With the demand for housing on the rise and a fast growing pipeline of developments in the works, the Alameda City Council has approved a moratorium on new building permits within the city of Alameda.

In a move designed to help mitigate the impact of all the new development on local services and infrastructure, a sharp increase in the City’s Development Impact Fee schedule is on the table. As proposed, Development Impact Fees would increase from the current $3,082 to $4,057 per unit of housing to a proposed $13,140 to $16,601. And until the new fees are in place, permits for new developments will not be issued.

Procedure calls for a public hearing before any adoption of a new impact fees, but if a tipster is correct, the new fee schedule has all but been agreed upon behind closed doors. The new fees would go into effect 60-days after adoption.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by SFrentier

    Looks like they’re learning from san francisco how to run things…

    • Posted by cfb

      Really? Despite it’s problems, last I checked SF was building far more housing than anywhere else in the bay Area.

      • Posted by SFrentier

        Good sir, please pass the bong over, cause you must be smokin’ something really good!

      • Posted by Jake

        It looks like SF isn’t building the most, at least according to a recent news report (namelink):

        “San Francisco took on 10,617 new residents in 2013, but added only 2,277 new housing units. Santa Clara added 5,245 new units for over 27,600 newcomers. And Alameda added 2,474 new units for 23,135 new arrivals, according to the Department of Finance’s report.”

        When normalized by the number of existing units, the 2013 increase in housing units is higher in Santa Clara 0.8% than the 0.6% in San Francisco and the 0.4% in Alameda.

        • Posted by jwb

          I dunno if this is obvious to you or not, but that’s in reference to Alameda County, which is enormous, not the relatively diminutive city of Alameda.

          • Posted by Jake

            yes, those numbers are for the three counties.

            per the 2010 US Census, Alameda county had about 583k housing units.

        • Posted by anon

          I’m assuming that he’s talking about under construction rather than completed.

        • Posted by R

          By those figures alone, the CITY of San Francisco is lifting more weight than any other CITY in the region.

  2. Posted by Joel

    This is legally questionable.

  3. Posted by Jimmy The House Flipper

    What a huge gift to speculators, flippers and existing owners! I think their reelection is virtually guaranteed.

  4. Posted by wiger toods

    Wonder if this will kill the Del Monte project?

  5. Posted by Chloe

    Agreed. Not only is it illegal for them to not go through the public process, but the fee increases are designed to keep building costs high, decrease the rate of housing development, and redline out families who can’t afford the additional costs.

    Actually if you review the study most of the money is going to new parks in Alameda point, not to services and infrastructure necessary for new development.

  6. Posted by soccermom

    We kvetch a lot about fees and whatnot, but if you try to build a house in rural Eastern California, you’ll face water development and transportation impact fees that dwarf these numbers. If a city wants to fund public works without asking entrenched voters, developers are natural targets… This will merely drive out lower income buyers.

    I haven’t done my Vallejo bit for almost two weeks – I’ll have to find a good listing on Redfin. Try the veal.

  7. Posted by P&M

    So the net effect is that only developers and those with deep pockets can afford to do things the “legal” way while normal mom and pop homeowners are shut out of the system. So much for enjoying the adage a rising tide lifts all boats. Guess the Alameda city officials missed the boat. We are happy to stay in SF.

    • Posted by soccermom

      New entrants into the market are being forced to shoulder a disproportionate share of funding for infrastructure improvements. Moms and pops who already live in Alameda benefit, and have their boats lifted.

      As my Alameda-dwellng friend likes to joke, “When it goes sideways in Oaktown, we just pull up the drawbridges.”

      • Posted by Matt in Uptown

        Umm, it’s been sideways in Alameda since the 1950’s. And, what about the “tubes”?

  8. Posted by Jack

    Prob in alameda is commuter txport on and off the island. Adding housing without means of egress is their big issue. It’s practical nimbyism, at least.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles