Blogging Bayport Alameda

December 13, 2019

12 years a slog, continued

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:03 am

Just in case you were wondering no one showed up to the Planning Board meeting on Monday to talk/rail/complain about the fact that the Planning Board was going to do a study session on Measure A (aka Article 26 of the Charter) in January.  Not one public speaker.

For those that were around and actively paying attention will remember that designing to format of the Measure A forum itself was a big deal.  Even after getting involved in the meeting to plan the meeting, Measure A/Article 26 proponents were acting as though they had been sidelined the whole time.  It was a particularly amusing form of gaslighting before “gaslighting” became common in our vernacular.

Remember the complaining was done by people who were actively able to steer the forum in a positive direction but instead elected to be unwilling to make any compromises at all.

But if you’re wonder how the actual forum itself went.  Well, it happened and nothing significantly changed after that.  I will note that, if I remember correctly, the historic presentation by Woody Minor, which was truncated, did not address any of the criticisms about inequity caused by Measure A/Article 26.  It did not talk about the Clayton Guyton settlement which should have been included for a more holistic understanding of Measure A/Article 26.  That was left to the legislative discussion, but an understanding of why black residents in Alameda felt as though Measure A/Article 26 was discriminatory would have been good background.  I honestly don’t think that a conversation about Measure A/Article 26 today would be complete without an examination of this dynamic.

What is notable, looking back on how this forum was structured was seeing what was important 12 years ago.  Unsurprisingly, auto use and transit option got it’s own panel. But the solution brought up back then is something that the City of Alameda has been getting serious about, but only recently.  From the post:

Some interesting things came up, one was about the need to possible decouple parking requirement from any future residential building.   As it stands now, parking costs are rolled into the price of housing, decoupling that would do a few things, one would be to reduce the price of housing and provide less incentive for people to own multiple cars if it is unnecessary.

And from the first panel about the benefits and limitation of Measure A/Article 26 on building housing:

David Burton (Alameda resident by the way) broaching the topic of Form Based Codes as possible tool moving forward.   Form based codes would regulate not lot size or limit the housing type available to build, but would rather dictate the type of building (height, massing, setback, etc…etc…) that could be built in an area which would allow for a much more predictable type of landscape.    But Form Based Code and other tools like it are so much more difficult to understand than Measure A.


Which the City has started adopting, starting with the Park Street Gateway,  I think.  Someone who remembers where the City started with the form based codes let me know.

Anyway, what is important for this new discussion about Measure A/Article 26 is: do we still need this encoded in our charter?  And with all the workarounds to be in compliance with state law, is this simply an outdated artifact with no real value other than nostalgia?


  1. Who wrote this?

    Comment by dave — December 13, 2019 @ 6:26 am

  2. is this simply an outdated artifact with no real value other than nostalgia?

    You talking about MA or this blog?

    Comment by Jack — December 13, 2019 @ 8:11 am

    • I’m witty. The wittiest. People, a lot of people say you won’t find anyone wittier.

      Comment by Jack — December 13, 2019 @ 8:16 am

      • Is that you Rod-ent

        Comment by Jack — December 13, 2019 @ 8:54 am

        • Nope. Not my style. Are you surprised somebody else might not like you?

          Comment by Rod — December 16, 2019 @ 11:07 am

  3. From NextDoor posted Dec. 9th or 10th;

    Public Information Officer Sarah Henry, City of Alameda

    Staff Evaluation of City Charter

    On Monday, January 13, at 7pm, the Planning Board will hold a public forum to review and discuss the merits of Article 26 of the Alameda City Charter (commonly referred to as “Measure A”), which prohibits multifamily housing and residential density over 21 units per acre. Read a staff evaluation of the land use regulations here:

    Comment by 2wheelsmith — December 13, 2019 @ 9:48 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Say what you want

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at