Mountain View’s February 10th Council meeting ran nearly to midnight, but the payoff was substantial: Council gave clear direction on the long-awaited R3 zoning update, approved a 2026 legislative platform that includes several housing production reforms we’ve been pushing for, and handled a consent calendar that included the 881 Castro street vacation for the Lot 12 affordable housing project.

R3 Zoning Update (Item 7.1)

This was the main event. The R3 zoning update has been in the works since 2019, and Council finally gave staff direction to complete it this year. The goal: replace the current R3 standards with objective, form-based standards that make multifamily housing feasible and encourage stacked flats over the townhome developments that have dominated recent R3 projects.

Dear Mayor Ramos and Council Members,

Mountain View YIMBY appreciates the opportunity to comment on Mountain View’s Legislative Program. There is a consistent theme that Mountain View advocates for maximum local control, especially on land use and housing. We urge the Council to ensure its positions on these issues are unambiguous and to avoid assisting “bad actor” jurisdictions that abuse their powers to kill housing projects arbitrarily.

Supported Items

We appreciate the inclusion of items on increased funding opportunities and displacement protections, including defending our local rent control ordinance, and the items that generally support increased access to housing, jobs, and services (Items C.8, C.10. C.25). We do appreciate the addition of Item 32, and encourage the City to actively advocate whenever it finds inconsistencies or ambiguities in state law which create uncertainty for both the City and developers.

Dear Mayor Ramos and City Council,

SB 79

Mountain View YIMBY supports harmonizing local development standards with the provisions of SB 79, as much as feasible, to provide clarity for developers and the community. We believe that such standards should incorporate existing work, specifically from the Moffett Boulevard Precise Plan, the Downtown Precise Plan Update, and the R3 Zoning Update, to make best use of staff resources and existing community engagement.

Re: Agenda item 5.1

Dear Chair Gutierrez and Commissioners,

Mountain View YIMBY strongly supports efforts to update the R3 Zoning District. We appreciate Staff’s extensive work to transition toward objective, form-based standards. This update is a critical step in fulfilling the Housing Element’s commitment to ensuring multifamily projects are economically feasible and can achieve their allowed densities. To ensure these new standards successfully encourage diverse housing types—particularly on smaller parcels—we respectfully submit the following recommendations:

In a marathon meeting that stretched into the early hours of Wednesday morning, the Mountain View City Council took significant steps to implement our Housing Element and expand homeownership opportunities. The meeting, which concluded at 12:30 AM, featured a robust public hearing on zoning changes for several sites south of El Camino Real and a study session on a new strategy for low- and middle-income homeownership.

Housing Element Rezonings Approved (Item 6.1)

The Council voted 6-1 (with Councilmember McAlister dissenting) to approve General Plan and Zoning amendments for several sites identified in the city’s Housing Element. The approved rezonings include:

Re: Agenda item 6.1

Mayor Kamei & City Councilmembers,

Mountain View YIMBY writes in support of the general plan and zoning amendments necessary to implement Item 1.1(g) of the Housing Element. The staff memo notes the two major considerations for why these sites were chosen out of the extensive research they conducted: to affirmatively further fair housing by allowing more housing in more affluent neighborhoods, and to encourage developments that are in the realm of feasible. Staff have done their research and outreach over the past three years, creating a clear-cut commitment the City must fulfill now.

Re: Agenda item 7.1

Mayor Kamei & City Councilmembers,

Mountain View YIMBY supports the City in identifying barriers to condominium development and implementing Housing Element programs related to homeownership. In the past we have supported efforts to reduce city fees on SB 684/SB 1123 starter home projects and the ability for ADUs and SB 9 DUOs to be subdivided.

The City’s recent feasibility analyses, including work on the R3 zoning update and East Whisman Precise plan, provide a strong foundation. Reviewing these past efforts for efficacy would be valuable. We also look forward to how the city can better streamline under the powers of the Subdivision Map Act as well as the learnings from further analysis of the North Bayshore site.

At last night’s City Council meeting, Mountain View took a step back from a rushed expansion of its Historic Register, voting unanimously to pause the adoption of a new property list while staff refine the criteria and gather more input from property owners. The decision comes amidst a heated debate over how the city should respond to SB 79, Senator Scott Wiener’s new state law designed to spur housing near transit.

Re: Agenda item 6.1

Mayor Kamei & City Councilmembers,

On behalf of Mountain View YIMBY, I am writing to express several concerns about the current direction of the Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Register Update. Our goal is to ensure that Mountain View’s approach to historic preservation prioritizes the preservation of genuinely unique historic resources while ensuring that we respect Mountain View’s history of being a vibrant, diverse, and continually changing city that welcomes new neighbors, stays affordable for current residents, and allows architectural innovation.

Dear Mayor Kamei and City Councilmembers,

We support the changes that align the BMR program with current economic conditions and past project experiences, such as removing the ownership “equal to 100% AMI” requirement that many projects used a density bonus concession to waive due to technical infeasibility.

We are happy to see the proposed BMR graduated fee schedule, given anecdotes of how much the fees as-is have impacted small unit development. We would like to see this graduated fee schedule extend to projects at least up to 10 units. There have been various state laws that have streamlined small unit developments that use 10 units as their cutoff (SB 684/1123, SB 10, SB 478). In doing so our city would further facilitate these gentle-density projects led mainly by our residents, rather than large institutional development. SB684 and SB1123, in particular, were meant to encourage more ownership opportunities.