Economic Development Commission Meeting
15 Novembre 2001
Notes from Joe Woodard

Commissioners attending:

John Abrate - Chair
Charles Ward
Robert F. Kelly
Gail A. Wetzork
Harry Dahlbert
Pattianne Parker
Dough deHaan
and two others whose names I couldn't see.

The big item on the agenda was a presentation by Steve Belcher, assisted by
Cynthia Liasun (sp ??, the project manager), of the Housing Element.

This was the sixth presentation given in the last 3 weeks, and the last.
It is 1 of 7 elements that will be incorporated into the Master Plan.

	A link to a summary can be found at
	
	http://www.alamedareport.org/epac/refs.html

	The Housing Element is also on-line. A link to it is on
	
	http://www.alamedareport.org/epac/links.html
	The appendicies to the Housing Element are crucially important
	but are not on-line. You can purchase them from the City. The
	linked page explains. 

The current fundamental problem with housing is that rents are high,
vacanies are low, and most people can't afford the increasing rents.
More than half of renters have said they'll move in the next year because
of increasing rents (though how many would move anyway is not clear). 
But everyone likes Alameda because of its small town feel and charming
character.  These points are summarized in the Feb 2001 Telephone
Survey Results. The City has to create very low, low, and moderate
income housing if it wants to keep a work force in Alameda.  The housing
policy is summarized in Housing policies.

Housing needs are calculated by the Alameda County Regional Housing Need
Determination (RHND), a group established by the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG).  The housing goals established by RHND for 2001 - 2006
are:
	very low income:	443 units
	low income:			265 units
	moderate income:	611 units
	market rate:		843 units

	Total			=	2,162 units by 2006

Mr. deHaan thought the goals were too ambitious to realize.

Many of the market rate units are in development areas, that is, they are
units to be constructed.

The City wants to add 20% affordable housing in new projects. 

Even though State law requires the City to adopt a Housing Element by year
end, Mr. Belcher repeated that he will continue working on the Element
until he submits to the City Council at the end of January for February
adoption. This delays doesn't cost the City anything but is demanded by
many citizen groups.

About a half dozen citizens spoke.  Most asked the Commission to consider
that the number of housing units planned for low-income people are not
enough. Renewed Hope speakers reminded the Commission that Measure A,
passed about 10 years ago, requires that new housing include 2000 square
feet of land space for every housing unit and this keeps housing density
down, lowering the number of possible units, and thereby forcing rents up.

I spoke about EPAC and mentioned our concern about the Estuary Park
project. I asked that the Commission hold it in mind and help us caution
city planning staff not to give the area away to developers before
considering the neighborhood's opinion about the park, as promised in the
1991 General Plan. Mr. deHaan asked if EPAC had spoken to the Recreation
and Parks Commission. I said yes and gave him the address of our web site.

Pattianne Parker, a Commissioner, asked a lot of questions of Mr. Belcher
about low-income housing: number, buy/rent ratios, guarantees of
availability over the years, possible subsidies, and so forth. A big
question was why the Housing Element has to be adopted BEFORE 2000 census
figures are available. 

Mr. Belcher said the City has no Inclusionary housing policy, that no
studies measure cost/benefit of rental units versus for-sale units. Ms.
Parker thought that rental units may be a better deal for the City. Mr.
Belcher also said that ABAG charges Alameda with housing unit goals, but
not rental goals. Mr. Belcher also said that he had no studies about the
cost/benefit analysis of residential versus business properties. Mr.
Belcher said that if Measure A restrictions were removed, the market would
create denser housing: smaller, cheaper units, like Fremont. Affordable
units can be maintained in perpetuity, said Mr. Belcher. Housing for
police, fire, and teachers can overlap inclusionary policy, he said.

The Housing Element favors home ownership over rental units.

By the way, only one Condo conversion (rentals to private ownership) has
happened over the last ten years.

Cities with a high proportion of rental units to owned units are, in order:
	Albany
	Berkeley
	Alameda

Mr. Abrate, the Chairman, want a variety of housing that is mixed. He
doesn't want people to look at Alameda and be able to say, Oh, the poor
live there and the rich live over there.

The EDC will not meet in December. Their next meeting is the third Thursday
in January, Jan 17th. They will meet again January 31st to review their
quarterly Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP).

Ms. Parker mentioned that the Norther Waterfront Plan Proposal Committee
will meet December 12, 5 - 7 PM (no location given). They are thinking of
development concepts for the Northern Waterfront, still at concept stage
but some are far out. (Contact Judith Altschuler in the City Planning
Department to find out more.) I gather the Northern Waterfront area extends
from Grand to Atlantic Avenues, from Buena Vista to the Estuary.

I spoke with Ms. Parker afterwards about the park. She disagreed that
planning staff was 'giving it away.' She said it is held privately and
without money to buy it, the City could give it away. She said they're
looking for alternate spaces for a park.  This was vague, she agreed.  I
mentioned there seem to be no champion in the City government for concerns
in our area.

Return to top