Title
Public Hearing on the Alameda General Plan Update
Body
To: Honorable President and
Members of the Planning Board
Chairperson Saxby and
Members of the Historical Advisory Board
From: Andrew Thomas,
Planning, Building & Transportation Director
executive summary
The purpose of the June 14, 2021 public hearing is to provide an opportunity for the public, the Planning Board and the Historical Advisory Board to review, discuss, and comment on the recently released March 2021 draft Alameda General Plan 2040. The March 2021 Draft General Plan, draft Environmental Impact Report and existing General Plan are available for review at www.alameda2040.org <http://www.alameda2040.org>.
No final actions on the draft General Plan are being requested at this time.
background
State law requires the City of Alameda to maintain a General Plan that is an “integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the adopting agency.” (Government Code section 65300.5.) The General Plan establishes the local development and conservation policies necessary to guide physical development and protect the general health, safety and welfare of the community and the environment. The last comprehensive update of the current General Plan occurred almost 30 years ago and was designed to serve the City for 20 years or until 2010.
In August of 2020, staff completed the August 2020 (initial) draft Alameda General Plan 2040 for public review and comment, and set up a website (<https://www.alameda2040.org/>) where updates, documents, and surveys could be accessed by the public. In the Fall of 2020, the Alameda Planning Board held four public forums that each focused discussion and review of the four themes of the General Plan, that of Equity, Access, Environment and Character (refer to Page 19 of Chapter 1, General Plan Organization and Themes). Approximately 75-80 people attended each of these forums. Over 1,500 individuals provided written comments and suggestions for improvements to the draft Plan through the General Plan update website, meetings and surveys. In addition, City staff met with a wide variety of organizations and groups, and benefited from recommendations received by over 25 organizations. (Refer to Forward, page 5, for a complete list of these organizations.)
Staff compiled the feedback and prepared the March 2021 draft General Plan, which synthesizes comments received from the Planning Board, the public, and other boards, community groups and commissions. Staff published the March 2021 draft General Plan on March 1, 2021. The March 2021 Draft General Plan is available for public review and comment at www.alameda2040.org <http://www.alameda2040.org>.
Since publication of the March 2021 draft General Plan, City staff has received written comments from a variety of organizations and individuals. The written comments are attached as Exhibit 1.
In addition to the General Plan update, staff is also currently working on the update of the Housing Element, which will be reviewed and approved separately in 2022, per State Law. A related report on the Housing Element update is included on the June 14, 2021 agenda.
DISCUSSION
Overview of Draft Alameda General Plan 2040 Alameda General Plan 2040 identifies the climate crises and the affordable housing crises as two of the biggest challenges facing the City of Alameda over the next 20 years. To address the threat of climate change, the City must work with its regional and national partners to address the impacts of sea level rise and ground water rise, but also to reduce greenhouse gas emissions locally and regionally. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions locally requires that Alameda recognize that over 70% of Alameda’s greenhouse gas emissions are generated by our transportation system and vehicles. Reducing greenhouse gases regionally requires that each city work cooperatively to implement the regional sustainable communities’ strategy, Plan Bay Area. Complying with Plan Bay Area and State Housing Law requires that the City of Alameda provide for its fair share of the regional housing need, referred to as the “RHNA”, which will require construction of at least 5,353 housing units in Alameda over the next 10 years. (See Housing Element report.)
Alameda General Plan 2040 policies focus on the following policy directives in an effort to manage change in the next 20 years in a manner that 1) promotes a healthy, equitable and inclusive city, 2) protects the environment, responds to the climate crisis, and meets regional responsibilities, 3) enhances mobility and accessibility, and 3) preserves and enhances Alameda’s distinctive character:
• Build new housing for all income levels in transit oriented, transit-rich locations in Alameda (such as Park Street, Webster Street, and Alameda Point with its two regional ferry terminals) to reduce reliance on the single occupancy vehicle, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and meet our regional housing responsibilities. (See Spotlight on page 37 of the draft General Plan “Where are the transit-rich locations in Alameda?)
• Focus on higher density multifamily housing, which is more affordable and generates less greenhouse gas per unit than low density, Measure A compliant, single family detached housing, which generates more greenhouse gas emissions and automobile trips than multifamily housing.
• Encourage preservation of historic resources, adaptive reuse of existing buildings, and compatible infill development and support and require high quality architectural design for new buildings, which may include creative, newer, more modern architectural styles that complement Alameda’s older architectural styles. (See policy excerpts included below from General Plan.)
• Transform Alameda’s physical transportation infrastructure to better support climate-friendly modes of transportation, such as walking, bicycling and transit and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce congestion that can come with a growing population. To make Alameda’s streets and roads better for active modes of transportation requires that Alameda work to make those streets safer for those modes (i.e. “Vision Zero”).
• Continue to work with our regional transit partners (AC Transit, WETA, BART, and others) to expand the transit system and the frequency of service to create better commute alternatives for Alameda residents leaving the City each day for work and workers entering the City each day for work.
Next Steps on General Plan Update: Responding to Board and Public Comments.
Mobility and the Environment: On May 10, 2021, the Planning Board and Transportation Commission held a very successful and productive joint meeting to review the General Plan and submit comments on the policies that focus on the relationship of land use and transportation. Based upon the comments received to date, staff believes the Planning Board and Transportation Commission and the community in general are in general unison on the overall policy direction and priorities established in the draft General Plan related to land use and transportation. Staff is preparing a number of recommended text clarifications and improvements based upon the comments and suggestions received at the joint workshop as well as from Bike Walk Alameda and from Mr. Michael Sullivan (see letters in Exhibit 1).
Based upon the comments received, including those from the San Francisco Bay Keeper, Golden Gate Audubon Society, and ReScape, staff believes that there is general consensus in the community in support of the policies in the General Plan update related to environmental protection, climate change, and conservation. Staff is preparing a number of policy text and mapping clarifications and corrections for the next draft of the General Plan based on the suggestions from SF Bay Keeper, the Golden Gate Audubon Society, and Rescape.
Equity and Character. The letters received and many emails received from Harbor Bay residents demonstrate the Alameda community’s ongoing debate about how to become an inclusive and equitable community and the meaning of preserving Alameda’s character.
Equal Neighborhoods. The draft General Plan Land Use Element includes policy LU-1 Inclusive and Equitable Land Use and City Design and policy LU-2 Complete Neighborhoods. (Shown below.) These two policies articulate the principle that all Alameda land use plans and regulations should be inclusive and non-discriminatory and that all neighborhoods should be treated and considered equal.
These policies also implement State Fair Housing law, which requires that Alameda identify housing sites throughout the community, in a manner that is consistent with its duty to affirmatively further fair housing (Gov. Code § 65583(c)(10)(A)). To comply with fair housing requirements, Alameda must ensure that sites zoned to accommodate housing for lower-income households are not concentrated in lower resource areas and segregated concentrated areas of poverty, but rather dispersed throughout the community, including in areas with access to greater resources, amenities, and opportunity, such as Harbor Bay and East Alameda. Historically, affordable and lower income housing has been concentrated in West Alameda, and the better school, parks, and amenities have been concentrated in East Alameda. Policies LU-1 and LU-2 read as follows:
LU-1 Inclusive and Equitable Land Use and City Design. Promote inclusive and equitable land use plans, policies, zoning regulations, and planning processes.
Actions:
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.
c. Equitable Distribution. Ensure that the uses, facilities, and services that are needed for a high quality of life are distributed equitably throughout the city.
d. Inclusive Processes. Ensure robust community involvement in all city planning, public investment, and development review decision making by actively engaging all segments of the community, especially those that have historically been less engaged in city decision-making such as lower-income families, people of color, and youth.
e. Equal Representation. Encourage a cross section of the community in the appointments for commissions and other boards and advisory committees.
LU-2 Complete Neighborhoods. Maintain complete, safe, healthy, and connected neighborhoods that support a mix of uses and meet the needs of residents of all ages, physical abilities, cultural backgrounds and incomes.
Actions:
a. Healthy Neighborhoods. Provide equitable and safe access to housing, parks and recreation facilities, community services, public health services, schools, child care facilities, and neighborhood amenities in all neighborhoods.
b. Parks and Open Space. Provide a comprehensive and integrated system of parks, trails, open space, and commercial recreation facilities within a safe and comfortable 1⁄4 mile walk from all neighborhoods. (See also Figure 6.2).
c. Water Access. Provide convenient and safe bicycle and walking access to the waterfront from all residential neighborhoods.
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 multifamily 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 Medium-Density residential zoning districts and in all three of the Mixed-Use Land Use Classification zoning districts to provide for the housing needs of all Alamedans.
g. Child Care. Permit child care facilities and services in all residential and mixed-use zoning districts.
h. Cottage Business and Home Occupations. Permit small employment and business opportunities such as home occupations, live work, and “cottage” businesses in all residential and mixed-use zoning districts to reduce commute hour traffic and associated greenhouse gas emissions.
i. Local Food. Permit farmers’ markets and community gardens in all residential and mixed-use zoning districts to increase access to healthy foods for all residents throughout the city.
For some commenters (see letters from Renewed Hope, Gaylon Parsons, and William Smith) these policies are an important first step to rectifying historic inequities in Alameda land use plans, zoning regulations, but they do not go far enough. For example, Renewed Hope and Mr. Smith point out that LU-2, Action F Multi-family and Shared Housing exempts neighborhoods designated for low density single family home from having to provide the types of housing that is needed citywide to accommodate the needs of all Alameda residents. They point out that Action F limits these responsibilities to “Medium Density Residential” area, thereby excluding people that require such services or housing types from the “Low Density Residential” areas. The commenters point out that exempting low density residential areas is inherently in-equitable and exclusionary, in direct conflict with the intent of Policy LU-1 and Policy LU-2.
In contrast, the Resolution from the Harbor Bay Community and many emails received in the last month from Harbor Bay residents specifically request that their entire community of approximately 3,000 Alameda residents be “permanently removed” from consideration for providing any additional housing of any kind to assist the City of Alameda and the State of California in the effort to accommodate its regional housing need. Staff finds the Harbor Bay Association resolution at odds with the General Plan’s equity theme and a wide variety of policies in the General Plan that articulate the premise that all neighborhoods are equal, and that all neighborhoods should provide for a variety of housing types and needs, including affordable housing.
Based upon the comments received on the draft General Plan, staff recommends amending Policy LU-2, Action F as follows:
f. Multi-family and Shared Housing. Permit multifamily 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 Medium-Density residential zoning districts and in all commercial mixed use three of the Mixed-Use Land Use Classification zoning districts to provide for the housing needs of all Alamedans.
Zoning Changes. The Community of Harbor Bay Isle Association resolution and the letter from the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society raise a number of questions and concerns about future decisions to amend zoning designations, height limits, and residential density limits.
The General Plan is not the Zoning Ordinance, and updating the General Plan does not automatically amend the Zoning Ordinance. The draft General Plan establishes long term goals and objectives and a framework of policies to guide future decision making. This draft General Plan update does describe the types of zoning changes that will likely need to be considered in the future to achieve General Plan policy objectives and meet State Housing Law requirements, but it does not actually change the zoning of any property in Alameda. The General Plan provides direction for those future decisions, but it does not predetermine those decisions. The General Plan cannot and should not be expected to pre-determine every change to every zoning district that may need to be carefully considered and adopted over the next 20 years.
The Harbor Bay Resolution incorrectly states that the General Plan “up zones” the Harbor Bay Club site and the Harbor Bay Shopping Center site. Both sites are currently zoned C-2/PD, which is a mixed-use zoning district that allows residential use on the upper floors above ground floor commercial use. As stated above, the draft General Plan does not change those existing zoning regulations.
The General Plan Land Use diagram assigns a Community Mixed Use designation for sites in Alameda that are currently zoned C-2-PD. The designation should be maintained for both the Harbor Bay Shopping Center and the Harbor Bay Club site that are currently zoned C-2-PD. The draft General Plan currently shows the Harbor Bay Club as Medium Density Residential. Staff believes the Medium Density Residential designation is a mistake and should be changed to Community Commercial.
If the Planning Board and City Council wish to “permanently remove” the possibility of housing at these two sites as requested by the Harbor Bay community, then the Planning Board and City Council should direct staff to change the Land Use designation for these two sites to Business and Employment, which is a General Plan designation that prohibits housing. Future zoning changes would also need to be adopted to change the C-2-PD zoning and prohibit future housing on both sites. It should also be recognized that under existing State Law, a decision by the City to down-zone a property to prohibit residential use must be accompanied by a companion up zoning somewhere else in the city to compensate for the loss of housing opportunity (the “No net Loss Law”).
Architecture, Design, and Historic Preservation. The General Plan Land Use Element provides a framework of policies to guide future decision making on issues of architecture, design, and historic preservation. Five of the most important policies are shown below.
Letters from West Alameda Business Association (WABA), Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS) raise concerns about Policy LU-17 Action b and Policy LU-26 action b. The letters and emails argue that “new and creative, contemporary architectural design” is inappropriate in Alameda.
Staff disagrees. New and creative, contemporary architectural design is appropriate in Alameda and creative contemporary design does not undermine Alameda’s historic buildings. It would be a mistake to require every new building constructed in Alameda over the next 20 years to mimic an architectural style from 100 years ago.
However, upon review of the comment letters, staff believes a problem lies with the term “does not mimic older styles”. The intent of this phrase was to prevent poorly executed designs that pretend to be Victorian or Craftsman. The intent was not to prohibit a well-executed re-interpretation of an older style or to prohibit a craftsman design for a new second story addition on a 1900’s Craftsman bungalow.
Staff has proposed some text deletions in the following policies (shown in strikethrough format) for Planning Board and Historical Advisory Board review and comment.
LU-17 Adaptive Reuse and Restoration. Support and encourage rehabilitation, restoration, and reuse of existing structures to retain the structure’s embodied energy and reduce the generation of waste.
Actions:
a. Intensification and Reinvestment in Existing Buildings. Promote reinvestment and reuse in existing buildings, including facade improvements, accessibility improvements and additional story height to increase the range of uses and richness of the urban fabric while building on the historic character and form.
b. Innovative Design Solutions. Encourage and support innovative design solutions for the restoration and reuse of older buildings for new uses and avoid design solutions that mimic a prior design style. (Change proposed by staff for Board discussion.)
LU-25 Historic Preservation. Promote the preservation, protection and restoration of historic sites, districts, buildings of architectural significance, archaeological resources, and properties and public works.
Actions:
a. City-Owned Buildings. Preserve, maintain and invest in all City-owned buildings and facilities of architectural, historical or aesthetic merit.
b. Partnerships. Work in partnership with property owners, Alameda Unified School District, and non-profit organizations, such as the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS) to ensure that the city’s memorable buildings and landscapes are preserved.
c. Property Owner Awareness. Continue to work to increase owners’ and buyers’ awareness of the importance of preservation in protecting community character and identity.
d. Historic Districts and Monuments. Designate additional Historic Districts and Monuments to recognize areas or sites with significant historic architectural design character or cultural history.
e. Financial and Design Assistance. Develop financial and design assistance programs to encourage the restoration or preservation of buildings, structures, and sites with architectural, historic or aesthetic merit, such as a Mills Act Program or the Facade Grant Program.
f. Demolition Controls. Maintain demolition controls for historic properties.
g. Alterations. Require that exterior changes to existing buildings be consistent with the building’s existing or original architectural design whenever feasible.
h. Archaeological Resources. Preserve important archaeological resources from loss or destruction and require development to include appropriate mitigation to protect the quality and integrity of these resources.
LU-26 Architectural Design Excellence. Promote high quality architectural design in all new buildings and additions to complement Alameda’s existing architectural assets and its historic pedestrian and transit-oriented urban fabric.
Actions:
a. Diversity. Encourage a broad range of architectural styles, building forms, heights, styles, materials, and colors to enhance Alameda’s rich and varied architectural character and create visually interesting architectural landscapes within each neighborhood and district.
b. Creativity. Encourage and support creative and contemporary architectural design that complements, but does not mimic, existing architectural designs in the neighborhood or district. (Change proposed by staff for Board discussion.)
c. Harmony. Harmonize the architectural design of new buildings with the architectural character of the surrounding buildings to create a visually appealing architectural landscape.
d. Human Scale. Promote accessible, human scaled designs that ensure that ground floors are easily accessible and visually interesting from the public right-of-way by facing buildings toward the street, using higher quality materials at the ground floor, providing pedestrian-scaled lighting, and minimizing the extent of blank walls along ground floor elevations with doorways, windows, art, landscaping, or decorative materials.
e. Regulations and Guidelines. Promote design excellence by ensuring that City development regulations and design guidelines clearly express the intent and support for creative and innovative design solutions. Guidelines should focus on desired outcomes rather than prohibited outcomes.
LU-27 Neighborhood Design. Protect, enhance and restore Alameda’s diverse neighborhood architecture and landscape design while encouraging design innovation and creativity in new residential buildings and landscapes. (See also Policy HE-15).
Actions:
a. Architectural and Landscape Design. Require that neighborhood infill development and alterations to existing residential buildings respect and enhance the architectural and landscape design quality of the neighborhood.
b. City Design Regulations. Develop regulations, standards and guidelines that express the intended and desired form and functional outcomes as opposed to expressing just the prohibited forms to support and encourage innovative design solutions and high quality design.
LU-28 Retail Commercial Design. Require that alterations to existing buildings and all new buildings in community commercial districts be designed to be pedestrian oriented and harmonious with the architectural design of the surrounding mixed-use district.
Actions:
a. Park and Webster Street Design. Continue to support and promote high quality design in the reinvestment in Alameda’s “Front Doors” to ensure the continued vibrancy of these unique city Main Streets for commerce, employment, entertainment, and culture.
b. Contextual Architectural and Landscape Design. Require varied building facades that are well articulated, visually appealing at the pedestrian level, and that utilize architectural and landscape design features that respond to the district’s existing architectural and landscape character.
Conclusions: Staff encourages the public, the Historical Advisory Board and Planning Board to review and comment on the draft General Plan and staff’s initial proposed changes to the draft General Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Review and comment on the draft General Plan and provide direction to the types of changes that should be made to the March Draft General Plan.
Respectfully Submitted by:
Andrew Thomas
Planning, Building, and Transportation Director
Exhibits:
1. Written Comments