On Monday, January 27, the Planning Board held its first meeting of the year and provided comments on the Draft Urban Forest Plan and the City of Alameda’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.

Urban Forest Plan covers a lot of ground
Identified in Alameda’s Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (CARP) as a key strategy to aid local carbon sequestration, the Urban Forest Plan is an update to the 2010 Master Street Tree Plan that outlines practices and resources to expand the City’s tree canopy to enhance quality of life and provide habitat for wildlife. Alameda Sustainability and Resilience Manager Danielle Mieler joined consulting firm Dudek’s Urban Forestry Practice Leader Ryan Allen to present the draft Plan to the Board.
Allen highlighted the Plan’s guiding principles to support an equitable distribution of canopy cover across Alameda, promote a healthy and resilient urban forest, grow the tree canopy by preserving existing trees and planting new trees, and increase community awareness and participation in urban forest management. To achieve these goals, the Plan outlines several strategies to incorporate tree planting into developments and plans for public and private property, and define staffing resources, responsibilities, and partnerships needed to maintain the urban forest.

The Plan also identifies neighborhoods to be prioritized for tree canopy growth, as well as a goal to reach a 20% canopy cover in 30 years. Canopy cover, or the amount of ground that is shaded by trees, is currently at 11.2% in Alameda. Increasing canopy cover to 20% will require adding approximately 9,600 new trees. However, public land can only accommodate about 4,200 new trees—the rest will need to be planted on private property or will require removal of concrete.

During public comment, Alameda Post contributing writer Irene Dieter, speaking as a resident of the community, asked the project team to consider including implementation strategies and site-specific opportunities as part of the Plan.
“It’s important that we include a starting point in this Plan that has clear, attainable objectives that will give us some quick wins,” said Dieter, who suggested that City staff could proactively reclaim and replant in empty tree wells around Alameda.
Resident Christopher Buckley also emphasized the need to retain elements from the 2010 Plan that differentiates the types of trees that are planted on major streets and neighborhood streets, noting that streets like Central Avenue give “an urban design framework to the City using trees.”
Board Member Hansom Hom had extensive comments during Board discussion. He applauded project staff for their work in Plan development and community outreach, and voiced his agreement with Buckley’s sentiments.
“There are certain streets that make a strong statement. Central Avenue is a signature street where the sycamore tree is the dominant tree,” explained Hom. “Identifying those streets and trying to hone in on what are the right tree species for those streets to make a strong statement.”
Hom and other Board Members also urged the project team to consider strategies to encourage tree planting on private properties or new developments and working with Public Works staff to address possible utility conflicts.
City Council will hold a study session for the Draft Urban Forest Plan at its upcoming meeting on Tuesday, February 4. The Plan is available for public comment until Friday, February 14.
Equity and Inclusionary Housing
During the second half of the meeting, City of Alameda Planning Manager Steven Buckley led a discussion to consider updates to the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
Passed in 2004, the Ordinance currently requires that 15% of units in residential projects with five or more units must be made affordable to very low-income (4%), low-income (4%), and moderate-income (7%) households. This applies to all residential projects in the City of Alameda, but those that are located on Alameda Point are subject to a higher threshold of 25%. The ordinance has since supported 140 below market rate (BMR) purchases and 318 BMR rentals, and provides $350,000 in annual revenue to the City through fees, according to Buckley.

Approval of the Housing Element in 2022 prompted a reevaluation of the ordinance to consider the modification of percentages, different requirements for for-sale and rental units, and other compliance methods.
Board members primarily discussed the equitable distribution of BMR units through the construction of residential projects around the City while considering the economic tradeoffs, particularly around a commercial developer’s ability to build off-site BMR units, which are instead constructed at a different location than the primary project.
“Inclusionary housing is not free. It is being subsidized by market-rate housing, therefore making market-rate housing more expensive,” explained Board Member Teresa Ruiz.
“Is it a priority to deliver as many units as possible, or is our priority focused on ‘equal distribution?’” questioned Ruiz. “If we want all the units on-site in the most equitable way, it’s going to make the market-rate units more expensive, and therefore the project doesn’t pencil.”
A working group with representatives from the Planning Board, Alameda Housing Authority, and the City’s Housing and Human Services Department, along with City staff and consultants, will continue with analysis and return to the Board later in the year.
Ken Der is a contributing writer for the Alameda Post. Contact him via [email protected]. His writing is collected at AlamedaPost.com/Ken-Der.