Alameda Planning Board Meeting – September 13, 2021: General Plan 2040 and Vision Zero Action Plan

The Alameda Planning Board convened on September 13, 2021, at 7:00 PM via Zoom to consider several major items, including the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Alameda General Plan 2040, approval of the General Plan itself, and a review of the Draft Vision Zero Action Plan. The meeting also included oral communications from the public on non-agenda topics and on specific agenda items. After extensive discussion, the board voted unanimously to recommend certification of the Final EIR and deferred the final approval of the General Plan to a future meeting to allow for a consolidated draft. The board also reviewed and commented on the Vision Zero plan.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Non-Agenda Oral Communications: A speaker (Lisa Ross) raised concerns about the difficulty of finding the Zoom link in the agenda, requesting it be made more visible. A second speaker (Christopher Buckley) noted that public correspondence records were unavailable online earlier that day. Staff acknowledged the issue but noted that the Legistar system does not allow colored hyperlinks. Board members offered suggestions to improve accessibility.

• General Plan 2040 and Harbor Bay Club: Numerous residents spoke in favor of preserving the Harbor Bay Club as a recreational facility, opposing its designation as community mixed-use or housing. Key points included:

  • Speakers emphasized the club's role as a community amenity, providing swimming, tennis, camps, and after-school programs, especially during the pandemic.
  • Several speakers (e.g., Chris Arya, Jeff Peterson) argued that the original developer’s agreement and reclamation district bond required the site to be recreational, and that changing the designation would breach promises to residents.
  • One speaker (Neil Dandavati) expressed openness to mixed-use development but stressed the need for community engagement and assurance that a recreational club would remain.
  • A speaker (Bill Pai, board president of the Harbor Bay Isle primary board) supported deferring the zoning decision to the housing element process but stated the community strongly opposes high-density residential on the site.
  • One speaker (Zach Bowling) advocated for keeping the Measure A historical references in the plan and deferring the Harbor Bay Club decision to the housing element.

• Vision Zero Action Plan: No public speakers signed up for this item.

Discussion Items

1. General Plan 2040 and Final EIR (Items 7A1 and 7A2)

• Staff Presentation: Planning Director Andrew Thomas presented the two resolutions: one recommending certification of the Final EIR and adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and the second recommending approval of the Alameda General Plan 2040. He highlighted the three-year community process, noting that 1,500–2,000 individuals participated. He identified three key outstanding issues: (a) references to Measure A and the Fair Housing Act in the introduction, (b) the land use classification for the Harbor Bay Club, and (c) the relationship between land use classifications and the upcoming housing element. Staff proposed maintaining the current commercial recreation designation for the Harbor Bay Club and deferring the housing discussion to the housing element update. Staff also circulated Exhibit C with additional amendments.

• Board Discussion on EIR: Board members had no questions on the EIR. The board voted unanimously to recommend certification of the Final EIR and adoption of the MMRP (motion by Board Member Teague, second by Rothenberg).

• Board Discussion on General Plan:

  • Board members debated the inclusion of Measure A language. Some (Curtis, Teague) argued it was historically inaccurate and should be removed, while others (Cisneros) felt it was a factual statement. The board also discussed the term "character" in the plan's themes, with Cisneros suggesting replacing it with "balance" to avoid exclusionary connotations.
  • Regarding the Harbor Bay Club, several board members (Hom, Cisneros, Rothenberg) supported staff's recommendation to keep the current commercial recreation designation and address the issue during the housing element process. Board Member Curtis provided historical context on the club's origins and the reclamation district bond, arguing that the site should remain recreational. Board Member Teague listed numerous specific amendments to the plan text, including changes to bike boulevard language, parking maximums, and equity-focused terminology.
  • The board decided to defer the final vote on the General Plan and requested staff to produce a consolidated draft incorporating all amendments discussed, to be brought back for a final review at a future meeting. The motion passed unanimously.

2. Vision Zero Action Plan (Item 7C)

• Staff Presentation: Senior Transportation Coordinator Lisa Foster presented the draft Vision Zero Action Plan, a five-year plan aiming to eliminate traffic deaths and severe injuries by 2040. She highlighted the data-driven approach, including a 10-year crash analysis showing that 73% of injury crashes occur on 20% of streets (high injury corridors). The plan includes 50 actions, such as prioritizing investments on high injury corridors, creating traffic engineering checklists, and focusing enforcement on dangerous behaviors. The plan will go to the Transportation Commission in October and to City Council for adoption in December.

• Board Discussion: Board members praised the plan's thoroughness and actionability. Suggestions included:

  • Adding a Caltrans representative to the task force (Rothenberg).
  • Including before-and-after studies to measure the effectiveness of safety improvements (Hom).
  • Clarifying the prioritization of actions within the plan (Cisneros).
  • Considering the impact of freeway traffic on Alameda's streets (Rothenberg).
  • The board also noted that Fifth Street, despite not being on the high injury corridor map, had recent crashes and community concern, and staff is evaluating responses.

Key Outcomes

• Final EIR: The board voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
• General Plan 2040: The board voted unanimously to defer the final recommendation and requested staff to bring back a consolidated draft (incorporating all amendments discussed) for one more review before sending to the City Council.
• Vision Zero Action Plan: No formal action was taken; the board provided comments and feedback for staff to consider before the plan goes to the Transportation Commission and City Council.
• Naming Policy (Item 7B): This item was deferred to a future meeting due to time constraints.
• Minutes (Items 8A and 8B): The board decided to continue review of the draft minutes to a future meeting to allow for public comment as advised by the City Attorney.
• Staff Communications (Items 9A and 9B): These were also deferred to the next meeting.
• Future Meetings: Staff announced upcoming items including a workshop on the housing element update, revisions to parking ordinance amendments, and climate action plan updates.

Note: The meeting adjourned after oral communications at approximately 11:00 PM.