) and prohibition on residential densities above one unit per 2,000 square feet of land are fundamentally contrary to State Fair Housing Law, are citywide, and are embedded in every zoning district in Alameda. So every zoning district needs to be amended.
With the recommended zoning amendments, Alameda will have a residential zoning code that looks very much like every other zoning code in California: R-2 will have a maximum density of 21 units per acre (21 du/acre), R-3 will have a maximum residential density of 30 du/acre, R-4 will have a 40 du/acre limit, R-5 will have a 50 du/acre limit, and R-6 will have a 60 du/acre limit. Buildings with more than 2 units will no longer be prohibited in every zoning residential district.
Remove Program 4 Transit Oriented Housing Waivers. AAPS would like this provision removed from Program 4 Residential Zoning. Staff disagrees for the following reasons:
Encouraging housing in proximity to transit is a long standing policy goal in the City of Alameda General Plan, the Bay Area Sustainability Plan, and California Housing Law. The provisions included in the zoning amendments are modeled on a variety of similar State Laws which establish waivers or exemptions for housing developments within ¼ mile of high frequency transit (e.g. CEQA exemptions, State Density Bonus provisions, etc.).
AC Transit does not unilaterally and randomly select transit routes, as stated by AAPS. Since 2000, the City has had a bus route map in its General Plan, which identifies which routes are appropriate or needed to serve Alameda’s transit needs. The City consults with AC Transit to determine which routes are best given AC Transit’s financial resources to provide buses and drivers. The goal of these consultations is to determine how best to utilize regional transit resources to best serve the Alameda community. AC Transit operates the services. The City of Alameda provides the streets, bus stops, and associated facilities to support those services.
The Planning Board requested a map depicting the parcels eligible for the transit oriented development 40 foot height limit. Exhibit 2 shows the residential parcels that would be subject to the 40 foot height limit. In future years, as transit services improve to Alameda Point, a greater number of properties west of Webster Street will be eligible along Ralph Appezzato Memorial Drive or Willie Stargell Avenue. Staff will maintain the map for public and staff use on the City website, but staff does not recommend adopting the map as part of the zoning amendments.
Remove Program 4 because allowing residential property owners to add housing will result in widespread displacement. ACT requests that the Planning Board remove Program 4 residential zoning amendments because ACT believes that allowing residential property owners to build housing on their property will result in widespread displacement and therefore residential property owners should not be allowed to provide additional housing.
Staff disagrees for the following reasons:
• The Housing Element is a plan to increase housing opportunities; it does not propose to eliminate housing, which would result in displacement.
• The Housing Element anticipates that most residential property owners will build additional units in their backyards, basements and attics to avoid the financial costs of moving their household or eliminating monthly rental income from rental units.
• Alameda’s Fair Housing and Tenant Protection Ordinance has strong protections for renters. The Housing Element supports the ordinance. In addition, the Housing Element includes specific actions and responsibilities to minimize or prevent displacement such as Housing Element programs #8 Affordable Housing Incentives and Waivers, Program #9 Extremely Low-Income Housing and Waivers, Program 13 Tenant Protections, and Program 14 Replacement Housing.
Residential Height Limits: Require Pitched Roofs for any Residential Development over 30 feet. AAPS recommends a new zoning provision that would require all buildings over 30 feet to have sloped roofs, if the height limit is 40 feet. Staff does not support the proposal. Alameda has many beautiful residential buildings that do not have pitched roofs and which are over 30 feet in height. The Planning Board could consider making neighborhood specific changes to the Objective Design Standards if there is a desire to ensure that all new buildings have pitched roofs in certain neighborhoods, but staff would not recommend a citywide zoning requirement for pitched roofs.
Commercial Height Limits. AAPS would like the Planning Board to lower height limits on Park Street and Webster Street. Staff does not recommend any lowering of height limits at this time. Staff believes that housing capacity on the commercial corridors on Park Street and Webster Street are already severely constrained by small parcels, existing commercial uses on those parcels, and property owners that have little capacity or interest in redeveloping there properties. For the few parcels with property owner and/or residential developer interest in building housing, staff is concerned that lowering the height limits will make the redevelopment of those parcels financially unviable.
Policy H-10 Education Campaign. It was suggested at the Planning Board meeting that the action requiring documentation of the large number of affordable housing units lost after World War II could be eliminated because the documentation does not create actual units. Staff does not recommend deleting this action for a few reasons: 1) the policy is about the importance of education about fair housing, 2) the action was included at the request of the public, and 3) the past decisions to demolish large numbers of affordable housing are an important part of the reason that the City is facing an affordable housing crises.
Program 7 Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. The Planning Board discussed the importance of affordable housing and suggested that the City may wish to consider amending the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Program 7 (page 22) requires that the City hold hearings to consider changes in 2024. In addition Program 22 Annual Review requires that the Planning Board hold an annual public meeting to review a listed number of ordinances for potential revision. The Inclusionary Housing Ordinance is one of the ordinances that is already listed as critical to that annual review.
Construction Costs. The Housing Element review of non-governmental constrains is a point in time review. Staff does not feel it is necessary to provide more analysis or data about the costs of construction. The Housing Element makes the key point: construction costs in the Bay Area and Alameda are high and they are increasing.
History of Rent Control in Alameda over the last 8 years. The review of past programs (Appendix B) is a table that briefly summarizes the city’s compliance with the Programs adopted in 2014. The Appendix provides a brief update to the extensive series of public meetings and decisions that were made over the last 8 years regarding the establishment of rent stabilization ordinances in Alameda. The summary is not intended to be exhaustive.
Definition of Family (Appendix F) The Housing Element confirms that Alameda is not using the term “family” as criteria for regulating land use. The City’s definition is in compliance with State Law. Staff does not recommend removing or amending it.
Historic Preservation. The Housing Element does not amend AMC Section 13-21 Preservation of Historical and Cultural Resources. Any future proposal to demolish a historic building subject to the ordinance will still require a Certificate of Approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
AAPS and ACT argue that the City should do a new environmental impact report (EIR) for the Housing Element and Zoning Amendments because the General Plan EIR did not adequately analyze the environmental impacts of the Housing Element Program 4 on historic resources and displacement.
Staff disagrees for the following reasons:
On November 30, 2021, the Alameda City Council approved the 2021 General Plan Update, and the City Council approved Resolution No. 15841 certifying a Final Environmental Impact Report for the Alameda 2040 General Plan Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2021030563) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and adopted written findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
The General Plan Update approved by the City Council included, and the General Plan EIR evaluated, the environmental impacts of the Housing Element update, which was well underway by 2020 when work on the EIR began. The EIR transportation, air quality, greenhouse gas, housing and population, and historical resource analysis evaluated the environmental impacts of:
• 12,000 additional housing units in Alameda over 20 years, including 5,353 housing units to accommodate the RHNA between 2023 through 2031.
• Placing approximately 64% of the 5,353 units at Alameda’s two PDAs at Alameda Point and the Northern Waterfront as proposed by the Housing Element.
• Placing approximately 27% of the units along Park Street and Webster Street commercial corridors and at shopping centers, as proposed by the Housing Element.
• Placing approximately 10% of the units in the residential districts, as proposed by the Housing Element.
• Removing exclusionary and discriminatory housing policies as required by Land Use Element Policy LU-1 Actions a. and b. adopted in 2021 read as follows
a. Equitable Plans. Ensure that citywide and neighborhood plans are inclusive, nondiscriminatory, and culturally responsive. Plans should reduce disparities, promote equitable access, minimize the impacts of income disparity, minimize displacement and promote fair access to affordable housing.
b. Exclusionary and Discriminatory Policies. Rescind existing policies, programs, or development standards that are exclusionary or discriminatory.
• Permitting accessory dwelling units and a wide variety of housing types in all residential districts as required by Policy LU-2 actions d. e. and f. adopted in 2021 which read as follows:
d. Accessory Units. Permit accessory dwelling units in all residential and mixed-use zoning districts to increase the supply of small, more affordable housing units.
e. Affordable Housing. Permit rental and ownership housing opportunities for all income levels, ages and family types and sizes in all residential and mixed-use zoning districts.
f. Multi-family and Shared Housing. Permit well designed multi-family and shared housing opportunities, including co-housing, congregate housing, senior assisted living, single room occupancy housing, transitional housing, emergency warming shelters, and shelters for the homeless in all residential zoning districts and in all mixed-use zoning districts.
• Permitting higher density multifamily development within walking distance of transit, on shopping center sites, and within existing buildings when it evaluated the impacts of Land Use Policy LU-16 adopted in 2021, which reads as follows:
Permit higher-density, multi-family and mixed-use development on sites within walking distance of commercial and transit-rich areas to reduce automobile dependence, automobile congestion, greenhouse gas emissions, and energy use; provide for affordable housing; make efficient use of land; and support climate friendly modes of transportation, such as walking, bicycling, and transit use.
a. Transit-Oriented Zoning. To support additional ferry service, bus service, and future heavy rail service in Alameda, amend the zoning code to allow for higher-density, mixed-use, multifamily housing in transit-rich locations.
b. Mixed-Use Shopping Centers. Amend the zoning code to facilitate the redevelopment and reinvestment in Alameda’s single-use retail shopping centers and large open parking lots with higher density mixed-use development with ground floor commercial, service, and office uses, and upper floor multifamily housing.
c. Adaptive Reuse for Housing. To increase the supply of smaller, more affordable housing opportunities and preserve existing urban scale and character, consider exempting the adaptive reuse of existing buildings from zoning district residential density limitations.
The General Plan EIR concludes that adoption of housing supportive policies and increasing the supply of housing in Alameda will not result in displacement that would require construction of significant new replacement housing.
The General Plan EIR also concludes that adoption of housing supportive policies and increasing the supply of housing in Alameda will not result in significant impacts on historic resources due to the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, which requires a Certificate of Approval to demolish a historic building. The Housing Element and zoning amendments do not remove or alter the Historic Preservation Ordinance.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163, none of the circumstances necessitating further CEQA review or preparation of a new EIR are present with respect to the General Plan EIR and the Housing Element General Plan amendment and associated zoning changes. The proposed project to amend the Housing Element and amend the AMC to implement the policies and goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan would not require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to new significant impacts or due to a substantial increase in the severity of the significant environmental effects. There have been no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken that would require major revisions of the General Plan EIR due to new or substantially increased significant environmental effects. Further, there has been no discovery of new information of substantial importance that would trigger or require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to new or substantially increased significant environmental effects. No further environmental review with respect to the General Plan EIR is required
CLIMATE IMPACT
Accommodating the RHNA supports the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A decision by the City to not meet the RHNA would likely have a negative impact on the region’s ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
RECOMMENDATION
Hold a Public Hearing and approve Draft Resolution recommending that the City Council approve the draft Housing Element and draft Zoning Amendments to implement the draft Housing Element to address State Fair Housing Law and Accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation for the Period 2023-2031.
Respectfully submitted,
Andrew Thomas, Planning, Building and Transportation Director
Allen Tai, City Planner
Henry Dong, Planner III
Brian McGuire, Planner II
Exhibits:
1. Letters from HCD and Public
2. Transit Waiver Map
3. Draft Resolution recommending approval of draft Housing Element and Zoning Amendments