Parks, Recreation & Open Space Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone. It's now 700 p.m. So we will call this meeting to order. The regular meeting of the planning and zoning commission of Wednesday, May 14th, 2025. And we will start with the land acknowledgement. The city of Albany recognizes that we occupy the land originally protected by the Confederated villages of Lijon. We acknowledge the genocide that took place on these lands and must make strides to repay the moral debt that is owed to this indigenous people, specifically the Aloney tribe. We thank them for their contributions which have transformed our community and will continue to bring forth growth and unity. The city of Albany commits to sustaining ongoing relationships with the tribe and together build a better future for all that now make this their home. And with that, we can go to roll call. Yes. Commissioner Mowman here. Commissioner Pearson here. Commissioner Pilch present. Commissioner Wadi here. And Chair Mloud here. Uh we'll move on to item two, expartate communications. We don't really have any design projects so or I don't think there would be any. Uh next item, item three, consent calendar, approval of minutes, April 23rd, 2025. There anyone who would like to pull this from the this from the consent calendar? Motion to approve. I'll second. And we'll go to a vote. Commissioner Mman, yes. Commissioner Pearson, yes. Commissioner Pilch, yes. Commissioner Wadi, and I vote yes as well. And with that, we will move on to item four, public comments for persons

desiring to address the commission on an item that is not on the agenda. Please note that policy limits each speaker to three minutes. So if there's anyone in the room that would like to speak and we can check online after that. So you'll have three minutes. Good evening. I am Dr. Steven Alpert. I and over a dozen individuals have requested why the council that the council justify why Albany follows only the minimum state mandate notifying those within 300 feet of new construction regardless of project size when in fact for years other California cities have used wider and varied notification to distinguish between small and large scale projects. The practice of only notifying those within 300 feet clearly limits public discourse, allowing this commission to propose and the council to then push through new projects, no matter how inappropriate, with minimal awareness and input from the public. Such was the case for the oversized five-story modern blocks proposed for 1600 Solano Avenue. Only 73 properties were alerted by postcards mailed 10 days before the first planning and zoning hearing. By approving the plans for this project as submitted, this commission and the council violated every aspect of Alby's planning and zoning mission statement, which reads, "The purpose of design reviews ensure that designs of projects are visually and functionally appropriate to their site and harmonious with their surroundings. Clearly, anyone can see that the plans for 600 Solano are not visually and functionally appropriate or harmonious with the adjacent craftsman era buildings. I reviewed the videos of the January 26, 2022 study session and the subsequent April 27th meeting devoted to 1600 Solano. Commission members had extensive concerns and lengthy discussions about the building's bike

storage, but not a single one commented that the modern design proposed was inappropriate for that site. Densy bonus was cited as the reason the plans for the five-story mixed commercial residential structure at 16o with no setback and no parking had to be approved as submitted. While density bonus allows for higher building heights, reduce setback and less parking, density bonus does not override enforcement of local building ordinances. Assuming, and that's a major assumption, the density bonus obligated the city to approve a five-story structure with no setback and no parking at 600 Solano. At the very least, this commission should have insisted that the building and corporate craftsman style features to be compatible with the neighborhood. Why bother to post a mission statement if you're simply going to ignore it? As directed by the council, commission members are obligated to follow 300 feet notice for new construction. But why did four sitting members of this commission feel entitled to ignore and violate every aspect of Alby's planning and zoning mission statement and the general plan. Albany deserves better, much better from this commission. Thank you. Thank you for your comments, which you'll ignore. Is there anyone who would like to comment online for public comment? No. No. Okay. Well, then we'll move on to item five. 5-1, study session on potential amendments to bike parking regulations. So, we will start. Yes. I would like presentation. Yes. I'd like to first introduce my colleague Ben Matlaw, who is an associate planner in the community development department in transportation planning. Good evening.

Give me one second here. All right. Um, thank you commissioners for having me. Um, I am going to talk to you tonight about uh what sounds like a much anticipated topic of conversation. Um, bike parking in the city. Um and I'm going to kind of run through um kind of three pieces of this uh conversation tonight which is you know one is to start by kind of understanding why uh we're talking about uh bike parking policy changes. Um two is just reviewing the existing regulations and best practices both in Albany and in nearby cities. Um, and then three kind of posed some questions that you probably saw in the staff memo about this to engender conversation. So, you know, we're not recommending anything tonight. This is really just the starting point to a conversation that will hopefully lead to an update in uh the ordinance and also relevant policies in the city. Um, so why develop bike parking regulations at all? Um so you know this is to establish kind of a standard of quantity design and placement for these spaces to uh ensure security uh weather protection um and integration with urban space um to reduce uh to ensure convenience and accessibility for folks

um biking and using mo microability devices and to reduce sidewalk clutter, prevent theft and encourage biking in general. um why do it now? Um so we I know you all talked a little bit um in previous commission meetings about AB 2097 um and the elimination of car parking minimums near transit which um allowed for the city to eliminate car parking minimums in general throughout the city. Um, so this is kind of uh a conversation to follow up on on that um policy change. Uh but also we have an active transportation plan uh going through the process right now um that may set policy standards, additional policy standards and we have a climate action plan from a few years ago um that set goals for uh reduction in vehicle miles traveled and uh GHG emissions etc. So there this is all relevant to that. Also we have to adapt to changing transportation trends. So, and with the increased popularity of ebikes, cargo bikes, and other micromobility devices, um, you know, it makes sense to be start to think about how the policy and and regulations of the city might change as they pertain to the parking of those devices. Um just to kind of set the stage here and define some terms. Um active transportation is really um a humanpowered um movement form of movement. So you know walking, biking, um scooters that are not electric, skateboards, wheelchairs, that sort of thing. micromobility when we talk about that it's it's these are usually um electric devices um and you know can

include anything like ebikes um manual or electric scooters um other compact electric devices like electric unicycles that sort of thing like infrastructure involves anything that um is uh infrastructure related that uh improves the facilitation the use of bicycles in the Um so that can include parking or um also bike lanes and paths. Um transportation demand management is kind of the practice of setting policies aimed at reducing um the reliance on single occupancy vehicles by encouraging other transportation options. Um and then short-term p bike parking is just, you know, the bike parking that you have, you know, often for very quick uh stops. Long-term parking is um secure and weather protected facilities. Um public bike parking is uh parking on in public space and private parking is in you know private facilities kind of restricted access for tenants, employees, customers, etc. Um so shifting gears uh to the city's bike parking ordinance and uh those of nearby cities. So uh in the city of Albany currently we have a an ordinance that mandates one uh shortterm parking space per 1500 square ft of uh residential uh mixeduse space. um and one long long-term bike parking space per unit. Um and then for commercial spaces, um we mandate one short-term space per 1500 ft² and we do not have a mandate for long-term commercial bike parking.

Um just in terms of the applicability of the ordinance, this is for uh new commercial uh mixed use and multif family spaces. Um and there's some general requirements that we won't get into the details of, but you know, just making sure that the bikes are safe and secure. Um and uh Salano and San Pablo have some special rules. Um the San Pablo specific plan um kind of ups the ante for uh bike parking um and and uh recommends 20 ft of uh residential spaces accommodate large bicycles. So those being, you know, something more akin to cargo bikes. Um the definition is at least 10 uh yeah do not require lifting and are at least 10 feet long. Um 20% of residential spaces would require electrical sockets to accommodate ebikes. Um and then um the sockets would be must be accessible to horizontal bike parking spaces. Um and then residential bike rooms provided have to be at grade ground level and provide access at to the street or sidewalk. Um this was also in your uh memo, but this is just a little bit of a kind of high level comparison um of the various cities um several cities in the East Bay um just to give folks an understanding of how uh bike parking is u mandated in the other cities and the way that they do it. So there's a lot of variance between the different cities um in terms of you know whether um it's mandated per unit, per bedroom, per

square foot, per car parking space um etc. and and you know so there's no right or perfect way to do this but there are different considerations to make. Um, we did not include San Francisco here because it's kind of an overly complicated um and and there's just a lot more nuance to fit into a simple chart. But, uh, we can talk about San Francisco's bike parking ordinance too if that is what the commission desires. Um, so just general considerations um, when thinking about bike parking uh, regulations. Um, you know, it generally we want to think about the number of spaces um required, the types of spaces required. We just talked about kind of cargo bikes and ebikes. Um, but there's also other microobility devices that we might consider and then the location of spaces and then and the convenience and access to those spaces. Um, you know, I I think we can get into uh best practices a little bit more, but you know, really we want to there's a an interest in prioritizing accessibility, setting clear standards, ensuring secure and uh security and weather protection, integrating with other transportation modes, um supporting both short and long-term parking, promoting equity, um especially geographic equity um you know thinking about what is enforced versus incentivized and not over complicating the process um or the the regulations. And to this point, um, I would just, you know, highlight the fact that, um, Portland, Oregon in 2023 actually voted to roll back its citywide, uh, bike

parking requirements because they were deemed overly cumbersome, uh, for developers when the city was trying to spur housing development. So always keeping that in the back of our head is how will this regulation um potentially um impede other goals of the city. So that's a very brief uh presentation on uh bike parking ordinances and regulations. Um, and I'll just kind of move us towards the discussion questions that we want to open this up uh to the commission to discuss. Those being, you know, how well do the city's current bike parking standards meet the needs of today's cyclists and micromobilities microobility users and where are the gaps that some of these questions may require more information that you ask of us to provide in the future. But um you know just to spur conversation here, how how can Alby's regulations better accommodate diverse bike types and evolving mobility trends? Should bike parking requirements be integrated into a broader TDM strategy? Um, what barriers might the city face in implementing updated standards? Um, and what strategies could help ensure successful adoption and compliance? And are there other factors, um, that should be considered when updating the regulations? Um, and with that, um, happy to answer any questions, but also happier to hear an open discussion about this. All right. Thank you very much for the presentation. Um why don't we just start with any questions for Ben right now about anything? I have a question. So just so this is I started in the commission in January. So my question has more to do with like where you are in the process. Are you

just talking to us or have you done community engagement? Um, yeah, that's my question. This is the the very first step in the process. Okay, got it. And are you here because the because this body asked you to come speak or is it a priority of the city or what are the strategic, you know, priority? It was it was because the body asked uh us to speak. I see. Okay. Thank you. Other questions? Uh, Commissioner Mullman. Um I have a question about the objective of this in in addition to the know typical processes. Are we going to focus our discussion only uh to the standards uh for the bike parking uh in uh ordinance or we aim to like improve the overall bike parking you know scenario in the city that includes parking provided by the private property owners as well as the city. It's my understanding that we are exclusively in terms of an ordinance. The ordinance would affect private property only. Okay. So the public realm we could make recommendations on but those would be subject to approval by other bodies. Okay. So that is separate from whatever we can suggest ideas but it has to be separate because you know it is integrated basically you know a lot of issues that we face today you know are not just related to the private property owners and parking provided there. I think the conversation can be about both and we should have the conversation about both but the the an any ordinance would be about private property exclusively. Got it. Okay. And just for my information, are there any

plans for improvement in bike infrastructure u in the city like any immediate plans? Could you repeat the question? I'm sorry. M are there any is city contemplating any improvements in the bike infrastructure in the city? So, you know, shameless plug. Uh the active transportation plan is currently in development. Um, this is a new active transportation plan for the city. Um, and we are currently in the second phase of a three-phase process. There will be a uh Tuesday, May 20 20th uh openhouse meeting discussing the active transportation plan and the progress that's been made. Um, this will be focused on the network development of the bicycle and pedestrian networks throughout the city. And that's going to happen on Tuesday, May 20th. So, in just under a week at the community uh center at 5:30 between 5:30 and 7:30 p.m. And that would also cover bike parking. We will not be addressing bike parking at that open house, but we No, but in in the study that you plan will address bike bicycle policies, bicycle and pedestrian policies and bike parking is a policy um that would likely come out of that. Okay. and any uh plans for transit demand management like you know our municipal code mentions transit demand management in just one paragraph you know there is not like a you know comprehensive strategy and considering that minimum parking requirement is eliminated there are some implications of that on traffic demand management so what is your u what what does city think about that means do we need that or

we're so per question three I think we're open to having that conversation and and this as part of a larger TDM strategy um but that would probably come as guidance from you as the commission. Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. Other questions? Yeah. Just one question. Uh when you mentioned the Portland um issue, uh did do they have um any minimum uh car parking requirements? Do you know? It's a great question. I don't know the answer to that. Okay. Thank you. Wy, any questions? No. Um I was just going to ask myself, um how do you see this process working? Uh I mean what uh kind of outline do we have? I mean I'm this is day one first session but where do we go from here and how do you see that moving forward? U some cities do a lot. I think Portland had 140 page bike parking document that they went through for I don't know how long but uh I don't want it to be that complicated. I think it can be a lot simpler. But what do you see as are So I think um I'm going to answer this one. So what we see is going to be largely determined about what we hear from you all tonight. So you can see that the study session's pretty wide open um because we wanted to hear from you before we kind of dove deeper into we that's the royal we before Ben dove deeper into doing research. So we want to hear from you. what we get back here. I can see either I actually can see actually following up with more research and more presentation and more options kind of a more u fine tuned study session unless we get super specific

information tonight which we could then potentially come back with the actual draft ordinance. I also see that um I want to put this I would like to talk about bicycle regulations. I think it's important to have an ordinance for standards. Um, however, if we're doing TDM or guidelines in terms of spacing or amount, I think that should be accompanied as part of a resolution. So, that would have more flexibility to be updated. So, when we talk about it, we may use ordinance, but I'd like to what we're hoping to hear is more of a bike policy regulations that could expand. Um, and like I said, it's really going to be based on the detail in terms of timing. We do hope to get back to you um before the August recess um if all goes well just for whatever that next stage is and then keep moving forward till eventually getting draft ordinances and potentially regulations for your recommendation then onto council. Okay, great. Um another question. Um we don't currently have any ordinances for temporary events, do we? Bike parking events. uh bike parking for one time or recurring temporary events. Nothing. That is correct. And we've been including that as part of the conditions of the temporary use permit, but nothing nothing codified. Correct. Okay. So, we can require it, but then it's not um there's no real guidelines for them to follow beyond our suggestions or our Yeah. Nothing for them to refer to really when they're doing these events at this time. Correct. It might be provide a bike coral or provide five spaces but not dimensions or location or you know types of racks etc. Okay. Um and then just

going back to Portland you said they repealed their ordinance or they scaled it back. What did they what were where where were they and where did they go back to? I mean, I'm just curious to know why it was so cumbersome or what the problem was or Yeah, I should have the information in front of me. Um, they, as I recall, there are three there were three kind of pieces of the ordinance that they were repealed. One was kind of there was like a high number, minimum number that they uh scaled back. Um but there were also very kind of prescriptive details to uh you know how bikes would um spacing and and that sort of thing. So that just made it exceedingly difficult for developers to um implement when they were developing um housing. Um so I let me put a pin in that and get back to you. Okay. That'll be interesting to know. Um, okay. I don't have any other questions, so uh, why don't we open it up to public comment? And we have one person in the room who looks like he would be a commenter. I walked quickly here. If there's anybody online, I'd be happy to have the first. Okay, that's okay. We'll start online. Yeah, if there's anyone online who'd like to speak on this matter, please uh, raise your hand. Hi, my name is Katherine and I'm an avid bicyclist in Albany, also pedestrian. I also have a car. I like bicycling because it's a way for me to get um places uh more conveniently, have great parking, and want to share the study from bikeport.org that bike visitors spend more money per month per uh convenience store, for example, compared to car owners. Bunch of ideas related to bike parking. I like the idea of keeping it simple and having recommendations rather than requirements because we don't want to get in the way of more housing, for example. Couple of ideas.

Bike parking should be inclusive of dedicated spaces for larger size, longer family bikes and cargo ebikes that allow people to have more options for getting groceries and running errands. Cars are very expensive by comparison. Bikes that carry groceries or kids or other things that are heavy can often be sold on bike racks that are vertical. and seniors and people with disabilities can bike but also can't lift bikes vertically. So having um ramps to allow for um rolling in and out is more accessible and equitable. As you can hear some strong feedback here from another hit about bikes. State law requiring daylighting 25 ft from intersections near stop signs are places that could be designed to provide parking for family-sized bikes rather than just empty pavement. Having locked rooms are really helpful. Um, but not being visible to the outside of a building is relevant because being able to have secure bike parking is key to being able to have people feeling comfortable doing more biking. And then um, bike racks also should be functional and not just art pieces because having it be too pretty can be an obstacle to having it be functional and having functionality and security is really important for actually using this. So, for example, racks that are bolted to concrete can be removed easily compared to racks installed in fresh concrete um are harder to remove for um theft. So, thank you for your consideration. Thank you for your comments. Yes. Uh good evening. My name is Lucinda Young and I am an Albany resident. uh longtime resident. Um I'm also a member of the Albany Climate Action Coalition. My primary form of transportation is by bicycle, although I also do own a car and drive a car. Um although I do try to

uh uh predominantly travel by bicycle to the extent that I'm able to. The two primary barriers to cycling I find is number one uh safe routes which I know is not before this committee uh this evening but number two is a safe place to safe secure place to park your bicycle. Many many people are concerned about bicycle thefts and I think everyone here is probably aware of the huge problem we have with bicycle thefts and that can only be addressed through safe vehicle parking. I want to mention um that under the climate action and adaptation plan uh that that calls for a 20% reduction in it's either 20 or 25% reduction in vehicle miles traveled. A big part of accomplishing that reduction is increasing uh bicycle and pedestrian transportation. Um and the only way that's going to happen is uh uh by safe routes and safe parking access. Um, I also want to remind the committee that last year the clim uh the city of Albany city council passed a climate emergency declaration which directed uh all decisions all decisions made by the city should be made through the lens of the climate emergency. So I would ask that that also be considered in your uh decisions this evening. Um, I I just want to as as a cyclist, um, I often deal with, um, finding trying to find a secure place to park my bike. And there's a huge difference in the racks. I don't want to get too technical here,

but I believe they're called grid bike racks. I see those all over the place. And they're not secure to uh to use. Uh, it's very hard to get a U lock on one of those. Um the inverted U locks racks inverted U-locks and the wave style bike racks work really well. Um I think it's also I want to echo what the previous speaker uh spoke about. It's very important that um cargo bikes um uh that the racks be able to accommodate cargo bikes but I would fully support um uh making sure that uh there is bike access. Thank you. Okay, thank you for your comments. If anyone else wishes to speak online, please use the raise the hand icon. No one else online, you're up. It's loose. Good evening, commission. I'm Ken McCrosski. I I'm a 15-year member of the transportation commission Albany and a a active transportation advocate. Speaking for myself, of course, this evening. You'll excuse me if I stop looking you in the eye and pay attention to the time monitor. Um I I don't need to repeat what was said by the previous two callers. Uh I I support almost everything they said. Um, certainly cementing in your bike racks is great when you can, but we have a lot of pavement out there and sidewalk already, so sometimes there's a compromise, and that can be okay, especially in a public place. Um, I want to remind you that bikes are already here. Uh, when I go home from a commission meeting up Solano, I'm passing the dishwashers riding home on their crappy little bikes that they've

stashed at the back of the restaurant. Um, bikes are all around us and the more we can support people on bikes, the the more we can get out of our cars. And as Lucinda noted, I think actually as Katherine, spend more money because we're visiting more often, even if we spend a little less. Um, secured storage is key. U, can you imagine driving your car to Safeway and taking your headlights in with you? Um, we all do this when we go places on our bike and it can work for errands. We can make it work. But if we're going to an appointment that's going to last several hours, the the equation changes. If we're uh living somewhere or going to a hotel, we want to be able to park our bike securely and forget about it um and go about our business. So, I encourage you to think, consider the fact that there may be a hotel one day in Albany. Who knows? Um the devil is really in the details of secured parking. Uh there are some straightforward options like uh the bike link boxes which have proven very secure. They take up a lot of space. Um bike rooms can be fantastic, but I've spoken to people where who have experienced situations where their entire complex everybody has access to the bike room and there's no camera. there's no accountability. So if something happens there, there's no Yeah, there's no accountability. You can imagine what happens. Um I would suggest that if if there's a common bike area or areas that um people gain access to that when they are using it, that could be hard to litigate or to to put into code. I understand. But again, the devil's in the details. Um, even if you just have card key readers that identifies who goes in and out and a camera, even if

you can't recognize them on the camera, you can figure out who was there. So, think big. Think about shared bike parking among businesses, maybe in a a bike station. Thank you for your time. Okay. Thank you very much. No one else. Then, uh, we will close public comment and move on to commissioner discussion and discussion with staff. Um, I don't know if anyone has any questions for Mr. McCrosski who has a lot of experience in this, but um, anyway, uh, yeah, I'd like to start. I mean, I'm probably the catalyst for bringing this to the commission. It was the very first item I asked to have reviewed when I started six years ago. Um, which seems like a very long time and nothing was happening. Um but since then we've adopted a specific plan for San Pablo Avenue. I think the climate emergency declaration is also another factor. Um but I think the fact that um we've adopted a housing element uh we have eliminated minimum parking standards uh for residential areas I think is really the key. um you know as we go forward and we're encouraging building housing and we want to build more housing and that housing could come with much less parking than much less car parking than before. Um you know I think we need to be cognizant of the fact that we want to provide alternatives so that people don't need cars don't need to go about their daily business with vehicles and create some sort of mode shift. Uh there was a letter written by Mr. Martin and he gets it exactly right when he said, you know, the more bicycle and micromobility infrastructure we have in Albany, the easier people will find they can live with fewer or no cars, thereby taking some stress off parking in our neighborhoods and satisfying our climate and other environmental goals, healthy

lifestyle goals, lifestyle goals, etc. Uh, so I think it's really critical. We don't want to have a bunch of housing come along and then have a flood of cars on our streets. So this bike parking ordinance or updating our bike parking ordinance is a really key fundamental element to encouraging um reduced car use in fewer cars. So um I really support just doing as best a model ordinance as we can right now. Uh really doing it right. um and then not having to worry about it for 15 years or whatever until technology changes and some other thing comes along that we have to worry about. Um but I really and I appreciate the um the presentation. I think we really absolutely have to recognize the paradigm shift created by the popularity and adoption of cargo bikes and other electric bikes that have more cargo carrying capacity even if they aren't longtail bikes. But um that is fundamentally changing how people shop. It's fundamentally changing how people are going to get around town. Parents and kids, you see them all over. Kids seem to be loving it. um that is what we should be encouraging and providing infrastructure for and that includes not just bike rooms but on the street protected bike lanes uh as part of this nexus between housing climate action reducing vehicle miles traveled all that sort of thing. So I mean there's this huge nexus here and it's all interrelated. Um and the bike infrastructure is a key part, transit's a key part, more housing is a key part. Uh it helps us reach our climate goals. So um you know, I just can't quite say enough about how important this is. Uh and then I would refer also it's very much related to the

housing element. In fact, in our housing element, we have policy 4.9 car free living. And I'll read it. coordinate housing initiatives with active transportation programs, car sharing programs, and parking initiatives so that it's easier to live in Albany without owning a private vehicle. Forgoing auto ownership can reduce household transportation expenses and create more disposable income for housing. So, it's also an equity issue. Much cheaper to live without a car. Uh people shop locally, creates a better city, creates a better urban environment. So, um, for me, there's really no reason not to promote it as much as we can and adopt a model ordinance. Um, you know, I could say more. you know, researching um the active transportation plan and the Solano Avenue discussion of last week, I came across a CALR main street document where um you know, even Calrans gets it. So, I'm going to read this to you. Main streets that support sustainable transportation systems encourage lowcarbon or carbon neutral travel options to reduce emissions and vehicle miles traveled. Providing comfortable conditions for biking, walking, and taking public transit gives people the freedom to forego a motor vehicle trip when they choose. Since many daily trips are two miles or less, creating infrastructure that supports non-motorized options and I would stress infrastructure of which bike rooms are infrastructure. Um, close, you know, creating infrastructure that supports non-motorized options close to homes and main street locations is a powerful mechanism for achieving achieving sustainability and climate related goals. Um, and I would also say it just

makes our cities better, more resilient, friendlier, cleaner, less air pollution, etc. Uh, I have a lot of specific recommendations, but I could wait on those and let other people weigh in. Um, and I'll hand it over to whoever else would like to speak. And just to interject, um I don't know when a good time to bring up the Portland, Oregon example is, but I do actually have a slide that I buried away that can answer that question. So whenever you want that information. Okay. Well, maybe we should hear from everyone first and then give us a little update on that. Anyone else like to speak? Sure. Go ahead. Okay. Um I'll just mention a few things that that come up. Uh, first I'll say I agree with everything that the chair said. I agree with all the public commenters and those who sent in letters well as well. Uh, great comments from the the public. Thank you to the public for that. Uh, and uh, one member of the public um, mentioned something that I was going to mention, which is that um, you know, parking your bicycle outside is like if you parked your car and left all the windows down and your hood up or or even if your car had no panels on it at all. You know, your your bicycle is completely exposed. Um and for that reason I think we should be thinking about for long-term parking uh individual uh parking for bicycles is the mo is the safest uh and most um safest and mo and gives most more the most confident to the to the owner of the bicycle. Uh the um bike link lockers that are available at BART stations are a great example of that. Uh you can feel very confident that you you uh have your

own space and no one's going to touch your bicycle. Um uh something like that. Uh I'm not necessarily recommending that we put that in the ordinance, but I wouldn't be I wouldn't at all be um I would love it if we did. Um there are um examples I did live in an apartment building once where each uh apartment had its own storage locker. Um and so it might not be that much more difficult for an apartment building to build individual units for storage uh for the residents rather than having a bike room. Uh I also worry about bike rooms for the same reason that a member of the public did. Um I've used bike rooms um uh public bike rooms such as are provided at at Berkeley uh uh in downtown Berkeley uh and um I inadvertently left a a light on my bike and it was stolen off of there. So uh you know bike rooms have their definitely have their downsides. Um I do I do like it that I think uh Commissioner Mloud maybe chair Mloud mentioned that um asked or someone asked whether we uh are going to have any standards for the public realm. Uh, I think we probably should apply the same standards, whatever standards we come up with to all the city buildings such as the building we're in now, uh, community center, public works building, uh, they should be probably subject to the same short-term commercial parking um, uh, requirements that we come up with. Uh, so I'd like to see that. And in terms of the the civic buildings, the public buildings, I think, um, those ordinance should require that the city do it now. and not not in any new

construction since the city's not likely to do any more uh construct any more buildings or do any more major renovations. Um I do like the idea of um addressing temporary events requiring bike parking parking at temporary events such you know major examples being the Solano stroll. Uh if we ever had food back out at the waterfront, um I think we should uh just have it in our ordinance that these uh major public events have um require bike parking. [Music] Um and finally I'll just mention that um the ordinances from the various cities oh couple more things. The ordinances from the various cities including ours um mention per square foot per bedroom and per unit um requirements. It seems to me maybe per square foot is the best because it's um a unit of housing is kind of a funny thing. A unit of housing can be a studio or it can be a three-bedroom or or larger uh building. So focusing either on the number of bedrooms or maybe since bedrooms can vary in size as well, the square footage would be the appropriate thing. So, if we're having um requirements that uh if we're having requirements for residential, I think they should probably be on square footage. But actually, um I wanted to ask uh I forgot to ask staff. Um uh Ben, do you have you seen any uh trends as far as what the cities are doing? Are they moving toward a particular uh towards square footage or per bedroom or per unit or uh you haven't really seen any trends?

The closest thing to a trend I could say uh I saw in my research was for residential um it was the requirements were typically per unit and commercial was typically for per square foot. Okay. All right. All right. Well, I think that per square foot for residential or at least per bedroom would be more appropriate um since a housing unit can can vary greatly in size and greatly in number of people that uh can be accommodated in it. Uh finally, I'll say that uh Chair Mloud reached out to Bike East Bay uh which has a lot of expertise in this area and they've been following what cities are doing and they have some preliminary guidelines uh that they're sharing with whoever wants them and so um those can be forwarded along. Uh, and I think that the there there's nothing that different in their requirements from what some of the other public commenters said. Um, but there's a maybe a little bit more detail uh in some areas. Um, including a mention that uh there's a state law that permits tenants to store and recharge one microobility device inside their apartment. Um but there's an exception if there is uh storage in the building for that. So uh that's something to note for residential requirements going forward. Um and I'll just leave it there for now. Thank you. Anyone else? Um yeah, I can go next. Um so let's see. So, first I'll say that I've been a bike commuter for 30 years. So, I am a bike

advocate with this. I'm struggling a little bit because I don't I don't know what the challenges are for the city of Albany with our existing regulations. So, when we talk about what do we what what are you trying to fix? What's the problem? And so from public comment like understand that there's some issues with the short-term parking and so making sure that it's secure that you know it's uh you know that it can accommodate these large bikes like that seems that you know that's important. I also like the point of the employee parking. You know, the problem with that is that we can only apply these regulations to new construction and so most of Solano and I guess San Pablo is built out. So we have to think about what do we want you aren't necessarily going to solve the problem of existing employees or employee parking. So, you know, thinking about new construction, how, you know, what regulations are needed in order to accommodate future employees, future customers, and again, I go back to what's, you know, what are the regulations today for the city of Albany, and are they working? Um, and so I would love to see more outreach to or I'd love to see outreach to the community to understand what we're doing well and where we have room to grow. Um, yeah, I mean that's I think um, you know, I I love the idea of having shared parking. The trans link and the bike station in the city of Berkeley is like that's where I park every day in In Albany, it's a little bit harder because we don't have that downtown location where everybody's going. We don't have a BART station. So, you know, where is the need? Is it at Safeway? I mean, that would be short-term parking,

but I love the point about not having to carry your headlights into the the supermarket because that's that's my problem every morning. So, um so yeah, I mean, I would love the idea of a bike station, Translink, but where should it be? like where is the one place in Albany or where are the three places in Albany that people need that and I don't know the answer to that. Um I like hearing from Bike East Bay. You know again it's for the region though you're not going to hear about Albany specific issues like in Berkeley we have bedroom parking because we have a lot of student housing and so we have six bedrooms per unit. So a unit doesn't work. Um, uh, yeah, I have questions about like what, you know, how well we're doing today before we go and rewrite the ordinance. So, that's it. Yeah, some sort of utilization study is what I would suggest. Thanks. Other comments, Commissioner Mman, thank you for a great presentation. Um I agree with most of what you have you know uh started with. I think you know uh it could be a great guide to uh you know uh move forward from here. Um I would echo what uh Commissioner Pearson just mentioned you know and that's what I asked you the first question about what is you know what the city have in mind for the overall improvement of bike infrastructure and so you know we need to promote active transportation and bike parking good secure bike parking is I think an important part of that in addition to other infrastructure in terms of bike paths and you know all that So understanding like the you know what we need currently what are the challenges I think is important and most of that is I

think related to short-term parking in public right of way and most of that is provided by city and so understanding that I think is important and then uh with that you know we could think about like other short-term parking um standards and requirements ments and then uh about the future needs most of those as you know commissioner Pearson also mentioned would be like you know provided or cared u taken care of from like private developments future developments large future developments uh but that depends on how you know we develop and u how the development goes in the city and that is again more related to long-term parking so I'm looking at place in like two different areas. Long-term parking more related to private properties and short-term parking more related to uh public right of way and very short part of that would be I think provided by private property owners and most of that remaining part would be from by the city. So overall I think uh you know considering that we have eliminated um minimum parking requirement we should increase bike parking provision you know u as much as possible and in that as I mentioned earlier short-term parking is important so in terms of just looking at the code uh ordinance I would recommend or suggest increased requirement for all non-residential uses not just like some retail and commercial spaces but all other uh uses that people can visit using bike and also we can focus on certain zones in the city particularly

the main commercial spines Solano Avenue and San Pablo. Uh we should encourage property owners to provide short-term bike parking on site and whatever we have in the public right of way should be as an additional capacity and that we can improve further and make space for other um bike parking related requirements in terms of diverse bike types and other microobility uh devices and we should develop better standards for those and then I would also recommend short-term bike parking requirement for multifamily residential projects to in addition to their long-term parking. And then for long-term parking, I think one per unit is reasonable. Uh but since we have eliminated minimum parking requirement, I think we should use bike parking as a kind of a bargaining tool. Traditionally transit demand management you know used to do that like if developer wanted to reduce their car parking requirement cities used to suggest higher park bike parking provision but now since we have removed minimum parking requirement that age of transit demand management tool is kind of you know not there but we could use that as a kind of a you know normal standard and so what I would suggest is linking bike parking provision with minimum of offstate car parking requirement. And so we can have kind of a base uh bike parking requirement which is one per unit. Uh that would go with the maximum off- streetet car parking requirement. And then if any project wants to reduce their car parking

requirement then we can require them to have higher number of bike parking. So there could be some kind of a balance between that. There could be some kind of you know standard that links the car parking with bike parking in some way. Like if they want to reduce 20% car parking then they should increase 20% bike or maybe more something like that. And then we should also uh require some non-residential uses to provide long-term bike parking like lot of as I think Mr. McCrosski mentioned you know a lot of employees need parking and if they have to you know park somewhere in the nook and alley or you know in insecure you know um space then that is not um helpful. Then uh let me And then uh you know the quality of space uh that bike are provided. Uh bike parking is provided should also be uh taken into consideration. Uh typically like you know u bike lot of you know people call it bike storage. I would rather call it bike room and a more active space should be provided for a bike room that can become a kind of a communal space rather than just a kind of a you know storage space in the corner that can be more active. Uh and

there should be you know um provisions for security u cameras and all that but it should be kind of a meeting space for the residents if it is for a larger multi- family project and then you know we typically struggle to activate street frontage of the buildings uh when considering that retail doesn't you know work or it is really difficult to make it successful full. So bike rooms could be know one use that can help activate the street frontage and we should also keep a provision for a conversion of a bike room if in case it is proven that it is not being used uh to you know u the intended u level of intensity. So that that probably if we are making the bike parking as a larger requirement and developers are spending you know using their uh resources to provide large spaces and if they are not used um properly or efficiently then there should be a way to convert those spaces back to some other u usable spaces and then we should also look at the standards uh you know uh we should U think about all different diverse modes of you know microobility like um all different types of bikes and provision for them but you know we need to be careful about that like what impact it would do on the size of the space and so proportion of those u different bikes like trailer bikes and longtail bikes and all that should be thought about. We have provided I think 20% proportion of those different types

of bike in San Pablo Avenue specific plan. So either we can continue with that. We we don't have any way to assess whether you know that is successful or not since we don't have any project built using those standards and then we should also think about uh accessibility in terms of like can you speak into the mic please? I can't sorry hear you. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So, we is this better or I have to Yeah. When I'm trying to, you know, look at my notes then it is not loud enough. Yeah. So, and then you know in terms of like um bike u you know racks and all that. So, we should have some standards for that. There have been some observations like um you know some of the those u equipment are not easy for everyone to use. Yep. And then you know there there is a huge um increase in uh electric ebikes and so there should be some provision for charging of those bikes. Yeah. So that's all so far. Um, Commissioner Wadi comments. No. Um, well, I have a list of things that I was looking at also. Um, and I did correspond with Bike East Bay and they're working on a set of model guidelines, but it's not finished yet. But the the one thing I did notice for sure was um they're recommending it's more per bedroom, one bike space per bedroom. Um you know, it's it's sort of, you

know, you wonder about occupants. It's it's more about occupants really. Um, so and even in a two-bedroom apartment, you could have two parents, two kids, four people, four bikes potentially. Um, so what I think is trying to make this kind of futureproof. It's not, and it's kind of like bike infrastructure. People say, "Oh, people don't bike on Salana. We don't need bike infrastructure on Salana." Well, that's not what's going to happen in the future. You create new infrastructure, you get more biking, and we're encouraging that. We're encouraging mode shift. So, I think we need to build in some future expansion into the bike parking. And I'm thinking mostly of multif family. I think that's sort of the crux of the issue, crux of the um ordinance for me is uh multif family, new multif family or remodeled multif family. uh it's where we're going to have the biggest impact in terms of residents potential car parking. Um we're trying to reduce car parking from those projects. So that's where I think the focus really should be. I appreciate uh the short-term parking considerations and I do appreciate the idea of businesses providing parking for their employees um instead of you know saying you know it's all somebody else's problem to solve. I think businesses should also be actively working on solving the parking problems in in the city. Um so my recommendation would be to go to one space per bedroom. Um you know the idea of it being expandable for the future. The city of Davis has one space per bedroom. Granted, they're probably a very heavily student um centric city. It's kind of

like Berkeley in many places, but again, it's more about occupants um you know, and how many bikes would occupants have in a two-bedroom apartment, let's say. And of course, not everybody in the in the in the housing project would have bikes, but we do want to allow that those who want to have bikes have access to a safe storage space. Otherwise, we're kind of pushing p people back into car dependency. Where are they going to store their cars? They're going to store their cars on the street, and we want to avoid that. I think that's really the big crux of it for me. Um and then encouraging active transportation and our climate goals. You know, it's part of all this all goes together for me. Um you know, in our ordinance, we don't define secure parking very well. Um you know, I think we have to have much better um guidelines or recommendations or requirements for that. Um you know, if your bike's stolen, you might replace it once. you're not going to probably replace it twice. So, if the secure storage area is not working, it's more than useless. You know, it's u you know, there are various ways to think about it. Maybe no access directly under the public rideway. Maybe going through an internal public space and then into the bike storage area. That's what the 1600 Solano uh was proposing. Go through their lobby. First a key into the lobby, then a key into the bike storage area. So, it's multiple layers of security. Cameras would help. Um, and not having it visible so thieves can't see it. I mean, if thieves see it, it's a magnet for theft. I mean, the same thing goes for outdoor parking. Um, you

know, and rooms are more secure. Even chain link is not secure. Um you with unfortunately with battery powered metal grinders you can cut through chain link in about 30 seconds. So you know somehow solid walls and better protection or are good. Um you know in a lot of places there are bike maintenance areas in the storage rooms as a way to help people fix their bikes when they need minor maintenance or service them. Um storage for cargo bikes is key. A higher percentage of spaces. We don't have any distinction of that except for the San Pablo specific plan area. And at 20% for cargo bikes, you know, it's a good starting place. But whatever we have with that specific plan, it should be citywide. And I don't know if we can retroactively go back and apply higher standards to the specific plan, but um you know, whatever we have should apply citywide. I'm certain of that. um you know as to whether 20% is the right mix I think uh that's hard to say probably I don't know how we determine that or if there's some way to figure that out or do research for that but I would generally think a higher percentage would be warranted than even 20% and then as far as charging outlets um most cargo bikes are electric and then there are a lot of other bikes that are electric so having 20% % uh of the spaces serviced by electrical outlets seems too low, you know, and electrical outlets are pretty easy to put in and it's just a 120 outlet. Uh could be required throughout the parking bike parking area without too much difficulty. Um the other thing is that we need space

standards, access standards, accessibility standards. Um my favorite example is the Albany Bull project where um you know they did a great job on the multif family multi-story building their bike rooms but in their town houses uh they were reminded that they were supposed to provide a bark a bike parking spot in the town houses as well and they put them in the garage in a space blocked by the car. So if you want to get your bike and you are using your garage for a car, you got to back your car out, get your bike out. So we have to have language in there about completely unobstructed clear passageway to the exterior from the bike storage area. Um and the same thing goes from within, you know, circulation within the bike storage area. There has to be enough room um to back bikes out and get down an aisle and get out without uh blocked in. Cargo bikes are 7 feet some of them. So imagine you're man maneuvering a 7 foot cargo bike. You need a big backup space. So we're, you know, Emeryville has some good uh physical space standards. um you know and there just some simple graphic um examples in there. Uh and then you know flat easy in and out no stairs obstacles etc. Um you know and then the type of bike racks is key. There's some like people talk about the grid racks they really don't work at all. You can't even fit a cargo bike or electric bike tire in there sometimes. So, I think we should have standards for the types of racks and some should just not be allowed. Uh, it's just where you have vertical bars, cross a top bar, bottom bar,

vertical bars, and some feet that stand. And it's a classic for putting your front wheel in there, locking your front wheel to the rack, and you come back and the rest of your bike is gone, and your front wheels locked to the bike stand. or bikes get tipped over and your your front wheel turns into a you know taco. They call it tacoed. So, uh those don't work at all. And part of my frustration with Foodie Land as a temporary event was that they we it wasn't our conditions, but we didn't really have any standards for this. And they did the grid racks. And one time I went out there and they had the grid racks and they had about 3 or 4 feet behind the or they had enough space for a bike and then about 3 4 feet and then just cars parking with no barriers. So you had to go somehow between the cars to get to the racks. So I mean it was just like not at all working. And they had, you know, 40,000 visitors in a weekend. So you can imagine the climate impact, the car parking impact, the the transit or the you know the access road blocking on weekend events in our city. Um so the more we can promote bike parking the more we can reduce that kind of impact on our streets as well. So less pollution etc. Um, you know, I looking at all the commercial, retail, entertainment. In our current ordinance, we have one space for 1,500 square feet for every single use. Um, I think that should be looked at with a little bit finer grain lens. and um city of Davis. I mean, I don't think we have to make it overly complicated, but some uses could have less requirements, some more, but you know, at least um you know, looking at it a little bit more carefully would be helpful.

Um yeah. Um you know, there are professional organizations that have model standards. Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals has standards and guidelines. Um, commercial streets, you know, I do like the idea of bike corrals. Uh, it would be, you know, somebody's mentioning u the daylighting zones, but I have a feeling you might those might be daylighting zones are there for sight lines. So, I'm not sure we can put bike corrals there if it's blocking the sight line to the corner. where if you have kids crossing the street or something, but if it's set back enough and it's low enough, it might be okay. Um, you know, I just really think we need to kind of futureproof our housing stock for eventual shift to more bicycling and more active transportation. uh that's um what I see as the most important thing. So you know there are a lot of details little things here and there to work out but um I I think it's really important we do this. It's really you know establishing this nexus between housing, active transportation, climate action. It's really important and I've read that in cities they've done studies more in Europe but where there is more bike parking people will bike more you have a place to secure your bike and it's safe and it's there when you need it. Um so yeah there's some correlation between the amount of bike parking provided in housing units and how much people bike. So, I think it's not trivial to do this. So, if anyone else has any

questions or thoughts or followup, Commissioner Pilch? Yeah, I do. Um, so one thing I guess we haven't talked about is commercial area standards where we don't have any either. Uh we we we for we do require businesses to provide bike uh temporary uh or short-term spots, I believe. But um when when is that um when is that when is that required? Is it upon getting a new business license or is it just building a new building? It's new construction, major renovation, or change of use. But you you didn't highlight a point, but I do want to mention that the city of in this city of Albany, we do not as a planning department review business licenses. So unless there is a need for a new use for the change of use, we wouldn't be aware of the the use change. Yeah. So, we have a lot of um uh it's been noted that we have we do have a lot of bike racks out there, but um they a lot a lot of them have been provided uh through a partnership with Albony Strollers and Rollers and the businesses, but that's only when the business wants to have that partnership. So, uh where those bike racks are is a little bit scattershot. It's, you know, there's no there's no no real plan for it. So a plan for the commercial area would be a great thing to have, you know, or at least um at least a vision for what we want, you know, what what is our what are our minimum standards for commercial areas or or retail areas. Um, as far as bike corrals in the 20 foot zone, um, they do tend to be the not

block sight lines, I would think, you know, uh, so, but it's a good point. It should be looked into whether or not bike corrals could be put in those areas. That would be a great use of that 20 foot uh, space. Um, then I have some questions for some of the commissioners. Uh um and uh you mentioned um uh Commissioner whose last name I'm forgetting. I'm so sorry. Pearson. Pearson. Pearson. Thank you. Um Alen uh that um you you use shared parking in Berkeley. Did you say that? Yeah, I park at the bike station. Okay, gotcha. Um, and then but the trans link is right next door and I can use that too if I need 24-hour parking. Okay, great. You also mentioned that you thought outreach was important. Um, can you say more about uh what you think that outreach should look like or you know specifically? Well, I mean, I think that staff can do a survey, a community survey to understand what the residents and visitors and employees want and need where they think that these that the bike parking facilities meet their needs or don't meet their needs. Um, I mean, it's great to get feedback from these five people, but we don't speak for the city. Okay. Thank you for that. Appreciate it. Um and uh just to follow up on something else you said about um you you kind of addressed just right now something you were saying which is how well are we doing today? So you know surveying can help elucidate that a little bit. Um he also mentioned what problems we're trying to solve and I think that um commissioner or uh chair mentioned that in that we um we want to

address climate change. We want to address we want to have mode shift. We want to get people away from uh motor vehicles and into microobility. Uh and it also I also believe uh as our chair does that it provide it makes for a better community. uh provides it makes for a better city. Um so it it is about encouragement. I do uh agree with the chair that we want to we want to have enough that it's attractive to people. They see that there's enough bike parking spaces wherever they need to go. So then they realize, oh, this is um this is even better than motor vehicle parking. I don't have to worry about where I park, where I go. Um and that can encourage this mode shift as well. Um as far as uh you know one of I know that we are worried we worry a little bit about um providing or asking requirements of developers and builders but um it wasn't too long ago that we required two parking two motor vehicle parking spaces per residential unit in the city and and thank goodness that is that is no longer the case. Um, and it would seem to me that building bicycle parking spots are got to be in magnitude order of magnitude um cheaper than uh than motor vehicle parking spots. So, a requirement for bicycle parking spots is is is uh not nearly as um um bad as as what what what developers used to look at with motor vehicle parking spots. So, um I'm not as worried about that. [Music] Uh and then finally I would say that uh

for in terms of Solano Avenue, yeah, we should be at least up to so I think we tried to make our tried to up our game with the Solano Avenue specific plan. So yeah, we should definitely at least get to that level with whatever we're doing and then hopefully may maybe even more. Um we should look to what the other one of the things we also should be doing is looking to the other cities and looking to standards like you mentioned uh from organizations and uh also what Bike East Bay is uh coming up with. Um, and finally, and maybe this is a well, I I guess it's not a question to be answered by staff right now, but um, if we do want to if it's not the uh, commission's uh, pleasure to require like individual secured spaces for uh, long-term parking for residential, say, uh, if we don't want to go down that route, are there any incentive incentives we can provide developers who go that route over say a bike room that would might maybe incentivize them to provide even better more secure safer individual parking. Somebody to something to think about if there's any mechanism in our code for doing that. Uh I think I'll leave it there. Thank you. any other feedback or um no um I would mention I did send to staff some guidelines that Oakland and San Francisco have for temporary events so we could look at those as well um you know sort of numbers of potential participants numbers of spaces projected um you know Solano stroll Ken do you have a discussion No. Do you have something? I mean, it's a discussion. Why don't you give us some

feedback? I beg you forgiveness. Uh there's been some topics that have come up since I commented. And just a couple quick things. Um you know, Commissioner Pilch, I think the the idea of a bike room in a multif family residential is a lot more flexible than having individual. Excuse me. I'm going to ask you to actually open the public hearing again. And if you open it, I I think we should offer that opportunity to people online as well. Okay. Okay. We'll open it to public comment for one more round. Uh we have one participant in the room. If there's anyone online who would like to comment, please raise three minutes. Yeah, it's fine. Please raise your hand. Sorry. Okay, thank you. I do want to do it correctly. Um so, uh a bike room uh or a series of bike rooms could be a lot more flexible, especially since you have some families that might have a lot more bikes and some with a few bikes. Typically, people with higherend bikes might bring those into their unit. You give some flexibility to what can happen in the location. Uh whereas individual bike cupboards would be somewhat burdensome, I would think. Um I came up with a longer list for you of of longer bikes, cargo, trailer, trailer bike tandemss, and they're developing as we speak. Um I I think you've zeroed in on the fact that One size doesn't necessarily fit all. Um, flexibility is good. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. If there's anyone online who would like to speak, please raise your hand. No hands. And I just want to remind everyone that they are welcome to email us further specifics or additional thoughts to you can mail them directly to staff to benblaw albalca.org mendes albbca.org or

directly to the planning and zoning commission or to all three of us. Okay. Thank you. And with that we'll close public comment again unless there are any other comments. Uh staff, do you feel like you have enough feedback or enough direction? I think we're good. Okay. Thank you very much. Uh then we will close item five-1 and go to item 6-1 2024 annual progress report of our housing element. So staff, please go ahead. Yes. Good evening. I'm Lesie Mendes, excuse me, the building and planning manager for the city. And first of all, I want to thank you all, especially those who looked at the packet a little early. Um, I guess I had a bit of a hectic week last week, so thank you. Um, I think I got it in pretty good order and by the time it goes to city council, um, it will be perfect. Um, so this is anformational item only with no action required on the part of of the commission and it is a summary of this year's or I should say last year's 2024 um the city of Alby's annual progress report or the APR and the APR tracks the city's status and progress in implementing its housing element and it's due every year by April 1st um to the housing um California Department of Housing and community development or HCD. So, um, I sent you an attachment of the housing element. As you can see, it was not very legible. I was trying to see if there was a way to get the actual spreadsheet to you all and I couldn't figure it out. So, sorry. Anyway, in 2004, the city did receive a total of 19

housing development applications. Um, all of those were ADUs. So we have um we continue to see a little slowdown. I have hope that that is going to turn around very soon. Um we issued 12 building permits for ADUs and additionally we saw the completion um/certificate of occupancy of 10 new units. Nine of those which were ADUs and one was a single family home. So, HCD track uh tracks housing affordability metrics based on the date of building permit issuance. Um, and just so you know, following discussions between HCD and the Association of Bay Area Governments, it was decided that for last year and for this year, if we didn't have actual information on the affordability or projected affordability for ADUs, we could use the 30 3010 formula, which we took advantage of, which is 30% at very low income, 30 at low income, um, 30 at uh moderate income and 10 for above income. Um so based on that we had um randomly assigned that and so how they progressed through we had four come in at very low income, six at low income and two at moderate income for this year. Last year we did report them all as moderate income. And I'm actually going to go and see if we can revise last a um APR to get take advantage of those those u those numbers. Um and just for hold on everyone's knowledge the um I'm sorry I have my I have the Oh, here we go. Um the AMI, the area median income for Alama

County last year was 155,700 for a family of four. And that um so that's what applied. This year the the new AMIs um were released and it's gone up to $159,800 for a family form. So the six cycle regional housing needs allocation or reena extends from 2023 to 2031. Um and calendar year 2024 is the second year um that our that our building permits are counting towards this REA cycle. So this table shows our current process of Reena. The projection period is was populated by HCD. Um, and that covered the period of June 20th of 2022 to January 30th, 2030. So, um, 2023, excuse me. So, currently, as you can see, we still have 1,600 units to fill. Um, but, you know, slowly surely we'll get we're working towards it. So, we'll get there. And finally, um, table D of the APR tracks housing element pro, uh, progress for all the programs that we've adopted. So, there is an update on all of them. However, I just wanted to highlight a few that few notable accompl excuse me, accomplishments for 2024. First is code enforcement. Um, our program was to develop more proactive building and housing enforcement programs. Last year, we issued an RFP and we selected a consultant to start up our um code enforcement pro uh program that includes our uh rental multifamily rental substandard housing inspections

as well. So those that has started this year, but last year we signed in uh with the contract. Next is our density bonus ordinance. we had a program to um both educate but as well as eliminate the need for density bonus projects to go to the city council. So you all reviewed that last year and gave recommendation and that was approved by city council. Subsequent to the updated the ordinance um which also updated for conformance with state law, we um we now have our density bonusformational handout online to hopefully um make it less um scary for folks. Next, um removal of appendments to fair housing is to implement the um recommendations of the analysis AI analysis of implement impediments to fair housing as part of the countywide plan. So that is ongoing. But I do want to say that uh the city of Albany was an active part participant in um the updated analysis of impendments to fair housing um with the Alama County Collaborative Cities um and county and that was released last year. So if you last month, excuse me. So the final draft was released last month. So it's available for you all to to view. Um, and then the last two programs that I'm highlighting are the uh rent review was looking at our current rent rent review program and see if there's al um updates or changes that could be made to further protect tenants and 5D is related to tenant protections. Um, last year we did initiate um and establish the housing advisory commission and it was fully seated. Although the work is really commencing this year. Um we got it going last year. So that is another

success. And that in concludes my presentation but I am here if you have any questions. Okay. Thank you for the presentation. Um do any commissioners have any questions for staff? Pilch. Yes. If we could could we put up the arena progress uh slide again? Sure. I have a blank screen. Hold on. Strange. Pardon? Well, I shut it. Um, hold on. Let me close that. It's just I think they're toggling between different screens. Let's try this again. Okay. Okay, great. Thank you. Um so uh the is does the uh units to date align with the projection period? Is that units to date um is that the same period as the projection period or different period? The projection period was the

year um before 2022 ended in 2022. Maybe I'm not understanding your question. I'm sorry. Uh well, I'm I'm just wondering if we should comp compare our progress by looking at the projection period and comparing it to units to date. Oh, I see. Um well, the projection period includes the units to date. But in terms of comparison, it's best to compare last year and this year since those are based on actual building permits issued. Projections are based on um the projections of the housing element that HCD enters. Not quite sure, maybe one of you knows how they come up with those numbers, but um yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Uh so I guess um what I'm looking for is an idea about um I assume we're um behind in meeting our goals. uh we are I think every city is I think the rain and goals are are are are right pie in the sky but it's it's understood I'm not trying to cast dispersion on the about that but um I'm just wanting wanting to get a sense by how much we're behind um so you can see that in that last column so we are 272 well behind we don't really have it per year so I guess we could have divided it by year and say So, we still need 272 um very low income, 143 low income, you know, 148 moderate um and 453 above moderate. So, um and remind me the end of the period. Uh what what year is that? It's 20 30 20 31. Yes, 2031. Okay, gotcha. All right, that gives me a little that helps me. All right, thank you very much. Okay. Um, if you wish to entertain questions or comments, we do have someone raising their hand from the

Okay. Well, let's see if there are any more questions for staff. Anyone else have questions for staff on this? What is the status of some of those large projects we approved in the last two years? Well, I'm not sure we've done anything um any large projects since the last two years cuz I've been here for two years. So, I will tell you that the Albany Bull project is moving forward. Um, we're keeping our fingers crossed. Their goal is to actually pull building permits by before the end of this year. So, that will be significant. And so, yes. Um, so what you will be seeing in the next couple like hopefully before the August recess is uh we have the public art requirement that does is required to go to the planning commission after it goes to the art committee. So I am working with the applicant team to try to get that through before the August recess. So fingers crossed on that. Um the Solano project is still on hold. This is the one we hear about. Um so have reached out. Um both of those projects have extended um expiry dates due to uh state law extending expireies to um 18 months. I can't remember the the number of the bill. So that still has about a year and a half. I don't have the but so we still are hopeful about that one but um it's not quite as active at the moment. Thank you. Just a quick question. Yeah, there was another project on Evelyn that was um fairly I mean not a big one but um that one's not coming. Pardon? I think way way Yeah, we're by Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We approved that a long time ago. I would I I don't know about it, which means I think it may have died. Um the other one I should mention, it's not quite as large as the threeunit development on Adam Street that you all proved I think maybe a year a year and a

half ago. So it's three kind of town homes just you can walk there. Um so they have also applied for a building permit. So okay, moving that one through as well. Okay. Uh any other questions? And not then we'll just uh go to public comment. Anyone would like to comment online please raise your hand. Ryan Martin, please go ahead if you can unmute. Uh yes. Hi. Thank you. Sorry. Uh I had a couple quick question just clarifications is um one is maybe maybe these were answered in the presentation but I didn't notice uh is the Cleveland Saha project what year was that completed when did people move them to that and uh when will those numbers show up if they haven't already um the um another one is uh for ADUs I think you said pretty much everything in 2023 and 2024 a new housing was ADUs and um but you assign them to different income levels and my understanding is having built had an ADU built in our backyard a few years ago was that um you know people owners can set the rent to whatever they want and there's no restrictions like there are on like large developments that have density bonus rules that say has to be below market rate you know so um how do you where did those um uh low-inccome very low income kind of designations come from for ADUs since I think they're all market uh rent. Thanks.

Thank you for your comments. Are there any other online comments? Uh anyone else wishing to speak, please use the raise the hand icon. Uh no. And if you like I can answer those questions. Uh we'll close public comment and staff could answer the question. I guess it was about how those values were assigned when there's no actual corresponding right. So first let me yeah there was also a question about the Saha units and those were the building permits were issued I believe in it was before the last two years. I'm not sure when. Um the certificate of occupancy will be reflected on 2025 APR. So that will be um bolstering our numbers a bit as well. So that was a great question. I know we kept going where are those Saha numbers and then as you all know um we're unable to include the the recent development on in University Village which would have been helpful too. Um so as to the ADU affordability so I did explain but it may be a little confusing. Previously many jurisdictions and this is what we did last year um were under the uh assumption and kind of was authorized to kind of have them as moderate income. And the thought behind it is that they were affordable by design, not that they were deed restricted in any way. We do not require deed restrictions or affordability levels for ADUs. Um, as I mentioned, it was agreed upon by ABG and HCD that we could use this 30 3010 3010 yes rule this year to um assign 30% at extremely low 30 at very low and 30 at low with wait I think I have that wrong but to divide the affordability up by that formula um again it was it's just through this year

so we're taking advantage of it and a lot of that again is behind I I mean, some ADUs aren't used as housing at all. They're they're um they're people's offices, but you know, they may have no rent. You know, people graduated children or grandparents who are not being charged rent. So, officially that is housing and if that would be extremely low. It could be extremely low. So, that is the thought about it. Not necessarily that that we have set rent caps on it that are monitored by the city but just by the affordability by design and the types of folks who would be inhabiting types of households that are inhabiting um those. So we did take advantage of that. So that's how we got the distribution of income level and those designations are permanent and those will stay in our categories all the way through. they stay in our category for Reena, but to also maybe expand further. That in no way means that one of the ones that's limited, you know, marked as extremely low has to charge an extremely low income. So, it's it's it's a reflection but maybe not a accurate depiction. Okay. any um any other comments by or discussion by commissioners or pilch. Uh yeah, so uh thanks for the presentation. Um the I think we should continue to consider whether or not I I know that building has been tough in the past few years. Uh and I know that the projects elsewhere have also not advanced. Um but I when I do look around to my surrounding communities like Berkeley Oakland and even uh Elsto for a little bit I do see some building going on. So I think we should continue to ask ourselves if our code is good enough to

spur the housing that we uh housing building that we need to do or whether or not we need to do more and things like a Solano Avenue specific plan. Um uh and uh uh uh I think already is is mentioned at city council that um considering uh changing the single family zoning uh as well. So um as we look at these uh numbers, I think we should keep that in mind. Thank you. Other comments? All right. Um well, I had a few things. Um, you know, I was looking through all our programs and there's still a lot we're obligated to do, uh, in terms of zoning, uh, mostly, uh, measure K, you know, raising our density there, trying to get a ballot measure. Um, also let's see, um, program 2B, yeah, revising measure K, program 4A, modifications to zoning standards. U, you know, there's still a lot we can do. And program 40, Solano commercial standards. I think that's kind of the key one for me. or all those things are where we could raise our density levels and push, you know, for more housing in those areas. So, making progress on those for me is really critical. Um, and I know the ballot measures are probably tricky. Uh, takes time to present them or prepare them. And I don't know, a lot of that is under council's direction, correct? So, not ours. So, I guess I would encourage council to get on the ball with those because uh those are opportunities that we could take advantage of and opportunities that could be missed if

some other lower density proposals come in in the meantime. So, really would encourage council to move forward with some of that. And I don't know if that's dependent on your time or uh um I believe it's measure K that they It it has K is the Al Alb Hill. Yes. So that's No, never mind. It's the other measure that limits zoning in our the city with too many measures limiting our zoning. So um there's still at least in departmental wise I think they're still very important to move forward and and hopefully we can get council to move forward on those as well. So okay. And then uh you know the other key one for me is the Solano commercial district. Um you know we're per our housing element we are supposed to be spreading development around the city not just San Pablo Avenue. So Solano is the perfect location for infill housing in you know almost all respects except for the small lot size. But uh barring that, I I was thinking, you know, and part of our housing element calls for upgrading our or upzoning or, you know, making uh possible to create more density. So, you know, I was just wondering how we go about that and if it's a specific plan, that would be great or just other independent zoning measures. Um, you know, F seems to be a constant problem for creating more density. I think we should look at F and just get rid of it. Nobody's convinced me why we need it anymore. It was in the past to restrict the actual size of the buildings within the envelope and not make it even possible to bill out to the envelope. So, that is

an obstacle to housing still. Um and so you know some way of moving forward on Solano I would really appreciate it you know somehow because I don't think our current standards at what three stories 35 ft it's barely three stories um is not going to be conducive when you have small lots the only way to increase density is to go up right cannot go wider so um you know raising the height limits you know the density standards already pretty high, but the F limits it. So, I think we have work to do on Solano Avenue as well. So, that's all I have uh on that, but if we have other comments, unless there's other comments, we can go ahead. Uh let's see, what do we have else? Any announcements or um um I just have many announcements. ones kind of with the next meeting. We will have a a meeting um May 28th. It will be a short meeting, two items, but it will be important to get them through. Um we will not be having a meeting the second Tuesday. No, this excuse me, the second Wednesday in June or the second Wednesday in July. So for June and July, just for your planning purposes, um if you want to go to Hawaii, do it. Um um I know um Commissioner Wadi will be out at the next meeting so please keep me informed of anyone else just just so we can keep apprised of the quorum. The other thing it's not maybe as exciting as a Slano plan but what you will be seeing sooner rather than later and again hopefully prior to the August recess as a first touch is the housing element program related to um care facilities and group homes. And we're also just updating our ordinance on um large family daycarees as part of that.

So we, you know, one of these that we were hope that we can just do it super quick. Um and so that will be coming shortly. Okay, that's it. Then we'll call this meeting adjourned. Great. Thank you all. Thank you everyone. Thank you to our attendees.