City Council - Special Meeting

All right, everyone. I hate to start the meeting on time, but here we are. Um, all right. It's 6:30, so I'd like to uh call the meeting to order. Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the special meeting of the Mountain View City Council of December 16, 2025. Uh please stand and join me in the pledge of allegiance. All right, great. The uh move on to roll call. The city clerk will take attendance by roll call.

Council member Clark here. Council member Hicks here. Council member Mallister Ho ho ho. Council member Ramirez here. Council member Sha Walter here. Vice Mayor Ramos here. Mayor Kame here. You have a quum.

Great. Thank you. Um so tonight we uh get to begin with a festive our festive occasion. We have our presentations. Please note that these are presentations only. The city council will not take any action. Public comment will occur after the presentation items. If you'd like to speak on these items in person, please submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk now. And um we will begin with this evening with our proclamation in recognition of fire chief Juan Diaz on his retirement. So I will come down to the podium and ask uh the chief to join me. I see a lot of people for you. So, I want you to stand here while we [laughter] so everyone can see you. Um, so before um uh we start tonight, I just want to say it's an honor and pleasure to uh recognize our outgoing fire chief, Juan Diaz, tonight. Chief Diaz has served our city for nearly 12 years. During that time, he has provided our community with steadfast and innovative leadership of our topnotch fire department. I'm going to read Chief Diaz's accomplishments shortly uh which will be in um his proclamation. But before I do so, I just wanted to add my own personal thanks to Chief Diaz. Chief Diaz is a proud immigrant and has shared his story as a refugee to United States uh openly and I think this really ties into our Mountain View culture of being a community for all. And I will say this has been his superpower [snorts] over the last four decades. Through resilience,

perseverance, and a deep commitment to service, Chief Diaz has built a distinguished career, centering all of that on his lived experiences and right Mountain View. So, this isn't goodbye. This is we will see you around. And being that uh Cuba and Puerto Rico, we are we are cousins, right? We're we're in the Caribbean Sea together. Uh we say balante forever forward. So, I just want to uh say all that. And now I will read the proclamation. Whereas as whereas Chief Juan Diaz will retire for on December 30th, 2025, concluding a distinguished 40-year fire service career, including five years as a reserve firefighter in Santa Clara, 25 years with the San Jose Fire Department, rising to deputy chief, and nearly 12 years with the Mountain View Fire Department, and the last 10 and a half years as fire chief. And whereas under his leadership, Mountain View Fire earned three consecutive insurance services office class one ratings, the only such distinction in Santa Clara County. Implemented full advanced life support services across all fire companies. Built a type one urban search and rescue team. enhanced the hazardous materials emergency response team to type 2 certification under the California Office of Emergency Services and significantly expanded public education programs. And whereas Fire Chief Diaz championed diversity, equity, and inclusion, advancing pathways for underrepresented groups, and promoting

MVFD's first female battalion chief, first female fire marshal, and first Chinese American battalion chief. A 2020 Santa Clair County grand jury report recognized MVFD's notable progress in gender diversity. And whereas he established the MVFD California Joint Apprenticeship Program and the department's first fully funded annual recruitment committee, helping MVFD achieve the highest per capita number of women firefighters in the county, as noted by the 2024 2025 civil grand jury. And whereas Fire Chief Diaz strengthened the department's culture by introducing the Mountain View Way, creating a formal career development plan, launching annual awards and recognition programs, and expanding peer support and cancer screening initiatives. And whereas he built a robust community emergency response team, also known as CERT C program, expanded training to more than 1,000 residents, enhanced neighborhood preparedness, and established seven portable emergency operation center buildings throughout Mountain View. And whereas he advanced innovation by securing modern fire apparatus and specialized equipment, including an electric vehicle battery extinguishing team, a type six wildland engine, and MVFD's first advanced life support transit ambulance. And whereas he founded MVFD's first honor guard, created the county's first tactical paramedic program embedded with Mountain View Police Department SWAT, and developed the department's swift water rescue capability. And whereas fire chief Diaz strengthened regional cooperation through mutual aid and support of the Santa Clara County Type three incident management team. And whereas during the CO 19 pandemic, he partnered with Santa Clara County health officials to provide free testing and vaccination services for first

responders, teachers, vulnerable residents, and communities in both Mountain View and San Jose. And whereas in 2024, he led the MVFD's 150th annual celebration, drawing more than 10,000 [clears throat] attendees. And whereas Fire Chief Diaz holds an associate and bachelor's degree in fire science, a master's degree in leadership with an infin emphasis in homeland security and emergency management and numerous chief officer and specialty certifications. And whereas he served as the president of the Santa Clara County Fire Chiefs Association Association, liaison to the Santa Clara County Operations Section, representative to the state homeland security program, and contributor to regional radio interoperability and mutual aid planning. And whereas an avid collector and restorer of unique fire apparatus, fire chief Diaz led the full restoration of MVFD's 1925 American La France engine, returning it to serviceful display after more than 50 years of deterioration. And whereas fire chief Diaz leaves a lasting impact on the Mountain View Fire Department and will always be appreciated and missed by the membership, his executive team colleagues and fire service. Now therefore, I Ellen Kame mayor of the city of Mountain View along with my colleagues on the city council do hereby express gratitude and appreciation to Juan Diaz for his leadership, service, and dedication to the residents of Mountain View. Can I invite you to stand and give Chief Diaz a round of applause?

[applause] Yes. Um the the mic is is yours or I can continue on with more presentations for you. Okay, we'll continue with the presentations. All right. Make it short.

Okay. [laughter] All right. Well, we um have um members of our distinguished California uh uh legislative delegation here. So, we'll now hear from Isabelle Augustine on behalf of Senator Josh Becker's office and Kevin Fong on behalf of Assembly Member Mark Burman's office. I'll invite them up to the podium to uh present. Hi. Uh, we just wanted to on behalf of the California State Legislature and Assembly Member Mark Burman, Senator Josh Becker, thank you for your dedication and your decades of commitment to the people of Mountain View uh, and the health and safety of our community. Uh, and we want to extend our appreciation for the many accomplishments listed by Marame and we wanted to wish you the very best on the next chapter and we hope we'll still see you around in Mountain View.

Thank you very much. [applause and cheering] Thank you. Thank you very much. You have a star show. Thank you. Thank you very much. [applause]

We will now hear from Nicholas Hargus on behalf of Congressman Sam Licardo's office. On behalf of Congressman Sam Licardo and his entire office, it's my honor to present this congressional resolution to Chief Juan Diaz. And uh thank you, Mayor Kame, for that beautiful proclamation stating his accomplishments. I will just read the the final sentence from this resolution. I am proud and honored to celebrate Chief Juan F. Diaz for his extraordinary career with the Mountain View Fire Department and express deep gratitude for his many contributions to the well-being, health, and safety of our community.

Thank you. [applause]

Thank you. Thank you. We'll now hear from Supervisor Margaret Abbe Koka on behalf of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors. And I believe last week you were honored at the county board.

Thank you, mayor. Well, good evening everyone. It's really uh wonderful to be back. I get nostalgic thinking a year ago I was sitting there in my last city council meeting and it's always wonderful to be home. But um it's really an honor today to be able to be here to honor a dear friend of mine, Chief Juan. And uh yes, we did uh do this presentation at the county last week, but it was the day that um Chief had to escort Santa uh to the tree lighting and we had a big long meeting and so it was cut a bit short. So I'm glad to be able to um have a second opportunity to uh do this honor. But um as the mayor read in the proclamation, I won't go over the inc all the amazing accomplishments and accolades that the chief has uh accomplished in his 11 years uh here in Mountain View, almost 12, and uh his over 40 years of service to our community in the fire industry. But I guess I I wanted to just share maybe a little bit more personal um comments and and insights. um when I uh I was coming off my uh second term on the council when we brought uh the our chief um into our uh organization here. And to be frank, um our fire department over the years, my two terms, um had some tumultuous times and we were really in need of steady leadership. And um the chief with you know his 40 years of service, he lives and breathes the fire service and I I think it might be attributed to his um you know being an immigrant fleeing uh his home country to come here, but he exudes patriotism, his true and genuine love for the community. Um he cares about everyone and um you know I I have the deepest respect for

all of our firefighters. Uh they put their lives on the line to protect us and to to you know to protect our community and the chief really exemplifies that to his core. He I love it if you follow him on Facebook, you know, he's always posting about him going to calls, which most chiefs don't really do, but it really comes from his love of of the of the service. And I'm just so grateful that we have had such an incredible leader uh for our fire department. Um you know, you he has helped to diversify the organization to better reflect our community. Um he's led and really nurtured our firefighters. I I love seeing how they have promoted over the years. Um really due to his encouragement, his mentorship and he's really really treated this the the the department as a family. We've had some tragic losses over the last two years and um it's you know really deeply affected all of us um and and he's really helped to help us you know come out and heal from all of that. But it's really because of his heart. Um I it's just bittersweet. I'm you know grateful and congratulate you chief for your retirement. Um but we will certainly miss you here. Uh I had the fortune I've had the chance to work with him at the county those last year because we do uh EMS emergency medical uh service response. Um I know that even though he's retiring, he's going to be around and directing all of us. u from the background and maybe we'll see him pop up in in the forefront again too. But um just personally uh he's been like a big brother to me watching over me showing me what the fire service is about what public service what public service really means and I'm just deeply

grateful. So, thank you so much for everything you've done and congratulations on your retirement. And on behalf of the county board of supervisors, for the second time, and I'm going to do this again on Thursday, but let me present you a commendation. Thank you. [applause] [applause] Congratulations.

I think before chief you leave, would you like to say a few words? Well, this way.

I'll be very brief. Thank you, uh, honorable mayor Kame and distinguished members of the city council and our city manager, Kimber McCarthy. The proudest day of my career was becoming a fire chief and serving this community. I am immensely proud of the men and women of the Mountain View Fire Department. Day in and day out, the Mountain View firefighters make sacrifices to protect our community. I'm extremely thankful to our city council and to our city manager that during the past incurring city council who have supported our firefighters so that we can have the tools and equipment to serve our residents. It's been truly an honor and a privilege to serve each and every one of you through our firefighters. Thank you very much.

[applause] So, we're I think um since we have so many um from our fire department and I know your family traveled very far to come and be with us. So, we'll ask our council to stand maybe if fire doesn't mind coming here and your family and all those who presented uh proclamations to chief if we could take one large picture before we go on. I think it's [gasps] would be great. Thank you.

All right. And we have another presentation. Item 3.2 uh is MountainB plans for Super Bowl and World Cup activation. So, I'm going to go back to u my seat, but we're happy to be joined this evening by R. Shakata, vice president of government and external affairs for the Bay Area Host Committee, and Amanda Rotella, the city's economic vitality manager to share about local plans. So, I'll let them come up here. Great. Thank you, mayor. Uh, we've got Ruth joining us over Zoom and she will be presenting the first half of our presentation. Good evening, uh, Mayor Kame and members of the city council. Um, can you hear me? Okay.

Yes. Okay. Very good. Um, so I have a very very short presentation because I know you've got a full agenda tonight. And so I I just wanted to provide just some um brief comments about uh the mayor's host committee and the events that are coming to um to our region in 2026. um to lay the the foundation for the item that's um coming forward to you tonight. So, next slide, please. On the Bay Area Host Committee is a Okay, Ruth, I'm so sorry. It's okay.

I'm going to need to interrupt you. Usually, we take public comment after all the presentation items, but I believe um we have our uh our our chief and his family. Um we we're going to give them the uh opportunity for council and uh staff to be able to do their public comment. Now we're changing it up. Great. Thank you. I I apologize. No problem.

Okay. Great. Um so um why don't we ask do uh members of the council have comments on item 3.1? Council member Hicks. So I'll keep it brief because we do have a a packed agenda tonight. But I I have to say I've long been impressed with Chief Diaz's work, but perhaps I was most impressed in addition to all the fancy things that the mayor said you did. Um I was reminded in detail of the of kind of the the basic work that you do during the pal the huge palisade fires um earlier this year uh in LA where my son was living and we were talking about it all the time. But in addition, my neighbors would come up to me frequently during that period and ask, "Is Mountain View in the same kind of danger?" And so I asked the city manager and she said to talk to you and you gave me a good probably 45 minutes of information on why we're not in as much danger. Um the tools we have and the here and the work you've been doing, which I'll now recount. No, I I I'll spare people that, but it was it was truly educational and it was um it was impressive enough that I asked that it be printed in summary in our uh city paper, the view um much I have to say to the relief of a lot of residents. I would refer residents to um to that information. So, um, and it again reassured me that you and the fire department were doing a great job. So, thank you.

Great. Thank you, Council Member Mallister.

Chief, 11 years ago, I was mayor and I had the privilege of swearing you in. I didn't expect to come back and see you go. So, I'm I wish we could continue this saga for a few more years, but it was a great honor then to have met you, worked with you. swear, get you sworn in, get you settled, and serve alongside you for eight years and now for a few more. Um, everything that everybody said was true. You're a man of uh great character, and that's uh something that no one could ever take away from you. So, I am honored that one of my great events as mayor was to swear you and bring you on board. So, my congratulations to your retirement. And as uh supervisor Margaret Aboke said, you'll be around. You'll be we'll we'll need you to tweak a few things. You still owe me a ride if before time departs. So, congratulations on your retirement. You well earned it.

Council member Sha Walter, I just wanted to kind of echo what everybody has said and a big thank you. And also to mention just the incredible leadership during the COVID pandemic. I mean that was just a um you know a once in a century event for all of us and the fire department with you in leadership stepped up to provide emergency medicine um in a way that was just thoughtful and effective. I mean, you went to people's houses when they needed you to bring a vaccine and you helped set up vaccinations and I mean, that was just an incredible response. So, thank you so much.

Great. City Manager McCarthy.

Thank you, Mayor. So, I just want to publicly give my sincere appreciation and thanks to Chief Diaz for his amazing years of leadership and service to our city and to our organization. I've had the pleasure of working alongside Juan for the last six years. It feels a lot longer than that going through the pandemic. Um, and I'll just recount a story of one of the first things that Juan and I had to do together as a team being a new city manager and having um, Juan as the fire chief. So, I started in March of 2020. So, you can do the math there. And in my uh, second week on the job, we declared a state of emergency. And at that time, we didn't know what was going on really. and we had been hearing reports that there was going to be a run on the gas stations, that there would not be any gas at all. So, I remember calling you very, very late at night, maybe it was around 11 at night, and he and I talking about making sure that the fire engines and every single vehicle was fully filled up with with gasoline at that point. We did not have we do not have electric engines at this point. Um, and also with with our then police chief at the time and you and I just talking about what this means, you know, for the community and how we were going to serve the community and be there and make sure that we could. So, that was really my first start um with this partnership with Chief Diaz. And since then, I've really appreciated his ability to collaborate with his peers and his other executive team members to give me great counsel and great advice when I needed it, when I asked for it, sometimes when I didn't ask for it. Um, which is a very good thing. And as you

all heard, uh, Chief Diaz has many firsts. He has created many firsts as fire chief, which is something to be very proud of. uh first ambulance, honor guard, so on and so on, water rescue, um so so many. So I just want to thank you on behalf of the organization for your tremendous efforts and leadership over the past 12 years and just uh wish you such wellness and success in your next chapter and and also to say that his wife Leah is here and sister who flew from Honduras to be here. And so just you're surrounded by people that love and care about you and and wish you the best in your next chapter. Thank you for everything.

City Attorney Log, thank you. I'll keep it quick. I just wanted to wish you all the best and I wanted to thank you for being one of the people that I remember as one of my first friends here in the city of Mountain View when I started. I appreciate the lunches and making me feel like I can handle a job that felt very big when I started and always reassuring me that I could handle it. So, I just wanted to wish you all the best and say thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Chief and and thank you to the public um and to to Ruth for letting us pivot to do our comments. Now, um we'll thank our special guests for for um joining us and we'll move back to item 3.2, to are the Mountain View plans for Super Bowl and world activation. Um, and so we'll go back to you, Ruth and Amanda.

Thank you, Mayor Kame, and the city council. Of course, that that was much more important than my little presentation here tonight, and I'm so glad that uh Chief Diaz is uh retiring and um off to to new a new chapter. Um anyway, um I just wanted to say that uh off this side that uh we are a 501c6 organ nonprofit organization. Um we reestablished ourselves in 2022. Some of you might have known our previous iteration for Super Bowl uh 50 and then for the um college football playoff national championship game um in 2019. But in 2022, our board of directors, which is made up primarily of the presidents of the um professional sports teams here in the Bay Area, decided that a sports commission was needed on an ongoing basis to serve regional needs and to bring mega sporting events into into the area. Our u mission is really to drive um to bring mega sporting events into the area and drive lasting economic, cultural, and social impact for the Bay Area. Next slide, please. And so how we do that is that we um we respond to the needs of event owners or governing bodies of these mega sporting events whether it be FIFA um the NFL, NBA. And so if we take um the NFL for example, um Super Bowl is their marquee event, their temple event. They put out requirements of what a community needs to do in order to host a Super Bowl. Um, and local organizing committees like the Bay Area Host Committee then looks at those requirements, responds to those requirements, and hopes that the NFL might select our community as the place to host Super Bowl. When that selection is made, then um we are able to use um some of the u intellectual property associated with

the Super Bowl um and um and sell some sponsorships in order to gain revenue to enable the hosting of the event. Um in general, all the tickets and all the broadcast revenue still belongs to the NFL. All the rights associated with their intellectual properties belong to the NFL. um and that we do what we can to to bring in local sponsorships to bring in the flavor of the San Francisco Bay area into the Super Bowl and to promote our region. So, uh next slide, please. Um so, for the Super Bowl, um these are the the major events. Um we uh the NFL announced uh these events uh uh within the last couple weeks, but just for tonight's purposes, um the team arrivals will take place on Sunday, February 1st. They'll fly into San San Jose at SJC. The media center, which runs 24/7 um for the for the duration of Super Bowl week from Sunday the the 1st through Monday the 9th, um will be at the Moscone Center in San Francisco. Opening night will be uh Monday, February 2nd. That'll be at the San Jose Convention Center. Um that one will have some uh limited um general admission tickets there. It's it's an opportunity for the community to um be introduced to the two teams, the community and the media. Um Super Bowl Experience is the NFL's uh fanfest. It'll be held at the Mosone Center from Tuesday the February 3rd to Saturday, February 7th. At the end of the presentation, I do have a discount code. Um, so for anyone that's interested in going to the FanFest, you can use the discount code at any time. There's no limitation on that. Um, and uh, we encourage our um, local Bay Area residents to go in the earlier part of the week when it's um, less expensive, less crowded. I know. I went online um a

couple days ago, Ticket Master, and then was able to get a Super Bowl experience ticket for for like $20 a piece um with a paid admission. Then uh kids under 12 are free. And so it's it's um it's a it's a great way to celebrate football if you're you're interested in football and interested in um Super Bowl. The Pro Bowl will be held um uh in Flag Football uh this year. It'll be at the Mosoneia Center as well um on um Tuesday the 3rd and of course Super Bowl Sunday is on February 8th. So next slide please. As far as the planning coordination is concerned on regional basis we've been planning with um public safety. It is a sear one event. That means it's the highest u security level that there is for events in the in the United States. There's been a lot of coordination between federal, state and county partners. There's been regular um meetings and coordination on the transit and transportation side. I've been talking regularly with VTA, MUN, Cal Train, BART, Ace Capital Corridor um and SAM Trans and um VTA has been pursuing partnerships for fair coordination with with Cal Train. Um they did that at Super Bowl 50 and we expect that they're doing that um uh again for Super Bowl 60. And then we're looking at what are the planning and transportation management um needs in in the region. Of course, we talked a little bit earlier tonight um about emergency management and emergency management is also a key part of the planning coordination. Um that is looking at it from a regional so in other words Bay Area wide basis. Um next slide please. Um so, uh the other sporting event that's going to happen in 2026 is the World Cup. Um on December 5th, our draw was announced. These are the five group games that are happening,

the five matches that are happening at the at the group stage. Um you'll notice that a lot of our times are um are later in the evening um and that they're on a lot of them are weekdays. Um we do have one um knockout round match which will be on July 1st. Next slide please. So, one of the things that we've done is to try and create some engagement um on on a local basis to allow fans to um to interact with the with these major sporting events, especially more so on the FIFA World Cup basis is to publish this um public screening playbook, which helps local communities understand what the dos and don'ts are with regard to viewing um these matches, these games in public. this uh playbook is is really meant for as a as a guide and so on the next slide please. Um so we we try to provide some helpful hints on what you can do um trying in in other words in avoiding the um intellectual property. So the use of the word Super Bowl or the use of the logos like the this ones on on the right with Kansas City and the Eagles. and then instead what the NFL allows for is the use of the words like big game. Um but there are ways to advertise and to bring people together um in what we would call a more authentic manner. Um so we we we're encouraging communities such as Mountain View to come together and to bring people into places where they already celebrate. So in downtown Mountain View, people come to celebrate. You have your art and wine festival. You have your bars and restaurants. Um people come out a regularly and create that create those moments again uh for Super Bowl and for FIFA World

Cup. Um the Bay Area Host Committee wants to um to encourage that and figure out ways how we can and support those efforts, whether it be, you know, bringing some kind of element in on World Cup bases that would kind of add that extra that extra fun and and more bring it more celebratory. Um, so we really really appreciate Mountain View leaning forward on these events and um including your community and engaging your community and um and that's what these are these things are all about and um and we want to support that. So next last slide please. So as I mentioned to you um that there are um discounts available for Super Bowl experience um and this is the code here. a partner 15. Like I said, it's not limited. Um it's usable at any time. Um we really want to encourage as many of the people in the Bay Area who are interested in football and want to participate in the fan experience to get out there and um we want to encourage that with this with this discount code. So u that's all um that's it for my presentation and um Amanda, did you have something? I'm sure you had something more to say, but I wanted to thank you for your time. Thank you for your part your collaboration, cooperation, and partnership.

Thank you, Ruth. And yes, I just have three super quick slides um just talking about what we're going to be doing here in Mountain View and our plans. Um we're obviously collaborating very closely with the Bay Area Host Committee. They've been an amazing resource. Um and we're working closely with the Mountain View Chamber um collaborating with them as well. So really our goals um as we're we're thinking about what we're hoping to achieve with these events coming to Mountain View, we really want to boost the local economic activity. Um so really driving foot traffic, bringing um bringing people into Mountain View Mountain View businesses to generate sales tax revenue toot bring bring resources both to the city and to businesses so that we can benefit from the opportunity. Um we want to provide opportunities for community engagement. So really bringing people together around sport and then lastly to really elevate uh the city's visibility. Uh we see this as an opportunity to really market Mountain View, market our downtown, market our businesses and um really establish ourselves as a key destination for visitors and sport fans. And so we're taking a three-pronged approach with our activation. Uh the first is around branding and placemaking. So bringing elements into the downtown and throughout the city. Um this like sidewalk decals, banners, other fun elements. uh just creating a festive environment. Uh the next is would be activation. So the city-led opportunities to generate fun and and uh encourage people to come to Mountain View uh looking at events for that. And then lastly, the third approach is really around business promotion. So we're going to be working closely with the Mountain View Chamber and I see Peter Katz is here uh to really help businesses um take advantage of the opportunity. And as Ruth said, there's rules around you can't say Super Bowl, but you can say big game. Uh, so we want to, you know, be that resource to help businesses understand what they can and can't do and to really help them think creatively about what might draw people into their businesses. Um, and then we, the city of Mountain View, are going to use our marketing experience and power to, uh, promote what businesses are

doing. And just as a little bit of a business engagement piece, we've already started, you know, pro um, reaching out to businesses. is we have a survey up where we're encouraging any business that wants to do some activations around Super Bowl to fill out our the little survey that we have up on the economic development website and we'll be adding them to our FanFest map which we'll be promoting um out to the community. And that's all. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much. Uh do any members of uh council have uh any questions on this presentation item? All right. Not seeing any. We'll now Oh, sorry. All right, Council Member Mallister.

Uh, being a small businessman, uh, this this, uh, website of yours, other than someone looking for it, well, how will it be broadcast so that I hadn't heard about it? So, how are other businesses going to hear it? Yeah, it's a great question. So, um, we started off initially, we put it into our newsletter. The chamber is, um, putting it out through their newsletter, and then we're going to start doing door-to-door engagement, um, in to the best of our capacity. um I started walking the downtown and had a conversation with a business owner who similarly wasn't aware that there was an opportunity and um had a conversation with him about how he might be able to lean in and participate. Will you be reaching out to uh businesses outside of the downtown to just collaborate?

Absolutely. Yeah, the downtown's an easy place to start because our offices are here, but um we're we're hoping to really collaborate with the chamber to broaden our capacity and ability to reach as many businesses as possible. Okay. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. Uh we will now take public comment on the two presentation items. Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on the presentation items listed on the agenda? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk. I am not seeing any. So, we'll close public comment on presentation and move on to item four, which is our consent calendar. These items will be approved by one motion unless any member of the council wishes to pull an item for individual consideration. If an item is pulled from the consent calendar, it will be considered separately following approval of the balance of the consent calendar. If you'd like to speak on these items or the next item, oral communications on non-aggenda items in person, please submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk. Now, would any member of the council like to pull an item? Council member Caler, is that a carryover or do you have something?

No, I just want to make a comment on that. Okay, great. Okay. Can you just tell me your item number? I think it's 4.6. Okay, 4.6. Okay, I'll come back to you, Council Member Sha Walter. I'd like to make some comments as well. Okay. On which I uh 4.2, 4.3, 4.5, 4.6, and 4.9. Okay. Uh, council member Clark, I'd like to pull 4.7 for discussion. All right. So, 4.7 has been pulled. So, we'll go over the um balance of the consent calendar and we'll start with Council Member Caller and then we'll come back to you, Council Member Schaalter. All right, Council Member Mallister.

Yeah. Um on 4.6 is council priorities and I want to uh when I came on board, I was always emphasizing uh the pavements and the road conditions. And I would like to thank my council for seeing that over the years and like in 2022 our PCI payment condition index was at 69. The next year it was at 68. The next year it was 67. So for the last three years it had been going down where 70 is the minimal enough to say it was good. And so I appreciate the staff council recognizing that this was the time to invest back in Mountain View. And so I just want to say that uh we're in the right direction and hopefully you will see roads improve but it's going to take a while but uh it it's something that we've been looking for for a long time. Thank you.

Great. Thank you, Council Member Sha Walter.

Well, as we get to the um end of the session, you know, this is sort of the end of our fall session tonight. There's always a lot on the consent calendar and um there's a lot of work behind it. So, I just want to mention a few things. Um item 4.2 two is an emergency water inner tie agreement with cow water. We get water supply from um cow water. Most of it comes from SFPU and from Valley Water. And we also have some um some uh wells and it's really just good practice to have interies between all of these systems so that um we can we can operate them as effectively as possible and particularly in emergencies. So, this is just really a good practice and I want to thank the public works department for going forward with that. Item um 4.3 advisory boards. We um uh I I always want to thank everybody who applied. We we had a good um group of applicants this time and um if you applied and didn't make it, I hope you'll try again. But congratulations are due to Sharon Sue uh to the board of uh library. We're reappointing Jonathan Davis and appointing Ida Rose Sylvester to the parks and recreation committee. We're reappointing Marisol Malara. Um Mike Casperac, Peter Catz, and Jame Shake. Uh and appointing Peter Ryder to the downtown committee. And we're also appointing Arena Conn to the performing arts. So I want to thank all of you in advance for all the hours you're going to put in for the city. Um item 4.5. Uh these this was an auditor's report and if you're interested in finding out about the way um the city is spending your tax dollars, this is the council report for you to read. Um it's fairly short um but it's uh it gets very much to the point and I I thought uh item attachment one was particularly

informative. Um then 4.6 that's an update on our council priority projects. Um the uh the council report and attachment to are particularly good um for getting caught up on what is happening with the projects that this particular council um put in our work plan last year and attachment two has a description of each one. I also just wanted to thank the staff for who prepared this. This was really well um organized and easy to understand. Um I know that takes a lot of effort. And then the last one um is um uh 4.9. This is really about improvements we are making to city. Oh, this one it's called a heritage tree removal, but really what it's about is the solar improvements that we're putting in many of our city facilities. And we have an extensive um uh climate action plan. And part of that is making sure that our city facilities are are um modernized and have solar and um uh heat pumps and that sort of thing wherever it's possible. So, this is a project about that. And um uh not only will these projects add solar to a number of our city um facilities or jointly operated school um district facilities, but they're going to save a lot of money in energy costs over the long term. And I think that that's something that's really worth noting. So, thank you.

Great. Thank you. So, seeing um no other council members in the queue, we'll do public comment. Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on these items? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk. Now, I am not seeing any public comment on the balance of the consent calendar. So, I'll bring the item back for council action and note that a motion to approve the consent calendar should also include reading the title of the resolutions attached to consent calendar items 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, and 4.8. I see we have a motion by Council Member Shaalter. May I get a second? Thank you, Council Member Hicks. We'll turn it over to Council Member Schultter.

All right. Um uh I move the uh balance of the consent calendar item 4.1. Adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View authorizing the city manager or designate to amend the city of Mountain View's salary plan for hourly employees for all classifications to comply with Mountain View's minimum wage to be read and title only. Further reading waved. Item 4.2. Adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View approving an emergency water inner tie agreement with California Water Service Company at 3645 Grant Road to be read and title only. Further reading waved and authorized the city manager or designate to execute the emergency watertie agreement with California Water Service and to execute all necessary documents to effectuate its purposes. Item 4.3, adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View, reappointing Sharon Sue to the library board of trustees, reappointing Jonathan Davis, and appointing Idar Rose Sylvester to the parks and recreation commission. Reappointing Marisol Malara, Mike Casperac, Peter Catz, and Jamil Shake, and appointing Peter Writer to the downtown committee. Appointing Ireina Cone to the Performing Arts Committee and appointing David Kim and Michelle Maguire to the senior advisory committee to be read entitle only. Further reading waved. Item 4.4. adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View authorizing temperature temperature sorry temporary closure of parking lots 4 and 8 from 7:30 a.m. through 2:30 p.m. on select Sundays occurring between January 5th, 2026 and February 8th, 2026 not to exceed four Sundays for use by the California Farmers Market Association to be read and title only. Further reading waved item 4.8 8. Adopt a resolution of the city council of the

city of Mountain View amending the fiscal year 2526 budget to appropriate the following funds for the general non-operating fund to the community development department of activations and promotions related to the 2026 Super Bowl and World Cup and the amounts of one 295,000 for city activations and pro promotions and two 30,000 for a grant to the Mountain View Chamber of Commerce to support Chamber and Mountain View Business Associate activations and promotions to be read and title only. Further reading waved. Great. Thank you. Let's vote.

All right. And that passes unanimously. So, we'll go back to consent calendar item 4.7 and I'll turn it over to Council Member Clark.

Thank you. Um, I just wanted to um I'm the chair of the investments review committee and I just wanted to um uh first of all our investments are all doing um quite well and uh we we moved forward with the staff recommendation and some of the recommendations of of the um IRC committee members. Um, taking off my my chair hat, I did um I did want to just raise another recommendation in here that was um made by the committee, but um I wanted to make sure that the full council was aware of it and had a chance to chime in. Uh one of the one of the recommendations uh that was raised uh was in response to uh some community members who attended the meeting and that was to essentially conduct additional research and consider adopting additional um social responsibility concerns. Um essentially we already have some social responsibility language in there. Um uh and the proposal was to broaden that a little bit further and the proposed language was quite broad and I had I had some reservations about it and I just wanted to make sure that my colleagues were aware of that um that discussion and I've actually thought more about it and I've heard some additional concerns from community members particularly our our um our um Jewish community members um about um the the additional restrictions that are being proposed. And so, um, I had a chance to do a little bit more research and I think staff did as well and they can answer questions, but I think the the additional restrictions that we were looking at studying are are so broad um that one, there's a concern about the the the breath of of those restrictions. But two, we also um despite the breath concern confirm that none of our current investments would be covered by that. So there wouldn't be any immediate changes even if we were to adopt that language.

And then second, because of our requirements on bond ratings that we would invest in, um it's highly unlikely that any of the the companies or investment opportunities on those lists that other um that would that were proposed by the committee members would ever be something that we would invest in. So, that's a very long way of saying in a in a in a year where we're potentially looking at revenue measures and and staff is going to be tied up with a lot of that plus everything that's that's gone on recently uh with world events. Um I just don't think this is the best use of staff's time because it won't really impact either our current investments or any of I think our our near-term investments. So, I think um my my preference would be just to adopt the the staff recommendation, but without the um without um the study of the additional restrictions because I just don't think they're they're going to move the needle for us in the near term. And I think staff's time would be better spent on the um on the revenue measure and other things. So, um I'll um I'll just to get us started, I'll go ahead and move item 4.7 um just without um just without the the additional review by staff of the uh investment restrictions that were identified.

Great. Thank you, Vice Mayor Ramos. Um so largely uh this was an item uh we we did have some public comment in our investment review committee. Um we usually don't get public comment in our investment review committee one because it's like in the morning and and the the the subject matter is generally very dry um for a lack of a better term. Um but we did have um a number of residents reach out um and they they want our way of how we do our investments to be reflective of our values. Um I know that uh uh council member Clark is concerned about staff time but we weren't asking well they were kind of asking it for it immediately. I don't think the people on the com in the committee were asking for it immediately. We just wanted to open that conversation to see what it would look like to make sure that we don't invest in weapons companies or uh private prisons or surveillance mass surveillance technologies. Um this is something uh essentially the community was starting to ask for. Um, I I don't believe it's as long as we don't pressure staff to be very quick on it to do it something in their own kind of time. I I don't see why we wouldn't be responsive to a community ask like this. So, I I'm not entirely I think like um a good number of us not necessarily directed staff but asked like what would it look like? what would um how how much we we don't even know the scope. We just want staff to just start looking at it. Um

and and I totally understand that this may be a a long process. When we first um made our statement that we wouldn't uh do invest in companies, fossil fuel companies, it was a long process as well. We just wanted to get started on it. So um I'm not entirely sure Basically, if if Council Member Clark's motion is just to kind of shut the door on it, I I don't want us to shut the door on it. I don't mind if it takes a long time, I just want us to actually just be responsive to our community. Council member Ramirez.

Thank you, Mayor. So, for the council's benefit, the recommendation from the IRC was unanimous, all five of us. Um, it feels weird to use this as an opportunity to shut down that dialogue, but um, it's also not a personal priority for me. So, I I don't have a strong investment in the outcome of this vote. Uh, but because we do have the benefit of having the director of the uh, uh, finance and administrative services department here, it might be helpful to ask um, how much staff time do you anticipate moving forward? There's been, it sounds like, a little bit of staff time invest invested in this investigation. Do you feel like there's a significant amount of work or a trivial amount of work? How would you characterize the work?

Thank you [clears throat] for the question. Uh, good evening, Mayor Kame, Vice Mayor Ramos, and, uh, council members. Derek Rampon, your finance and administrative services director. Um, we have taken a preliminary look. We've worked with our investment management firm Chandler to take a preliminary look. It will take some additional time. I don't have an estimate per se. I don't think it's a ton of time, but it will take a little time to work with them and come up with possible scenarios and recommendations. Um, I will say that currently based on the parameters that were spoken about at the IRC meeting, um, we hold zero investments in what was discussed. Um currently we already have as was stated earlier um good governance, social governance that was put into the investment policy years ago and um we are governed not only by the city's investment policy but also the California government code. So we have we're pretty restricted on the investments that we can even take a look at and so but we're happy for to take direction from the IRC. Okay.

Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Um I'm not going to make a motion, but maybe what I'll suggest as a uh an attempt at a compromise would be rather than just take it off the table entirely, um that that work be suspended until after the conclusion of the work necessary for the revenue measure. So it's on the back burner. It's not we're killing it today, but rather um once staff has has completed the work needed for the revenue measure, then they can pick up the work, whatever remains to complete that investigation. Thank you, Council Member Hicks.

Yeah, that actually sounds good to me. I am not on the committee, so I haven't done a deep dive into this subject, but I have to say, um, people, uh, when I've gone to sustainability conferences, people have approached me and been very impressed with the fact that we don't invest in fossil fuels. I think these uh kind of measures are important to people. And also just kind of randomly I know people going to uh University of Colorado Boulder who these are nieces of mine who phoned me and asked because I'm on the city council here how they would interact with their um finance committee in Boulder uh to get a very similar uh set of parameters for for their investments. And I told them how to look it up. and when they looked it up, their city had already made that [laughter] already made that pledge. Um, so I know it's possible and it seems like since we now hold zero investments in this arena, it it sounds possible here too. And it like it sounds like it would not ruffle too many feathers, but I'm um I would be behind suspending it until uh after the res revenue measure. Um, thank you, Council Member Clark. We'll go back to you

just to provide a little bit more context and to be um just a little bit more blunt than I was earlier. One of the suggest So, we we've already um we already have language adopted around fossil fuels and and pretty standard I think progressive social um social socially responsible investing. what was proposed. Um the community members who who um wrote to us and came to the meet the meeting are I think uh from a particular um activist community and I think if some of the other community members of our community um had known that they were going to propose that they would have shown up uh in force. And so I think that if this moves forward, for example, adopting language that says investments are prohibited in subsidiaries that facilitate the violation of human rights, things that are that broad. Um, you can probably guess the concerns that would be raised um uh around some of those things. And I think um I think there will be a lot of community discussion if we if we move forward with studying this particular um uh breath of socially responsible investing. So that that's why I wanted to flag it. Um I did I did vote to move it forward in the committee. committee committee member, council member Ramirez is correct, but I've heard from folks in the community since then that um you know this is something that they feel quite strongly about and it's just something that I I wanted to make sure my colleagues were aware of. Um it's because I don't think it's going to affect any of our current or uh any near-term investments. I don't think it is uh worth the the time and the potential um um breath of the community discussion that will occur to to move this forward.

And I think I I would prefer not to just push it off. I would prefer to just um not just not do this right now. And we can always we can always um look look at this in the future if for some reason there's a proposal for us to invest in companies that might um trigger any of this, but I just don't foresee that happening. So just a little bit more context.

Great. Thank you. Um I just had a a question um for Yes, thank you. Um, so it it sounded like that staff had already done a preliminary search um and that none of the businesses that we um associate ourselves with in Mountain View fall under this category. Do we need to take specific language like we did with fossil fuels since it's already not a practice? Is there something that council can do if if we're already It sounds like we're already doing it. So, I'm trying to understand why um staff would be investigating and putting staff time into something that the the city's already um you know practicing, which is not um not engaging with these types of companies. So, I seconded Council Member Clark's um motion because I um did research into this as well and it s and um it sounds like, you know, we do not do those practices. So, perhaps staff can help illuminate for um council in the audience um a little bit more. Thank you.

Yes. So the community had given provided input that um was rather broad and we feel like that some of the uh some of there's not there's no list official list that we can that our investment firm can um compare to and go off of. So some of the recommendations or proposals that they were putting together is not feasible while maybe a small section could be. um but it's relatively new to this area area I would say as having some restricted specific wording. So there is no index officially that we can follow. So the research was basically to come back with that information. Uh city manager McCarthy. Thank you.

Uh thank you mayor and our to our finance director. So, um, to be clear, the city does not have investments in in the broad categories that that were outlined, um, by some of the folks that showed up at the committee meeting. And I think, uh, staff has struggled a little bit, um, in trying to figure out what the broad categories would mean because we have a highly restrictive way that we can invest. And it's not just Mountain View, it's any local government agency governed by uh certain California rules and legal restrictions. And then we place our own restrictions that are even uh more conservative, I would say, on how we can invest. So I think uh the struggle that that we have or that we've talked about even with our um the firm that works with us is we would essentially be searching for what uh corporations might even fall under these categories which we do not believe uh we have any investments of that nature or from any of those categories. So, um it's highly likely that staff would be coming back with um kind of nothing to report that that there's nothing that we would um find or have um investing in now or in the future, especially because we have the uh social responsibility policy already in place with some broad caveats in the policy already,

right? And every item is governed by our budget equity lens, which I know the council adopted. Um, so is this something that maybe staff would be able to tackle as part of uh, you know, next year we'll be starting to talk about midyear budget and the budgeting process and maybe this is something we can add to our budgeting brief or just um, you know, uh, letting letting people know that, you know, confirming what it sounds like we already know. So, I think that the best path forward might be to just have staff come back with a recommendation on the best time to discuss this. We don't normally um incorporate our investments into the process, but we can certainly look at the best avenue for doing that and then uh bring that back uh to council.

Okay, great. Um to the to the motion maker, would that be amenable to you? That would be fine. and whether it comes back to the full council or the investment recommen. Great. Okay. Well, I can I can second that if it comes back perhaps since it came became a discussion at full council, it can come back to the full council. Uh council member Mallister. Yeah. Would um could they come back in a written memo instead of bring it to full presentation? Would that be helpful? City manager.

Absolutely. We can do that. Should that be the desire of council? I mean, that would be a better use maybe to council member Clark's. It would just give us an idea before we start spending time on on city staff. And I agree with Council Member Clark that staff time is valuable. And so, I mean, unless we see a real outcome out of something, I'd rather see them spend their time on other issues. So, Council Member Hicks. So, I just want to recap of what we will be voting on because it was it it was to take that to accept the report, take out the part, not do what council member RmIrez said, visit it later, but now people are adding back in things to do later. So, I've become confused.

Sure. I I believe it's a revised motion. So, um, the revised motion I can turn to council member, uh, Clark, which I think is just to have

sounded to me, and city manager can correct me if I'm wrong. It sounded to me like we're we're basically we're approving the we're accepting the committee report which was the staff recommendation except um what we're doing is just we're we're we're not um doing the additional uh study of of investment restrictions today. But it sounds like staff if and when um I if and when there's any possibility that we might uh you be looking at investing in a company that might fit some of these criteria that you it sounds like the full council would would get an update or a memo on that if it

so what would trigger it would be the point that a potential investment was made. No, I think I think I think if we were ever in if we were ever in a world where um where some of these um some of these companies, which we don't even have a list, but if we if we if but that might meet some of these criteria um might begin to be in the realm of of things that we might end up investing in because of our because of our overall policy. I'm struggling to find

Yeah. Thank Thank you, Council Member Clark and Mayor. So I think it would be if something were to ever surface or if our um uh consultant, our firm that we work with uh were to raise something uh for us to say, "Hey, this investment uh might be getting into, you know, whatever uh whatever line of business that we would not want to align ourselves with. Then at that point that would be something that we could bring to the investment review committee or let council know in an off agenda memo. But uh proactively right now there's there's nothing to proactively remove at this point. So it would be more if something were to come up. Council member Sha Walter, um just as a reminder, could you um send us out sometime in the next few weeks? I know you're busy, but uh what the social responsibility policy is not serving on the um the finance committee. I just know sort of generally about it. I'd love to actually read the text.

Sure. Great. Thank you, Council Member Hicks.

Yeah. So, I think I'm going to abstain or vote no just because I'm not clear on what our current statement is. It sounds like possibly we could just use our current statement uh because members of the public are concerned if we're not. So, I would prefer to look in it a little more the way uh council member Ramirez said, but maybe this will get the votes. Okay. Um no one else is in the queue, so we can we can call a question. Um and then we'll we can have more discussion. Okay. Sure. So my understanding of the motion is approving the staff recommendation. Um let me read. So the the recommendation for the staff report says accept the annual report of the investment review committee for fiscal year 2024 2025 uh as well as attachment one to the council report. But I think there was a specific call out in the recommendation about looking into I'm trying to find the language. Does staff have the language that or CMA Clark? I think it's just what we're voting on tonight is to is to accept the report and then there was a separate direction to staff that if if there's ever if there's ever a change in the environment to where you know some of these broader criteria might end up applying to some of our future investments um which I think is unlikely but if if they were that we would um proactively be um either the both the investment review committee and and maybe the full council would be made aware of that just so we can look into it at that Yes, that's part of the motion. I think if anything would be flagged, it sounds like the um our finance and administrative service department worked

with our outside entity, Chandler, and did a cursory view looking at if we in uh you know invest in any of these companies, which it sounds like would include um you know uh weapons and private prisons. And so they already did the cursory view of of what was looked. Nothing was triggered. And so I think this would um it was broadened to include I think looking to staff. Do you have the language from the IFC meeting, please?

Yeah. The recommendation was that the IRC the IRC recommended that staff conduct further research regarding the social responsibility concerns raised by the public and explore potential updates to section 8.0 of the investment policy.

So I think perhaps as part Thank you. So I think as part of the motion too, what we could include is what council member Sho Walter said, which is um once again sharing our social responsibility guidelines and perhaps that's something that we can make sure is available uh online and um available for our public to also see because I know that we've been committed to that um as we looked at divesting from fossil fuel companies. So, I know that that's a practice where um we have used that as an umbrella for um how we we operate in Mountain View. Um and so perhaps that can um come back to the full council. Is that okay to include that uh in your motion? Council out of course.

Great. Thank you, Council Member Mallister.

Yeah, I just I I like to have either they do it or they don't. I'm trying to get clarity on if when it's appropriate they'll do it, but they won't do it until that time. There's there's nothing that they will the only thing that they would do is flag it to us and then ask us if we want basically go through the uh you know adop or changing our policy at that time. Right now we already have a socially responsible investment policy. It's actually pretty broad. The concern with what was raised at the meeting is that the criteria they were proposing was so broad that I don't I don't want to sit down and decide who is or isn't violating human rights. That's a very broad statement. I don't think any of us do and I certainly don't think staff does. And so I think having staff go study how we broaden things right now is just because it's not going to impact any of our current or near-term future investments is just not a good use of folks's time. It would be a good use of time if you know there were companies that we were either invested in today or that we might potentially invested in the near future. Then I I'm I'm totally on board with that. I just don't think this is the right time and the right moment to be studying broader investment restrictions with um around really really broad concepts.

Motion would be to study it now. No, no, my motion is to not study it now. The motion is to accept the report and not study it now. And if and if we ever end up in a world where um you know some of these companies might qualify then staff will just tell us. I got it. Yeah. Thank you. Okay.

Yes. That was why the item was pulled to change the motion. And I think what's also included in that is um you know sharing um internally and externally our our social um uh responsibility um guiding principles. All right. So let's um see we can vote. All right. And that passes 52. So, uh, we will move on to oral communications. Oral communications. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic within the city council subject matter jurisdiction for up to three minutes during the section. State law prohibits the council from acting on non-aggenda items. If you'd like to speak on this item of um ple or the next item, please submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk. Now, would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on this item? Uh if so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or submit the blue speaker card to the city clerk. Now, we'll take in-person speakers first and each speaker will have three minutes. Uh, Steven Goldstein. Steve,

sorry about that.

Thank you for your time. I really appreciate it. I went through two years of homelessness due to the fact that a city employee made a comment in court saying that he could not find anything that would render my apartment unsafe. However, it turns out that the building I was living in had no building diagrams in the city record, no initial building code permit for building it. It was non-conforming at 184 Center Street as an R31 zone when the building was a R4 type building. And at the same time, I could easily document severe cracking in the foundation, severe cracking in the elevated walkway, and even sinking in my floor. And what happened? A city employee went to the the court and testified. Upon visual observation, he could find no observable uninhabitable problems. However, that is not what the law allows. A letter also said that the city was assuming that it was in compliance regarding the building code at the time it was built. Turns out the building drawings were burned in a fire in 1958. And yet, the building was built in 1960. And yet there was never been any action taken to rectify the fact that the building records were incomplete in the city. Thus violating the standard the state health and safety code 19850 which says that the city must have th those records in the in the records in order to have some kind of uh proper operation of the the rental property. Finally, at the same time, the state clearly states that no or government agency can

assume safety without evidence. And what I understand is that the city has done everything it took to prevent any inspection of the property. Again, I wound up being homeless because of these actions. And I'm not giving up. I'm saying that the city should have had this corrected. The the state law says that the city should be demanding that property owners be providing these records to the city before anything can be approved, including importantly a certificate of occupancy. Without these records being in place, a certificate of occupancy under those circumstances would be not valid. And I think at this point in time I what's going to happen is I'm now in contact with the state housing uh department to arrange a audit of the city's practices and if the city is found to have a significant amount of records missing in the housing department that could render a lot of problems for the city. I suggest the city does something to correct it.

Thank you. All right. Any other public comment in person on item five? Okay. Not seeing any. will go virtual. Bruce England.

Thanks, Mayor. Good evening, everybody, council members, members of the public attending. Um, I'll be I'll be short. I just want to I figure we're getting close to the end of the year and I want to bring up the community for all policies of the city and praise the city and members of the community and all stakeholders who are upholding those those goals and those positions uh regarding community for all. Now, it's very focused on our own city, but you know, our country and our world is built of a collection of communities, and we're one of them. And if other communities also have their equivalent of community for all um policies, then we're we're in a good position. So, I think that altogether what this means is that we're we're not divisive in what we do, that we care about all people, and that we don't try to put wedges in between one group of people versus another. Mountain View represents diversity and care for all members of the community, obviously, including people who don't even have homes to live in. We try to take care of everybody. And so, once again, I'm I want to praise the city and I want to praise everybody who works on this and holds these values to be as important as I think they are. And I hope that they will continue forward as they are. Thank you.

Thank you, Hala Alshawani. Yes. Good evening. Uh thank you, mayor. Uh good evening, council members and city staff. My name is Hala Alshawani. I'm a an old resident, old residing member of the community in Mountain View. Uh just wanted to comment on last week's council meeting. Uh last Tuesday, December 9th, there was an outpouring of public concerns and grave uh fears regarding having their properties designated as um historic buildings. And I believe this is justified. In all the city's outreach community meetings on downtown historic preservations that I have attended, there was very little information, if any, regarding the benefits and the responsibilities of owning historical buildings. There was no mention of tax benefits, subsidies, uh, for repairs or replacements, the ability to modify, to update historic buildings. None of this was covered generally or thoroughly. This information is vital for the public as well as the policy makers to know and understand so that everyone can make informed decisions. The city should also state the benefits of retaining our historic downtown to the econ economic vitality programs and the significant tax revenue that it generates. Fiscal impacts and otherwise are important to mention. Moving forward, I hope that the city staff andor the um hired consultants can provide a full disclosure of what is entitled in owning a historic uh residential or commercial buildings in Mountain View. Thank you so much.

Thank you Sophie Yet.

Hi there.

Hello. My name is Sophie and I'm uh speaking to the council. Thanks so much for hearing me. Um I'd just like to voice support for what was discussed earlier around um the investment report. I think I concur with what Bruce was saying earlier. I think as a community, Mountain View really thrives based on diversity and, you know, moving towards treating everyone as a human and ensuring the rights that people have. And I feel like as a as a city, we have the ability to make a powerful stand. And the fact that we already do not support investments such as those in weapons, private prisons, and mass surveillance should be seen as a good sign, and we can continue to move forward with that going in the future. Um, thank you.

All right, that concludes um public comment and we'll move on to item six, which is our public hearing. Item 6.1 is our housing element program 1.1G, zoning precise plan and general plan amendments. Principal planner Diana Pancholi and community development director Christian Murdoch will present the item. If you'd like to speak on this item, please submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk. Now okay, good evening, mayor and council members. Um, my name is Diana Panchcholi, principal planner with the city's planning division, and I'm joined here tonight by uh community development director Christian Murdoch. At tonight's meeting, staff is presenting the proposed amendments to implement program 1.1G of the housing element. Program 1.1G aims to ensure consistency with zoning and journal plan for all sites in the housing element site inventory and identified housing opportunity sites. The housing element zoning sites and densities are shown here. As a reminder, the Moffett Boulevard zoning changes will be completed separately through the Moffett Boulevard precise plan process. And just as a reminder, the program has a housing element deadline of December 31st of this year. A little bit of the um background on this um the housing element itself. The sixth cycle of housing element developed between 2021 and 2023 included several outreach activities to create programs to meet the city's reena requirements and further the housing production. Two key policy considerations from community

input um were equitable distribution of housing sites across the entire city and the viability of sites based upon quality, age, size and use of the buildings as well as the property owner interest. Other housing element programs such as program 1.4 and 2.6 also address other sites with viable development in the city's highest opportunity neighborhoods. At previous meetings, the environmental planning commission and the city council reviewed the proposed amendments and approaches presented here tonight. City council expressed support for a general plan mixeduse fillet center land use approach for the sites as shown in blue on the map here to help preserve locally serving businesses. The city council also supported a flexible precise plan approach for the remainder of the sites as shown in orange which would allow sight specific code requirements to allow the densities and the character appropriate for the area. On November 6 earlier this year, the EPC held a public hearing to discuss the proposed amendments. At the meeting, the EPC recommended council approved the journal plan and zoning amendments at the Miramonte and Questa sites with the 6 vote and one recusal and the remainder amen amendments were unanimously recommended for approval with a 70 vote. As described in the staff report, some of the proposed amendments introduce the general plan mixeduse village center land use in existing regulations to achieve the housing element program. The general plan mixeduse village center land use is a set of existing mixeduse development policies that preserve the existing commercial zoning but allow opportunities for multifamily housing. The locations for these developments are determined by the journal plan through

mixed-use designations. However, the zoning district remains commercial and the journal plan makes mixeduse village center developments are the only residential use allowed in these commercial zones. The development standards for this approach utilizes existing mechanisms to preserve existing commercial businesses without the need to create a new mixeduse district. This does not change the underlying zoning. avoids non-conformances for existing developments and creates a pathway for residential development consistent with the general plans villagelet center policies. So in summary, the table here presents the proposed general plan map and text amendments to allow the residential uses as described uh at at densities prescribed by the housing element. The cells show in shown in blue are amendments intended to facilitate the journal plan mixeduse village center land use and the orange cells reflect the remainder sites. Details of the amendments are further discussed in the staff report. One key difference is the 1949 grant road amendments which proposes densities to allow 35 dwelling units per acre which is slightly greater than the 30 dwelling unit per acre allowances of the housing element. And similar to the general plan amendments, uh listed here are the proposed zoning and precise plan amendments to make the uh sites consistent with the housing element and to allow residential uses and development standards to allow existing office businesses to return to these sites if redeveloped. Other minor code amendments are proposed to update outdated code references in the precise plans for consistency with the city code and the state law and zoning amendments to clarify navigation easement requirements which relates to restrictions on the use of property and incidental effects such as noise and the height restrictions on any new structures.

Based on the previous council directions, staff reviewed existing resources to help small businesses return to sites if redeveloped as listed here on the slide. Additionally, the economic vitality strategy also includes an action item for tools such as rent caps and commercial rent subsidies to help bridge market gaps. However, further work is needed to identify a stable funding source to ensure success of this program. Specifically around Evendel Precise Plan area A, staff studied several zoning options to retain small businesses. There are limited land use zoning tools as restrictions on the residential development conflicts with the housing element goals to create more housing opportunities or may be difficult to implement under the current state law. As part of the environmental assessment for the project, staff reviewed the proposed amendments to understand if there were new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of the impacts and found that the project was already analyzed as part of the city's housing element update program environmental impact report adopted in 2023. Therefore, no additional environmental analysis is needed under California Environmental Quality Act. Staff would like to note that we received several uh written public comments prior to this meeting. A few supported the proposed amendments and several voice concerns related to the proposed amendments for the 1702 Miramonte site and the impact of highdensity residential developments on single family residential character of the neighborhood. Now I will pass it on to my public works colleague for the next slides.

Good evening um mayor, council members. Um Ed Orango um assistant public works director. Um as um principal planner Pancholi noted um the city received uh public feedback regarding the intersection at Marmani and Qua. Um continuing on this topic, I'll briefly be going over the existing conditions and concerns we heard. near-term solution staff is reviewing and long-term strategies that could look at this in more detail. Um, in this view, uh, Mirammani is running north south and Qua is running east west. Um, along Qua through this intersection, there's an offset and Slad Key, a T intersection, is in very close proximity to the Qua intersection. And please advance the presentation. Um, some concerns that we heard include the movement along the northbound Marirammani turning left onto Slattkkey uh movement. As vehicles are waiting to turn, I'm sorry, can you go back? As vehicles are waiting to turn, this can cause a queue backup. This can be further exacerbated for those vehicles turning onto northbound Marammani from Qua in advance. Additionally, exiting Sladkkey, vehicles turning left onto northbound Mymani have to negotiate southbound vehicles coming down Mymani and the previously mentioned movements from northbound um Mirammani vehicles in advance it. Lastly, uh there are some parking concerns about businesses um parking spilling into the neighborhood. Next slide. So staff is um currently looking at some near-term solutions um from the comments that we received. Um some preliminary options we've discussed is the possibility of restricting the left turns into andor out of Slacki at Mirammani. This would help address the concerns um previously mentioned and if pursued would require to conduct uh

public engagement with the neighborhood. Um the Mirammani paving project um which is um limits are from Questa Castro will be starting construction in March. Um if the turning restrictions at Slacki are pursued um going through the public engagement process um the modifications could be incorporated into the project but could also be incorporated independently for the traffic signal at Qua and Marrammani. Staff will be observing the signal timing and seeing if there's adjustments needed during specific times of day that may help with operations. And then lastly, um staff is always available for public requests and the public can request um reach out to staff public works specifically via askmount view calling public works directly um or sending us a message u requesting evaluation of any specific locations or requests for red curbs including concerns about site visibility. Next slide, please. So, moving on to the long-term strategy. Um, in January 2026, council will be reviewing considering the Marmani corridor study. The study presents potential multimodal improvements along the entire corridor. As part of the capital improvement program process, staff can review establishing a project to do a deeper dive and study these two intersections more closely. We do recommend this be done um in the context of the CIP process to provide um the information regarding other projects that may be proposed in workload. But a new study could be a future project that would review the configuration and identify if there's anything feasible to improve the operations. I'm going to be handing it back to Principal Pancholi to conclude the presentation. So, in conclusion, staff recommends the city council to approve the proposed amendments to implement the housing element program 1.1G goals and increase the housing opportunity in the sites.

Please note um that assistant community development director Blazinski and project manager Krisha Pinola are also present here tonight if council has any questions along with our environ consultant as well. Thank you. Great. Thank you. And just for the public, apologies we didn't say from the front. So staff's going to do their presentation, council will ask questions, and then it will be everyone's turn to provide public comment to council. So we'll go to um council questions. Council member Ramirez.

Thank you, Mayor. Uh and thank you staff for uh responding to the numerous questions that were submitted in advance of the meeting. Um the first question under this item, question 29, um reveals that uh 1702 Marrammont and 777 Kesta Drive are subject to uh Senate Bill 6 and Assembly Bill 2011, which allow housing at 30 units per acre uh ministerially, right? So, it wouldn't even have to go to a city council uh uh public hearing for for a vote and approval. Is that is that correct?

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, City Council. Christian Murdoch, community development director. Um, in part, the answer is yes. AB2011 um creates a ministerial approval process for qualifying commercial sites based on adjacent roadway width. Um, this site would um qualify both under AB 2011 and SB6. SB6, just to distinguish, does not create a ministerial approval process, but does create a pathway to submit an application to approve commercial development through the normal discretionary review process.

And and apologies, I just for those that may be attending our meeting that don't know what AB and SB means, maybe we can just say that those are some state laws, Senate bill, and assembly bill, and just add some color and some background. I I I think that was just signed. So, I just want to make sure that we're allowing the public to understand that state law has been enacted and signed by our governor. And I'll turn it back to you, Director Murdoch. Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, yes, for those that don't uh work in this space every day, um these are state laws that are part of a series of laws that the legislators enacted in recent years to expand housing development opportunities. These two laws, Senate Bill um six and Assembly Bill 2011, um passed by the legislature and signed by the governor uh maybe two or three years ago at this point, um expand uh housing development opportunities in commercially zoned areas by uh overriding local zoning in areas that may be commercial only to allow residential development um if certain physical characteristics and other use uh components are present on a site. notably the um width of the roadway uh adjacent to the site in question. And so um these two sites that are identified for action tonight have u exceed the minimum roadway widths to be subject to these laws.

Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Council Member. Thank you, mayor. Um and and and uh thank you uh director for for walking us through. of two separate pathways under state law today that override local control allowing for housing at a minimum of 30 units per acre on each of these sites. And the 30 units per acre is also the density that is proposed in the staff recommendation. Right. So it's it's the same. That's correct. And then on top of that, um, projects that use the two state pathways, Assembly Bill 2011 and Senate Bill 6, whichever way you you choose to go, also can use the state density bonus law on top of that. Is that accurate?

That's correct. Including the use of uh waiverss from development standards and and um concessions as well. Correct. Okay. um that that's that's helpful for us to to understand. So even if the council um decided to take no action or we were to deny the staff recommendation, um housing would still be allowed under state law pursuant to a to assembly bill 2011 and Senate Bill 6.

Correct. Okay. Um that was something that was for the benefit of the public uh new to the council. I think all of us just in in seeing the responses to the questions today learned about that. So that's something I think the the council may want to sort of talk through and understand. Um are there certain advantages to having um so we we we have a a commitment under the housing element program to conduct the resonings. the responses to other council questions disclose some amount of risk and not following through. Um, and I won't delve too deeply into that, but maybe another way of looking at that could be are there certain advantages even if we already have to allow housing at these sites. Are there certain advantages to having local development standards governing those lo those properties? Um, so I think in in general, yes, there's a benefit to having local standards. Um, it can communicate to a developer the types of development that the city wants to see as opposed to development that the state mandates to occur. and some developers are sensitive to that and and try their best to design projects to be um locally acceptable and uh to integrate better into the community. And so to the extent that the city could adopt local regulations that achieve those outcomes um it is advantageous to have um local standards in most cases.

Thank you. And my last question will be uh can staff sort of walk through um from your perspective maybe a couple of examples in the staff recommendations for proposed development standards where um you might work with a developer to communicate certain expectations.

Sure. We'll need a moment to pull up those standards that are proposed for this site. Yeah, thank you. So um without taking too much time, I think the proposed amendments that we have presented in here um have looked at certain specifics such as the setback requirements or where the setbacks are measured from or the allowed height um or the amount of F that is allowed on a site which can then result into the desired densities to align with the housing element. That would be some of the examples of the standards that are being proposed in order to bring the um the sites in compliance to allow a development that can come in uh and u produce the amount of densities that are prescribed in the housing element.

Thank you. Council member Sha Walter.

Thank you. Okay. Um I have uh I um like to hear from Mr. Orango. Um I'm Hi, nice to see you again. I'm interested in this Miramonte traffic study. Um you mentioned it and um discussed it starting in 2026. Um, and so I'm I'm kind of interested in hearing a little more about what the components of it are and also the duration because as you know we're we're doing a big project on um Marmont, a big repaving project and of course we want to include any improvements in it. So can you just describe the traffic study and and what's made up what what it's made up of and how it long it takes?

Sure. Absolutely. again Ed Orango assistant public works director um so we had a sort of the two-prong approach that we were looking to do here the first is sort of this near-term um elements that the staff can do at staff level with the resources we have um evaluate what the um implications would be and what it would look like again this is um we just recently started these discussions so um we need an opportunity to evaluate the feasibility of this is closing the access um from it's left turn movements coming out of slide going on to northbound Marmani and then coming into Slack from northbound Marmani. And so we see this as an opportunity to address some of the concerns with the congestion in that specific area. These two intersections are very close together um and traffic can back up into the intersection um as soon as other movement starts being introduced. So, this is something that we can introduce um with our staff in early 2026 to start evaluating what that looks like. Um see if it's feasible and then we again we would have to do a public engagement with this. Um it would impact circulation through the neighborhood. So, we want to be sure that we're um giving the opportunity for the neighbors to be able to uh weigh in and give us um feedback. But um if supported, we could move forward with that with the Marmani project um and do modifications of that. But the um the implementation isn't all that difficult. Um and we can do this independently. So um the modifications for Marrammani Drive, they really are kind of matching up um the existing conditions at the Questa intersection because we that's sort of the u beginning of the project or end of the project. So we need to match those existing improvements that are coming into that intersection. So effectively, it's going to look pretty much the same at that location as it does today. It's because it really does have two lanes that are going in each direction coming from the south. Um so that's sort of the first, you know, approach. Again, we're going to look at the traffic signal timing as well to see if that can be

adjusted at the Questa Maron intersection. Um but the actual traffic study, we would need consultant support help for this part. Um and that's where we're proposing to um we if council directed us we could include that as a proposed project in the next um uh capital improvement program review cycle. Um come back to council to evaluate what that would look like for workload and whether that would be a a 26 27 project or a future project depending on the other priorities that we have on the projects in the capital improvement program.

Okay. So, so essentially the there's sort of a short-term version and a long-term version. And the short-term version could definitely be incorporated into the repaving project. The long-term version, we don't know what it would say we needed to do. So, you can't answer that. That's correct. Did I get that? That's correct. Yes.

Okay. Got it. All right. So, then um in addition to that, if I I um I used to take these turns very very frequently when I had children. Um, but that was a while ago. Young children driving around and there used to be a sign there that limited the times you could turn left out of Slad Key. Is that still there? I see nodding heads. Okay. Um, uh, that was a very odd sign. You It was sort of small. You You had to take some time to read it. I'm sure the people who live in the neighborhood go by it, you know, hundreds of times. They know it by heart, but for people who were just driving there occasionally, you kind of see it and go, "What?" Anyway, um we've been putting in a lot of pedestrian uh uh sort of temporary um uh signals. You know, there they don't function when nobody's walking there, but when they do function, uh you know, there's all these lights and stuff. Um is there any um do we ever put in a a stoplight that only works for like three hours a day

or something along those lines? So, I'm going to try to start off this uh response um and then actually um I have uh Lorenzo Lopez, the city's traffic engineer. He's on Zoom and is available for to answer responses questions, but let me start off and see if he has anything to add to this response. Um we do implement um um traffic signal equipment as you mentioned that really is um it's not necessarily times a day uh as it much is um u sort of pedestrian actuated so on demand. Um so recently um CALR installed the um pedestrian hybrid beacons on El Camino Royale. These is an example of an ondemand traffic signal where it's really free flowing traffic on El Camino until somebody decides that they want to cross a street. So they push the button and then that notifies traffic that there's somebody here want to cross and then it turns red and that is a true traffic signal stop. So the the traffic has to abide by that red light and that allows the pedestrian to cross. So, it's sort of on demand. Um, and then it turns off once the that we have the timing to allow enough uh travel time for the pedestrian to get across the street. Um, so that's one element that we've we're introducing. We're doing this at at the Grant Sleeper intersection as well. Um, it's currently under construction, but a current example is the El Camino site. Um, we also implement um pedestrian um we call them um rapid flashing beacons. So, this is also um on demand. These are smaller poles that flash at the um vehicles when a pedestrian pushes the button, indicating that there's a pedestrian wanting to cross. Creates more visibility and attention to the crosswalk and the intersection that we've identified. Um so that vehicles are aware that somebody wants to cross here, I better slow down and stop so that to allow them to cross rather than that not having it. So we're selective on where we put these. Um usually in the high volume areas really um providing

and they're all pedestrianoriented. They're all pedestrian on demand by pedestrians. So pedestrian pushes a button or if a bicyclist um and then they cross, but again it's um it's not necessarily times a day as it is um okay by the the user. So and then I want to offer an opportunity for um the traffic engineer Lorenzo to provide any additional input unless um if he can be promoted. Hi Lorenzo. Hello. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes.

Hi everyone. Uh Lorenzo Lopez, city traffic engineer. Ed summed it up pretty well. Um those signals that that you are mentioning that are uh not on all all the time is a pedestrian hybrid beacon and those have the actual red lights that um serve like a traditional traffic signal. Those are um along El Camino right now. We don't have any on city streets yet, but as he mentioned, Grass Sleeper is the first one. Um, we do have others that are proposed in the future at other locations on city streets. And again, as he stated, those are all pedestrian or bicycle activated, so not vehicle activated.

Thank you. That's very informative. All right, so I have a couple more questions. Um uh

oh yes yes not for red. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Um this one is more about what can we do to preserve small businesses or you know or the um the dental offices. Clearly everybody needs a dentist, right? We need it's one of the land uses we need in our community. Um and uh um these are you know these buildings have been there a long time so um there might be differences of opinion about whether they should be redeveloped or not but but we do need that land use for sure and um uh you mentioned that there wasn't much in land use law that we could do to protect those small businesses but what else could we do? I mean, we've had some situations where, for instance, at the corner of El Camino and um and uh Castro Street where we, you know, where we preserved the um the uh the Rose Market and the uh and the coffee shop. And so I just wondered if if there's if there are things that can be or included or are they included in our zoning to support um businesses or other programs? Thank you for the question. Um I'll start first with talking about sort of what the tools are um at the legislative action level that we're talking about um and maybe how that's distinguished from a project level action right of the examples you noted and then ask principal planner Pulli to just talk about the care and the the thought that went into um selecting the zoning tools to ensure there are ongoing commercial operation opportunities with these resonings so sites don't end up as non-conforming commercial uses that could restrict ongoing operation. Um so to start um uh it's it's challenging from a legislative zoning and general plan policy level um in light of state law to um achieve the kinds of um small business preservation outcomes that you're describing. Um typically that

would require discouraging other uses um such as residential that might have different economics that lead to development of those uses in a way to uh protect the desired use. Right? in this case the small business commercial opportunities because of state law and the responsibilities the city has in the housing element we're not able to discourage residential uses in this case uh to preserve commercial uses and so I think the sort of balance of the tools that are available is is challenging in that regard um where the city may have additional opportunity to work with an applicant is on a specific project which is not the stage we're at tonight which tonight is a zoning and general plan action in the future there be a project action where there's an actual developer with a project impacts that are known and a timeline where the city has the opportunity to encourage the applicant to work with those businesses to minimize the impacts in that specific project level um situation. And so um you know the lack uh of additional tools tonight doesn't mean that uh further opportunities are foreclosed in the future to continue to work towards that business preservation.

Okay. And then my final question is just to ask you to remind us how long the Blossom um the Blossom Valley Center across the street from there where the Safeway is um uh has been zoned village center. Um can we get back to you on that in during this meeting? Yeah, but I guess the point I want to Yes, I would like you to get back to me. Thanks.

And just adding to the other part of the question is um you know the specific reasonings where we have been where we have selected general plan mixed use village center um land use is we looked at a lot of different ways to reszone this but this one would would allow residential while also allow keep allowing commercial. That was one of the zoning tool that we used. And then there are some minored modifications that we are proposing to our existing code where you cannot convert the existing groundful commercial into an ADU and lose that commercial space. That is another example of the specific things we considered. Thank you. That's all my questions for now.

Great. Thanks. And we'll let sta staff will let us know when they found that as we go through the questions. Um, Council Member Hicks,

thankfully many of my questions have already been asked on the importance of small businesses. And then the one uh, Council Member Ramirez asked on uh, the state uh, bills that uh, kind of conflict with things we may try to do here. So I think my remaining questions are regarding the um the site at 1702 Miramarante that there's been some concern about. Um I I guess my question is going to be around um some of the kind of conflicting or overlapping uh legislation that that could uh affect that site. So one is my understanding and and please confirm or not that if we were to remove it from our housing element there is a buffer so it would be possible to remove it. Is that true?

Buffer of in terms for the public in terms of meeting our required number of units in that particular area uh for our housing element requirements. Right. I'd say that there are a number of considerations the council should keep in mind when thinking about removing this um as it relates to the the buffer consideration specifically. Um I think we would be okay um in terms of our housing element capacity and buffer uh in the event that the mati site was removed.

Okay. But so we would be okay. But there is already as council member Ramirez went over there is state legislation that says even if we removed it, this would be what he Assembly Bill 2011 and state bill 6. Um the housing development would still be allowed without council review any so we'd remove it but in some ways it would still be there. not in the housing element, but available for the same type of development.

That's correct. And in one instance, potentially a ministerial approval that does not even come to the city council. It would just go through a staff level review, perhaps under Senate Bill Six, some sort of city review process that might go to a public hearing. But in both cases requiring the city to allow residential development and and do those allow you to um retain or preserve the existing businesses or they don't it's something that you would have to work on but they

yeah we would need to to double check both laws to see if there's a required commercial component in either case. I think our initial sense is that there's not. So the city may have fewer options to uh impose those other u sensitive qualitative components about commercial use ongoing

and um and then also would there be if we were to remove it would there be additional work for city staff such as additional sequel review? Um, so the the simple answer is yes, there would be additional work for staff if council opted not to um complete the the actions recommended by staff tonight. Um, we think that ultimately um the city would need to amend its housing element, which is a pretty substantial effort that's not currently planned for in our work planning and staff resourcing. Um, you know, the council may remember um the initial housing element process and how involved it is. Much of that's required to amend the housing element as well. um engaging with the state um preparing public review drafts um responding to public comments conducting environmental review and obtaining state certification. Um we estimate it would take the better part of a year or more to conclude that process. Um you know an option short of that is to not complete the action tonight if the council is interested in doing that so that uh additional study could be done related to the traffic concerns and um the scope of improvements that could be made are better understood. Um but um in either case um there are risks to the city from not completing the action tonight giving the housing element deadline that's um or the deadline that's in the housing element for this program.

So let me see if I understand. We could potentially remove those properties not be in a better place legally because the other laws would allow the same type of development but give staff a lot of extra work. Correct. Is there any advantage to doing that to removing them? We It seems like when the series of questions I've asked, we come up with a lot of disadvantages. Are there any do we get in any better place in any way? I I can't think of any advantage to the city relative to trying to shape the outcomes of future resident residential development at the site by removing these from the housing element.

Okay, there's there's an answer. Um, okay. We're going to get to public comment pretty shortly. I I apologize. I know it's been two hours since our meeting started. Thank you very much. This is our public meeting process and and council will have an opportunity to finish their questions and then I promise we will get to public comment. Thank you. I'm finished with my questions. Okay. Vice Mayor Ramos.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, can I see the slide about the traffic improvements again? I have some clarifying questions relating to that. more of the action. So I think this is a slide after this. There we go. Um, so out of all all these items, do any of these require any council action today to move it forward?

Um, no, none of them require any council action. This is um all elements that staff can do at staff level. Um, and we're we will begin as I mentioned um the evaluation of that first point on the turning restriction of the turning movements is something that we're going to start in um early 2026. And um again the traffic signal observation is something the staff will be doing. Um and then again the last point I can't um I don't want to um beat a dead horse but the public always can reach out to us contact public works for any sight specific requests and staff will evaluate that um on a sight specific level to see if there's um a red curve request or there's some site visibility that needs to be evaluated. So, um, as you evaluate the the slat key turning movements, um, say that somehow you determine that the no left turns is what is the best thing to do. What is the time frame on this?

I don't have a good um answer for you right now on the time frame. Um, the the element that um, we would need to include is this public engagement process. if we were to restrict those left turn movements in and out of Sladki, um it would affect neighborhood circulation and just how people get in in and out of their, you know, residences. So, we want an opportunity to have the um um the neighborhood hear this if we decide to pursue it, get their feedback before we would recommend doing kind of any further implementation. That piece is sort of that's the the question mark that I don't have a good answer on timing. Um but again, early 26 is when we'd start evaluating that. Um we may have some kind of survey that goes out. um maybe by spring to identify what that looks like. Assuming we would want to pursue this. Again, at staff level, we would not uh feel that um this is something that's feasible before we'd reach out to the residents because we feel like after evaluation, if if it's not feasible, we would stop there.

Okay. So, if it's determined not feasible, what are some of the other options to improve that intersection? other I see the traffic signal and I'm not entirely sure what would be included in the paving project too.

We only included the element of the paving project that um if we decided to move forward with those left turn restrictions, we have a contractor already working in the vicinity and on that exact uh location that we can request to do modifications to close those restrictions. Um but this is what we came up with on the near term. Um it's a tricky intersection to be able to do anything more at the staff level. Um and so that's the second part of what I had mentioned on if there's a study that council want us to look at. We'd suggest that that be evaluated as part of the capital improvement program process because that is an actual project that would need to get funded. We need to bring a consultant on board. um time and effort. Um again, at council's um direction, we would absolutely do that, but um kind of weigh the um other um projects that are being proposed for the next fiscal year and future fiscal years as well.

All right. And this might be for the city manager. Uh when would our public get the first crack of an opportunity to uh advocate for something in our CIP? So, I can answer that question.

Oh, great. Thank you. Sorry about that. Um so our capital improvement program process um is um sort of a um it's a annual um evaluation um but it's a full-blown um evaluation of the entire program um every other year. Um this last spring was that we did a full-blown evaluation. We mapped out the next five years. We're already in year one. So the next four years after um but then in the spring um on the off years we evaluate the next fiscal year. So the 26 27 projects that we have identified in the capital improvement program right now um will be evaluated at that time. That's the work program that we would look to come to council identify if we wanted still to do all those projects or if there's any new projects that we wanted to include and then um it really is a workload balance um which projects would um need to be removed in order to insert new projects and we would do that um with um a conversation with council.

Sorry, did you give me an actual time? Sorry, I did not. [laughter] Um, I think we're looking at April of 2026 to come to you as a a study session for the capital improvement program. All right. Thank you. That's all my questions. Council member Mallister. Ed, while you're sitting there or standing there, couple quick questions. Um, how many accidents have been recorded in that intersection? I don't have that data in front of me. We'd have to um return at a later date with that information. Um, if you did the recirculation of that area, normally we send it out to 750 people. So, but that would impact a neighborhood from Marammani all the way to Springer. So, would you expand that public notice to a much greater population?

So, you hit the nail on the head on this one. Um, the 750 um radius would be insufficient. We recognize that completely. Um, we would have to expand the notification area to a much wider neighborhood. um you know likely um I'm kind of thinking through the neighbors know the streets um u form road also um parallels u mymani um so at least that far if not further and then up to Barbara again at least that far if not further because that's the neighborhood that really would be affected

right and here's another one how about I love roundabouts and I've seen them in Europe now this is one heck of a it sort of fits that criteria because there's roads coming all around. What do a roundabout be? Whoa. Okay, let's just keep an open mind on that. [laughter]

I'm just going to Thanks everyone. And I'm just going to ask for a point of order where let's just council member Mallister ask your question and we'll have assistant public works director orango answer the question because the the longer that this continues the longer it takes for us to get to public comment. So I'd just like to to proceed. Thank you everyone.

So the specific um implementation of anything more significant at that intersection would require an evaluation and a study. And so that's where I mentioned we'd have to get consultant um support to kind of really look at have them implement a study um evaluate that and again with that study there's a public engagement component as as part of that too um identify alternatives and then kind of bring it to um the public and the council to identify this is the path forward but right now I don't have a um um an implementation tool that could be done at that intersection. Yeah. Uh, so you do have traffic counts on this roads, right? We have traffic counts at this intersection. I don't have them in front of me, but we do do counts.

Would you know off hand? Uh, the traffic counts increasing. I wouldn't know that off hand. Okay. Thank you, Ed. Appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Clark. Oh, no. Oh, you have more. That was for Ed. Oh, sorry. Apologies. I thought you were Thank you. done. Okay. [laughter]

Okay. So, um, I was not here in 23, so a lot of these decisions were made and so it's I'm taking a longer time to get up to speed than I initially thought. Um, but to follow up on Council Member Hicks thing, the the advantage of taking it out would sort of help determine housing throughout the city or throughout south of El Camino. So one of the objectives for identification of this site was to advance uh objectives in the housing element related to equity and distribution of housing development sites. Um the city has a lot of um identified housing opportunities in areas north of El Camino Rail precise plan and uh in the past has seen a lot of development along the El Camino Rial corridor but not significant development of this type south of El Camino Rail. And so um you know the objective of this this package of resonings includes in part um expanding those opportunities to areas south of El Camino Riale precise plan. So to remove this um I think the the natural alternative would likely be to find some other suitable site or sites that meet or exceed what the resoning objective was for um these sites at Qua and Marramonte.

Okay. I have to applaud the the council. They asked some great questions and one of the great questions was if it was based on buffers that we could remove this the building site at 1702 and still have enough units based on our buffer the no net loss. Is that correct?

That's correct. Um, but the buffer is generally intended to be for instances when the council approves a project that has fewer units than were anticipated in the housing element to prevent the city from tilting into a a net loss scenario that triggers a rapid resoning process um for the city and the city council to consider. Um, it's not typically associated with other legislative actions of this sort that are prescribed in the housing element. Well, back to the question, since uh it's not intended, but it could resolve the issue of rem if we decide to remove it because we have the no net loss, there's plenty of units in the south of El Camino. Would could the city staff says would you have to re-evaluate the housing element, etc., etc., but you're still in compliance based on if on the buffer there's enough space in there? because I was reading the following your answer saying something about the buffer. So if there's remove it, it doesn't affect the buffer. Why would it affect the housing element? Right. The buffer is just one of several considerations related to the city's housing element compliance. Um the other relates to that equity and distribution on more qualitative dimensions as opposed to the quantitative buffer uh dimension. And so, uh, while we may not run a follow of the buffer requirements, uh, and no net loss considerations, um, we would not have fully implemented our commitment to, um, the other, um, obligations in the housing element.

Okay. So, just want to follow up on that, but if we have a buffer, we've met the goal of the affordability and so if we remove it, the we still met the requirements of the housing element. Correct. because we have those housing low-income housing in there and etc. Thank you. So, I'm going to try to answer this from a different angle. Oh, I like my angle. Go ahead. [snorts and laughter]

So, what um director Murdoch was trying to tell you is you know there is the numbers game and then there is where are you going to put those numbers? These were these are the two things that we are constantly trying to uh bring a balance to when we are trying to get a housing element uh adopted and approved. And when we tried to do it and um right around January and February of 2023 when we were really struggling to have that conversation with HCD uh we were given you know pretty direct input from HCD to find these back pocket sites and

and HCD being the California Department of Housing and Community Development. They're the state agency responsible for reviewing and certifying city housing elements. So these um Miriamonte being one of the sites and the blossom shopping center um were some of the sites which are identified through that direct coordination with HCD. So although we might have the buffer number uh still there in terms of the capacity but in terms of where we are distributing those or getting those numbers from that might not meet HCD's qualification criteria. Okay. Were the city staff initially looking at these properties or were there uh influences to say do it this way?

Yeah. All right. So, um these sites were not initially identified u by staff in work on the housing element. they came up in later stages of the housing element development process uh in response to uh the review comments if we'll we'll call it that from the state and others um during the process.

Okay. Um, another confusion part that I had was I asked about um medical and you know since we have a major hospital there that is a I think anything around that area is considered a major medical center because it's a hub I should say you look at Stanford and all these other ones and so with this medical uh where's that question I asked about 37 D no why are medical buildings considered different than commercial ones? And you said because they need special use, their special requirements, regulations impact the different types of commercial retail. And then on another one, you say they are part number 40, dental offices are considered medical offices use and permitted in the CN neighborhood. Um, but sort of says that they are special uh animal type of business. So does that give us any consideration of saying okay well they're medical we want to keep them and therefore they're ex could be deferred exempt from including in other parts of this uh housing element.

So I think you you bring up a an important consideration for local zoning and including housing element site identification. I think the challenge here is that the city has gone through that process to vet sites and identified this site at 1702704 monty for housing element purposes. And so um you know as discussed earlier there is a a process to amend the housing element if the council's reconsidered that site selection criteria and process. It's a very involved process that we haven't yet budgeted staff time and resources for uh and would take likely the better part of a year to complete. And so it would be a very involved process to revisit the site selection to uh discourage development um as it were in the housing element for a site that has uses that the council wishes to preserve.

I was sort of okay that's a comment. Um I'll save that later. Um so the other one so let's go on this uh well let's go go about saving business a small business as a small business owner I uh very concerned about redevelopment and how many small businesses we're losing and when this came up in earlier in the year I was very concerned about losing small businesses and um there's not much we can is there more than what you put in there under the small business preservation that actually says we can do something because according to I mean to follow up on uh council member Shaw Walters over at Castro and El Camino they did when they built we required them to put uh business in there. We didn't give them enough parking but we said you had to put them in there. Can we do that with the all these new state laws that say can you say we require that you maintain or re uh save space or build space for these medical units to go back in.

Right. So I think um you know the example you noted was a project level sequence of events. Um there is an opportunity to have a dialogue with applicants at the project phase that's different than this sort of generic reasonzoning phase that's a legislative action. Um the city would have limited opportunity in the case of a development at this site to require those kinds of actions. U but the city can ask. Sometimes there are other um allowances or exceptions or deviations developers seek in part of uh as part of the development review process that we would have an opportunity then to talk about small business preservation activities. Um so it's hard to say specifically um because the circumstances are always different uh and unique at the the project phase. Um and that those are factors we can't know now at this legislative phase.

Okay. Uh so we're going to go into a hypothetical uh scenario. So if this if a project was allowed and it's 30 units to the acre and it's a little under an acre I understand how many units are you're saying proposed there was it 100 how many units are proposed that could be built here under the scenario that you have right now 30

so I think the figure that's estimated in the housing element is 15 units and that includes some discounting for um site develop velment factors um to have a realistic capacity in the housing element. Um the actual project that could come in would be evaluated on a 30 dwelling unit per acre um times the project area uh basis. So with a density bonus, so you're saying 15 if you went without any uh allocations, but if you went with a a density bonus, you could get up to

So I I think we estimate the base density at approximately 20 units. And so whatever density bonus that a project would qualify for would be applied to that. Um and they can range from, you know, 13, 17, 22, 25. Um it really depends on the amount of affordable housing that they include in the project. And how many uh how many stories would you need to get up to 20 units? I think that depends in part on whether there would be ground flooror commercial associated with the project. You know, two or three stories potentially.

Okay. So, we were talking about traffic earlier and there is a lot of young people going in there and so forth. So, would they be would the setbacks be the I like why the sidewalks. So, was the setbacks they would they would be closer to the sidewalk and this is one question. Yes. Okay. The the next question is, would they be allowed to have limited parking?

So, I'll take the parking question while principal planner Pulli is looking up the setbacks that would apply. Um, this is a project site that is not located in a a high transit service area that would have exemptions from parking requirements under state law. Um, a density bonus project could utilize reduced parking standards um as provided in state density bonus law. they still would be required to include parking. And so that's a difference from those higher transit service areas that the council's encountered previously. So um those parking standards are prescribed in state density bonus law and they um in some cases would be less than the city's base code requirements for parking, but parking would still be required.

Would parking be um required for every unit or could they Some units I've seen that they're only putting in 50% or less? Yeah, I'm not aware at this moment of any uh allowance to not provide parking for um units of any size under state density bonus law parking standards. Okay. And

and regarding the setbacks, it's 15 ft street side setback and then uh 25 ft from the residential adjacent sense. So would there be an exemption where they could go closer to the street? If they um if a future developer wants to come and utilize the state density bonus law uh and we were allowed under that, they can. Okay. How many projects have we seen in the last two years where somebody did not use the state density bonus law? Um, my team is telling me one project [laughter] that was a housing development project.

Okay. Um, if we wanted to u bifurcate this motion and take out those properties, how would we do that, city attorney? So, I do not recommend making a motion to take out the properties tonight because I don't believe that council has the authority in of itself to just amend its housing element without going through the process that is set forth in housing element law. What I think you could do is you could direct staff to take the steps necessary to work with HD to consult with HD to see what would be required in order to amend the housing element to take those sites out. So rather than actually just removing them yourselves, I think the direction is for staff to work with us and we would just reach out to HCD and explain the situation and figure out if we need to go through a full public process and then comment period. Um the law talks about substantial amendments. I don't know if this would be considered a substantial amendment would require extensive process or if HCD would advise that it was something less. But I think really the direction should be to explore that with HCD rather than to remove it tonight

under that scenario. How would that work if you were able to justify it? Um so I think as noted earlier, right, there would be a a process staff would have to undertake um with staff work, technical analysis, environmental review, public engagement, public review and comment and coordination with the state agency uh in order to effectuate that. Also, in such a scenario, we would need to come back to council with um a list of options for council to depp prioritize to allow that work to occur. Um and council may be aware that um on January 27th, we're also intending to present implications of Senate Bill 79 and Assembly Bill um

130 um and uh potentially to undertake a local alternative planning process that would also require similar um dep prioritization of other work to accomplish that. So, um there are potentially u you know more than one upcoming planning effort that the council would want to undertake and require dep prioritization of other identified work that's currently prioritized.

Okay. And I have one more like an environmental question. We have medical services. Sometimes they use chemicals. Sometimes they leak into the ground. We have a gas station. Sometimes they have tanks that leak and leak into the ground. We have a creek over there. So, how is there any way to sort of be proactive in saying to I I guess it cost for the city to just do chemical sampling to say, "Hey, this is site is already deemed a federal hazard site or whatever you want to call it." Uh, and this is not practical to build on there. Is has that been done in Mountain View? I'll just start by saying I I don't think we have any information that suggests uh this site's contaminated and I want to be clear about that on the record. Um principal planner Pulli maybe you can talk about what our typical development review process is areas that we know are um typically contaminated from historic industrial operation and what our process is in the project review process.

Before you start, there also was a dry cleaner in that area. So you got a dry cleaner, medical offices, and a gas station. Triple play.

Yeah. So thank you for the question and uh typically during the development review process we do ask the applicant to provide us with us with the phase one study depending upon the result of the phase one they have to provide us the phase two studies. Um I am not aware of a situation where city has done the um environmental assessment of a site. Um we did do a programmatic EIR for the um housing element um at the time of adoption and uh we assess the the conditions at that point of time when a specific suppose we move forward with the resoning when specific development proposals will come up for a sightspecific development at that point of time more sight specific issues um are reviewed. We are aware of areas you know we know about um the contamination around the Leyong properties uh under our MEW um super fund sites. Um these are the areas which we know you know to stay away from or ask them like hey these are the concerns please assess it before you come forward with the development proposal. Uh so that's our typical process at this time.

Okay thank you. Those are my questions. Great. Thank you council member Clark.

Thanks. Just briefly um a follow on to earlier um because it's uh the web of state laws is ever evolving uh in a very uh quick manner and I'm feeling extra dumb wearing this sweater. So maybe I'm just not fully fully grasping um or maybe I maybe I maybe something didn't click before tonight or maybe um I I just didn't fully grasp it. So, it sounds like um based on your earlier answer to Council Member Ramirez's question, um something that I didn't fully recognize until tonight is that existing or recent state laws. What what's proposed tonight is to reszone this to to mixed use. One, not full residential because we wanted to make sure that we were able to preserve the building, the the offices, and the medical offices, and they wouldn't be um under mixed use. They're allowed. They're not non-conforming. Um, but the the reasonzoning that we had previously agreed to the state through the housing element on was 30 units per acre. Um, it sounds like since then state law has evolved to already allow 30 units per acre of residential on this site regardless of what we do tonight. Is that correct?

Uh, just looking at the um statutes, I mean it was roughly the same time. So, Assembly Bill 2011 was um enacted in 2022. Okay. Um so, it's all converging in roughly the same span of time, but but essentially if we were to reszone the properties tonight, we're not increasing the density that is already allowed under state law. That's something I didn't fully grasp. Correct. Okay. So, someone can do a ministerial application today for 30 units per acre residential on that site and they can wipe out the dentist office under today if they wanted to. if if they wanted to do a full residential application at 30 units per acre. I think that's likely correct.

Yes. Um, so then, um, so then, uh, the I think I'm guessing there's a benefit to us of applying the general mixeduse zoning to that site because presumably we have objective standards and other things that would apply if someone were to come forward with a there's no development proposal today, but if someone came forward with a development proposal under general mixed use, they can't just go through the ministerial process with no objectives. standards, they would have to go through our process with a general mixed use zoning and all of our objective standards would apply. Correct.

Okay. So, it sounds to me like uh unlike what I thought before tonight, there's really no if I were if I lived, I don't know, 500 feet from this, um there's really no advantage to me that there's an advantage to me of having this zoned as mixed use because now objective standards apply. Whereas, if we just do nothing tonight and let state law apply, there's someone can just go through a ministerial process without a public hearing presumably and wipe out everything and build a 30 unit to the acre residential complex with with with no parking. Um because I think I think right now the way state law stands for residential project, you don't have to apply parking. I think

it might depend on the transportation aspect of it. Yeah, I'd say generally yes. I would need to follow up more specifically on the point of parking under AB 2011 and SB6. Uh and then just clarifying in both cases uh projects would be eligible for state density bonus law which could cause deviation from objective standards that the city has adopted.

I see. And then the the final question is um um so let's say we if we wanted to defer this to do additional study of traffic and other things at the end of the day that's not going to matter because 30 units of acre is already allowed without any traffic improvements or anything. So that's not to say we shouldn't or may maybe we'll direct staff to study additional things here, but delaying this really really doesn't materially change anything other than putting us in a really bad position with the state because previously our housing was denied. And the reason why some folks may have seen 15story building proposals come to us was because the state denied our housing. And one of the key aspects that they noted was that we didn't zone for enough housing south of El Camino. Um, and that's what we ended up having to fix by finding some additional sites working with the state like this.

Yes, I think I generally agree with that characterization. Okay. Um and then and then just to refresh my knowledge, the reason we were we were we were able to require Rose Market and other businesses to stay at Castro and El Camino was because that was a gatekeeper project, I think, which unlocks basically allows us to require anything and everything we want. And in this case, there's not going to be there's not going to be a a gatekeeper process for this. Yeah, I think that likely was a gatekeeper project. I just didn't want to confirm that earlier. I would need to double check, but I think it likely was. And that does give the city significant additional discretion. Okay. Thanks. [clears throat]

Okay. Thank you. Thanks to colleagues for all their great questions. I'm I'm sorry. I have I have a couple. So, um just a quick question. So, uh looking at the recommendation, um but also hearing from our assistant public works director. So, in your presentation, you said you had near there were the near-term solutions and the long-term strategy. So, those are just staff FYIs. We don't need to add anything into the recommendation tonight. It sounds like colleagues may be interested and I'm just wondering procedurally how that might need to go forward.

That um thank you for the question. Um that is correct. Um on the near-term um elements that we had identified, there's no council direction needed. We're going to be starting that effort. Um on the the long-term strategies we've identified, um we're suggesting that we come back to council in the spring. Um again, in April of 2026, we're going to start doing the our first study session or I think we're just going to have one study session with council to evaluate the capital improvement program. Um, and at the time the public can weigh in on projects and as council and we have an opportunity to evaluate projects and and balance what the priorities are.

And can you refresh our memories please on how um we share with the public that these projects are going on? So like for example the uh the Miramonte paving project that's on our public works website I believe and do we keep a status there? I just want to highlight for the community that may be interested in what's going on if there's ways that they can kind of keep track on what the council will be doing. Yeah, absolutely. Thank you for um identifying that. We recently um updated the public works um project status web page. Um project status website. Okay. Public works project status website. Great.

Yes. We we call it the um the featured capital projects or featured projects list. Um we've identified approximately 25 projects that are um we think are um interest to the community to council um on kind of ongoing status. The Mirammani paving project is on the on that um web page um as identified one of the projects with the information of um what it is um the current status when it will be completed um and then a contact which is most important. if there's a contact. We actually put the project managers um contact information right on there so the public can reach right directly out and get a hold of who's actually working on the project.

Great. Thank you so much. That's my questions for you. Okay, turning to staff. So, I just had a a quick followup. I think council member Mallister asked an outreach question and I know there was one in the council questions. Can staff uh refresh our memory? So, we do the 750 foot uh radius of potential project sites. Um, but this was also part of the housing element. So maybe you can share what the outreach was like. Are we reaching out directly to our neighborhood associations? Um, I' I'd really like to um understand better. Thank you.

Yeah. So, uh, during the housing element process, we sent out the mailers to the property um owners um and the tenants. In addition to that, we also reached out to all the neighborhood associations uh leaders so that we can get more um um you know outreach to those uh folks and also uh reached out to all the interested parties who had signed up as we went through a very long um housing element update process. Uh whoever signed up, we sent out um um email notifications to those uh parties as well.

Right. However, these this some of these areas were added later and so did we still do that process? Yes, we did. Right before the when you know when we were coming back to the decision makers for adoption, we did send out uh uh notices to all of all these parties that I just listed. Okay. and and if staff or um if council has feedback on expanding the the radius. Um is that something that we can discuss tonight or we can give direction on or anything? I would defer to the city attorney. I mean that's not an agenda action item. I think we can hear some general feedback on that that might shape further action in the future.

Okay. Agreed. Um you could give general feedback on that. Okay. We've got council's received quite a bit of public comment about increasing the radius area or um letting people know in a greater re region um especially those that may not may be affected but not necessarily within that. So just trying to understand how to address that. So we would have to can you just clarify? We'd need to do that as a future agenda item or just as general feedback. Sorry. I think we can answer questions about the process and hear if there are individual um thoughts on modifying it. But I don't think the council could give direction on that item tonight.

Okay. Um so I think for staff two, so I have questions on the small business preservation. This one is actually related to the um an area we haven't been talking about yet, which is um the Evendale precise plan. So I I'm trying to understand the recommendation from staff. On page 10, we talk about um so the small business preservation, the three steps that we're trying to do kind of in summary, you know, we're looking at site selection, business development, small program, and just how difficulty small business preservation is. I think uh colleagues ask questions related to that. However, when we look down as underneath the alternative zoning, it's it talks about how um you know, we looked at preventing small business displacement that there are these um businesses on Lyang that that serve the community that we could not include, but you still want them included. So, I I I don't really understand why we talk about how difficult small business preservation is, but we have an opportunity to pre um to preserve them. And I understand it is a citywide issue, but I just was cuz it there's also a statement about how um you know, we would still be able to meet our our obligation and just trying to understand you know, people are going to need dentists, dry cleaners, just just trying to understand. Thank you. Of course, I think it you've hit on a really difficult policy question and trade-off that the council has to make. Um, all factors considered in balancing the significant importance and obligations the city has for housing development. The staff recommendation was to shift the balance in favor of of housing production, but flag this as an opportunity for council in light of that specific interest on this item um

related to small business preservation that there is an option if council finds the balance to be someplace different than staff to um withhold the resoning on uh those parcels that are identified. Well, my understanding of all the parcels we're talking about for this item, you know, we can we can reszone them and we can try to create opportunities for the small businesses to come back, but unlike the gatekeeper process, there's um kind of no measure other than perhaps uh applicant goodwill to try to bring them back. Am I understanding that issue correctly? Yes, I think that's fair.

Okay. All right. Great. Thank you. All right. Well, thank you for um letting me ask my questions. Uh it looks like we have another question from Council Member Ramirez. Is that right? Thank you, mayor. A quick followup. I think the the mayor asked an important question about Lyang. Um and I wanted to see if staff had a chance to evaluate whether um AB 2011 or SB6 also applies uh to that corridor and those properties. [snorts]

Yeah. So, um we looked into that into that question and uh it might the Leyong um sites would probably not qualify um under the AB2011, but it they may qualify under SB6. Okay. Thank you. That's helpful.

All right. Thank you for everyone's patience. We're going to move on to um that concludes the questions from council and we uh will move on to public comment. So, if you're a member of the public um joining us in person, we'll start with in-person public comment first and then we'll move on to virtual. If we have anyone um virtual or in person that still has not submitted their blue speaker card or raised their hand, please do so now. Um given the the volume of speakers we have u we're going to do um two minutes, but we have someone who's made special arrangement to speak on behalf of I believe quite a few community members and that's Kristen Lonard who will have 10 minutes. So, please come to the podium. You'll you'll start our public comment. You'll see a 10-minute timer here and then it will chime. And then I'll just ask folks if they don't mind starting to queue up for after Kristen, which is Wendy Sarathy. Apologies if I'm pron mispronouncing Ella [snorts] Lonard, Lana uh Shukman, Eric Knoff.

Pull up your presentation now. Oh, great. Great. All right. And you you can just say next slide if you'd like and and staff can work with you to do that. Great. Okay. Okay.

All right. Thanks so much. Um uh there was some new news tonight um that we were just talking about. Um I do um it does feel partial builder remedyesque. um if there's no controls and there's no choice and um but anyway I uh I uh wanted to basically say thank you for everyone here today because the questions are amazing the attention you're giving this to this topic is really important um I do think that in this presentation we do have a proposal that seems to meet a bunch of the needs of the people protecting um the city from non-compliance and negative consequences although in light I'm not um protect protect the number of affordable units that we're trying to maintain. I think that's an important concept. And protect the safety of our children um at this location and protect local establishments that the that our community anchors for us. Um next slide. Um Mountain View is changing and I think if we well if we all work together we can grow together. I think more housing does mean that the costs will get go down and we need this and changing zoning laws is an effective way to do this and I want to say that change can be good but inclusion is key um and thanks to the council for including us in the decision- making um because you guys all have a hard job. Next slide please. Um so I think we want to focus the conversation in this presentation on the intersection of Sladki Marramonte and Kesta. The data that we have in this proposal shows that approving the housing element asis actually increases the risk of non-compliance and triggering the no net loss law and potentially SB35 and it adds more risk of not um getting houses built. And so I'd like to share that data with you. Our specific ask is to not reszone at Kesta Slatkkey intersection as it is not

a viable spot and shift the units to what is a viable spot. Next slide. The four main issues that we have are the dangerous traffic and safety of our K children. Um it's very dangerous already to walk and bike and there are certain physical characteristics that cannot be changed. Um and a lot of them were spoken about tonight so I don't need to mention that. Um but more housing here will create more cars and more conflict points and greater risk to the safe and health of our kids and community. The businesses, they're not just local businesses. I mean, they're they are local businesses, but they're womenowned, minority owned. They have like 300 plus clients in um in the neighborhood. Um and the owner has no intent to sell, and they're discussing 10-year leases. And so, in addition to the fact that um under construction, they would be permanently displaced. And that can be discussed more. Um the outreach um did not match the significance of the scale of this change. Notices were went out. We mentioned 750 ft. I live exactly nine feet away and I never received one and half of our working group lives within a five house radius and half of them did not get it. We have not been included in this conversation. We have a petition. We have almost um we have 1134 people who have signed it in the last four weeks strongly opposing this having lots of concerns because we've lived with uh the the safety issues and we've lived with um the accidents and the almost accidents. We know people who've died. We've know people who have gotten hurt. Like it is a very very systemic serious issue that we need to take seriously. And here us representing 1100 people who are trying to speak up and say please please hear us. Next slide please. Um, of the 27 comments written, 23 were

on traffic, parking, safety, uh, the two-lane streets, worried about overflow parking, slower emergency response, not wanting to let their kids walk alone, walk and cross streets, not bike. My own children have expressed fears of biking um, when there's lots of parked cars where they're pulling out and crossing the road and crossing Questa and it's extremely dangerous. Um, next slide please. Um, I think I want to explain a few reasons why this is a huge impact and they are physical um, inherent um, issues or situations of where we are located here. You can see Marramonte and Grant and you can see that it's a major thoroughfare between 280 and all the way up to to the 101 and 85. So they're huge thoroughs and having change on Mariamonte has more impact than on Grant. Grant is a four-lane road. Um when we go north of Kesta, there is going to be the road diet which will push cars even more into a more narrow corridor um that is already struggling with congestion and safety. Next slide, please. This is where the children are traveling. The circles represent schools. There's five major schools. On the west side of Marramonte is where we go down to the schools down in red. on the other side of the street street they go north. There's almost 2,000 children that travel down here and back and forth either biking, walking, or in cars. And this shows that this is a very particular intersection with very very high traffic coupled with the issues on the um the traffic patterns. There's um it took 17 minutes to drive from Questa to Covington, 32 car backup um during school time. And so there are some very serious patterns that [clears throat] um make biking along all of those cars also very unsafe. And when you have um

St. Francis, um I don't know if you've been, but if you go to Safeway at around 3 p.m., you'll see about one or 200 cars picking up their kids and about two or 300 kids uh crossing the street, not in a crosswalk. Um, this is a this is a over um uh it's a it's a it's overt trafficked and it there's people and lots of um uh lots of um people walking in traffic and you know what I'm saying. Next slide please. Um this we've talked about this before is slide key is the main ingress and egress. Um the stars represent huge amounts of traffic flow for children. So the traffic flow is also on top of the cars. And we've talked a lot about this. So I'm going to say next slide. Okay. This is where I think it also gets especially interesting. So essentially at the 1702 site there are physical constraints. The site is small and oddly shaped and about point it's exactly 0.56 acres. It's not 75 acres. the housing element is incorrect and it has um missed represented the number of units by nine units. If you look at this chart, if you look at blue, that represents the number of units for the density bonus. And at this site, there's 15 moderate income. That is a that is a ratio of 15 of 26. That's a point that's a 58% ratio of affordable housing to the total number of units. If you don't have the deny bonus, it's 15 of 17. You can see the red lines there where which is the error in the housing element suggesting that you could have more units than you can. The yellow is 100% affordable. So you can likely ignore that because that that may not be um a possibility. Next slide, please. I went and I looked at all of the the sites. I went looked at everything in the housing element and all of the sites um from the other proposals which is uh Grant Road, Grant Shopping Center, Knobill. I looked at all of the um

dwelling units per acre and um allowed and I looked at the assessment site and looked at the exact sizes. So we know now how are they going to meet the 100 forable units. If you look at the small blue box you could add up those all those numbers you get to about 105. What happens when you the first and the fourth column of data have moderate income um um units assigned to that. And what happens is you are you are changing the ratio of the number of units at that site to the total number of units possible. And why that's a problem is because it doesn't net out or pencil out um economically. It's not as feasible to build on something when you have such a high percentage of that where you have more units possible. you can distribute these units um to sites and not and have almost no impact into that um ROI that a developer would look at when they're looking at if this is even financial. So because we care about the 105 unit the 105 units we care about the 100 units we understand that that is something that we have to meet although maybe there's some buffer um moving the units gives you a higher level of assurity that these units will actually get built and you are preventing the net um the no net loss law and SB75. Next slide please. Our ask is to move these units to the other sites without and when we do it this way, it doesn't require reszoning. You're not destroying the financial model for the developers. Um, and it gives us the best chance of being built. Next slide, please. We're asking the city council to see these issues from a more holistic view. Every decision has an impact. Narrowing Maramonte may help us with bikers. That's great. But it's going to shrink those these roads that can cannot handle

it. It's squeezing the balloon. You can cut off not let us turn left onto Slade Key, but you're going to funnel traffic to um Forom. So eight or 900 people are the people um who are saying that we have a terrible problem here. Please hear us. Please don't zone here. Take this intersection off the list and find alternatives. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Next speaker is Wendy Chart. Wendy, if you could come up, it's your turn to speak. All right. Thank you. We have a long list of other people who are going to speak. Wendy, Ella, Lana, Eric, Joshua, Kim, you'll have two minutes. It's going to go really fast, so if you don't mind queuing. Thank you.

City Council members, my name is Wendy Sarathy. I've lived in Varsity Park for 22 years and my children attended the local schools. You have the opportunity here to help avoid a potentially tragic traffic accident. The reasonzoning and potential housing complex will exacerbate existing well-known safety concerns for children going to school at the 1702 Marammont. We are a walking and a biking neighborhood packed with students and families. All the students in Varsity Park travel the same direction to school south. They all have to cross both Sladkkey and Qua, a major commuting thorough affair. This parcel enters and exits into those very streets, Sladkkey and Qua, directly into the pathways of these children traveling to schools. The other sites on our list do not have that quality. They don't have so many children passing these major thoroughares. At our recent neighborhood meeting, almost every person there had a story of someone in their family being hit. Traffic accidents, close calls. These close calls aren't recorded anywhere. We are sharing them with you so you can understand the scope of this problem. These problems cannot be solved by public works. It's the layout of the streets. It's the fact that we have so many people living so close together. We have so many commuters. There are cars everywhere. Our neighborhoods were not built for this kind of density. To add more density is going to exacerbate these problems. The location of the schools, the fact that this property is steps from a major intersection, the strange layout of the parcel, which was incorrectly the the size was incorrectly um calculated. We'd like you to consider on the one hand moving these units in South El Camino so that you're meeting the state's needs. Move these units

somewhere else on the South El Cam area and or reduce the height. Reduce the height where you can. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. And everyone if you can just please um speak. Thanks everyone. um if you could speak directly into the mic because there's many people watching virtually and they can't hear you if you don't speak directly into the mic. Also, the more of the clapping then we pause. So, um if you maybe want to just like put your hands up and then we can that way people can keep going and I can say the names then I will know that you are in support. Thank you. Go ahead, Ella.

Hello, city council. My name is Ella Leonard and I'm a freshman in college. My family and I moved into our house, the house directly next to the small businesses 5 years ago. Throughout this time, I have experienced these streets from my middle school years during CO to my last days in high school at Mountain View High. I have been biking to school for the majority of those years up until two years ago when I started driving. These streets have become more and more busy and more and more dangerous. Implementing a multi-story building would make biking more dangerous for children on an already packed street. The proposed solution of closing off the turns onto Slad Key um and Miriam Monte does not solve the issue of having too many cars parked on the road in overpopulation that we already have. Finally, this decision single-handedly decides whether my family and I get any natural sunlight in our home during large parts of the day. All in all, adding this high-rise will exacerbate the issue. It would make it even more hazardous for kids biking on our street. I'm asking you on a personal level if you would consider all the other spaces to put the high-rise that would not endanger kids and students on their way to and from school. Thank you.

Great. Thank you, Eric. Oh, I love it. See? Yes. Great. Thank you. Uh Eric then Eric Nooff, Joshua, Dylan, Kim, Leaden, Andreas, Lucas, Camila. Are you Eric? I'm Eric. Okay.

Um, so, um, mayor, vice mayor, council, thanks for hearing us out. Um, quick about me. My name's Eric Kn. I've lived on Slack Avenue for over 20 years. Uh, I live six houses down from the site in question. Um, I'm an engineer at Ericson 3D CAD on a daily basis. And so, I'm experienced in creating concrete visual representations from ab abstract specifications. Um, I find visualizations helpful in distilling and communication written proposals in a more understandable way. Um, I created the following images to satisfy my own interest of what a six-story building would look like on the site, which is allowed by the current zoning requirements, and found the result fully out of scale with the neighborhood and surrounding area. Sorry. Um,

oh man, look at that.

In addition to all the concerns highlighted yet this evening, this parcel seems like an exceptionally challenging site for such a large building given as essentially on a peninsula of land jutting out into a four-lane intersection. The unique way Quested jogs over to meet Slide Key pitches off the front edge of the building, which even today creates a difficult traffic situation by stacking up cars at the light to block the slide key exit. This leaves the neighborhood streets as a main entry and exit point into this parcel. Furthermore, current commercial parking on the site results in an overflow of visitor car parking stretching down the length of Slad Key. Adding additional residences and their respective vehicles in this area would only make this problem worse. Bottom line, if the this image were built, it would seem to embody an oversight in zoning, which is ideally intended to prevent. Um, we asked just that there be a comprehensive study to um address the concerns that are being brought out this evening. Thank you.

Thank you, Lana. [applause]

Good evening. Uh, my name is Dr. Lana Shakman and I've operated in my general dentistry practice at this location for over 13 years. We provide care to thousands of children, adults, seniors, and patients with medical and mobility challenges, many of whom live within walking distance. Our practice also supports nearby schools and community programs. My team includes four long-standing full-time female employees, nearly all of whom grew up or attended school in this neighborhood and rely on these jobs to support their families. Uh like the other six dental practices, I've invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in specialized improvements that cannot be relocated or recovered. This size has housed dental and medical practices for more than 40 years, including throughout the pandemic when we remained open to provide essential care. These offices are not interchangeable commercial spaces. their longstanding health care providers that deeply embedded in this neighborhood. I [snorts] only heard about the resoning few weeks ago from a neighbor. Reszoning would incentivize redevelopment, likely triggering the sale and demolition of the property. Construction timelines would force all six dental practices to permanently relocate once our leases expire. Given the high cost of the building to building out the dental space and the already elevated rents in Mountain View, these practices would not return even if allowed. Many would be pushed to more affordable cities, reduces reducing local access to care. Uh many [snorts] longtime patients, especially seniors, have already expressed that they will be unable to continue care if we are forced to move further away. Small [snorts] healthc care practices like mine operate

on thin margins and we can't absorb the dramatic rent increases that thank you. Okay, Joshua Dylan Kim Leaden Andress Lucas.

Hi, I'm Josh. Uh thank you for your time, council members. Um I just wanted to kind of respond to some of the dialogue that we've had tonight. Um so AB11 is actually stuck in Senate Housing Committee still. Uh it is a troubled bill and we don't know the outcome of it. SB79 is a transit oriented housing bill that doesn't apply to this area. SB6 does not create a ministerial process as was indicated here. What's the point I'm trying to make? The point is clearly this decision is being made in haste. You don't have all the information. We don't have all the information. Let's work together to find a way where we can actually have a sustainable solution here. But let's not make choices under duress or threat. That's how bad choices are made. And those bad choices will affect the fabric of this community for decades, maybe a hundred years. In fact, I moved to Mountain View with my family who uh by the way probably the youngest uh members in the audience here, Ari and Zoe, give a wave. Uh who would obviously be affected by walking to block Springer and the schools nearby. Look, this community is charming and it's charming because of its downtown which was thoughtfully planned. It's charming because of the community which went within which we live because it was thoughtfully planned. That's what your job is to do. Your job is to provide for the community to keep us safe to represent us. You have a thousand people who within four weeks have been surprised, blindsided, and are coming and telling you that this is a decision being made in haste. You know, it's being made in haste. You know as well as I know. Let's find a way to actually do this thoughtfully and do this right so we can accommodate the needs of the state, the needs that you have and the needs we have. We don't have to just make a rash decision. Thank you. [applause]

Thank you. remember uh jazz hands. Um so next up we have Kim and then following Kim we have Andres and Lucas.

Hi, my name is Kim Leaden. I have been a resident of Varsity Park for over 10 years and I raised my son there. Um I'm worried that my neighbors are going to be mad at me, but I want to speak in favor of the reasonzoning. Um, I don't know as much detail as a lot of my neighbors do and maybe it's not the right time to do it and the laws and that sort of thing. But what I do want to say is that um, I have a kid who tells me he's never going to be able to afford to live around here if I don't give him my house. And we are in a housing crisis in California. And I think I want you to know that some of the neighbors in my area are cognizant of that, cognizant of that. And we don't want to stop housing development in our neighborhood. Um, California, as I think everyone knows, needs three and a half million more housing units built. Uh, the Bay Area needs another 700,000 housing units built. And we all say we're pro housing, but then when someone wants to build housing in our neighborhood, there's always reasons that ours isn't the right neighborhood. And that happens in every neighborhood every time we try to build housing. And that's part of the reason that housing is so incredibly unaffordable. and so hard for people to get. So, it breaks my heart that our children aren't going to be able to afford to live here. Nurses, teachers, firefighters, the people who clean our houses, who take care of our yards, who work in the stores and the restaurants. We need to find places for them to live. Um, and I know change is hard and it's scary, but um, our neighborhoods get bigger, our cities get bigger, our children get bigger. Um, and we have to change. And I want to say that I'm proud to be a Mountain View resident and in a city which takes its moral responsibility to develop housing for the people of California seriously. Um and so um I thank you for that. Um I know you'll make a good decision whether it's to approve or not approve the zoning tonight, but um uh and hopefully

you guys won't be too mad at me for saying that. Thanks. Great. Thank you. All right. Um Andre,

hello. Good evening, uh, mayor, vice mayor, staff, uh, council members. Thank you. My name is Andrea Kavia. I live on Quest Drive. Uh, I have some remarks. First, uh, we voted for you. You're here. You have agency. Your decision matters. If ministerial action would were to happen, it would have happened. There's a reason why Quest Mir doesn't get to Sacramento or Newsome, right? It's because the decision is with you. It's a fallacy that this decision is unimportant. Uh, my two children bike to school every day. uh from Questet Mill and High School respectively. They press the button, they wait for the rapid flashing beacon, the flow of traffic continues, right? Uh they have to negotiate uh careless drivers speeding through the crosswalk as they try to cross to school. This resoning will bring even more traffic. This is fairly obvious and create even more dangerous crossings. But this is not uh a neighbors or many neighbors opinion. This is the memorandum issued by the city on March 27, 2024. Transportation plan and manager. It's an extensive list of recommendations on the vision zero action plan and local safety plan. Uh you can read it of course you know it uh working group that put this together includes public works, city manager, community development, police, fire, library uh bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee. Page four of this report there's a map of the city mountain view. You will see that the corner of minima our discussion is highlighted as a crash intersection for walking and biking biking. I'm setting verbatim from this. This is the only intersection entire city south of El Camino that is designated as a crash site. So we're looking here at a comprehensive report commissioned and executed by the staff, commissioned by the council, executed by the staff by the city of Mountain View. One year later, the only and singular site isolated as a crash risk safino is the one proposed to fulfill a state deadline. So my son will continue. He has a lot of things to say.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Right, Lucas?

Yes. Hello. Uh thank you. Uh so uh to continue on, this seems like an oversight from part of the city to add more cars, congestion, and parking pressure to precisely the worst possible spot as stated um uh by the memorandum. Um it uh I have to question the purpose of and resourcing put behind these reports. If we will simply ignore their recommendations and statements, our concern does not end there. The area is already in a precarious state. The infrastructure is not there to support growth, traffic improvement or look after the safety of our bikers and walkers that report that the report is telling us to look after. We live close in uh we live close enough to the intersection of Qua and Fortam. The knock-on effects of traffic congestion are a daily reality. We have witnessed close calls and collisions in front of our house. Um, and when the traffic recedes, speeding on Qua to and from Miramonte is considered normal by the many drivers, including red light crossings at the Springer School traffic light. The proposed resoning ignores factual risks to the neighborhood and seems to counter the city's own work and commitments to traffic safety. We support affordable housing, but not near a crash intersection for walking and biking. The city's leadership seems not to have a plan for traffic safety, but instead to have a deadline. So, please please do not reszone uh 7 uh 1702704 Miramonte Avenue and 777 Questa Drive. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you, Camila. Then Andy Turner, then Gnome Laura Berbomb, and then Shrioth Bellum.

Hi, my name is Camila and I am a middle school.

Do you mind coming directly to the microphone? There you go. And you can pull it. You can move it if you want. Hi, my name is Camila and I am a middle school student that crosses Qua every day to get to school. I am here because I think that the highdensity zoning that might be taking place in the local dental office will be a very unhealthy addition to our neighborhood. One of the reasons why I think this isn't a good idea is because there is already lots and lots of traffic on Mirram and Qua and adding more cars in traffic is not going to help with the safety of kids going to school on their bikes or walking. From my experience, I sometimes have to press the crosswalk warning device button three times because cars won't stop even when the people inside see me. Furthermore, on my way to school, when I was crossing the street, on that same crosswalk, there was a car that stopped, but the car behind it swerved around the first car. So, the person inside didn't have to wait for me to cross the street. This happened while I was crossing the street. There have already been countless stories like this that I have experienced on the Fort Questa on Fort Questa, and this adds up to too many close calls and accidents happening on the streets that will be affected by the zoning. And adding more traffic by zoning this area will put kids like me in danger and only add more close calls and accidents that aren't needed. Today even there was a close call in the same intersection involving my brother and a few elderly citizens that were put in danger due to the to the traffic and the cars that won't stop. I hope these facts speak for themselves and show just how unhealthy this will be for our neighborhood. Thanks again for your time.

Thank you, [applause] Andy Turner. Madame Mayor, Madame Vice Mayor, council members, thank you for listening to us. My own background started when I was the same age as some of the young people uh who have just presented because when I was a kid growing up, I helped my dad and others keep the zoning laws from being changed where I grew up, which was not here. And we won and we kept the high-rise from being moved into where I used to live. I I reacted with horror when I saw the pictures of the high-rise that the gentleman showed when he was a he showed some pictures of what it would look like. I went to the front of Woo Dental, which is one of the three places. There's Woo Dental, Miramonte Dental, and Rosen Dental. I'm sorry nobody's told you the names of them so far, but I went in front of Woo Dental. And from there, I was able to take a picture of my house, which is on the other side of Miramonte. I'm on Allison Avenue. My house backs on the church lot. I can see my house from there. If a high-rise goes up, people in the upper stories will be able to look down into my backyard. So, I won't be in the shadow like was in the picture, but I and others will have people looking right into our backyards if this is built in. So the conclusion I'd like to make is I hope a decision can be reached not to zone this in this direction if possible because I know zoning work has to be done well in advance of anything happening based on my experience in Washington DC growing up where we kept a high-rise from being built into our neighborhood. Thank you.

Thank you Gnome Lord Bob. Mayor, council members, my name is Noan Lorrabone. My family and I have lived near Qua Montes since 1998. My kids grew up here and uh it's always been a quiet, familyfriendly, walkable neighborhood. We recently remodeled so we can age in place. Um expecting this area to stay stable and residential. I support adding housing in Mountain View by all heart. My concern is putting high density zoning right at the edge of a single family neighborhood where traffic and safety are already strained as we heard. that would change this from a quiet residential area into a higher activity zone with more traffic, more parking, parking spill over and then this streets can handle. Rush hour um already shows the limits here. Uh the no left turn sign we talked about has on my monten slide key has been knocked down multiple times. Um so if it's there or not there depends on what day you ask. The keep clear uh zone um in front um of that area is blocked often uh by traffic and creating conflict for cars, pedestrians including elderly and kids on bikes like many people said. I understand you must implement uh the housing elements and follow state laws like SB6 but these laws do not require placing higher density specifically at Questa and Miriamont parcels you can adjust sites as long as

total capacity is m is maintained so I'm asking you to exclude 702 704 mirrammont and 777 qua from 611 and [clears throat] uh direct stuff to find alternatives. Thank you. Thank you. Uh Shri, then Leila Abazari, then Victoria Lim and then Frank Cow. Not here. Oh, not here. Okay, great. Thank you.

How about Ila? Okay. And then Victor, Victoria Lim, are you here? And then Frank Cow and James Kuzal, if folks don't mind queuing. Uhhuh. I'm Frank. Hi, Frank. Okay.

Hi. Uh, thanks for hearing us. Uh, I'm a resident nearby. Um, I think, uh, to my understanding, um, many of my neighborhood already said a lot about uh the traffic situation here. There are two things I want to add. One thing is uh I saw in this earlier school analysis uh they seems to miss two and two schools. Uh, one is a a daycare center right at that intersection. To man, there's like 60 to 80 daycare kit going around there all the time. And other one is uh in the dental school uh dental office. There is a particular pediatric dental office very popular. My kid is there too. So you can imagine how many additional small kids is running around just at that intersection. Right. And uh this is the first thing I want to add. The second thing I want to comment is uh it's pretty clear to everybody here. Uh somebody also mentioned earlier to add this have this particular parcel in this resoning package. A big package. It's a small parcel in a big package. Seems like a very hasty decision made several years ago when people did not made that decision did not even went to the intersection. Check out how many schools there. Check out how many people is crossing that street every day and somehow the map say point to this looks good right? So now we are on the deadline few years later say we have to do it because it looks good few years ago on the map. So what I'm asking is looking at everybody here. Don't make

that same mistake today. If it's more work yeah we may have to do more work. Take it out. [applause] Leila then Victoria Lynn then James Kimal then Brent Bell. Uh, good evening everyone. My name is Dr. Leila Aazari and I'm a pediatric dentist in 1704 Miramonte. I'm a long-standing commercial tenant, small business owner, employer and a nearby resident. I strongly urge you uh the council to deny the proposal resoning of the one-story commercial properties at 1704 and 1702 Miramonte. For more than 40 years, these buildings, homes primarily to dental and medical practices have provided accessible, affordable health care to this community. My practice alone serves thousands of children and adolescence, including many with complex and medical and special health care needs who rely on continuity of care and proximity. Many of uh our patients walk to our office and we um maintain long-standing partnership with nearby schools and community programs. This neighborhood has an established scale and character that supports small businesses and walkable community oriented environment. Allowing buildings significantly taller than what exists today would fundamentally alter the character and create abrupt mismatch with surrounding properties. Increased density without guaranteed infrastructure improvements brings real consequences. More traffic, reduced parking, added strain on road and emergency services. These impacts

directly harm small businesses that depend on accessibility for the families we serve. Reszoning is permanent once these protections are removed. The president cannot easily be undone. We're not opposed of thoughtful growth, but growth must be appropriately scaled. Thank you. Okay. Victoria, James Kusimal, Brent Bell, Cindy Policio Newman.

All right. Thank you, council members. Thank you neighbors, everyone who's stuck here for, you know, for more than three hours to really show our support about why we think that the reasonzoning of the Mytone location should be removed. I think you've heard a lot about the traffic issues in this neighborhood, especially that left turn on Slatkkey. You know, that sign's there, but people are making that left turn anyway. Um, we see that it's already an overt trafficked, overburdened neighborhood. We have the red curb parking. You know, public works is talking about, okay, let's add more red curbs. Cars are already parked in the red zone day and night regardless of those red curbs being painted there. And our short-term solution is, oh, we're going to block that left turn on Slack key, redirect traffic through the neighborhood where the young kids are. I mean, that the cars are still have to go somewhere. It's just going through more of our neighborhood streets. So, I think we've really shown and we've spoken up about why this neighborhood just isn't built to support more high density. We I I personally very much believe in affordable housing. That's how, you know, we can afford to live in this, you know, great area, but it needs to be done in a area that's more appropriate. And, you know, I think we also talked tonight, I want to address some of this, you know, conception of, oh, it's a done deal. It's already state law. We're going to put there there's going to be highdensity housing there anyway. But if state law, you know, we're we're zoning for Mountain View. If state law changes, but we've already zoned, then we're saying that this is okay. You know, developers are going to this list and saying, "Okay, these are the areas that the city think are appropriate." If we put Miramonte on there, we're saying as city council, we're backing this and we think this is appropriate. So, we're really beseeching you, you know, as our council members that we voted for to please speak up for us and say this is inappropriate and that this needs to be removed to somewhere else, even if it does mean staff going back and doing more work, doing more homework to find a more appropriate location and seeing if there is like medical office exemption rules. So, thank you so much for hearing

us. We really appreciate you. Thank you, James. [applause]

Good evening, council. I'm James Guzma. speaking to both Mountain V's lever letter and speaking as a lifelong resident of the city. Uh firstly to the since the downtown transit center is also absent as this I hope that when that actually comes forward as a project we see a lot more than 75 billion units per acre regarding the controversial aspect of this resoning. I want to say support the resoning. Um more people living in Mountain View is good. More housing options in a part of the city where you can only live if you can afford a $3 million home needs to happen. It's unconscionable that right now we have a vast neighborhood where you cannot afford to live if you cannot afford to live in that type of housing and a location that is immediately across from a bunch of shopping that is near a hospital that is near medical centers where workers could now live that is near some yes low frequency but very real bus lines that I mean I personally used when I broke my collar bone and needed to go to El Camino Hospital for surgery and follow-up appointments is entirely appropriate as a location to do this. Um and yeah um it's near the hospital and the it is near a place in the city where we are investing more in bicycle and pedestrian safety. Um assistant public works director at Orango mentioned a bit about the uh some of the ongoing improvements. We are spending the money to do those improvements. We should build more housing so that more people can take advantage advantage of that. So more people can live near the schools can live near the hospitals and can live in our wonderful city. Um, and yeah, I think that's about all I have. Thank you,

Brent. Then Cindy, then Dr. Kunor Chakrai, then Mark Azopardi. Hey Brent.

Hi there. Uh well, it's uh nice to be here with the mayor Kamaya and those two are left. I know from many times before, Pat and uh Allison and John, I know these people from all of their actions. And one of the things I wanted to comment you on is the action of putting the fire department over on Castro and Qua. That [snorts] has saved my life and my wife's life. And she's going to the hospital tomorrow. should be here today. But uh let me say that the conduit along uh Quest is very important for this because it connects up to the El Camino Hospital. We've lived here 50 years and uh we've [clears throat] seen a lot of things, but one thing that hasn't changed too much is around that shopping center there. Uh and of course we do shop and we want to say that uh used to be Purity Market, now it's Safeway, but we go there all the time and we have places to park, but of course increasing the density of housing in that area. Although it it doesn't seem like a real pleasant thing and it wouldn't be because you've seen some of these crazy places on El Camino. They're just giant huge places. [snorts] But uh you know, let's say that uh there's no parking. What are they going to do? They're going to go over to the Safeway and then we won't have any place to park to to do our grocery shopping. Be dangerous. It's all the kids walking down from schools. You know, we have kids from schools in the neighborhood. And this is a major conduit. We have her at Springer School. We got them up the the high school and the other high school. Get three three big schools in the neighborhood. And they're all walking. They're all taking their bicycles and everything. So, it's dangerous now. Could be a lot worse. So, I'm just saying that the reason I come down here to support uh not doing this is that I can see what it could lead to.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Cindy.

Seven years retirement from City of Mountain View and I'm back. Um I am Cynthia Palacio Newman. I live uh across from the hospital off of Ununice. The Grant Road uh convolescent hospital is one of your projects, but I'm going to speak about my church. After I retired, I joined First Presbyterian Church of Mountain View, which is at the corner of Miramonte, Qua, and even Began. Um we have two go two congregations on site on Sunday. There's like four services. Uh we have a preschool, Little Acorn, Little Acorn Christian Preschool. Our director is here. Uh my pastor asked me to speak Uh, Pastor Kim Tilly, she's been with us a year and a half. This church is celebrating 175 years of a congregation next July. 175 years built on the old Bub Ranch. Um, first I want to say I understand the housing element and all of that, but um, what concerns me is if the legislators would just look at an aerial, you will see that this all this property south of El Camino is housing. We have a neighborhood shopping center. If we keep intensifying things and building high density to be affordable, we end up with a maybe a food desert. It's one of the few shopping centers and it's a target. Look at the aerial. This is all housing. As to more affordable people, uh, more affordable people, more affordable um, schools, not schools, sorry. You know what I'm trying to say there? What about the residents that are here already? I bought in 20 years ago. We have people in my neighborhood that are in their 80s and 90s. We want to live here. We don't want to be shoved out to make room for somebody else who's going to pay a higher price. Um, our church provides

many services including um food drives. Um, traffic's a concern and that's my time. Thank you, Doc. Dr. uh Kenor.

Hi. Thank you so much for this opportunity. My name is Dr. Kohino Chakravarti. I'm a nonprofit worker and I've lived in Mountain View for the last 25 years. Thank you so much for always um keeping in mind the security and safety of residents of Mountain View. I live right adjacent to the Grant Road proposal on 14 1949. So um my house is right next to that. Um, and there is no clarity on the zoning or the construction that's going to happen. Never received a notice, never a survey. This was the first time I found a letter in my mailbox that got me here. So, this comes as a surprise. And I wonder the traffic analysis or anything that was done in 2023 almost two years or three years away from now when COVID was happening and people were working from home which is not the case right now is really um effective in this day and time on Grand Road from one end to just the end of Kuet Kesta. The traffic is awful. It takes me on a mile about 30 minutes with El Camino Hospital there and the schools there and the fire trucks not being able to move because it's like a parking lot. I don't understand how adding more housing and more cars is going to be helpful. A child already lost their lives at that intersection on El Camino and Grant. My son while biking was hit by a car, fell down and still has those cars. I am not um against housing. I'm just against the proposal that the housing is going to be effective here. It's going to be a

bottleneck that's going to keep residents from keeping getting to the hospitals. Thank you so much. Okay. Mark, then Reverend Kim Dortilly, then Kathleen, and then Alpana Call. Good.

Hello. I'm Mark as a party. I'm a resident of Mountain View. My wife and I have lived here for 49 years on two lane in Mountain View. Um, I appreciate all your work at the city council does. I know it's a thankless task many times and I know that uh some of this work has been kicked down the road from the state with the laws that they are passing. Um but one of the things I want to quote is a a line from Strother Martin in the movie Cool Hand Luke. Now you old people remember it. You young people just Google it. Okay. What he said after he hit Paul Newman with a lash was, "What we got here is failure to communicate." Yeah. You remember, huh? All right. Yeah. You're a fossil like me. You know, um this is the first time, you know, a lot of people heard anything about what was going on. You say that we we got notices. 750 ft isn't enough. I mean, even with the with the with the intersection one, you need to go through the whole Varsity Park neighborhood, like you said, and give us notices. I didn't receive anything. And then all of a sudden, it was the game of telephone. They're going to put a six-story building at the medical center. There's going to be no parking because they can't put anything underground because of the creek across the street. So, they're going to have to put all above ground parking. That's what we heard and that's why you see the signs because, you know, torches are out of out of touch now. So, um, the thing about reszoning the property is that it's going to increase the value of that property. You reszone it and somebody, quoting another movie, is going to make them an offer they can't refuse because somebody's going to say,

"I can build this huge building, make a major profit." So, the owner of that property that these ladies are working at, is that my time? It is. I'm sorry. Sorry. Reverend Kim,

hello. Thank you so much. Um, I do just want to thank all of you for your wonderful questions and just understanding. Um, I am new to the area. I've been here 18 months called to First Presbyterian Church of Mountain View. I'd love for all of you to imagine that intersection that we've looked at repeatedly tonight where the proposed building on Miramonte is on the northwest side. The property on the northeast side has three nonprofits with a very large footprint in this community. So, I commend the concern for uh small businesses, but I would like to increase the awareness of that property. Um, again, our preschool director, Little Acorn Christian Preschool, is here. They have a deep, deep footprint, which brings little kids to our church Monday through Friday. On Sunday, we have preschool and all kinds of kids programs. There are two churches on that property, ours, First Press Mountain View, and also Menllo Church is there. And so, we have kids from every age and stage. And um, and that's on Sundays. We also have special events there. We have Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts that are there in the evenings. Um, so we have a large population that is coming to and from that property at unusual times. I'd like to mention that the the park bench where the bus stop is is on our property and we just want to say that there are often sprinkler heads that have been kicked over because of the foot traffic to the bus stop there. Now, now that could be anybody, but there will be more foot traffic conceivably trying to get to that park bench and the bus stop. our property is being it's difficult to

maintain because of these sorts of things. Um the last thing Qua it's uh it goes from two lanes to one and it bogs down. Thank you. Thank you Kathleen Alpana and then I think Hung and then Erin uh Dearan.

Hi thank you for the time. I I am a resident uh almost 30 years of uh the neighborhood. I live on the Springer side of Sladkkey and I like every others who've said here I I didn't know about this till literally like 3 weeks ago and if this was approved in 2023. It's a complete surprise. Would love to know the other properties that were actually considered and why they are not on the list and potentially even um understand the Safeway potential. It's a bigger lot and I don't know if neighbors are going to be mad at me for even mentioning it, but we do need the housing. It's just finding the right place for it. And as people have said that 1702 1704 is very small. It's an odd shape and there's no parking. It already impacts neighbors at that end of uh Slad Key only Monday through Friday on business hours. And I can't imagine what it'd be like to the rest of the neighborhood for above street parking for um 24/7 families, guests, and friends. And then also if we close the left turn lane at Slad Key, then all the traffic will need to go through form and and then turning left onto Qua or right onto Qua. That it's going to be a mess, or out to Barbara, which is a light. And then also I want to make sure um we consider the traffic impacts to uh other intersections. We're not just talking about Miramonte and Qua. We're talking about um if there's schools or families increasing the amount of students going to block potentially. As someone mentioned, Miramonte goes down to one lane. There's Miramonte and Covington. That is an awful intersection. It's a four-way stop and people going to block there. You need to do the traffic studies there as well. And for the other things and and also people go already go through the

neighborhood to get to St. Francis um on the other side of Safeway and um we thank you. Okay, Alana.

Hi, my name is Alpana. I live on Sladki in between Form and Springer. Uh I have two sons, a 30-year-old and 25 year old. We moved here uh when my older son started kindergarten and they've all been to the public schools here. They've served on the city council throughout their middle school and high school years and they added their voice to this protest. I think they are really concerned that this is a very short-sighted decision, not well thought out. Uh I think first of all regarding the notification process I appreciate that you have a process for notification but even me on Slack key I had not heard about it until my neighbors started uh becoming activist about it. So I request you to please look at your process and see what we can all do better. We would love to team with you for future issues like this. Um my kids walked, biked and drove to school. The older one had no problem. The younger one who's 5 years younger than him. Yes, he faced those traffic hazards too and was in a couple of minor accidents and I believe the traffic is getting worse. Um, I have heard all the discussion here about the state laws which appear to be uncertain at best based on what some of the other neighbors here said. Uh, but it is still hard for me to believe that the only option available to us is to comply under duress of the laws that were quoted here. I call upon this community and council to take time to figure out holistic solution that helps us address the housing issue but at the same time does not worsen the traffic and safety. But also please remember what we are also talking about here is access to education. You know if you impact access to education you build a very different kind of community. So please do take that into consideration as you make your decision tonight. Thank you and thank you for all the facilities that I've enjoyed in the city for the past 25 years. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. Hung Aaron David Watson Allison Stern.

Um hi, my name is Nyong and I live in Mountain View. Um a lot of people mentioned that I mean that corner it's throw away for just a lot of the schools like Springer, St. Francis, Mount View High, um you know block, but then there's also bullet charter. There is um the children's house which is very popular preschool. There's so many preschool. There's a preschool at the corner of Elmonte and Qua which is a one lane and there's the oak preschool. There's Graham middle school that no one talks about cuz the kids from Imis are going to go to Graham and they go through that way too. It just and I brought this up before. I mean, remember the kid that got run over, Graham? But just all that traffic, please just, you know, think about the safety of the kids and just don't put anything there that will increase the traffic and make it less safe for them. Um, also like small businesses, it took them like 10 plus years to build it to get it running. So any disruption to the continuous operation will kill their business, will kill their livelihood. So when you make change like these, you only benefit the developer. But you have to think about like the residents and the local business owner and like the kids. I mean, you are our representative. We vote you into office to look for our well-being, not to benefit the developers. So please think about that. Thank you.

Thank you, Erin. Aaron Dearden. Maybe they left. How about David Watson?

Good evening, Mayor and Council. I'm David Watson. I'm speaking in support of uh the resoning. I hear the neighbors from south of El Camino asking why is there so much density proposed here instead of next to the Cal Train station. Uh to be clear, I think this is a fantastic site for housing. It's a high opportunity neighborhood. It should have apartments, but the reason the neighbors here feel like they have suddenly become the target of all this resoning isn't because this is a bad location. It's because for decades groups like Livable Mountain View fought tooth and nail to kill density downtown. They were successful in blocking housing in their backyard. And because Old Mountain View dodged some of their fair share, the city is legally required to play catchup here. Now, uh, regarding complaints we've heard tonight about neighborhood fit, I'm not asking you to do something that I wouldn't do. Uh, I live in a single family zone in a different part of the city, but when a seven-story apartment was proposed in my street, I supported it. The complaints about traffic and shadows are the exact same ones people make everywhere. But, uh, staff made the reality crystal clear. Voting no does not stop the housing. Uh, under state laws like AB 2011, which did pass by the way, [laughter] homes can likely be built here regardless of what you do tonight. The only choice you have is does the city retain control over the design or do you abdicate that power to the state regarding the parking panic? Uh, you know, I can't come up here without uh getting a little bit georgist on you. Uh, the answer isn't to block the homes. The answer is to implement Shupian performancebased uh uh curb management. Now uh set the expectation that new residents and old ones will pay the market value for uh storing private vehicles on public land.

You have to approve this item. Uh but ask yourselves how we got here. Thank you. Allison Stern and then uh Shat Shatu Baracharia then Giau Luo and then Alex Brown and then we still have virtual public comment.

My name is Allison Stern. I moved into Mountain View in 2007. I had been visiting since 2004. I was the crossing guard hit at Granton Phillis because of traffic being overcrowded and somebody running a red light. I was the crossing guard at Covington and Miramonte when somebody decided to go around the cars and over the stop sign. I am a resident here that can tell you that the traffic is getting worse. I have to tell my bosses that I can't come into work between 8:30 and 9:30 sometimes, especially on a Wednesday because of traffic for not the six schools she listed, but the 9 to10 schools because she missed Graham, she missed Bub, she missed the school in Los Altos off of Golden, she missed another school. There are a lot of schools all with the traffic going through our intersection. It is not okay. We reduced the traffic so that we went from two lanes to one lane and now traffic is even worse than it was. And now you want to add a six-story building. Is that even sound reasonable? I had to protect kids the day that the guy went through the stop sign at Coington. You got to think about the traffic, not just at Kusta and Marramonte. Oh, by the way, where are all the patients going to go at Grant and Questa at the Questa site? Where are those patients going? Cuz my father just got out of there. It's not okay. Shatu.

Um, mayor, council members, thank you for your service. Um, I know this is probably not as much fun as you maybe think it would be when you took on the job. Um, I think a couple of different things I want to say. Uh, I've been a resident of Mountain View for close to 20 years now. Um, currently living in the Wy Park area. I think specifically I want to talk about the 1949 Grant Kesta rehab area. Um, I look, I know people are being nice, but really it's inconionable what you guys are seeing here and what's been proposed. Um, these are deep residential suburban neighborhoods where you're proposing deep highdensity housing. There's a giant swath of empty land on the corner of Phyllis Martins and on El Camino. I think it's probably El Camino Hospitals land. That's why nobody's going after it, right? But let's be honest, come on. Everything from the edge of Inn and Out all the way across here could have been redeveloped for for highdensity housing. Nobody did anything. You know what? I don't need a city council that's this big. redevelop this area. Take the parking lot next door which is empty which has been empty. The Wells Fargo moved out. All of this land is available but we don't see people doing that. Where do you want to put the housing? You want to put the housing deep inside the middle of the residential neighborhoods. People talked about traffic. People talked about kids. I have friends whose kids have scars on their faces from falling over on their bikes because of the traffic. I will ask all of you to come and try and take a left turn from Kesta onto Grant at 8:00 in the morning. Okay? Tell me how long it takes you. Okay? You want to add a construction facility over there. Lastly, the Grant Coaster rehab facility. I have friends who live around there. I have friends who've seen that facility. There it is infested with rodents, with medical devices, all kinds of hazardous waste, all kinds of chemicals. There's people who are receiving radiation therapy. Has there been any analysis done on the impact of redeveloping that area? There's a school

literally next to it. That's the Amy MI am school. Um, please think about what you're doing here. You cannot let this pass. Thank you. Okay, Joe.

Hello. I'm Ja and uh I different than others. I'm not a long-term residence here. I just recently moved in and when I heard from neighborhood I was shocked like what happened the reason only I never know and the reason I'm chosen here is the perfect it's a great you know school zoom or very you know convenience for my family not my kids but my mother-in-law my parents they without us to you know driving by they can cross the street to Safeway and they have you know a lot of you know the fun place to go Uh and also I know they mention grade school here but also as a typical Asian mom they have a kumo they have you know piano entertainment you know centers that's is my son after you know the normal pretk there went there and I'm a walking mom they're mentioning you know the safety and uh you know traffic but that was a fact let me talk about the influence as a working mom I'm not able able to allow him to walk his straight to take a class. I need a comb balance between work and you know the safety. He is the only child. I if you know traffic getting bad and or young people moving because the support like affordable house and there what are the you know parking front of my house I living in to land and I needed to picking him up and send his school and I needed to you know also pick um u driving him to the school and what is my dream what the reason I'm coming to United States I want to work and I want to you know support my son but also alo achieve my personal goal and I know it's um I want to say it's for we understand mixed use development but that should

support function however reszoning in the center of the school center of housing

thank you thank you thank you Alex Brown hi friends Uh, if there's a thing called crash intersections, we should really do something about that cuz that doesn't seem like a good idea. Um, why why all this traffic? I feel like the what I'm hearing tonight is that there is a real need in this area to handle the danger of traffic and all these cars and how it impacts people. I think that that is something we need to address. I think the vision zero plan is was a great goal. I still miss Ria uh because she gave really good presentations and I I want I want to be hoboken, you know. I want to have safe streets for everyone in Mountain View and that includes the people who could be living there and whose kids could walk to school and so they're not in cars not adding to traffic because there is more housing in that area. That is the solution or a solution is to actually build more housing in the areas where you have resources. So if you have more housing there, those kids can go to school. Those are the ones who can walk there safely. Uh because we should be protecting the kids who are walking to school. We should be making sure that they are safe. uh and that is not by you know going back on our housing obligations or just denying housing projects or fear-mongering about you know what the impacts of any given development is going to be for an area and just imagining the worst case scenario. Uh it is taking care of people and recognizing when there are problems what we can do to fix it. Um, so completely separate. I don't like all these single parcel like the map. The map you could barely see what we're actually resoning. It is so tiny. It spreads throughout the city. I Why wait? Our plan is just scattered. And I uh I

was talking in the back. Uh we put too many eggs in the Google basket. I'm very sad that we have to do all these small things to try to meet our obligations, but we do still need to do it and I support this. I took it the whole time. [gasps] Okay, great. Thank you. Any more in-person public comment because we're moving virtual. All right, so I'm not seeing any. We're going to go virtual. So, first we have Manuel Salazar. You already spoke. Yeah, everyone gets one turn. Thank you. Yeah. Okay, no problem. All right, Manuel Salazar.

Yes. Hello. Hi. Uh, good evening, Mayor Kame and members of the city council. My name is Lorenza and I'll be speaking on behalf of SKL. Uh first I'd really like to begin by thanking city staff for the work that went into bringing this item forward. Uh it's clear that a great deal of coordination and careful planning went into aligning the general plan zoning and precise plans. Uh and that effort is evident in the council report. So we're really happy to see that the targeted of zoning is moving forward um that are happening uh by increasing housing capacity in places like you know the city has already identified as appropriate for growth. Mountain View is really taking a smart and practical approach to planning. one that honestly I'd love to see other cities in the county kind of follow suit. Uh given recent state housing laws, development on many of these sites would likely be able to proceed regardless. And honestly, by adopting these resonings, uh it's allowing the city to maintain some sort of level of uh local control over how the growth area will be, you know, occurring. Uh this kind of focused, intentional planning is great to see specifically because it creates real opportunities to deliver new housing. Uh it also reflects the city's following through on commitments that they made during its housing element, including program 1.1G. Uh that followthrough really matters, not only because failing to do so can expose the city to potential consequences from HCD, but also because plans only have impact when they're actually implemented. So, you know, once again, thank you to staff for your work. Thank you to council for considering this item tonight. And uh we strongly encourage you to approve the staff recommendations. Thank you.

Thank you, Juliet Cham Chamrat. Okay. Hello. Yes. Um, thank you for listening to me. Um, I'm a 20-year resident on Sladki Avenue and I'm also someone who goes to the Lopez dental office that's right there on the corner of Marramonte and Qua for about 20 years. Also, my children go there. We walk there all the time from our house mainly because of the lack of parking in that area. Um, it's very convenient to walk to that dentist office. I am absolutely against uh building a very highdensity apartment on that corner. Um I feel like it's an awful lot of work for a very small number of housing units. It doesn't seem worth the effort. Um I think the city council can take the approach of denying this uh change in um in status because it's such an unpopular proposal on that corner and also across the street at the 777 Qua. it'll be really hard to find a developer willing to put um effort into those areas for such a small amount of reward for um affordable housing. I think the effort would be better taken up in a much larger spot, maybe one of the shopping centers that could be right for redevelopment. Um I'll yield the floor to the next speaker. Thank you.

Thank you, Francois B. Um, hi. Yeah, my my name is uh Sanjay Valetti. Um, I'm actually a resident of U on Marramonte Avenue, a few doors down from the proposed site. And um, I think you should deny this reasonzoning for the very simple reason that it is going to cause a lot of traffic increase and accidents. And I'm speaking from personal experience here. So, we we had our parked car on the street crashed into by somebody um a couple of years ago. A few weeks later, the same thing happened at the at the house next door to us as well. So, that's already happened. This is just going to cause more of that to happen. And as everyone else on this call, on this in this meeting has said, um there's a lot of school traffic. My kids went to Springer. I have one that bikes to block every day now and one that bikes to Mountain View. And that intersection is extremely heavy traffic to begin with. And what we heard today, and I'll quote, I think there was a quote that said, "I don't have an exact timeline to give you on how the traffic is going to get fixed." So there's a plan to reszone, but there really isn't a concrete timeline or a plan to actually address the traffic problems. So I think the whole thing needs to be really thought through a lot more and and not passed. And the last point I want to make is the whole idea of repaving Maramonte was to make this a safer route and this entire new resoning is going against that. And that repaving plan, by the way, is running about a year and a half behind what you guys originally had in mind. So maybe focus more on improving the safety and deemphasize the reasoning here. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Now, Franuis P.

Hi. Um, yeah, thank you for the opportunity to speak. Uh, my name is Francois. I'm here to speak in favor of this resorting. Uh, I moved to Mountain View in 2016 and I was renting an apartment for a long time until I got the chance to buy a home in the Mirror Monte neighborhood two years ago. Uh, I don't live right next to the area that's scheduled to be reszoned, but I live a couple of streets away, so I'm pretty familiar with what this area has to offer. And I hear a lot of people here who really love this area. They love the schools. They love the supermarket. They like the parks. Um, I love I I run a lot. I love running to Questa Park, running through Stevens Creek. I cycle as well to Los Altos. I cycle to get my grocery shopping done at the local shopping center. And I have to say, I've heard a lot about the traffic here and how dangerous it can be. I I have to agree that it's not the best experience to to cycle or to walk next to the street. But I think that's something that needs to be addressed no matter what. And what I would love is for others to really enjoy the same things I enjoy, like enjoy running, enjoy this neighborhood, moving close to the school, being able to attend the schools. We need to make more space for others, not just us who are lucky to be living in this area, but others to be able to afford to live here and move here and enjoy everything our city has to offer that you like that we all love. So, you know, change is difficult. Maybe eventually my own area will be resedoned. I would be in favor of it because I had this opportunity to move here and I really want others to be able to do so. And it's a small drop in a big bucket, but I think everyone really has to do their part in California. Thank you.

Thank you, Matthew Martin. Hey, can you hear me? Yes.

Great. Um, yeah, I'm in full support of the resoning. Um, it seems like a lot of the people fear-mongering about traffic assume everyone who might move into new housing will live in an utterly car dependent way. I live near Ranksorf Park. Uh, I own a car, but I bike to the transit center downtown, take the train, and then bike to work. Uh, I walk to Walgreens, I walk to the doctor. And, uh, speaking of dentists, I walk to El Camino and take BTA Line 22 to the dentist. Uh, I got gas two times this year. That's it. Uh, by the way, most apartment complexes, including mine, have parking. It seems like most of the cars on the streets around me are from detached homes. So many people say, "We support housing, but not here." But don't you realize there will be other people at the places you're proposing, we move all the new housing, who will oppose it there for largely the same reasons that you're giving here. And it would be one thing if you were actually proposing new sites, but a lot of the time it's just expecting existing sites that are already getting up zone to magically get more units. I think someone uh earlier said something about squeezing the balloon regarding traffic, but that's actually exactly what you're proposing with housing. If you if you oppose housing here, you oppose housing. And we're in a housing crisis. we can't afford to keep opposing housing. Um, finally, uh, I want to note about, you know, safety for people cycling, uh, and about traffic. Um, Miramonte's, uh, getting, uh, improvements for bike infrastructure. And, you know, there is bus service on Miramonte. It's not great. It's every 30 minutes, but when VTA goes to look at what routes to

increase frequency on, they're going to look at density. Thank you. Okay. Alex Shukman Shakam.

Yeah. Can you hear me? Yes.

Yeah. Uh first, uh I'd like to thank obviously the uh the city and all the members uh with respect to this very difficult decision, but I I do want to point out a few things. First, none of the practices that the staff contend that they notified were in fact notified. None of them. All of them were shocked and surprised as to the fact that they that they were just learning about this at this time. So, it's not clear how if no effort was made to inquire about the unique business dynamics that are associated with the impact of the staff's decisions. They didn't work with any of the impacted businesses at all. Um, it's not sure how they can contend that their decisions were properly informed. I would urge that the city not make the same mistake by making a very hasty decision without having worked with the impacted residents as well as the business owners. Second, I'd like to point out this idea, this idea of dedicating to other places, okay, in adjoining cities, they will not return and this will televise to other dental practices that the city does not understand the uke needs and it should not be considered as a conducive place for such businesses. Now, that will who will that hurt? that will hurt your residents, the many people who who are actually there. Third, I want to just point out the cost of any reconstruction, any new property owners, all of that will be passed along to the new business owners and who will ultimately pay for that. That will be the residents because what's not been discussed is the type of leases that these businesses have. They're called triple net leases where all of those costs get passed on to the businesses. And what do the businesses then do? Thank you, Sophie.

Hi again. Um, I'd like to speak in support of the reszoning. I am someone who is living at the corner of um, El Camino and Grant. So, I am close to the proposed 677 to 699 Calderon Avenue that's also being upzoned. Um, I'd like to just put forward that I agree with previous speakers who have spoken in support of the resoning that I feel very fortunate to be able to live in Mountain View as someone who grew up in Certino and then moved here later. Um, and I want to be able to extend the many positive parts of living to Mountain View to other people, especially when we are aware of what crisis we are in with regards to housing and what good fortune we have to be able to be where we are now. I believe we have a responsibility not only to ourselves and our neighbors, but to the people that we live in community with. And this includes people that we interact with when we go shopping, when we go working, when we go to school, and all of those different environments in which someone could be traveling very, very far to be contributing to the same community that we all are in. So, I'd like to once again state my support for resoning. Um, we certainly face a crisis in terms of housing and I believe Mountain View City has done a really good job of trying to meet um, those requirements where we are and I just want to say thank you for all of the hard work that's being done to research these proposals. Thank you.

Thank you, David Abazari. Hello. Can you hear me? Yes.

Hi. Um, my name is Dr. David Abazari. I work at Forever Smiles Pediatric Dentistry at 1704 Marmonte. Um something that I that I think a lot of people may not know is dental zoning is um pretty rare. So in a city um it's not just medical zoning. We have a special zoning requirement for dentistry. And that's probably one of the reasons there's so many clustered at 1704 and 1702 because those were zoned for for dentistry. So, if a housing um project does get developed there, um we will be forced to leave and there really aren't any other areas in Mountain View that would be able to accommodate um dentistry for us. So, um as others have mentioned, we would have to locate elsewhere um and at significant cost to us um and we hope that we don't have to go through that. We've been privileged to be part of the community for over a decade. Um serving some wonderful children, some some kiddos that um need some extra attention and we're able to provide that with our sedation dentistry um as specialized dentists. So uh we um would prefer that this proposal did not move forward and to work with the state to try to allocate some other area for for construction of um affordable housing. Thank you. Thank you. Daniel Holy.

Oh, yeah. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes.

All right. I I'm Daniel Holtz. I'm a Mountain View resident. I live in Del Medio, which is not in this area, but I think it's actually a far superior neighborhood. Um because there's a lot more housing. And so I think we should have more housing throughout our city. Uh and I think the city's plan planned for more more housing throughout the city. And I I think we should follow through with that plan uh and not waste staff's time looking at something that would uh be a big waste of time. uh by changing something to be zoned for a capacity that state housing law already allows for. Uh so absolutely support the reasonzoning. I think we should follow through on our commitments. Uh and this is just a part of that. I think that uh generally we need to combat misinformation also, but that's another discussion. All right, I'll quit wasting your time. Bye. Cliff Chambers.

Hi, Cliff Chambers. Uh, resident of Mountain View. I also support uh the reasonzoning uh proposal. I I first want to really uh thank staff. I think they did an excellent job with the staff report. It's very well organized and reads really well. and the presentation staff made was excellent and the response to some of the traffic concerns are are are admirable. Regardless of what happens here, we we've got a safe route to schools problem. We got some circulation issues that need to be addressed. I do really believe though when we were doing the housing element and the distribution of sites, there was a lot of work to identify sites and and the sites that we're talking about tonight are are important. But I I do think the presentation that was made earlier, the the 10-minute presentation, her rationale for some alternatives uh I think were strong and should be considered. But overall, I support and I don't have time to repeat what uh council member Chris Clark said in terms the rationale for going forward, but I really think that it does need to go forward in some capacity and would make sense given all the changes in state law, etc. I think the other thing I I was going to come to the next uh agenda item. It's going to go way too late, but I do think we have an opportunity for middle inome housing and condo development. We really need to be thinking about sites like this for, you know, first floor retail and condos in the second and third floors. And I do think the other criticism I have of the staff report is I do believe that if there was some more graphic representation of welldesigned 30 dwelling units per acre, it would make a

big difference because there are some really good designs of uh that kind of at density level. It's not that high of Thank you, Cliff. Okay, Ava Mogar Moog Harabi.

Yes, thank you actually. Uh so good good evening mayor and council members. My name is Payon McGori. Ava is my daughter. Um I want to speak against reszoning the Marante property area. Uh this area isn't just generic office space. Over many years it's become a real hub for medical and dental offices. So, we're talking about doctors, dentists, pediatric specialists, and other healthc care providers that serve Mountain View residents every day. People come here for routine care. They come here for ongoing treatment and time sensitive appointments. It works because the zoning has stayed stable and predictable. So, resoning puts that at risk. Medical and dental practices aren't easily replaceable. These offices are built out specifically for patient care with accessible parking, short-term visits, and daytime traffic patterns. Reszoning creates pressure that can push these providers out, not because they want to leave, but because they have to. Once we lose medical office space like this, it's really hard to get them back. Keep in mind that Marmont serves the community, supports good local jobs, and provides essential care and location designed for it. I urge the city to keep the existing zoning and protect this important healthcare area. This is health care. Again, this is health care for the community. Thank you.

Thank you, Pang Zang. Hi. Uh, can you hear me? Yes.

Hi. Uh, so I'm a resident of Mountain View. I And I would like to say no to the reasoning. So, uh, we have five years old son and he's adorable and energetic. So, every day I send him to school and pick him up from there and I can witness how bad the traffic is on the Mirror Mont and also on the Slack Avenue. So uh adding a high density residence will definitely give this make these things even worse. So that is one thing and also as a as the lady mentioned there. So there are a lot of after schools in the saf plaza such like the kumo and also there's a uh dancing school every day a lot of kids went there and they're young kids. So adding a high density resident will definitely make the parking space even short even less and they will definitely move to uh safely pro and uh that uh with that a lot of kids the safety made at risk. So we should not put the risk safety risk uh of children and uh yeah that is something I want to say.

Thank you. All right. I'm not seeing um okay XJ.

Yes.

Uh good evening everyone. I've heard some Mountain View resident who didn't live in this area speak in support of this proposal tonight. But I would like to ask a few important questions. How many of you commute commute on this road every day? Do you know how heavy it already is during peak hours? And how many of you have children attending school in this area? There are several schools nearby and adding large apartment buildings here will significantly increase traffic and create a serious safety risk for our kids. We strongly oppose building apartments here and ask the city to protect our children's safety. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. No one else virtual, but I do see someone a last speaker in person. Praep Via.

Uh good evening and thank you for staying late and thank you for uh being there. Couple of observations I want to make. I'm a resident of Sladkkey Avenue. I'm right on ground zero of the 1702 and 1704. I strongly oppose this. The report that was presented by this team here seems to be biased. AB21 2011 states that property must be must fit the criteria of being a commercial corridor and avoid certain sensitive areas. I feel there is a bias that came out on the reporting on the state laws today. That is my observation. I work in a high-tech industry. I'm an executive. I've been in the resident for 20 years. Also, on the public works department, this is all band-aid fixes. Those don't work. I've been living with redline curbs and people take my trash, they put it on the sidewalks. Red line. Every time I send pictures, there's no nothing. Okay, we'll fix it. We'll extend your red line curb. That's not the way to go about. I've been, you know, I've been living in this community. My daughter refuses to go on a bike to school. She says, "It's too dangerous, Dad. I can't do that." She's in a middle school. She went to Springer Elementary. How do I How do I live in that neighborhood? I was thinking of retiring in that. And now you're saying, "Let's resone. The state laws keep evolving. We're not here for that. I will keep hearing the bias on this side, but please do consider our representation. We've all, you know, gathered here. We have a specific problem. There have been killed. There have there was a recent fatality at the intersection of Qua and Miramonte. A person was just gone off the There was another fatality on Grant in El Camino. Kids, you want to see kids? You want to see this report in front of you? Kids dying because there are schools 2500 kids go through that come. I invite the

public works to come over and be at the right timing near my neighborhood. I need

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Um that concludes public comment. Um and I have had some requests from colleagues for us to take just a a bio break. Um and I would just appreciate everyone's patient with us. So what will happen is we will take a five minute I will try to keep on track of all of us a five minute bio break. So we will come back at 10:50. The council will then ask any remaining questions and we will deliberate. I would just ask like this is now the time for council deliberation and public comment is over. So if there's more you would like to provide us, you can email us, but maybe no shouting um because we're just going to deliberate. So I just wanted to to to share that. So, um, we'll take 5 minutes, come back at 10:50, everyone

All right, everyone. We're going to reconvene. I'm trying very hard. 10:51. Okay, not too bad. Let's um looks like we have at least a council majority. So um so let's let's reconvene. Thank you everyone. Appreciate it. All right. So, um, that concludes, um, public comment. So, we'll bring the item back for council questions and deliberation. Please note that a motion to approve the recommendation should also include reading the title of the ordinance and resolutions attached to the report. Council member Hicks.

So, I'm going to say something very short. I'm not going to solve the entire problem right now, but um there was some talk this evening about whether uh state assembly bill 2011, which would allow housing on the um 1702 site, whether that had actually passed. There was some talk of possibly it not having passed yet, but I believe that the one that has not passed, and the speaker even said this, but the one that has not passed, I believe, is AB11, not AB 2011. He even said AB11. So, I just wanted to clarify that that the what what had been generally talked about as already sort of zoning that site for housing has actually passed. and staff who knows much more about this than I do can tell me whether I if I'm wrong, you can tell me. So, so um so I just wanted to clarify that because that's probably one of the things that many council members are thinking about and that's except for this one. Um

okay, that that was it. Okay, Council Member Clark.

Yeah, I'll just start with a few comments. Um just wanted to address some of the questions that were asked by the public. Um first of all I thank you for everyone coming and participating. Um yes it's a slog but you know this is what we signed up for. Um we're your representatives and it's our job to to be here and to listen to all of you and to um and to uh when it's time to take arrows to take arrows and when it's time to celebrate together celebrate together. Um I live about half a mile on the other end of Miramonte down by um El Camino. Um full disclosure, I live in some number some some dwelling unit that isn't too far dwelling unit per acre that isn't too far away from this um in a condo complex that used to be the um the um Harves car wash. Um and um but so I'm fairly familiar with um multif family residential kind of roughly on this scale and traffic impacts and things like that, but that's neither here nor there. Um some folks brought up a few uh you know had we looked at different sites um and I just the staff can correct me if I'm wrong. the the Safeway complex which is the or the the shopping center there um which is my shopping center that I go to most frequently and I also go down Miriamonte to get to 280 to go to work. Um that uh that shopping complex I believe has already been reszoned. Um so it highdensity housing is already allowed there. It's also already allowed on the parcel the El Camino Hospital parcel that they're currently using as their dirt pile unfortunately but um which is right across the road from where I used to live. So, um, someone can build can propose a highdensity housing project there or I believe on some of our parking lots here, too. So, um, what we're really talking about tonight is, um, yeah, we drew a line in the sand and said we're not going to reszone anyone's single family home as part of this. Obviously, that would be, um, very

unpopular. Um, and so, what we're looking at now are are sites that um, we think would be we hope would be least impactful. So, I I just wanted to address those. And also, um while I know uh folks uh uh you know, there were a lot of criticisms tonight, one of the things I really enjoy about Mountain View in the community is that everyone uh regardless of our disagreements on whatever it happens to be, we all tend to work constructively toward a single goal. And while we might not agree on the right way to get there, I I find that most folks are pragmatic and and constructive um especially our first speaker um who who did the presentation who um I had the opportunity to meet with um and um you know it was all a very constructive conversation just kind of understanding the landscape and what we what we need to do what we have to do in order to meet our obligations and not lose our local authority. That is the thing that we don't want to do. It's being chipped away at at the state level and the last thing that we want to do is um not meet the commitments that we've made and then lose our zoning authority and end up with a 15-story building at this site or elsewhere in Mountain View. So I just wanted to say that and then as part of the discussion you know and looking to colleagues um um you know I'm a pragmatist and at the end of the day uh while this isn't my uh I'm talking about Miramonte specifically while this isn't my favorite site for uh for housing the thing that I I do want to do is I want to make sure that the way that I vote tonight is the vote that is uh the least likely to produce the outcome of uh that a few speakers showed including with visuals. So my understanding is that under under the existing zoning uh through state law

today uh we're probably closer to the scary boxy sixstory thing that is uh that that was that was shown. Whereas if we um because that that at least currently at least under AB 2011. The other confusing thing about this is that every year the numbers start over again. Um and you might pull the wrong uh uh one from from a certain year. But my understanding is that because um because uh because housing is already allowed there um by right and through uh what would most likely be a ministerial process assuming a developer can meet the various conditions uh a lot of our standards in terms of breaking up the massing and all those things wouldn't necessarily apply. So that that's a long way of saying like I I look to staff and my colleagues. What I want to vote for tonight is the thing that preserves the greatest amount of local control over the ultimate if an application ever comes forward, the ultimate local control over the design and the objective standards of what is going to be there. So, um, while it might make folks feel good if we kick the can down the road, um, I'm most interested in the outcome that will produce if a project comes along the the least impactful project. And if that answer is to apply our mixeduse zoning so that we don't zone our uh, dentist office out of existence because mixed use allows that to stay. uh at least at least provides a pathway for them to stay and and allows us to adopt objective standards that will apply then you know even though we're being told we should not not reszone the property I think that's actually the outcome if you like my parents I'm telling you I'm telling you

the thing that you uh you'll thank me later or something like that but uh but I I I just whatever we do tonight I want to do whatever preserves the greatest amount of authority for us to shape and impact whatever development project comes. And if that means delaying this and studying it more, then okay. If that means applying our general mixeduse standards to this, then I think we should do that. And that's where I'm at. Thank you, Council Member Shelter.

Well, the first thing I have on my uh list here are things to talk about is local control. So, thank you, Chris, for summing that up very well or council member Clark, sorry. Um, it's getting late. We get a little less formal. Um, we really do want to be able to control the design. I think that one of the couple of things was great to see so many people involved. Um, I'm sorry that maybe people are so upset. That isn't good. But it's good that people are involved. That's really democracy should not be a spectator sport. And so for you to be here and be thinking about this and be talking um to each other that's you know that's that's that's great. Um [snorts] I too would like to commend the first speaker uh Kirsten. I met with you and um we had a great conversation and um you did a really good job on the presentation. So thank you for putting all that information together. Um but I think we are very very concerned about what's the best way for us to maintain the maximum amount of local control and um uh that's really what we're going to be working to. Another thing that I people mention sort of in in coming is that we need to speak up. They they said we're the you're the council. You need to speak up for us. I couldn't agree more. I think that one of the things that we need to do, and we're going to talk about this more in the next item, is we need to be advocating with our legislators about what are the impacts of um some of these housing laws. I think that they go beyond um some of the intended unintended consequences, and that's really not in anybody's favor. I mean, Mountain View has been identified as a pro-ousing

um community, but that doesn't really seem to get us uh any trust with the state that we're going to do the right thing. So, I think we do need to be talking to our legislators about how can we change these some of these legislative some of these laws that have been passed recently to be a little more um uh appropriate uh and not necessarily a one-sizefits-all. Um I do have a question for staff. Do we have a dental zoning um category? I wasn't aware that we had one. It's not a dental zoning. It is covered under our commercial uh land uses. It is considered as a medical office. Thank you. Okay. So, um and and the Grant Road is also essentially um a similar kind of zoning, right? The Grant the Grant Road parcel is also a similar kind of zoning.

Uh that is under the Grant Road precise plan.

Oh, so that's a little different. Okay. All right. Anyway, um so we don't have a dental zoning that we're going to get rid of. I was worried that that I might might have missed that. Um and um we want to protect from outland what I think we would all call kind of outlandish development. And that means we want to have the best control. And that means we want to have a process that requires that anybody who comes and makes a development on this side has to come to the city council and go through the whole process and talk about all the components of the project. We don't want just ministerial. Ministerial means you just go in with your project, you get your permit, you go you you don't really have um much oversight at all. We don't want that. We want the city council and all the processes that we've developed over time to control. The other thing I would like to say is that somebody mentioned that um Mountain View was a really great place to live in because it was well-designed and I would agree with that and I think that is one of our city's um basic obligations is we uh need to work to make sure that houses are welldesigned or buildings are welldesigned and also that they're safely built. We do that through our inspection services. Well, this slide key um uh this slide key and uh Miramonte Questa intersection that was not welld designed. That was a big goof. They should have had um a lot more space between those two intersections. And there should also be another connection between Miramonte and um and the road that there isn't. That was the kind of um development that was very popular in this in the 60s and 70s to put to put in these sort of um tracks that that had

kind of a lot of interior streets that didn't connect too well. Um and we found over time that frankly they don't work too well. I live in Waverly Park and um it's it's not uh it's it's sort of a similar sort of a street pattern and it's we're stuck with it but but it it's not good design and going forward we're not going to do any of that. But what we can do and what we did here is that this is a big traffic problem. And you heard our um city engineer talk about how there are short-term and there are long-term things that um we can do. Well, rest assured we heard you. So that's what I want to say right now.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Ramos.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, so I'll start with thanking thanking the residents who showed up through several hours of uh council meetingness and public comment. Um, I I had the opportunity to meet with a number of you when I just kind of dropped in one of your community meetings. Um and I I recall in that meeting there was one there was a lot of information that had to be shared out. Um uh why we were doing this uh lots of terms like affirmally furthering fair housing. What are Arena goals? What does it mean when there's a there's our overall arena goals and there are firmly furthering fair housing goals and each thing that kind of meets how much that intersection is very unique. I remember as I go there every once in a while. I always think that um I didn't realize it until people talked about it today. I always like thought that that sign would get removed every once in a while and then I realized it's probably because people just ran over it. Um and that's why it's not there sometimes when uh I go by. Um so I I understand a lot of the concerns of the residents. Um, I I thank you to some of the residents that that reached out and the beginning presentation from the residents was was very impressive. Um, I I um I think about our housing crisis a lot. It's one of those things that keep me up at night. Um, and to solve it, there's a lot of different solutions that get thrown out. And the more specific solutions can get, the more complicated it can get. And it's hard for for a lot of people to track what means what. And um and I understand that it's it's difficult if it's not like your full-time job to to follow all

this. And I can see how people would get upset when um not understanding if one bill applies, if one bill had already passed. um especially among a community of essentially regular normal people who don't have these housing laws and housing bills stuck in their head all night. Um so I I thank the community for their patience a lot on this. Um I I one of the biggest game changers for me in in this decision was the the Assembly Bill 2011 um which is also known as the Affordable Housing and High Roads Jobs Act of 2022. It became effective on July 1st, 2023. Um I believe the the resident who spoke earlier was a talked about AB11, which is I believe the social housing one, which I also love, hasn't passed yet. Um but doesn't really have the same zoning. um doesn't have a zoning thing. You usually don't see in state the the state legislature essentially um move making moves to pro prevent production. What you're going to see from the state legislature going forward is generally how to increase production because that is that is essentially the goal because that is the answer to the housing crisis. And the more specific they try to make it, um, the more complicated it gets, but at the same time trying to to reach those and sometimes it it leads to situations like this weird intersection. Um, so um, thank you to staff for your work on this. I know that this has been a long meeting and a long work since our housing element in general. As we talked about our housing element, um it's not like this particular neighborhood was specifically targeted and we're like,

we're just going to stick the zoning right there. It was one of many neighborhoods that will face reszonings as we saw through the staff report, whether it's Leon Drive, which is actually near where I live, um or um other places south of El Camino, a lot of places north of El Camino. Um and so that that housing element was supposed to be our local plan on how we address our housing crisis. Um and that meant that essentially spread out the housing. Now some of our housing should be um near our transit centers and that is where we're planning the bulk of the housing and also like North Bay Shore, East Wisman um those big change areas. But some of it, small portion of it does have to be south of El Camino to reach our affirmally furthering fair housing goals. Um, I appreciate a lot of the work staff and our community have worked toward doing this. Um, but I am likely to support a motion to follow staff's recommendation. Thank you,

Council Member Ramirez.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, I move to approve the staff recommendation, including adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View adopting a general plan amendment to update the downtown mixeduse land use designation in the land use and design chapter and modify the general plan land use map to change the land use designation for the following properties to implement housing element program 1.1G. 1, 830, 835, 850, 859, 870, 889, and 897 Leong Drive. and three and 55 Fairchild Drive from neighborhood commercial to general mixed use. Two, 1702 and 1704 Mironte A and 777 Kesta Drive from office to neighborhood mixed use. Three, 677 to 699 Calderron A from neighborhood commercial to neighborhood mixed use. and 41949 Grant Road from lowdensity residential to mediumigh density residential as recommended by the environmental planning commission. On January 24th, 2023, the city council certified the 2023 to 2031 housing element update environmental impact report adopted by resolution number 18755 pursuant to SQA guidelines sections 15168, 15162, and 15163. None of the circumstances uh necessitating further SQA review are present to be read entitle only further reading waved and introduce an ordinance of the city of Mountain View amending chapter 36 zoning of the city code to implement subtask G of housing element program 1.1 including updates to article 5 commercial zones to allow general plan mixeduse village center land uses in the uh commercial office zoning district and to make other clarifying and confir clarifying and conforming changes such as modifying and reorganizing standards in division 23, general plan mixeduse village center developments of article 9 standards for specific land uses to be

consistent with the uh commercial office zoning district and the uh Evendale precise plan and requiring navigation easements pursuant to the Moffett Federal Airfield comprehensive land use plan as recommended by the envir environmental planning commission to be read and title only further reading waved and set a second reading for January 27th, 2026. 6 and adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View amending the P32 Evendale precise plan to implement housing element program 1.1G and make other clarifying changes as recommended by the environmental planning commission to be read and title only. Further reading waved and adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View amending the P26 Grant M Martin's precise plan to implement housing element program 1.1G and make other clarifying changes as recommended by the environmental planning commission to be read and title only. Further reading waved and adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View amending the P18 Evelyn Avenue corridor precise plan to implement housing element program 1.1G and make other clarifying changes as recommended by the environmental planning commission to be read and title only. Further reading waved. Um, first I want to thank staff uh for uh responding to uh all of our questions for making time to meet with members of the community over the past several weeks um and uh and especially thinking through some of the impacts that were referenced by the community uh and putting together uh at least some preliminary proposals to address uh for instance the uh transportation safety and and circulation issues. I know there it's not easy to do, but I think um both the short-term and long longer term ideas are a a good start. Um there are problems today, right? Notwithstanding whatever happens with zoning or with uh redevelopment, what we're hearing is there are challenges today and it's good to know that public works is thinking through potential solutions to those issues. Um, as members of the council have shared uh earlier, I'm grateful

also for uh the engagement of the public. Um, I also had a chance to speak with members of the p public and um and heard uh not only about uh some of the challenges that were currently experienced by neighbors, but also uh ideas for how to find viable alternatives. I I felt like it was a a good faith engagement and a valuable experience to to hear what's going on uh in a neighborhood I'm I'm familiar with but have never lived in personally. Um and uh I know it's not easy to to make time to to come and and sit in a council meeting for so many hours to give two minutes of public comment. um and particularly knowing that this is an issue that is uh uh challenging for for many and and two minutes is just not enough time uh to to share the concerns uh that I know many have have shared. Um Council Member Clark spoke to many of the uh issues I was going to bring up. Um, but to to make a couple of them maybe a little bit more explicit, uh, our we were out of compliance with our housing element for approximately 3 months. Within the first couple of days of our non-compliance, um, one of the the first builder's remedy application was submitted, eight stories, I think approximately 80 units off of Tyrella, uh, project that did not comply at all with the general plan or the zoning. Uh, we approved that project last week and it was very challenging. There were many neighbors uh in that area who just as many of you have turned out to share concerns and asked the council to take action. Um and the challenge was the reality is uh there really wasn't an option for us. We our our municipal code requires us to conduct a public hearing and to uh you know make a judgment on the permits but state law made it

essentially impossible for us to make findings to justify denial. Uh so it was difficult to sit through that meeting and hear members of our community share concerns and then have to say sorry there's not a whole heck of a lot that we can do. Not too long after that application was submitted, the application that C council member Clark has referenced a couple of times was submitted, a 15-story 455 unit tower off of Rangdorf and Lghorn, and we approved that project last month. Um, there are serious repercussions for having a non-compliant housing element. The state is serious about addressing the housing crisis. And that's why many of the decisions that we've made that we're making are are so hard. We're really deprived of meaningful opportunity to to do something different from what state law is dictating. And in this case, right, some members of the council had cheered this is a hard decision. Um, it's hard because politically it's challenging, but the decision is already made whether we take action or not. Housing can be approved on this site. Uh, that that is what state law allows at 30 units per acre, which is the the staff recommended density. Um, and on top of that, state law already allows the use of state density bonus law on top of either an Senate bill 6 or an assembly bill 2011 pathway for for housing there. And as council member Clark had shared, um, not necessarily using development standards that we would want to see used. Uh, so we we don't there is no decision in that regard. The decision is do we want to have some amount of local control by implementing development standards that make sense

for Mountain View? And uh over the years I have sometimes been frustrated with uh with city processes and um you know we've seen outcomes that I personally haven't liked in in many cases but um I I do think the staff have been very thoughtful in proposing development standards for the sites that we're discussing today. Um I don't I don't think these are hasty decisions. These are decisions that have been in informed by uh a lot of work over five years approximately. Um I am empathetic with concerns about uh limited uh noticing or neighborhood engagement. I think it's it's not an easy thing to sustain over a long period of time. Uh the housing element is uh something of an opaque and um and uh not terribly accessible process. Uh it's not something that we study in school. Remember the housing element class that you took in middle school didn't exist. Right. Um right. So it's it's you you go to the community and say, "Hey, do you want to provide input on the housing element?" And everyone's eyes glaze over. Right. Right then and there. So, I can understand why uh we didn't perhaps receive the level of input that in retrospect would have been nice to help inform decisions like this one that we're making today to implement the housing element, but also it's not easy to make something so technical um accessible to a community that is very busy, right? all have jobs and families and and lives to live and shouldn't have to feel burdened by uh some of the the planning decisions that the council and and you know city staff are are having to contend with. Um so um that's the motion is the the staff

recommendation. Um I I I think there are great risks to doing anything other than the staff recommendation where we don't have one there is nothing we could do about state law and I feel like if we were to do something with the intent of appeasing the community today and a year down the road there's an application pursuant to AB 2011 the risk is a feeling of betrayal. Well, city council, didn't you do something about that? And we'll say, sorry, state law, just as we're saying today. Um, so I feel like there is no value uh in taking an action other than implementing the state law at the very least, if nothing else, right? We have our own objective standards that the staff have prepared. Um, and the color on the map, right, uh, reflects also what state law allows. So if someone goes to as so many people do right the general plan and the zoning maps to understand their community they will see ah right this is what is permitted here and it will align with what state law already allows a property owner or a developer to to dom so uh those are my preliminary comments. Thank you

council member Mallister. Yeah, thanks. I have a couple of questions. So, quite a few [clears throat] council members said that we're still going to have some kind of a control. Is that true? If these laws are here and they say you have to do that, what control does the city have? If any of the developer applies any of those laws? Uh so if the council moves forward with the staff recommendation um it would provide an additional pathway to pursue approval of development on the site u outside of the provisions in state law that have been discussed by the council uh some of which include a ministerial approval process. So the council will be preserving a pathway for a project to go through the city process subject to the discretionary review process, public noticing, public hearing, um which provides more opportunity for community input in the development review process.

But if a developer doesn't want to do that, do they have the uh right to just go straight to it? Uh so a developer would likely have the opportunity to pursue a project under um AB 2011 or SP6 on these. Okay. So all this talk about we're going to have some control could be okay. Would you do you know of any developer would like to go through that process where they can have a streamlined process to just do it?

Um so I I'll just say that um in my experience um there has not been widespread adoption of the AB211 and SP6 processes. And so uh for some reason um developments are not materializing under those laws at this point in time. And so, um, I would assess it's probably more likely that a project would come through the city's process if the council were to provide one.

Okay. Uh, speaking of these laws, I mean, there are constantly new laws coming up. Uh, laws are being reviewed and looking at the unintended consequences. So, do we see anything going down that that some of these things might be consolidated since there's new laws coming out all the time, which makes it very confusing for the community and the state. So have you seen anything come along where let's come out and say okay let's let's revisit let's consolidate anything along this line.

I'm not aware of any attempt to consolidate these into fewer or a singular type of you know expedited or streamlined um housing approval process. Um the legislature seems to be focusing on different issues related to housing development and rolling out the legislation over time. in the trend is to provide for less and less local control and more and more prescriptive standards, streamlined processing and so forth. So, it's not really going to get any better for local control. I mean, I I don't have a crystal ball, but I think that the trend line is is suggesting that less and less local control will be a feature of state housing law.

Okay. And then there was some concern that we would uh be out of u compliance with the housing element, but I read in your qu answers that it would not take us out of the housing element as long as we're discussing. So it doesn't put us at risk because if we do something blatant, you're not it's still a process to change it, but it doesn't put us at risk.

So I think it's it's a more complicated answer. I think there's if the council were to not um support staff's recommendation for let's say 1702 Marmonti tonight um there would not likely be an immediate consequence of non-compliance descertification of our housing element by the state. Um what it could do is start a process right that engages the state looking at Mountain View's performance in implementing its housing element. The state could look at other examples where the city's behind schedule on its implementation of housing element programs. It could, you know, present a uh more uh comprehensive picture of the city's efforts towards implementing the housing element that maybe would support an argument that the city uh should be subject to some further investigation and enforcement that could lead to descertification. It's speculative uh you know what the state would do in that case. I don't think there would be a great case to say that the city's been a bad actor and, you know, lead to descertification, but is it a possibility that those initial steps could begin? Yes, I think it's a possibility.

Okay. So, it sounds like we have a lot of ifs, a lot of scenarios that could go many different ways, right? I think there are a few black and white, you know, simple yes or no answers in in this type of situation.

Okay. So, my general comments, um, starting off with how we got here, uh, small businesses, how we got here, some of the other concerns, um, this, uh, how we got here. You even mentioned that this property was not initially looked at but because of outside influence or persuasion or threats that they the city had to come up with a new this is my observation that may not be fact but this is my obser that the city had come well you got to find more you have to find this high opportunity area to find it and so we're going to have to start picking items um I don't me personally I don't like to be threatened or bullied into doing something and a lot of this stuff is happening and I I said I may not be correct but I push back because I want to see it defined. I want somebody has to say no you're going too far. So the how we got here uh bothers me and we shouldn't and sometimes risk is at at stake but we have to protect if we just keep going along we really don't protect our residents. We just sort of we're not we're giving in too soon. So, I'd like to see us do it. So, that's one thing that makes me concerned about this project is that staff didn't recommend it. It was forced upon us and now we have to do it. The other thing that bothers that concerns me is that small businesses uh when we brought this up before I was concerned about protecting small businesses and I know that there is a medical there was a medical center u of dentists and doctors over on Nickhamarker in Sunnyville and when that reszone all those people had to leave away this medical center these dentists if it's res or not reszone but if it's developed they're gone they're not going to find those kind of facilities because it is very I had my teeth clean

today so what the hell uh so um I know that there's a lot of de uh technical stuff and it has to be specifically built. So if anybody's building it, they're going to put a lot of investment it's going to cost and I don't see anybody going to be doing that again over here in this area. Um, another concern of mine is the traffic and that we keep saying it's that Varsity Park, but it's much greater. Um, where I live and where I work, I drive that road every day and I've been driving that road for I hate to say it about 50 years. So, I really know what things are going on around here. Um, and so that is a big qua from Grant Road to all the way almost to San Antonio. It's a very heavily road because we do have certain certain segments of the city. Marmani was that's a major thorough affair going from Los Altos Hills to the highway to 101. Grant Road is a major thoroughare going from the 280 to 101 and then that's you know that's north south and east west. Quest is one of the big ones because we do have a lot of schools over there. Uh more schools than people mentioned. There's private schools but the daycare. My kids graduated from Little Acorn, so I hope that doesn't make me have to recuse myself, city of Attorney. And so, um, so there is a lot of traffic going both ways. And so, it is going to be a concern. The, um, the impact of potentially, we've already heard somebody try to put a development and say, well, we're going to rent parking spaces at across the street from someplace. Now, this is getting a little carried away, but there's a potential depending on how what's I'm looking at you as you're looking at these guys. Sorry. Would you answer [snorts] my questions? Um, the potential of the parking is really it's just a very bad place for parking. And if they start doing the sidewalks and going out to the

side, it really is not a good project to go there. Now, I was reading something and I don't know if it's applicable to the Grant Martins um zone, but there was some um language that I thought was interesting that could be uh correct me if this is not applicable. uh when a development comes in the development should have promotes the desirable character harmonious with the existing and proposed development in the surrounding area because it creates opportunities and so when we see these and multif family residents so it's I don't know if this you would say this is harmonious it sort of just sort of sticks out but we don't know if they're going to put in rentals or condos do we so it could the and anything that goes into the city, and you're going to see this at the next report, next agenda item, that we're going to have items that people can't afford. No matter what you say, if even you give them $100,000 down payment, they're still not going to be able to afford. So the idea that if we put in 15 units or so and three or four are going to be affordable and the rest of market rate um that's a lot of disruption for that neighborhood for three or four units where I rather see somebody and I I support housing. Uh Chris and I have supported voted a lot of housing in the time we were here before. So we probably put a couple thousand out there and Pat's been with us. So putting a project here the dis the it's not worth the the disruption that it's going to cause. We're going to lose too much. So, I'm not going to be able to support any motion that doesn't say look at it through another lens. And I know it's going to be a lot of time for

the the staff and I know it's could be a bit a risk. But we have just been all this builder remedy, all these other projects are coming down the pike and we're just saying, "Oh, it's too big a risk. We can't push back. We can't push back." And sometimes we need to. This is the first time that I've seen a petition for,00 people signing. That's a lot of people. You know, usually we see we've done more changing of council policy when we've had smaller crowds in here and now we have this whole community that's coming towards us. And I think I want to represent that community to an option that they might find a um reasonable that we can get to instead of just saying no this law the law the law. I I like to push the law a little bit. I like to research it. I'd like to see if there's a ways we can find solutions for it. But that with um yeah because this could he's based on staff we could determine how the other housing is coming through the city. So with that being said um if we do if [clears throat] we can you know proceed with reviewing this particular property otherwise I won't be able to support it.

Great. Okay. Thank you for everyone's initial comments. Um so right now we have a motion um by Council Member Ramirez and that was seconded by Vice Mayor Ramos. I think before we get through another round if people have another round that of comments they would like to to share um I' I'd like to take my opportunity. So [snorts] um first I just want to um give thanks to staff for the the work. I want to thank um the community and the residents and then I want to apologize if I mispronounce misprononunciated your name um and thank you for your patience with me as I I got through um our long um inerson and uh virtual public comment. So I think before I go into just the motion at hand, I would say that to me there's like three top takeaways um that come out of this item. The first I would say is um how the city can improve on our our outreach kind of just holistically and generally. Um I think that some council members asked about outreach and I think over my now seven years on council and then time before that on planning commission we're the city's always talking about how we can better engage and better inform. Um and then that also falls incumbent on on council members. And so I think you know you have highlighted for us how we need to be um proactively sharing as well as working um uh to to make sure that that outreach is happening. Um you know I don't I don't think the housing element is dry. I think that that affects our day-to-day as we're as as we're seeing. So I think it's just about making sure that we're we're educating and constantly informing. And so um that's that's a lot of the feedback that I received on that. I would say the second top item um that um I'm reflecting upon is kind of community safety in general. So a lot some of it's been related to traffic congest congestion. Um some

people mentioned our vision zero which is to um our goal to have zero um vehicular uh fatalities in our city. Um, but I would say kind of overall community safety in general, making sure that people do stop when it's a when it's a a red light. Um, and so while it might I think it there needs to be more long-term solutions, I do appreciate the community's feedback on the I think near-term and the long-term strategies that um council can put forward. And I think what's will be really great is those are things that staff can do right after this meeting. It's we were told that um there's no council direction needed on that at this time. And so um that that heartens me that at least we can really be addressing um the community safety aspect. I think third what what comes to mind for me is small business preservation. Our council has been talking about small business preservation for many years and um just and I I reflect upon it because my family were small business owners here in Mountain View um for many decades. We learned from our business license sales hack that actually in 2018 when the city um looked at that that really a majority of Mountain View are small to midsize businesses. And as we are addressing our our housing crisis, I think what makes Mountain View so special and what I love about this community is every neighborhood has their little neighborhood spot. Everywhere has their own community. um and the different I would call them resourceri um items and I think that's why um this area of the you know Blossom Valley was was looked at because it's a resourcerrich area but what I I think I reflect upon as well is

as we look in reszoning how do we preserve those resources so we can we can reszone them and we can encourage the mixeduse development but I feel like what I've seen over the course of time is that just because we encourage and we ask there aren't a lot of levers or benefits and so um that might not be included in the projects that we see coming forward and so um I struggle because I want to make sure that we can you know preserve our dentists and create much needed housing um and so I I want I think it's important that the city be diligent as we are talking about small business preservation um because when we talk about what is it the three Ps of housing uh preservation production what's the last P Emily what protection yes okay we need to be thinking about all of those things related to small business too in in in my mind um because a lot of what we're seeing from our current uh state legislature and our governor is the cities may come up with great ideas and those are overridden um by the state [snorts] um so I think when it comes to the sites that we're talking about tonight. There there are multiple. I um I think the frustrating part about um what council member Sha Walter talked about related to local control is um the the position that the state has put itself in, which is taking kind of a broad brush to address our housing crisis. And so I think it's important that we what we're going to do tonight would come I think it would my understanding and colleagues can correct me and staff can correct me is that we would be aligning the housing element is looking to align to where the state is because

that is what um is is already in place. Um, and though we may have our own thoughts and feelings about it, I would say as we went through our housing element process and we tried to have a two-way dialogue with the state many times, um, because we're prohousing designated, because we have been so forward thinking about housing for a very long time and creating production, it wasn't necessarily um, always a two-way uh, dialogue. And I think that's kind of led to a little bit of of what we're seeing tonight. Um, so there are certain parcels that are overridden by that state law, but I think where we can, I would encourage colleagues to be looking at how we might be able to do um some preservation. And so, you know, specifically, it sounds like the only area with which we might be able to look at that is with the Evenddale parcels where there are some existing um small businesses that AB 2011 would not be applicable to at this time. there's there's no current legislation and so we could be able to preserve those while also um increasing the density for a couple neighboring parcels. I think that for some areas of the city that we are looking at, people go to that neighborhood dry cleaners that's right there. People go to the market that's there for their grocery shopping. And I want people to live in a walkable bikeable community where those resources are there and they don't need to go elsewhere. So I would ask colleagues if we can, you know, with the motion that's currently it sounds of all the parcels that's something that we can do. Um that's my understanding from our four hours of of discussion thus far. Um, and so I would just say that the current motion, um, I wouldn't be able

to support and I would look to the motion maker and the seconder to see if there would be amendable to at least that because it sounds like that's something that actually we can retain our local control on. Thank you, mayor. I'd be happy to accept that as a friendly amendment. So if staff I think that would be alternative to adopt. So the approve the staff recommendations with modifications to the Evendale precise plan excluding three parcels as as described in the alternative zoning option. Correct. Thank you.

And then the secondary is okay with that. And then if there are any other creative solutions on how we might be able to be addressing retaining some of the small businesses on some of the sites. I mean, I want the housing there and I want I'd love for us to be able to have what we have on the corner of El Camino and and Castro where we were able to preserve that, but as was mentioned, it's gayer, but we got input from our community that they would love for us to be able to keep their their neighborhood at least the, you know, dentist. Um, I I don't know what creative solution we can come to, but looking to colleagues as well. Uh, Council Member Clark,

I don't have any creative solutions on that front. Um, I I will um, you know, I looking at AB 2011, some folks talked about what it what a state law change is. It's it has a 10-year term. So, um, I, as I, as I mentioned earlier tonight, um, I I I'm just not willing to roll the dice for eight years and allow um allow a lack of local control over over these parcels. And so, especially with respect to mirror mate, I think putting mixed use in there instead of pure residential or pure commercial allows us the greatest level of flexibility because it will allow us to preserve or at least it provides a pathway to preserve the existing um businesses while um recognizing that housing is already allowed there. So, I'll end up supporting the motion. The only other comment that I had with respect to to traffic and and things in the Mye area, um, as we do the repaving project, I know there's a little bit of time before that, one one thing that I've, um, I've really appreciated about the city over the last, um, last few years, we've been willing to try things um, with sometimes sometimes to great a claim and sometimes, you know, people have complaints, you know, California Street, for example, but we learn a lot from it, right? And so if there are temporary things that we can put in place, um I think if we if we start talking about taking away permanently taking away turning movements, you know, you will have a group of people who be very excited about that and you will have a group of people who will be very very adamantly opposed to that. But what people might be much more amendable to is is trying things and see how they go. Uh so not not putting permanent changes in place. So that's just a long way of saying to Mr. Orango and others. We're not giving direction tonight, I know, but if there are um as part of the repaving project, if there are near-term sort of temporary things that we think that we can try, um I I I'd be very open

to that. There might not be any, but maybe maybe there are instead of just permanently removing a attorney movement. Maybe we can if if there's enough community support, maybe we can try it. Um and if it doesn't work, it doesn't work. We revert to what we did before. But I I think um that's one thing that we've done over the last few years that uh that I've appreciated is that we're willing to try things and if they don't work, we change them and if they do work, then we we uh we move them forward. So, um I'll I'll be supporting the motion. Council member Hicks,

thank you. This is actually my first comment. My last one was more of a question. So, um, so I, so among the things that council members have said, some of the ones that resonate the most with me are, um, that we need to make whatever decision we can make tonight that optimizes city control over um over the the parcels that uh, the parcels that the community is most concerned about. um and uh finding a way to do that that allows us to apply our um our apply mixed use standards to it and hopefully then um preserve the businesses there. Although I actually do think that for dental offices that's pretty hard to do when you when you're building stories on top about on top of them. I'm not sure that I have a a method for that, but get as close to that as we can to um apply local standards. Um I have to say I'm not and so for that reason I I will be supporting the amended um motion. Um I have to say I am not um happy about it though. I'm uh a Oh, and I especially appreciate the changes that the mayor uh suggested in the Evenddale parcels um because I'm concerned about uh neighborhood serving uses as well. People in that area have told me that they used to and along Moffett that they used to walk all the time and now they have to take their car to go places. So I I don't you know we call it a transitorian development around Moffett. I don't know whether you think Evenddale is around Moffett, but um if we're turning every I'm all for more housing, but if we're turning everything into housing compounds with no neighborhood serving businesses, transit oriented

development doesn't really operate very well that way. So, that I support. the rest of it I'm I'm reluctantly going along with. Um because I feel like state law, although it's good for some things, I feel that maybe I can put it this way. I'm a retired city planner. I like a lot of people became planners because I wanted to uh make great cities make cities great. But more housing is one of the things that makes cities great in my opinion, but it's not the only thing. And I feel like the way the laws I don't I feel like the laws do not have to be coming down the way they are. That they could be coming down in ways that give us the ability when we have a taller building to have wider sidewalks to have those objective standards to maintain ground floor retail and do a number of other things. And I actually think that that would make people people who currently do not support the created creation of additional housing be supportive when we're developing places that people actually like. So I think it's kind of a tragedy that that uh we don't have the ability to to apply those standards. Nevertheless, that's where we are. Um, and so I'm also going to agree with what council member Sha Walter said earlier that we should be lobbying the state on this because I think, you know, because the direction we're going in and the state is going in is not entirely good in my opinion in terms of making great cities, but we are where we are right now and so I will be supporting the motion.

All right. Thank you everyone. Uh, any other further comments or questions? All right. Okay. So, I think we're gonna take the take the vote um right now. Okay. All right. And that passes 61. Thank you. Um thanks everyone for joining us. Um, we'll move on to um our next item, which is we need a motion to continue the meeting past 10 p.m. All right. So, let's vote. We have a motion by Vice Mayor Ramos, seconded by Council Member Clark.

All right, that passes 52. So, we'll move on to item seven, our study session. Item 7.1 is our low and middle inome housing ownership low and middle inome home ownership strategy. The purpose of this study session is to receive council input on staff's recommended scope of work and timeline for the fiscal years 2025 to 27 council work plan project to develop a low and middle inome home ownership strategy. Affordable [snorts] housing manager Julie Bernard and housing director Wayne Chen will present the item. If you'd like to speak on this item in person, please submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk. Now, we'll begin with the staff presentation whenever they're ready.

All right. Good evening everyone. Um, mayor, vice mayor, city council members. I'm Julie Bernard, your affordable housing manager, and I'm joined this evening by housing director Wayne Chen with Christy Wong from our consultancies um available by Zoom. Um this evening we're here to talk to you about um the low and middle inome home ownership strategy. Uh the purpose of this uh study session is to confirm staff scope of work and the timeline for the fiscal year's 23 oh sorry 25 through 27 council work plan project. Um this was adopted earlier this year and has also been on council's um on the council work plan cycle for a few years now. Um but this year it narrowed its focus to include home ownership but also broadened it to include low income. It has been known as middle income for the past several work plan cycles. The intent of the strategy is to address barriers to entry for home ownership as well as to um investigate ways to balance Mountain View's heavy rental housing supply and production. The immediate actions that we've taken since the beginning of the fiscal year include onboarding or procuring a consultant team that have extensive experience in this area. Um developing a scope of work for your consideration this evening and conducting an initial market analysis. Staff is recommending the following framework for uh the strategy. uh we re we do recommend um using the standard definition for low income which covers households from 50 to 80% of the area median income or AMI. On the other hand, there is no established industry standard for the definition middle income. It often depends on the context in which it's used. So staff does um recommend

including the definition of moderate income which is 80 to 120% AMI. In high-cost areas like the Bay Area, middle income is often used in discussions to donate a higher income range, specifically those that would be needed to purchase a home. So uh that may range up to 200% which I'll discuss on the next slide. So um this slide indicates or this table indicates the average sales prices of condominiums and town homes in Mountain View in the last 6 months. So if we were to compare a condo with a um town home, a three-bedroom condo and town home, um a condo would be around uh 1.2 million with the average um town home of being 1.6. The second table provides an analytical comparison of what different home sales prices would need to be at the various income ranges and household sizes if we were to assume that housing costs are 30% of a household income. You'll notice that home ownership is tough to afford for any households earning under 120% AMI. So although the numbers start to pencil out on paper at around about 150% AMI, this does not um like reflect the real hurdles that home buyers face such as saving for a 20% down payment, competing in bidding wars, and qualifying for financing in a very volatile market. So um staff u recommends including a definition of middle income of 80 to the 200% AMI. So our first question is does staff sorry does council agree with staff's recommended framework to study the income range of between 50 and 200% AMI or do you have other direction?

Some of the challenges that we experience are related to market and external forces that are outside the city's control. The fact that the city has very limited local um tools um and specifically that there's no requirement for developers to develop um home ownership products. As we know uh public funding is limited and usually focused on rental and deeper affordability levels and those with um special needs. And um additionally, another giant challenge is the construction defect liability law, which protects home buyers but disincentivizes developers due to the long-term risk of them being sued. So, the city has undertaken some initiatives relating to low and middle inome home ownership in the in the past several years. The first includes updates to the BMR program. In 2019, the AMI levels were amended. Um, the city has recently made some modifications to zoning and precise plans which increase um densities permitting a wider range of housing types. Staff are in the process of standing up a small home buyer assistance program. And finally, the city's housing element currently contains a number of policies and two specific programs that we'll talk about here. Staff's uh Proposed scope for work includes seven to seven tasks which I will discuss in further detail in the following slides. As I mentioned um staff proposed that task one addressed a review of literature comparable jurisdictions and best practices. We propose focusing on home ownership programs, programs with measurable outcomes, factors contributing to their success, and identifying strategies that are most city suited to the city of Mountain View.

Task two will address a variety of economic analyses and modeling, including a market analysis, affordability gap assessment, financial analysis, and perform modeling, and sensitivity testing. So this will estimate the total subsidies that may be needed to facilitate affordable home ownership across the different affordability levels especially those relating to tasks four and five. The third um task relates to our stakeholder outreach. We anticipate meeting with large-scale market rate developers, smallcale developers, property owners interested in infill development, financial institutions and real estate brokers, employers and businesses. We also anticipate having one general communitywide meeting, conducting a community survey, and if and when um necessary, having holding uh individual meetings. So for task four um analyzing potential policies, programs, funding and partnerships um sorry I lost my train of thought as part of our scope of work. This includes options to facilitate the development of ADUs found in house in housing element program 2.2 as well as some other funding and partnerships listed here. So, as you know, the city has um typically used an RFQ RFP process to develop affordable rental housing on city-owned sites. So, for task five, staff recommends exploring a home ownership project on the city-owned site in North Beayshore. To our knowledge, there's no similar models for and this presents an innovative solution for affordable home ownership. In January this year, staff collaborated with the urban land institute to con convene a technical assistance panel. Um, this tap examined prototypes and conducted

initial feasibility te testing. So task five will build on these ULI tap findings and if feasible staff would return to council um to council study session to discuss an RFQ RFP process and the development priorities. This would um occur after the strategy adoption as part of the implementation plan. Task six um is focused on how to address barriers to condo development. Council has an interest in condos for a few work plan cycles and they are proposed land use or regulatory they are a proposed land use or regulatory focus because they offer lower price points and therefore are more attainable homeownership product. They also advance city goals by promoting housing diversity, efficient land use and transit oriented growth. staff recommends uh so for task 6A barriers to condominium um development staff recommends two subtasks or sorry two tasks um to I'm sorry [laughter] let me start again staff recommends two subtasks within task six so 6A proposes a scope of work that addresses the options that are within the city's control these include development standards and regulations s and to um review previous and ongoing actions for e efficacy at reducing these barriers. Task 6B is primarily focused on fees, processes, and procedures relating to the subdivision map as well as applicable state laws AB 1033, AB 684, SB123, and SB9. Task seven will finally develop a

strategy, document, and implementation plan. This will include actionable recommendations, roles, responsibilities, and resources, a five-year implementation plan, and indicators and continuous improvements. So, the second and final question, does council support staff's recommended scope of work, so tasks 1 through seven, um to develop the low and middle income home ownership strategy, or does council have other direction? To recap, uh, question one, does council agree with staff's recommended AMI ranges and the recommended scope of work or or would you have other direction? So finally um to conclude our next steps uh the tasks one through seven shall be implemented over the course of the next year with staff returning to council for the adoption of the strategy consideration and adoption of the strategy in December 2026. So that concludes staff's presentation. Um we're available for questions and we can turn it back to the mayor.

Thank you. So since this is a study session, we'll do public comment first if there is any. So if um any member of the Pu public joining us virtually or in person would would like to provide look it's it's it's contagious. It's contagious. Would like to provide comment on this item. Please click raise handbend in Zoom or submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk. Now I only see one person in person. I'm gonna give you one minute and then we but we have public comment on online too. So they're going to get one minute too unfortunately because it's midnight. So Alex Brown, sorry.

Oh, I thought you were going to go 30 seconds and I would have supported it. Uh, finally. Yay. All right, James Kuzzmol. I think it's so it' be 60 seconds is one minute.

I I I won't worry about it. Um okay. Uh I support the items for staff investigating this. Lots of arbitrary differences between different types of development. We should reduce. I would note that renting is so good. So don't I I always get irritated when people just focus on home ownership, but we should be worrying about differential barriers. And I hope that my if my dentist ever does get redeveloped that uh they can live above it in a unit they own in a new practice rather than living in Pacific and commuting to Mountain View like they do right now. Thank you

David Watson. Hey, David. All right, we can try to come back to David. How about Daniel Holy?

All right. Hi. Uh, so I I think uh it's it's good that uh the city is looking at this. Um, in terms of this the scope overall, I think uh just to echo uh what James Kuzzal said, you know, we we shouldn't be looking necessarily at uh homeownership as opposed to rental units. It should really be about uh enabling homeownership where uh rentals um wouldn't really make sense. And a a really good example of a a policy that fits that is AB1033, uh, which is one of these really great state housing laws that, uh, is a local control law. So, the city has to pass an ordinance, but basically it would enable homeowners to build ADUs and and sell them as condos, uh, which would increase the supply of condos in the city. Um, it's also much better for building those ADUs, for financing them, uh, because for a number of reasons. The big one being that the mortgage on the condo is going to have a much lower interest rate uh, than the heliloc that that pays for the construction. So, it's a great law. I I think that should absolutely be some sort of thing that that the city is looking at. Uh, so support that. Thank you, David Watson.

Um, I uh I was going to just add from from uh Mountain VB's letter. Uh I uh wanted to also uh highlight uh you know there are different uh many different things that can uh restrict uh uh the um feasibility of uh construction. And I uh wanted to uh once again mention the uh the dual staircase uh mandate and uh that uh we should uh look into mechanisms for flexibility uh like Santa Monica has done for uh single stair projects which I think will make uh it easier for condo projects to um to be feasible. Thank you.

All right. [snorts] I'm not seeing any other inperson or virtual public comment. So, I'll bring the item back for council questions and then we can discuss and provide feedback on the two questions that staff provided. Does anyone have any clarifying questions for staff? All right. I am not seeing council member Mallister.

Okay. So you're saying okay the first question about going uh 50 to 200 and even at the 200 range is is not likely that someone's going to be able to afford it. So why are you stopping at 200? Why don't you go to find a number that actually is gives us a number that says if you do this you're likely to be able to afford a house or ownership.

Um thank you for the question Wayne Chan housing director. um at some point we'd need to find a line somewhere and I think um we thought that 200% uh made some sense to go go above the 120 but um even higher might start to get too extended. U the other is that at around the 200% AMI mark they folks are starting to able to afford the average selling price um but they may still encounter some barriers such as a down payment or or other factors and so this group um is starting to be able to afford the market prices and above that they were starting to get into a territory where it just becomes much easier for folks to afford um and so we thought that the 200% AMI would be the reasonable place to um sort of draw the line and conduct the the evaluation.

Okay. So that's what their income is, but then you also mentioned the idea of a down payment. So um Okay. I I could say that for a comment. Okay. The other question I had for you, and I think it was a mis wording on my part potentially, um that the construction of apartment is different than construction for a condo. And can the city make it more feasible to build apartments with condo construction? And the question is can we save actually not um not feas I guess feasible but the the re answer is what I was looking for is can we encourage condo construction so that we can do a conversion down the road. And you said the city zoning regulations is not distinguished between the two. Well, the regulations might not distinguish, but the building code would distinguish the two. Is that not true?

I'd like to I know um community development director uh Christian Murdoch is here. Maybe he can assist. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council Christian Murdoch, community development director. Um I think there there may be some instances where uh the building code provides for different standards for uh ownership units in terms of unit separation requirements, fire rating, um uh acoustic and other types of insulation and so forth. Um that is something we can look into as part of the scope if there's interest in um seeing if there's a way to encourage apartments to build to that standard so that they're readily adaptable in the future uh to a condominium conversion. um if I'm understanding the underlying uh premise of the question.

Okay. Well, okay. If you off the top of your head, do you know how much more it costs to build at uh condo construction versus apartment construction? I I don't that's something we could research as part of this work. Okay. And the last question is that was the last question. Thank you,

Council Member Hicks. So, I am interested in being able to sell off ADUs as condos. Can you which one of the the public speakers mentioned um can we can you clarify that for me? Can we do that now? Is AB1033 the only way of doing that? Do you have any other information? I think we'll defer back to uh community development director Murdoch and help us. I think you know as we mentioned in the report um task six is primarily going to be driven by yeah community

right so u AB 1033 is the clearest mechanism and it provides the enabling legislation um that the city can uh pursue to allow those types of sales um it's been a while since I looked at it my recollection is that potentially earlier versions of um or maybe even the current versions of state ADU law provide that the units cannot be separately sold and so it's reconciling that uh discrepancy that may be in the law. Um could there be other, you know, local control mechanisms to allow the sale of ADUs potentially? Uh but AB 1033 would be the clearest path in my opinion. Okay. And it sounds like that's something you'll be looking at. Uh yeah, that's part of task 6B, I believe.

Good. Um and then Yeah, I'll leave it at that. Thank you. Well, um people don't need to wait if they don't have any questions. Um we have two questions before us for the study session. Um the answers can be yes and yes. Um because the question number one is does council agree with the staff's recommended framework to study the income range between 50% AMI and 200% AMI or does council have direction regarding the income range? And then question two, does council support staff's recommended scope of work to develop the low and middle inome home ownership strategy or does council have other directions? So, Council Member Ramirez.

Thank you, Mayor. Yes. And yes. Um I do have a couple of quick uh comments. Um, one is I'm remembering um, uh, something uh, Eric Anderson, who was I think the lead on the housing element said many years ago. Um, as we were getting very deep in that process, um, he expressed what I think was a bit of a concern that we're we're doing a lot of planning to plan and not like actually doing the things that we want to do. And I I felt that way as I was reading through the staff report. All of this is good. This is this is an excellent work plan. I guess the question I have is, do we really need the work plan? Can we just do some of the stuff that I mean, maybe it's more rhetorical. If if staff thinks there is value in having, you know, the the the work plan in place, I'm going to vote yes. This is great. I'm I'm very grateful to uh Mayor Kame for prioritizing and and championing um um opportunities for for low and middle inome people to uh to purchase homes. I know uh other council members including council member Sha Walter for years, you know, have been advocating for mapping uh allowing ownership opportunities. So like we're all there 150% actually 200% based on the new AM limit. Um I guess it just I I don't know if there's a reason we have to go through the steps and have you and all staff take a lot of time putting this document together. Great. I'm happy to support it. Do we really need to do it though? Can we just start doing the work? I would prefer that.

Vice Mayor Ramos, I thought it was a rhetorical question in the council member's mind. I mean, but but yeah, [laughter] Vice Mayor Ramos, thank you, Mayor. Um, I'll start by saying um well, thank you to staff for the work on this. Um, this has been I know that this has been on our priorities list for for a long time. It's it's it's actually one of the priorities I think was put in before the pandemic and was kind of

pushed aside because we were in it since we were in a once in a-lifetime state of emergency. Um and now we get to go back to the goals where some of you ran on and wanted to get it through. So I'm very happy it um um it's coming up. Um, so thank you to staff for bringing it back. Um, and especially bringing it back before some of my colleagues are done. Um, that sounds really ominous, but whatever. It's it's past midnight. Um, one of the things I also want to kind of point out, I know, um, in one of the comments, um, there was a concern of like we're not we're treating homeowners as a as a special extra class. I I think our our focus on home ownership here is actually more because the current rental market actually is starting to to meet the the the current rental market right now is actually starting to meet the low-inccome needs um at 80% like it you can actually get a rental unit right on the market. Maybe not a new unit, but like maybe a slightly older unit, but and then we do have some units here that renters at 80% AMI can find and afford right on the market today. Home ownership, however, [laughter] um you you can be at as as they show, you could be at 120% in a oneperson household and with a m your maximum purchase price availability is 470,000. I have not seen something for sale for 470,000. I am addicted to Zillow. I I I keep an eye on that. Um the the current market ownership market right now does not meet the needs of those who are making even 12 20% AMI. Um, it it could like I've seen some at 150% AMI, but

that's like a once in the blue moon and it's like a oneperson unit in like a really really old condominium that was built like 50 60 years ago. Um, 200 seems a little high for me, but I don't see a problem with studying up to 200. Um I agree um about the looking at the applicable state laws. Um as the commenter said about AB 1033, it actually says in the law um uh the it authorizes a local agency by ordinance or ministerial appro approval to provide creation of accessory dwelling units in areas zone residential use. Basically it says local jurisdiction, you can do this. Um, and that that's necessarily what that build I would love for us to just straight up do it and not have to go through a a a whole plan to plan to do something. Um, so I'm I'm but overall I am happy with the plan as we are. Um and yes, I think 200% is really high, but at the very least it takes um it out of the speculative market and and it's al it's deed restricted from there on if we do plan on having something at 200% AMI and that's valuable in its own way. Um so I I um yes and yes. That was my longest way of saying yes and yes, so sorry about that. Um but yeah, thank you staff for this and let's move forward onward.

Great. Thank you, Council Member Schwalter. Well, answer to the first one is yes. Answer to the second one is yes, but I'd like to put in a few priorities for me. Um item six, tax six. Task six, which is the barriers to condominiums. That's the one I have been talking about for many, many years. I'm so glad some people were listening. Thank you. Um [laughter] and um it really does mean a lot to me. Uh I think that um uh if we and um I uh I just think that's really important. The other one I think that we the the planning to plan um it's it's always a you know it's a fine line. You need to do sufficient planning so that you um you know you spend time and money wisely but you don't need to plan to the you know to the um zeros event and I think that um I trust you to sort of figure that out and come back to us with things that well this would the best way to plan would be to be do a pilot project. So give us a little money and let's let's try. I mean to me I I hope that you will you you know feel um uh feel happy to uh suggest innovations like that to us. Um I would welcome them. And then the other thing I wrote I think I wrote another thing here. Oh. Um, I was talking to a friend who has worked in affordable housing for a long time and she said that um, Spur was leading a charge on construction liability improvements. So perhaps we

could look into that. Um, because it does seem like every time you talk to a builder about um, condos, construction liability is is like the first or second thing out of their mouth. So um we can't solve that independently but we certainly can lend our voice to it and um and then as we've talked before you know the things that we can identify that are within our ability to change if there are inspection mechanisms or I don't know I I don't know what they would be but if if there are things that we can change let's do it. Okay thank you council member Clark. Um also yes and yes and the reason that that was so easy is that this is a comprehensive set of strategies um so I don't want to detract from that just with a very simple answer but between between the the overall set of strategies and the briefing that we had that really really helped and thank you mayor for your leadership on this and to everyone else who's been um council member Scha Walter Council member Mallister everyone everyone is um who's been champion um championing um ways to increase um home ownership opportunities for folks in in different product types over the years before and after the pandemic. Um I really appreciate everyone sticking with this.

Great. Thanks, Council Member Hicks.

So, yes and yes. Also, um in terms of the the kinds of programs, I'm maybe this dubtales with what um council member Ramirez said in some ways. I'm particularly interested in um programs that give us kind of a big bang for the buck. Um I'm more interested in what will produce the most results relative to um the amount of administration and and money put into the program. Um I don't mind putting a lot in if we're getting a lot out, but what I want to avoid is a lot of expensive tiny programs that are difficult to administrate. um that are symbolic in nature, whatever. Um so uh and the other thing I'm interested in to some degree is the funding partnerships you mentioned. I think with the disappearance of the a lot some of these potential programs rely on money and with the disappearance of the BAFA bond and certainly no money coming from the federal government. um you know it's I think for some of them we're there are some potential funding partners but I don't know if they'll come through and um yeah so looking at those and then you know maybe not considering programs if we that we can't do if we if those are are not a possibility. Um, and then I did like I I asked the answer of what staff thought were the um the programs that probably had the biggest potential and you said the uh housing site we would develop in North Beayshore and reducing barriers to condos. So, you know, that sounds good.

Thank you, Council Member Mallister. Um, I had one one Another question and I didn't think you'd uh the question was if we do get involved in this uh housing or the apartments and we do lend money uh will there be a mechanism that we recoup our initial investment I just want to make sure that he yes typically when cities provide um down payment assistance uh um not not closing costs per se but down payment assistance those are typically loans that get repaid and so we get it back and we can lend it out again.

So we would get our money back when the propertyy's sold. Um yeah. Yeah. So and also when they're you're they're paying down the mortgage as well. Okay. Because you said something about the city doesn't get involved with it. And I agree the city wouldn't get involved with the sale of the property. Yeah. That would be um I think the response for task five if there was a developer selection for our north beayshore site and then they're off doing their own uh sales process and the city want to be involved with that.

Um thank you council member Clark. U some of these people aren't been around long enough to realize that about 2012 or 2013 someone kept talking about condo conversions and the you know getting down on the law. So, um it's Thank you, mayor, for refreshing everybody's memory. So, been working on that. Um for question one, uh yes and no. Uh I'd like to see it higher than 200 because what you're showing I would like to see realistic scenarios in a 200. We're we're borderline there. So, I rather see us go higher. you'll have the flexibility to do it once you start thinking about um I would see hired to say actually someone gets here and they know for sure if there's a scenario says this will work I would like to see that so somebody has a realistic go there but yes uh that and on number two the question is yes but I would like to see the real crux of this is we got to get the building developers to build and as long as there's that 10-year your liability. We're not going anywhere. And so I rather see you con something what uh Mr. Luke, Council Member Romero says, I would rather see you concentrate on getting a good sense of legislation change and we can do it by ourselves. We don't have to wait for someone. We can initiate it so we can get out there and start doing it. I know. I'll be I'll be first there to help you do that and get a sense of where we can change the law because until we get that law, the building developers, you know, you said 47 units and how many years and I don't know how many were before that. So it's concentrate on things that you know you can move forward and see results because if you don't get the development guys the council member mayors you're doing a lot of something that's it's great for background but it doesn't translate into

actual action. So we say GSD, right? So let's GSD it and um um yes. So those are my thoughts to get that getting us going.

Yes. Get stuff get stuff done. All right. Um thanks colleagues um really appreciate it. So um first just want to give a huge thank you to our staff um for doing this because I have no questions because I asked them all my questions um because I had seven years to do that. Um but [laughter] no no no just in all seriousness yes my my answers to question one or two and yes and yes I think the feedback that I'd like to provide is for task three when it talks about conduct stakeholder outreach I think what I would be most curious about is thinking about the the the lifetime of someone's opportunity in Mountain View. So perhaps someone is living in the sevens um but they um they are you know single income household it becomes a dual income they get bumped up on the AMI range so they need to look for something else. Perhaps our program right for low and moderate income could help them go from being in that uh situation right uh BMR housing to our our home ownership. And I would love to see kind of the the life cycle that someone may be able to go through. I think we heard feedback from people who say that their children cannot return to the area, right? Um, unless they inherit a home, well, perhaps they could something like this would be able to help them. So, I think when we're thinking about stakeholder outreach, I would really encourage and hope that it would be um citywide and we're really thinking about um making sure that uh we get all input on how people may be entering um the this type of of market because I think one of the other pieces that we don't often talk about is perhaps someone wants to downsize but they don't feel like they have that opportunity to downsize because they're a senior on a fixed income. And so I really want to just um I love that Mountain View is a a pro housing designated city. I love that though

we're able to do a lot related to the rental market and I'm very excited to be talking about um expanding our portfolio and what we can offer for home ownership because I want um no matter where someone is in their like housing journey, I want them to feel like they can do that here. And what we're doing tonight with all of um this I do think it's fruitful to have a plan. um that that we're able to reach and achieve those goals. Um and I I I'd be open to hearing as um as staff looks at the ranges from the for the AMI. Do we need to go over the 200 as um council member Kister mentioned just because of um and and I talked with staff, you know, uh half a million dollars is what it costs for 20% down on a you know, market rate um home ownership opportunity in Mountain View. Um not a lot of h people have that. but then it's also an additional usually 20% in your bidding war. So really excited for this. Thank you very much. I don't think you need anything else from us because it sounded unanimous and it's a study session. So just want to thank um staff for hanging in with us. Does uh do colleagues have any other comments on this item? All right. Great. Well, so we'll move on to item eight, our council staff and committee reports. Council member Shoalter. Okay. Okay, I'm going to make this quick, but there's a couple things related to um Silicon Valley Clean Energy I do want to share with you. Um last week we approved the budget. Um and that uh required us to dip a modest amount into our reserves. The cost of energy has gone down, which is good. But that means that the cost of revenue that SVCE gets has also gone down which means um we're going to dip a little into our reservoirs reserv reserves but that's what they're for. That's what they're for. We were also educated about some economic levers that we might be able to

pull if this negative economic um situation persists. So we continued our discussion um in detail on Friday morning. We had a a Friday morning workshop where we talked about um the priorities and what our priorities should be. And some of the ones that were brought up would would be affordable, 100% clean energy, always being cheaper than PG&E, um innovation, and the programs we do. So, it would be great to have some, you know, as your Mountain View rep, it would be great to have some casual conversations with you or not so casual if you don't want to be casual about um what you think is important with Silicon Valley Clean Energy because we were, you know, we were one of the the the founding partners. We um this is a a very important agency for us. Um, and then the other thing I wanted to share is that Thursday afternoon after a wonderful lunch, I went and met with some um, Tabella property owners to hear their concerns about RVs parked in their neighborhood. Um, I want to thank Audrey um, Seymour Ramanburgg for joining the call. She had important up-to-date information to share with them and they really appreciated that and um, and the and the the good customer service that you know that her knowledge and getting back to them represented. But I just see that, you know, looking forward, we're all going to have to be thinking about um RVs uh in the future. So, we'll we'll be meeting with lots of property owners. [laughter] Um and that's it. Thanks. Great. Anyone have anything else they'd like to report? Okay. Not seeing any. I'm just going to go over mine really quick. Last week I attended an event held by um Santa Clara County called Belonging in Santa Clara County related to immigration. So I'll be sharing that information with our city staff. also spoke on a panel for the Silicon Valley

Chamber related to um the FIFA World Cup and uh innovation and AI in in Silicon Valley and joined four other mayors um in our area and uh was able to give the welcome greeting to our community team uh action team uh Bosala on Saturday as well as kickoff and uh start our German holiday market on behalf of the city. Then yesterday I got to join council member Hicks. We had a ribbon cutting for NAR restaurant. Um those of you are familiar with the old happy house on um El Camino. It is um providing caucus cuisine. So it's um the region of um Armenia Azerbaijan and uh Georgia and it's um absolutely amazing and phenomenal. You can read the Mountain View voice article about it. Um, and that is all I've been doing, um, uh, for mayor. Thanks on behalf of the city. So, um, thanks everyone so much. This concludes our council meetings for 2025. We made it into the next day. Um, this meeting is adjourned at 12:30 a.m.

See you next Oh, the next city council mill meeting will be held on January 13, 2026. Thanks. Happy holidays, everyone. Yes. Happy holidays.