pages: PlanningBoard/2021-10-25.pdf, 6
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2021-10-25 | 6 | housing in other places, such as the Gold Coast. He said the only way to address Alameda's past is to reverse those policies that had stopped housing. Board Member Rothenberg closed public comment and opened board discussion. Board Member Curtis asked about the number of units Alameda was responsible for. Director Thomas said it was somewhere between 1-2%, Alameda's RHNA was 5,353 units. He then explained the failed appeal of that number, all the appeals from Alameda County had been denied. Board Member Curtis asked about the removal of the Navy Market rate Cap and said getting that removed should be a top priority. He wanted to know what it would take to make that happen. His point was that removing that cap would buy flexibility for the city. Director Thomas said that staff had heard that request from the community and the council loud and clear and that process had already begun. The Community Development and Base Reuse Department had started that conversation with the Navy. He discussed the other agencies that staff had reached out to for help on getting the cap removed. He made it very clear though that as great a housing opportunity as Alameda Point was they could not put all 5,000 units on the point, they have to spread it out over the whole city. He said that getting the Navy to respond was going to take work from their state and federal representatives, regional partners, and all levels of government from California to Washington D.C. Board Member Hom discussed the goals for sections one and two. He highlighted the goal to end homelessness and wanted prevention to be added to the actions. He also gave his thoughts on the Fair Housing analysis, the need to upzone residential districts, and ways to utilize shopping centers for housing. He also gave his thoughts on negotiating with the Navy about the cap and agreed it would take political pressure to get the Navy to respond. Board Member Cisneros asked about SB-9 if the Housing Element complied with that. She also brought up SB-10 and how to get some of ADUs to count toward lower income. Director Thomas explained that was something they were still working on and discussed how SB-9 would affect Alameda and what was already allowed in Alameda. He then discussed ways to incentivize homeowners to deed restrict their ADUs for lower-income. Allen Tai, City Planner, discussed how other cities were encouraging homeowners to build ADUs by making the permit process easier and even waiving fees. Some cities required the units to be deed restricted for affordable housing for 3-5 years. Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 6 of 8 October 25, 2021 | PlanningBoard/2021-10-25.pdf |