OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Alameda Planning Board Workshop on Inclusionary Housing - Nov 10, 2025

Planning BoardMonday, November 10, 2025
BodyAlameda, California
SessionPlanning Board
DateMonday, November 10, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:48:31
Transcript — Verbatim
0:32

President Citros, it is Monday, November 10th, and we're um gonna go ahead and get uh started with that training board meeting.

0:41

Um board member Sahiva, do you mind reading us uh leading us in the pledge?

0:46

Yep.

0:50

A pledge of agents to apply of the United States of America and to republic for which it stands one nation, under guide, individual delivery, just for all.

1:05

Oh, God.

1:07

All right, meetings call to order.

1:08

Let's go ahead and do roll call.

1:11

Yes, good evening.

1:13

Um, let's see.

1:15

Board member Wang.

1:17

Here.

1:18

Board Member Sue.

1:19

Here.

1:20

Board Member Sahaba.

1:22

Present.

1:22

Board Member Hom.

1:24

Here.

1:24

And President Cisneros.

1:26

Here.

1:26

Okay, we have a quorum, and board member Ruiz is absent this evening due to illness.

1:34

Okay, great.

1:36

Um we have agenda item two.

1:39

Any agenda changes from uh staff or nothing from me now.

1:45

All right.

1:46

Um any non-agenda public comments.

1:50

Anyone in the audience here live or online could speak for three minutes or anything not on the agenda.

1:56

Do we have any speakers?

1:59

No hands raised, no speaker slips.

2:06

We have one for non-agenda, Mitch Ball.

2:10

Okay.

2:22

With construction on the Webster and Posey tube about to begin, Alameda will likely be facing high traffic congestion in the next few years before the Oakland Alameda Access Project finishes.

2:33

I work in between these two tunnels and often pass by the congestion uh that already exists when I bike to and from work.

2:39

The city's made meaningful progress in enabling people to use other modes of transportation in recent years, from bike lanes to the water taxi, and vehicle miles traveled are reducing.

2:49

However, there are still ways that people are being artificially incentivized to use cars, and the city can end these incentives by simply enabling enforcement of a 30-year-old California state law.

2:59

For those of you who don't know, parking cash out law has been on the books since 1992, but often goes unenforced like it is here in Alameda.

3:07

The intent of this law is to prevent employers from subsidizing car use more than uh they subsidize any other modes of transportation.

3:14

This law requires qualifying companies to offer employees who don't drive to work the ability to cash out their parking space and receive cash or alternative transit subsidies instead, equivalent to the cost of each parking space.

3:26

This could be huge for individuals who can't afford to own cars or families who can't afford to own multiple cars.

3:32

Additionally, for those who currently drive to work but could use other modes, this could be a great incentive to stop contributing to rush hour traffic and road maintenance costs.

3:40

These people deserve to be properly compensated for the true economic consequences of their decision.

3:45

Alameda just needs to do two things to enforce this law.

3:48

Firstly, adopt a financial penalty for businesses that do not comply with this state law.

3:53

The state law explicitly grants cities the power to do this.

3:57

Secondly, change zoning to require new commercial leases.

4:00

Have their parking unbundled unlisted as a separate adjustable line item in the lease.

4:05

This makes calculation of the cost of parking easy and allows businesses to save money by reducing their parking footprint.

4:11

Additionally, it also benefits commercial lessers as it allows them to identify land unclaimed by lessees that is prime for infill development in the form of new jobs, homes, and property tax revenue.

4:22

As you're all well aware, we have huge swaths of asphalt all over Alameda.

4:26

Much of this goes unparked and is for all intents and purposes vacant land, but just hasn't been formally recognized as such.

4:32

Unbundling parking is not a radical policy and is in fact already required of all new residential development in most of California.

4:38

Alameda can go farther by requiring that all commercial and residential leases in Alameda on development, both new and old, offer only unbundled parking.

4:46

It's not fair that tenants and employees who don't or can't drive are made to pay for parking that they don't use and don't want.

4:53

It's a distortion of the market that encourages speculation of effectively vacant land.

4:57

Unbundling parking, an enforcement of parking cash out law, reduces car congestion, protects the environment, encourages new development during a housing crisis, doesn't have any high construction costs, and instead actually increases tax revenue and provides financial relief to the city's road maintenance budget, as well as Alamedans who need it the most, and so should be implemented here in Alameda.

5:17

Thank you.

5:20

Thank you so much.

5:23

Any other speakers?

5:25

No more speakers.

5:26

All right.

5:27

And with that, we'll go ahead and close the non-agenda public comment.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Affordable Housing█████████████████████████████████████████████92%
Equity in Transportation██4%
Procedural██4%
Summary of Proceedings

Alameda Planning Board Workshop on Inclusionary Housing - November 10, 2025

The Alameda Planning Board held a regular meeting on November 10, 2025, featuring a workshop to discuss updates to the city’s inclusionary housing ordinance. The board received a staff presentation, heard public comments, and provided direction to staff for a forthcoming city council presentation. Consent calendar items were also approved.

Consent Calendar

  • Approved meeting minutes for May 27, June 23, and July 28, 2025 (Board Member Hom abstained on July 28 due to absence).
  • Approved the 2026 Planning Board meeting schedule, which includes regular Monday meetings except one Tuesday meeting due to a holiday, an August recess, and reduced meetings in November and December.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Non-agenda public comment (Mitch Ball): Urged enforcement of the 30-year-old state parking cash-out law to reduce traffic congestion and incentivize alternative transportation. Suggested adopting financial penalties for non-compliant businesses and requiring unbundled parking in commercial leases.
  • Public comment on inclusionary housing:
    • Andrew Rosenberg (Pacific Development): Asked the board to recommend a $10 per gross square foot in-lieu fee for the Alameda Marina project, citing financial infeasibility of on-site BMR units due to high costs (seawall, remediation, etc.). Stated that a $2.5 million fee would make the project viable.
    • Mitch Ball: Supported the staff recommendations but urged adding a fifth recommendation to remove the exemption for single-unit homes and developments of 2-10 units, arguing that wealthier homeowners benefit from constrained supply while middle-class renters bear the cost.

Discussion Items

  • Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Workshop (Agenda Item 5):
    • Staff presentation by Steve Buckley (Planning Services Manager) reviewed the history of the ordinance update, policy options, and financial modeling. Proposed focusing rental inclusionary on 15% low income (80% AMI) and ownership inclusionary on moderate and low income with several options. Discussed in-lieu fees ($25/sq ft for rental, $50/sq ft for for-sale as initial direction), clustering criteria, and affordability terms (life of project vs. 99 years).
    • Board members discussed feasibility, flexibility, and the need to balance housing production with affordability. Key themes:
      • Board Member Hom: Supported staff recommendations but emphasized the difficulty of crafting a one-size-fits-all ordinance. Suggested development agreements for bespoke solutions.
      • Board Member Wang: Called for explicit acknowledgment that the update does not address feasibility, and proposed a parallel temporary relief package to spur development in the current market.
      • Board Member Sahiba: Questioned whether the fee structure discourages housing production; advocated for percentage-based fees tied to overall project costs rather than per-square-foot.
      • Vice President Edison: Supported 99-year affordability terms and cluster options; urged consideration of market conditions and small infill projects.
      • Board Member Sue: Echoed support for flexibility and dialing options; noted potential for cost index adjustments.
      • Board Member Hom (again): Highlighted that feasibility varies by project and that development agreements are a key tool in Alameda.
      • Board Member Wang (reprise): Challenged the preference for on-site units over in-lieu fees, arguing that in a down market, in-lieu fees can fund affordable housing via nonprofits.

Key Outcomes

  • The board provided oral feedback to staff, which will be summarized for presentation to the city council next week.
  • No formal votes were taken on the ordinance; the workshop was for direction only.
  • Staff will draft an ordinance and conduct further feasibility study before returning to the board and council.

Meeting Transcript

President Citros, it is Monday, November 10th, and we're um gonna go ahead and get uh started with that training board meeting. Um board member Sahiva, do you mind reading us uh leading us in the pledge? Yep. A pledge of agents to apply of the United States of America and to republic for which it stands one nation, under guide, individual delivery, just for all. Oh, God. All right, meetings call to order. Let's go ahead and do roll call. Yes, good evening. Um, let's see. Board member Wang. Here. Board Member Sue. Here. Board Member Sahaba. Present. Board Member Hom. Here. And President Cisneros. Here. Okay, we have a quorum, and board member Ruiz is absent this evening due to illness. Okay, great. Um we have agenda item two. Any agenda changes from uh staff or nothing from me now. All right. Um any non-agenda public comments. Anyone in the audience here live or online could speak for three minutes or anything not on the agenda. Do we have any speakers? No hands raised, no speaker slips. We have one for non-agenda, Mitch Ball. Okay. With construction on the Webster and Posey tube about to begin, Alameda will likely be facing high traffic congestion in the next few years before the Oakland Alameda Access Project finishes. I work in between these two tunnels and often pass by the congestion uh that already exists when I bike to and from work. The city's made meaningful progress in enabling people to use other modes of transportation in recent years, from bike lanes to the water taxi, and vehicle miles traveled are reducing. However, there are still ways that people are being artificially incentivized to use cars, and the city can end these incentives by simply enabling enforcement of a 30-year-old California state law. For those of you who don't know, parking cash out law has been on the books since 1992, but often goes unenforced like it is here in Alameda. The intent of this law is to prevent employers from subsidizing car use more than uh they subsidize any other modes of transportation. This law requires qualifying companies to offer employees who don't drive to work the ability to cash out their parking space and receive cash or alternative transit subsidies instead, equivalent to the cost of each parking space. This could be huge for individuals who can't afford to own cars or families who can't afford to own multiple cars. Additionally, for those who currently drive to work but could use other modes, this could be a great incentive to stop contributing to rush hour traffic and road maintenance costs. These people deserve to be properly compensated for the true economic consequences of their decision. Alameda just needs to do two things to enforce this law. Firstly, adopt a financial penalty for businesses that do not comply with this state law. The state law explicitly grants cities the power to do this. Secondly, change zoning to require new commercial leases. Have their parking unbundled unlisted as a separate adjustable line item in the lease. This makes calculation of the cost of parking easy and allows businesses to save money by reducing their parking footprint. Additionally, it also benefits commercial lessers as it allows them to identify land unclaimed by lessees that is prime for infill development in the form of new jobs, homes, and property tax revenue. As you're all well aware, we have huge swaths of asphalt all over Alameda. Much of this goes unparked and is for all intents and purposes vacant land, but just hasn't been formally recognized as such. Unbundling parking is not a radical policy and is in fact already required of all new residential development in most of California.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com