Oct. 14, 2025 Joint Meeting of Mountain View City Council and Shoreline Regional Park Community

Video

Transcript

Segment 1

[00:03:30] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right, good evening everyone. Thank you for joining us for our closed session.

[00:03:36] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: City Attorney Logue will make a closed session announcement, and then we welcome public comment on the item listed for closed session.

[00:03:44] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Good evening Vice Mayor, Mayor, and Councilmembers. There is one item on this evening's closed session agenda.

[00:03:51] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Item 2.1 is a conference with legal counsel regarding one item of anticipated litigation, pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2).

[00:04:04] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on the closed session item listed on tonight's agenda?

[00:04:14] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right, I am not seeing any in-person or virtual, so I will close public comment and we will recess to the Plaza Conference Room for closed session

[00:04:23] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: and return to the Council Chambers at the close to continue to the regular session at 6:30.

Segment 3

[01:34:09] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right, good evening, everyone. Thank you for your patience. Welcome to the joint meeting of the Mountain View City Council and Shoreline Regional Park Community meeting of October 14, 2025. Please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

[01:34:45] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: The Assistant City Clerk will take attendance by roll call.

[01:34:49] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Clark?

[01:34:50] Councilmember Chris Clark: Here.

[01:34:51] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Hicks?

[01:34:52] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Here.

[01:34:53] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember McAlister?

[01:34:54] Councilmember John McAlister: Here.

[01:34:56] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Ramirez?

[01:34:57] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Present.

[01:34:59] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Showalter?

[01:35:00] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Here.

[01:35:01] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Vice Mayor Ramos?

[01:35:02] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Here.

[01:35:03] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Mayor Kamei?

[01:35:04] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Here.

[01:35:05] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Thank you, you have a quorum.

[01:35:06] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. So we'll move on to Item 2, our closed session report. City Attorney Logue, do you have a closed session report?

[01:35:12] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: No reportable action was taken in closed session this evening. Thank you.

[01:35:16] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Thank you. So we'll move on to Item 3, our presentations. Please note these are presentation items 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 Assistant City Clerk now. And so I will, um, head down to the podium for our first. It's Item 3.1, our Compassion Week Proclamation.

[01:35:59] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right. And tonight we are joined by Yvonne Murray, Compassion Week Co-chair. So I'll invite her up to accept the proclamation. Hi, Yvonne. All right. Yeah, we got to do the kickoff together. All right. And the proclamation reads: 'Whereas the City of Mountain View is a community that embraces, promotes, and values compassion; and whereas the City of Mountain View appreciates the acts of compassion performed by community-based organizations, nonprofit agencies, and individuals every day to foster a kinder and more connected community; and whereas the vision of Compassion Week is to build a strong, compassionate, and empathetic community that bridges divides by creating service and learning opportunities for individuals to expand their understanding of local and global needs; and whereas all members of the Mountain View community, regardless of age, background, education, gender, religious beliefs, lifestyle, ability, or skill, were invited to contribute their talents and energy to participate in Compassion Week projects and activities and help make Mountain View a more caring and kind community. Now, therefore, I, Ellen Kamei, Mayor of the City of Mountain View, along with my colleagues on the City Council, do recognize and celebrate this past week that we just had of October 4th through October 12th as Compassion Week.' And so I just wanted to present that to you and then wanted to invite you to say a few words if you'd like.

[01:37:31] Yvonne Murray: I would just say that we really appreciate both the City Council, but more importantly, we appreciate all of the, uh, people in Mountain View that help make Compassion Week meaningful and help contribute to our thriving community. Thank you.

[01:37:48] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Of course. And so I'll just add a little bit more because I think that Compassion Week, we got to kick it off in our plaza in front of City Hall, and there was, I think, over what, 100 projects that people could participate in. And the City of Mountain View, we invited all residents to unite in service to our community through participation in the activities. And want to thank all the sponsors of Compassion Week, namely our Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation, the Fremont Bank Mountain View branch, Greathouse Family Foundation, and the Los Altos United Methodist Church for their efforts to bring community members together in service and offer thanks to our other sponsors of Compassion Week and every community-based organization, nonprofit agency, faith community, individuals who, um, strengthen our city and improve the lives of our neighbors. So we will, um, stand back here and we can take a picture with all of our colleagues. So let's give a round of applause for our Compassion Week. Thank you.

[01:39:04] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right. Item 3.2 is National Domestic Violence Awareness Month. We're happy to be joined this evening by Shabana Ansari, legal advocacy coordinator for Maitri, to accept this proclamation. If you want to come up.

[01:39:22] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right. And your proclamation reads: 'Whereas October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month, a nationwide effort to raise awareness about the prevalence of domestic violence, its impact on communities, and the need for support and prevention efforts; and whereas domestic violence is not limited to any one group and can take many forms, including emotional, physical, psychological, and economic abuse; and whereas although progress has been made toward preventing and ending domestic violence and providing support to survivors and their families, important work remains to be done; and whereas Domestic Violence Awareness Month provides an excellent opportunity for residents to learn more about preventing domestic violence and to show support for numerous organizations and individuals who provide critical advocacy, services, and assistance to victims. Therefore, I, Ellen Kamei, Mayor of the City of Mountain View, along with my colleagues on the Council, do hereby proclaim the month of October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month in the City of Mountain View and encourage our residents to work together to eliminate domestic violence in our community.' All right. Let me present this to you. And would you like to say a few words?

[01:40:39] Shabana Ansari: I promise I'll be brief. Good evening, everyone. Good evening, Mayor, Councilmembers, and everyone here. My name is Shabana Ansari, and I'm a resident of Mountain View. I represent Maitri, its domestic violence organization based in Santa Clara County, devoted to serving victims and survivors of domestic violence since 1991. And I would like to take a few moments to talk about the issues of domestic violence that is pervasive in our homes, cities, state, country, and all over the world. October is nationally celebrated as Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Today, I stand here as an advocate for victims and survivors of domestic violence to commemorate Domestic Violence Awareness Month. And I thank City of Mountain View for recognizing and this proclamation.

[01:41:40] Shabana Ansari: Research shows that one in four women, 24.3%, and one in seven men, 13.8%, aged 18 and older in the United States have been the victims of severe physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime. Intimate partner violence or domestic violence is exist in all communities irrespective of culture, religion, sexual orientation, financial status, or immigration realities. Domestic violence is the third leading cause of homelessness among families in the United States. Research also informs us about the lasting negative impact on children growing up in a household experiencing and witnessing domestic violence. California has higher rates of domestic violence experienced by both men and women when compared to the national average. There were 124 domestic violence-related homicides in California in 2024, of which 93 of the fatalities were female and 31 were male. Last year, Maitri provided culturally responsive services to 814 individuals. Organizations around California served more than 57,000 individual with life-saving support services within Santa Clara County, helping more than 8,000 survivors who reached out alone.

[01:43:20] Shabana Ansari: The need for a comprehensive plan to address domestic violence in our communities is urgent. And we thank the City of Mountain View for providing much-needed assistance in many areas as well as request to step up the effort. I request the City Council and the residents of Mountain View to become partner with us in preventing domestic violence and facilitating effective intervention methods if it happens. Here are a few things that I'm—we are suggesting: Create a supportive environment for everyone to seek out information and service related to relationship abuse. Demand curriculum and practice that uplift healthy relationship at every educational level and professional spaces. Enact and support policies that address intersectional approach to addressing domestic violence, homelessness, pay equity, reproductive rights, poverty, banning child marriages, to name a few. Support funding for domestic violence services provider at the federal, state, county, and city levels. We all know what's all going around with funding everywhere. Rethink law enforcement responses to crisis situation with special focus on stopping brutality against people of color and training on domestic violence. Evaluate and improve language access at city facilities. Offer training on cultural responsiveness to various local government employees and agencies. And involve non-governmental organizations as thought partners while planning city activities. And uplift the voices of the minority groups wherever possible as they lack representation in committees and other policymaking spaces. On behalf of Maitri, I really thank each and every one of you and City. Thank you.

[01:45:15] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right. And we have one last proclamation tonight. It's United Against Hate Week. And we're happy to be joined this evening by Nancy Ducos, our Senior Community Outreach Coordinator for the city's Multicultural Engagement Program. So Nancy, come on up. All right. And the proclamation reads: 'Whereas the City of Mountain View stands for diversity, inclusion, and respect for all, irrespective of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or any characteristic; and whereas we reject hate, discrimination, and violence aiming for a prejudice-free community; and whereas we collectively promote acceptance, respect, tolerance, and unity, enabling residents to live, work, and thrive without fear; and whereas united, we strengthen and celebrate our city's rich tapestry of cultures and perspectives; and whereas the City of Mountain View is fully committed to racial equity and justice as it strives to be a welcome and inclusive community for all, where every resident can live, work, and flourish without fear of hatred; and whereas we support the California Versus Hate coalition's mission to combat hate, prejudice, and intolerance, such as xenophobia, anti-Semitism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, anti-Muslim hatred, and other bigoted views by emboldened hate groups and individuals, and intolerance from our communities, and encourage communities to report hate incidents to the California Versus Hate hotline; and whereas the City of Mountain View seeks to join other communities in the Bay Area, California, and across the country in observing United Against Hate Week and sending a resounding message that we are united in our resolve to combat hate and promote acceptance; and whereas we call upon all residents, businesses, schools, and organizations to unite against hate, join events, champion inclusivity, tolerance, and unity; and whereas we urge our community members to report any hate incidents to the California Versus Hate hotline at 833-8-NO-HATE or online at cavshate.org in order to combat hate effectively and promote a safer environment and community for all. Now, therefore, I, Ellen Kamei, Mayor of the City of Mountain View, along with my colleagues on the City Council, do hereby proclaim the week of October 19th through October 27th, 2025, and each and every day beyond as United Against Hate Week.' Nancy, would you like to say a few words?

[01:48:10] Nancy Ducos: Good evening, everybody. Buenas noches. On behalf of the city Multicultural Engagement Program, I am here today to accept this proclamation. Through the city MEP program, we celebrate our community's diversity and bring people together as a community for all. The MEP program builds bridges between city government and residents, including English learners. It is through this program that the city offers civic leadership academies for Spanish and Chinese speaking residents, facilitate translations and interpretation services, and host multicultural events like the upcoming D���a de los Muertos celebration on Saturday, November 1st. One of our city partners, Stop AAPI Hate, is unavailable to be with us in person today. However, they say they are very much with us in spirit as we stand united against hate in all its forms. Their latest State of Hate report for California found that nearly half, 48%, of Asian American and Pacific Islander adults in our state experienced some form of hate due to their race, ethnicity, or nationality in 2024. This is a sobering reminder that our work is far from over. Stop AAPI Hate would also like to thank the City of Mountain View for standing with them and for our leadership in building communities where everybody belongs. Here in Mountain View, we are united against hate and working together to build a safer, more inclusive community. Muchas gracias.

[01:50:31] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: We will now take public comment on the presentation items. Would any member of the... oh, sorry, would any member of the council like to say a few words? Councilmember Hicks.

[01:50:43] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I'm just going to say briefly for all three of the proclamations, I found it in this kind of time that of national discord that many people are feeling—I know my neighbors and I talk about it a lot—I thought it was refreshing to have all three of these proclamations tonight. Let me see if I can sum them up: Against hate, against violence—I guess domestic or otherwise—and for compassion. I feel like that's something we especially need right now. So thank you all.

[01:52:01] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes, um, you said it very well. I also wanted to add that, um, for Compassion Week, um, it wasn't just projects, which was a great idea to have volunteer projects, but I also attended a lecture on, um, the impact of ICE in Mountain View. And, um, it was, uh, it brought together a lot of people who were interested in getting the information and also kind of wanting to talk about how they might help. So I just wanted to, uh, say thank you for the, the Compassion Week organizers for, for thinking about that education component as well.

[01:52:59] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. We'll now take public comment for the 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 Assistant City Clerk. I am not seeing any in-person public comment. So I will, um, turn it over to virtual.

[01:53:01] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right, well we'll move on. Um, we'll move on to the 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 or communications on non-agenda items in person, please submit a blue speaker card to the Assistant City Clerk now. Would any member of the Council like to pull an item? Councilmember Showalter.

[01:53:39] Councilmember Pat Showalter: I don't want to pull an item, but I just would like to comment on a few. Is it okay if I just go? All right. Well, well, um, there's always a lot of work behind these, uh, consent calendar items, so I think it's good to just recognize that. And Item 4.2 was modification of the funding for the Linda Vista and Lot 12 affordable housing projects. This represents important progress on the Lot 12 project as well as realistic transfer of funds from one project to another to make our current affordable housing program work better. And I want to thank the staff of the City and Alta Housing for working out this deal for us. And 4.3, it's a temporary rent waiver for Silicon Shores, um, the Shoreline Boathouse kitchen expansion. We are rebuilding the kitchen at the cafe out there. And while that's going on, um, a special arrangement has been made so that the, uh, owner of the business can continue to do business, but instead of doing it in the kitchen, which is under construction, which obviously won't be available, they came up with the innovative idea of using food trucks on site. So I think it's, um, cool that they are being so innovative. Thanks for thinking of that. And then also, um, we always have several things related to infrastructure. We have an addendum to the Regional Water Quality Control Board plant basic agreement and also a completion construction notice on our water and sanitary sewer main replacement that crosses 101. I, um, know from having worked in water for a long, long time that, um, these, uh, projects are very complicated. They, um, take coordination along, um, many agencies as well as contractors. And so, um, our staff deserves a big pat on the back for getting them finished. And thank you very much for doing that. And then also, um, acceptance—this one is with the Police Department—acceptance and appropriation of $75,000 for an Office of Traffic Safety, selective traffic enforcement, um, program grant. This will help enhance our enforcement training and education to reduce DUIs. And DUIs are a big source of, um, the collisions and, uh, injuries that happen in Mountain View, um, traffic. So, um, reducing that number, uh, will improve the safety of all of us. So thank you.

[01:56:48] Councilmember John McAlister: I had, I just had a question on 4.3.

[01:56:52] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay, 4.3 is the waiver of rent for the Silicon Shores. We can ask that now without pulling the item. So let's see, the Boathouse expansion—is that public works or is that...? We have our Public Works Director here if you have a specific question about the project. Great.

[01:57:42] Councilmember John McAlister: So we're waiving the rent for the whole entire, uh, business down there, but they have actually two separate, uh, departments. One is food and one is the Boathouse and the leasing of equipment and so forth. And I can see with the, the restaurant being totally shut down, we could waive the rent. But the other one provides—they charge 10% of that. So why did we waive the items that are not under construction out there that are still able to still operate and, uh, therefore we had the potential of collecting more, you know, some rent from that project?

[01:58:42] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: Good evening, Jennifer Ing, Public Works Director. So thank you for the question, Councilmember McAlister. The simple answer is that we have a lease with Silicon Shores and that lease requires reporting of gross receipts across a multitude of revenue categories, yes, but we only look at it sort of on a gross basis. And so the two, um, businesses are interconnected with respect to that. We also feel that with the impact of construction on the kitchen, uh, facility, um, it's expected that the number of patrons that would be coming out to visit and utilize the, uh, the water, um, the water, um, what's the word I want, the water features that are out there that they can avail themselves to, um, would be diminished. And so in the aspect of just, um, total fairness to the tenant who has been a great tenant, uh, for the City, we are recommending a full waiver.

[02:00:53] Councilmember John McAlister: Do you have, um, any idea how much that, uh, water facilities and boats and stuff they generate a year?

[02:01:33] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: I have that breakdown back at the office, but I don't have that with me right now.

[02:01:37] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, you can get that later. Thank you for—that's all I have.

[02:01:41] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or submit a blue speaker card to the Assistant City Clerk. I am not seeing any in-person public comment. So I will, um, turn it over to virtual speakers. Each speaker will have three minutes. So it's a phone number, uh, 408 ending in 897.

[02:01:51] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Hello?

[02:01:53] Public Speaker: Hello?

[02:02:28] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Hello.

[02:02:31] Public Speaker: Hi, my name is April Mack. I tried to join virtually on Zoom, but I had to call in. I couldn't unmute. I'm sorry.

[02:02:37] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Oh, no problem. Were you trying to comment on the proclamations, or...? We're in the consent calendar now.

[02:02:46] Public Speaker: Correct. Yeah, I had a couple of problems with the phone. I'm so sorry. Um, is there a way that I can make comment about those or not?

[02:02:57] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[02:02:59] Public Speaker: So I was call- I was coming to the meeting—I'm not a resident of Mountain View, my mother is; she just recently moved there about three months ago. Um, last week I had the unfortunate, um, confrontation with Mountain View PD as well as the ordinance, I guess, for oversized vehicles. And this was just basically touching on Compassion Week as well as, you know, violence or domestic or non-domestic—it could just be, you know, mutual violence, like the councilwoman had stated earlier—and then also hate. So I was arrested, me and my employee. I run a food truck as well as I feed the homeless. Hot Dogs for Homeless is our non-profit program. Name of my food truck is Momo's Place. I pulled up at my mother's, um, to unload. I came out, officers outside. Um, I was assaulted, arrested for something that in essence I should have just been given, I guess, a ticket on my vehicle and a 72-hour notice. I see you guys have ordinances there now. Like I said, I'm not a resident; I was just simply stopping by. But all of this happened to me Monday, and I, I thought I put the proper steps to try to get in front of someone to talk about it, but I'm having a couple issues with you guys' police department there. Um, so I just wanted to ask the Mayor if possibly someone can investigate that for me, um, or, you know, what channels I could take.

[02:03:51] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: We're not able to comment on, on your public comment, but we, uh, will be able to—you can reach out to our City Clerk. Um, and they, they can follow up with you. It's just city.clerk@mountainview.gov.

[02:04:08] Public Speaker: Thank you. I really appreciate it.

[02:04:11] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Of course. Thank you. Thanks for calling back in.

[02:04:15] Public Speaker: No problem. You guys have a great night.

[02:04:16] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: You too. Thanks. All right, well, that concludes public comment on our 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 the consent calendar items 4.2 and 4.7. We have a motion by Councilmember Hicks.

[02:04:38] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes. So I'm making a motion to adopt the entire consent calendar, including Item Number 4.2, adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Mountain View rescinding appropriation of $6,800,000 from the City's below-market-rate in-lieu fees fund and $3,200,000 from the City's local housing trust fund to the 1012 Linda Vista affordable housing project, less any eligible expenses incurred to date, and returning all remaining funds to their originating account, to be read in title only, further reading waived; and adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Mountain View, Number 1, reducing the appropriation of $6,300,000 from the City's below-market-rate in-lieu fee fund to the Lot 12 affordable housing project by $3,200,000 and, 2, reducing the appropriation of $5,950,000 from the City's housing impact fees fund to the Lot 12 affordable housing project by $2,643,327 and, 3, appropriating $3,200,000 from the City's local housing trust fund, $1,862,056 in Home Investment Partnerships program grant funds, and $781,271 in Home American Rescue Plan program grant funds to the Lot 12 affordable housing project, to be read in title only, further reading waived. Also adopt Item 4.7, which is a resolution of the City Council of the City of Mountain View authorizing temporary closure from public access of up to 60 parking spaces within parking lot Number 7 for up to 60 days, to be read in title only, further reading waived.

[02:05:35] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right. And that was seconded by Councilmember Showalter. So let's vote. All right. And that passes unanimously. We'll move on to Item 5, 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's subject matter jurisdiction for up to three minutes during this section. State law prohibits the Council from acting on non-agenda items. If you'd like to speak on this item or the next item in person, please submit a blue speaker card to the Assistant City Clerk now. Would any of the members of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or submit a blue speaker card to the Assistant City Clerk. We'll take in-person speakers first, and each speaker will have three minutes. So I have Dylan Rich, Dennis Goldwater, and then Daniel Hulsey. So we'll begin with Dylan.

[02:07:41] Public Speaker: Hi. My name is Dylan Rich. I'm the director at Palo Alto Prep School. First off, I'd like to say thank you to the City Manager, City Attorney, and City Councilmembers. I know you guys all have, uh, very hard jobs and a lot of decisions to make. I really appreciate it. You guys—it's a great city. I was born and raised here, um, as a child, and now I work here, um, and it is a really good city. What I'm, uh, bringing up is really something to call to your attention. I spoke, um, on the previous Council meeting, um, and I'm talking about the sight lines, um, that, uh, our kids have to deal with when navigating, uh, Independence and Wyandotte Street. Um, and so what I have up there, you can see Wyandotte going left to right and Independence, um, up and down there. Um, we're located over on the left side there across from Midwife and the Baker—shout-out, they're really good, you guys should go there. Can I have next slide, please? So I took a picture—this was from Monday here—on a biker's perspective turning left onto Independence, which is where some of our students would travel to go get lunch, maybe over at, uh, Costco, McDonald's, um, even down the street, uh, further. Um, and this doesn't quite do it justice because this is me walking in the crosswalk. I put a little red dot there. Um, they would be a few feet back, but turning left there, you can kind of see there's a wall of RVs. And understandably, they're blocking off a lot of the inside of the, uh, RVs because they want privacy, but it doesn't allow for people to see through. Um, and it basically creates a wall for not being able to see. So it's kind of a you have to enter into the traffic, and you can't make a good decision on whether someone's speeding or things like that. I have an eight-year-old who I'm teaching to bike, um, and I try and teach him to be aware of the cars, as like if there's someone in the car, they might open the door suddenly, so you have to be aware of that. Um, they can't make a decision until the last minute, um, coming across here, making a left turn here. If I could go to the next slide, you can see a better picture of it. Um, so you can see the wall that's up there of, uh, RVs. It's a little bit worse today because there's another RV, um, right where that car is, um, so it's hard to see through that. Could I have the next slide? Um, walking across Independence—this is me a couple feet into there—and you really can't see on that left side there. Um, that's really just a couple feet. And I only got 40 seconds, so can I go to the next slide? Um, you can get a better view there of not being able to see an oncoming car. Um, can I go to the next slide, please? This is the point where you'd have to walk into the street. That's about 10 feet inward before you can actually see oncoming traffic. Ten feet! So you have to go that far into the road in order to see an oncoming car. Um, next slide. That's just a better view of it, um, taking a wide shot there. Um, so this is just a, uh, a safety hazard that I want to bring to your attention. Um, and, uh, so I appreciate your guys's time. Thank you very much, and I did it with five seconds left.

[02:09:32] Public Speaker: Hello. Dennis Goldwater. Um, I walk the Maude Street entrance to the Stevens Creek Trail most days. I want to talk about the new Ameswell Hotel bridge. I would think that the most important guidelines for the new bridge would be to ensure that it matches the theme followed by all other bridges along the trail and that it does not negatively impact the experience of trail users. The City does not agree and seems to have exhibited a lack of foresight and a lack of oversight. The bridge itself is fine. However, there's a new 10-foot path connecting the trail to the bridge. The path contains a wall, as do all bridges on the trail. All other bridge walls follow a consistent, thoughtful theme completely ignored by the new bridge. First, for all other bridges, the wall from the bridge does not extend all the way to the trail. They begin several feet off the trail, so that no wall is visible from the trail until people are almost at the bridge. For the new bridge, the wall is visible from hundreds of yards away. Furthermore, because the, uh, trail bends at that area, when viewed from a distance, the wall appears to cut across the trail. The wall reduces the previous beautiful trail view of several hundred yards by half from one direction and eliminates the view entirely from the other direction. Second, for all other walls connecting to, uh, bridges, the walls are very short, about three feet long. Many are longer than that, but any part of a wall longer than three feet is no more than a foot above the ground. At the three-foot point, the walls rise quickly, almost all to a height well below my hips. The new wall extends onto the trail itself and is very close to shoulder height. Third, all other walls have the same design: tasteful, well-crafted stone walls. The new wall is tasteless, ugly, cheap-looking concrete—an in-your-face blight on the City. Does the City really think that most people will not notice and will not mind seeing an ugly concrete wall blocking the previous beautiful view of nature? Does the City not care that the new bridge wall ignores the well-thought-out themes followed by all other bridges? I would like to see the ugly wall removed. Replace it with a wall like all others on the trail: short in length, low in height, made of stone, not easily visible from the trail. Please replace this eyesore. Don't lower standards at the expense of trail users. Thank you.

[02:12:31] Public Speaker: So I'm just here to say thank you for two big projects that, uh, got just about complete this summer right here in the view. Um, first one being the El Camino Real, uh, pavement project, which got us, uh, bike lanes on El Camino Real. Um, if you told me before this project happened that I would be able to bike on on this road and it would be totally fine, I would not have believed you. It's a great project. Um, other project is the California Street, uh, complete streets, uh, pilot. Um, took that over here; I, I live on the end of California. Um, great bike lane, very happy with it. Um, and so, you know, I've got some time on my hands; I wanted to just say thank you for these and thank you for, you know, all the things that come after it, too. All right.

[02:13:37] Public Speaker: Good evening, Councilmembers. I'm here tonight to speak on behalf of the residents living at Wisman Station—people who have endured years of relentless noise from the VTA trains. Right? Um, you know, and the Council, while this Council has basically stood by, um, sat on the sidelines. We first raised this issue more than two years ago. Right? Since then, we've seen silence from most of you, with one exception, and that's John. We really appreciate your help there. But what do we need? We need the rest of you to get involved. Right? We're done waiting. You guys have been AWOL for our neighborhood. We've suffered relentless noise changes that's gone up and up and up, and we're tired of it. We're done waiting, we're demanding action. We engaged with you over two years ago. Nothing's changed. Right? You need to get involved, you need to press the VTA, you need to work with the CPUC to get the problem solved. We asked for seven things: a quiet zone—an immediate action to get a quiet zone between Central Expressway, Bayshore, and NASA, right? Eliminate train horns at stations and crossings. Reduce or silence crossing bells. Install noise barriers or soundproofing along the tracks.

Segment 4

[02:15:00] Public Speaker: ...regular maintenance of noisy trains, adopt quieter train technology, and create a neighborhood committee with real authority to review and approve any VTA changes because they keep changing on us, they keep raising and this needs to stop. You guys gotta get involved, you have to press them. These are reasonable and actionable and overdue measures. We deserve peace and accountability. We need our neighborhood back. Right? It's time for the council to stop ignoring Whisman and start solving the problems. Thank you.

[02:15:36] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right, that concludes in-person public comment and yes...

[02:15:42] Councilmember John McAlister: Can I give you an update on that... possibly?

[02:15:43] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yes. Oh, Brad before you go, sorry. Oh he knows. Okay. Councilmember McAlister has an update for us. Okay.

[02:15:52] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, tomorrow as it turns out to be that the chief operating officer of VTA will be meeting with me and Brad and Public Works Director and other concerned citizens at the Whisman station tomorrow to address their concerns. So we are stepping up our action and we are grateful that the chief operating officer is actually going to be out here, not somebody else. So we are looking into it and see what we can get this resolved and it's been going on for a long time so hopefully we get some constructive action taken care of.

[02:16:41] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Did you want to share the time?

[02:16:44] Councilmember John McAlister: Uh, no. Well, they know it's 11:30.

[02:16:47] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay, just for colleagues or okay. Okay. Great, thank you. Those of us who are recused from participating because they live in the neighborhood appreciate you. All right. Um, thank you. Um, we'll move on to, seeing no other public comment, we'll move on to item 6, which is public hearings. Item 6.1 exterior alterations on historic structure 484 Loreto Street. Would any council members like to make disclosures?

[02:17:23] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right, not seeing any, I will move on to the staff presentation. Principal Planner Diana Pancholi will present the item. If you'd like to speak on this item in person, please submit a blue speaker card to the assistant city clerk now.

[02:17:44] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: Thank you and good evening Mayor and members of the council. My name is Diana Pancholi, principal planner with the city's planning division and I am joined here tonight by our assistant community development director Amber Blosinski. The item in front of you tonight is a historic preservation permit request to allow exterior alterations to an existing historic structure at 484 Loreto Street.

[02:18:15] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: The 0.14-acre project site is located at the northeast corner of the intersection between Bush Street and Loreto Street. The site is currently developed with a one-story historic residential building with a detached garage. The general plan designation is low-density residential and the site is located in the R-1 single-family residential zoning district. The surrounding uses are one-story single-family residential dwellings to the east and the south and multi-family residential dwellings to the west and the north.

[02:19:03] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: To provide some background, the property is currently listed on the Mountain View register of historic resources. City retained a historic consultant, Page & Turnbull, as part of our ongoing work to update the city's historic preservation ordinance, including a city-wide survey of historic resources. As part of this work, Page & Turnbull prepared a historic resource assessment for this property, confirming the eligibility of the existing single-family home for the state and national registers under criterion C/3/C as a notable and first-in-the-development example of Mission Revival architecture built within the stylistically diverse Palmita Park subdivision during the 1920s.

[02:20:12] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: The project is before the council tonight as our city code requires properties that are eligible for the California and national historic registers to be reviewed by the city council to determine substantial compliance with the US Secretary of Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties. As mentioned previously, the city is in the process of updating the historic preservation ordinance, which will take into consideration how minor modifications which have no impact on the historic significance of a structure may be reviewed and approved in the future.

[02:21:11] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: City council could consider removing the council review requirements for such single-family residential modifications as a policy change as part of the historic preservation ordinance update or as part of other efforts to update the city code. Staff will bring the historic preservation ordinance update back to the council for direction on several items, including the above-mentioned process modifications, tentatively scheduled for December 9th, 2025 and for final ordinance adoption in 2026.

[02:22:01] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: Now a little bit about the project scope, it consists for a request of a historic preservation permit to allow exterior modifications to the existing single-family residence. The proposed modifications include modifications to the openings on the rear facade of the residence, construction of a wood deck at the north elevation, and addition of a new openings at the east end of the detached garage.

[02:22:54] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: For compliance analysis of projects like these involving historic buildings, one of the four sets of standards is selected from the Secretary of Interior standards. Given the scope of this project, the standards for rehabilitations were selected. These standards allow changes to the building while ensuring its historic character is retained. The compliance analysis concludes that the proposed project would not result in an adverse change to the historic resource and minimizes impacts to the physical characteristics of the historic resource that convey its historic character.

[02:24:02] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: The proposed project would also not result in any adverse change to the historic resource and minimizes visual impacts to the character-defining features or physical characteristics of the historic resource that convey its historical significance. Additionally the proposed project preserves the residence's primary character-defining feature, including the overall massing, stucco cladding, pedimented gables, and all street-facing fenestration.

[02:25:21] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: Alterations are limited to the north elevation and east end of the detached garage, which are not visible from the public right-of-way. The proposed project is compatible in scale and material and sufficiently differentiated from the original construction. As a result, the project will allow the historic home to continue to express the features, design, and context that makes it significant for its Mission Revival architecture. For these reasons as mentioned just now and with the support from the compliance analysis memo, staff recommends finding that the proposed project is in substantial compliance with the Secretary of Interior standards for the treatment of historic resources.

[02:26:56] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: In conclusion, the proposed project will not result in any substantial adverse change in the significance of the historic resource, maintains and enhances the appearance of the community, and is in the substantial compliance with the Secretary of Interior standards. For these reasons, staff recommends that the city council adopt a resolution approving a historic preservation permit pursuant to the conditions of approval attached to the council report and find that this project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to section 15331 for historic resource and restoration rehabilitation. This concludes staff presentation. I would like to note that staff including community development director Murdock is present here tonight for any council questions. I believe the project applicant is also present here tonight and has prepared a brief statement.

[02:28:31] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay, well why don't if the applicant has a brief statement then maybe we should do that and then we can go into questions and the council may have questions for staff or for you if that's all right? Okay. Wonderful. Welcome.

[02:28:47] Public Speaker: Yeah, welcome. Thanks for your attention on this matter. Really appreciate your time and attention again. So, so, um that's actually all I want to say, have to say at this point. I'm open for questions and yeah.

[02:29:07] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay, great. Thank you. Thanks for joining us. All right. So does any member of the council have any questions? All right. I am not seeing any. That's good news. So would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on any item on the... or sorry, on this item? Sorry, was reading that.

[02:30:15] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: If so please click the raise hand button or submit a blue speaker card. I am not seeing any. So we'll take 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 resolution attached to the report. Councilmember Hicks... um so before we go to Councilmember Hicks, I just want to say there is a motion to approve by Councilmember Ramirez, seconded by Vice Mayor Ramos and in the queue to speak is Councilmember Hicks.

[02:30:44] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I will be supporting the motion to approve. I just wanted to thank the applicant and the staff for the work they did on this and say that it's an issue that's important to me. I live in Old Mountain View, although far enough away from you that I don't have to be recused from this particular agenda item, but I know that a lot of my neighbors and probably yourself and your neighbors, it's in part the history of the neighborhood that drew us to the neighborhood.

[02:31:50] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And it's also one of the things I think that gives our city a sense of place and a sense of community and certainly, you know, I think it's not only the people living there close by who appreciate the sense of history, but you know, legislation as far flung as from Sacramento as SB 79, which is an upzoning measure, recognizes that we need to add housing and upzone, but we also need to protect our historic places and sense of character. So I think it's widely recognized.

[02:33:04] Councilmember Alison Hicks: All that said, I think that we could streamline the process. Um particularly when you're... I'm glad that staff reports that this has improved the compatibility of the project, but when you're working with the backyard and things like that, I think we could probably... I look forward to streamlining it and I also look forward to any engagement you might have with how it might be streamlined, what was helpful, what was not. So I look forward to that entire process.

[02:34:13] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And in addition to that, I do want to note for people that although the process was longer, um and correct me if I'm wrong, you did get more development opportunity in terms of grandfathered-in setbacks that I know other architects I know who've worked with properties in Mountain View have had problems expanding because their setbacks were not... their house was not historic and their setbacks were not grandfathered in, if I'm using the right terms. Okay. I am. Good.

[02:35:08] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So um, yeah, thank you for being patient with us and going through this before we've streamlined the process, but I think what you're doing is important and any feedback you might have would be welcome. And with that I am... I will be supporting the motion to approve.

[02:35:31] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Councilmember Ramirez.

[02:35:32] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Mayor. I'm going to move to approve the staff recommendations including adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View approving a historic preservation permit to construct exterior modifications to the rear facade of an existing one-story 1,821 square foot historic single-family residence with a basement and detached garage on a 0.14 acre site located at 484 Loreto Street, APN 158-30-060 and finding that the project is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act to be read in title only, further reading waived.

Segment 5

[03:00:00] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: which is something that is rarely done in the city of Mountain View. But I'm going to move to amend the motion to include two changes. One is, and I've shared these with the staff in advance, one is to exempt from the gatekeeper process applications for a conforming rezoning. So basically, if you want to rezone your property to align with the existing general plan land use designation, you shouldn't have to go through the gatekeeper process.

[03:00:29] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And we have a number of misaligned parcels, including not too far from where I live, the Bruce Bauer, right? The zoning is industrial, the general plan is I think medium or medium-high residential. And it doesn't make sense to require that property owner to go through the gatekeeper process to simply align in that case the zoning with the general plan land use designation. So I think that would be a clarification that I hope we include.

[03:01:01] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And the other is in the application to no longer require floor plans. I think none of us really investigate proposals at that level of detail. We do care about certain things, right? We want to know what the project will look like and how you know that massing will affect the neighborhood. I think those are valuable pieces of information, but we don't necessarily have to know the configuration of every floor.

[03:01:31] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And especially knowing that this is even before we get an application, right? It still has to go through a completeness process, then has to go through design review. Those floor plans I expect will change considerably. But it's very expensive to put that level of detailed information together for the stage where you seek permission to submit an application. And I think it acts as a de facto deterrent to submitting gatekeeper proposals altogether.

[03:02:02] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So those are actually in the implementation ordinance, they're not in the policy. So that would be the motion I would like to make. So it would be the staff recommendation, which I think Councilmember McAlister, you'll probably have to read eventually, but with the two changes to exempt from the gatekeeper process conforming rezoning, a rezoning that aligns with the existing general plan land use designation and to no longer require floor plans in the actual application submittal.

[03:02:59] Councilmember John McAlister: There's been a lot of opportunities to bring these items up in the past and in prior things. And staff spends a lot of time trying to get this across the board. So when we do these last-minute tweaks or amendments, that I'm always concerned that why weren't they brought up sooner? So I want to get this thing clear, get it passed, and then you'll have time to bring it back. So no, I do not accept the amendment.

[03:03:30] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I'll make it a substitute motion if we have to.

[03:03:37] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Well, he didn't make the substitute motion yet, so I think he's maybe feeling where others are at before he does that. That would be my guess. Councilmember Showalter.

[03:03:51] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, I've given this a lot of thought. This was one of the things, getting the gatekeeper going again was one of the things that I campaigned on in 2020. So it's a long time. And we've made progress. We finally had a gatekeeper hearing, which we hadn't had for many years.

[03:04:13] Councilmember Pat Showalter: But I think one of the things that's really important when we think about this is at the point of the gatekeeper hearing, what we're really making is is kind of a comprehensive land use decision. We're not making the decision on the project the proposal. That information comes later.

[03:04:35] Councilmember Pat Showalter: We're making the decision on whether or not this is a project, this kind of project is something that we think would be good for our community in this particular place. And so when I think about that and I think about well, what do we need to make that decision, that land use decision? I think we really need the site plan because we need to see how much of the site it covers and is there enough room for ambulances or fire trucks or trash cans, trash trucks to get on and off? You know, that sort of thing.

[03:05:14] Councilmember Pat Showalter: We don't really need the floor plans because they always change and they're very expensive to produce. And we don't want to put forward unnecessary barriers. We do need information that tells us about kind of the massing of the project and how it's going to fit in with the rest of the neighborhood, which is what I think that the elevations and the conceptual renderings provide.

[03:05:50] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So I really feel that we want to make sure that our processes are appropriate, our requirements are appropriate for where we are in the process. And I think because this is much more of a land use decision, you know, I think that what Councilmember Ramirez brought forward is really very germane.

[03:06:12] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And you're right, a lot of stuff has been discussed, Councilmember McAlister. It has. But as people think about these things and look at the details, questions keep continue to arise because it's complicated. So I don't think that we should be saying that well everybody's had their chance, we've been doing this a long time, we knew it was finished.

[03:06:40] Councilmember Pat Showalter: I think this is more of a living process and we it's really appropriate that we change it a little as we think about it more. And that's where we are right now. So I think this is a very important change.

[03:07:12] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And I guess the other thing that I'm a little concerned about is we put this one-year requirement in, and it's in part of the housing element, that we have a gatekeeper hearing every year. But if we put so many barriers in that nobody ever applies, then what do we do to meet that requirement? We just have a gatekeeper hearing with no projects? I mean I guess we could do that just as a formality.

[03:07:32] Councilmember Pat Showalter: But we want to have, we want to encourage housing, we want innovative projects to come through. So we don't want to, we want a process that's right-sized for us. And I really appreciate the suggestions that Councilmember Ramirez has made.

[03:07:57] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I was totally ready to support Councilmember McAlister's motion. I think we have been through this process a lot and I read the report thinking I would mostly be just rubber-stamping it. But I will say the couple of suggestions that Councilmember Ramirez brought up I'm willing to go along with. I think that the zoning if it conforms to the general plan...

[03:08:33] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So the big concern for me, and I guess I'm going to disagree with you a little here Councilmember Showalter, I think the gatekeeper process is more than a land use decision because what it is is you're changing things usually, except for the zoning one that we're talking about now. You're changing things that have come together through a public process with the public during the general plan.

[03:09:02] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And you know, a year after a general plan is agreed to, we'll have a gatekeeper process. And I don't want it to be that the council at that point can just say, can just overturn what the public came to. I think it needs more boundaries than that. And I think that we've and also for that reason because we're going against what the public has agreed to, sometimes for good reason because maybe it's not a year later, maybe it's 10 years later and things have changed. But still, we haven't checked in with the public.

[03:09:37] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And we're also looking just at the site that's before us. And the great thing about a general plan is you talk about how that site connects to all the sites around it. And frankly, sometimes I think we gloss over that when we look at gatekeepers. So I think we've been through a thoughtful process and come up with a better process and I'm sure we'll continue to improve it.

[03:10:01] Councilmember Alison Hicks: In the case where the zoning does not conform to the general plan, we would be allowing it to change to what the public has agreed to. So I'm willing to let that go through as Councilmember Ramirez has says in a more streamlined process.

[03:10:20] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And also taking the floor plans out, I can't imagine a smaller tweak. That and that's something that was brought up by folks from Alto Housing. And so but everything else would be in there, elevations, etc., etc. So those two I'm willing to go along with.

[03:10:40] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I'm not willing to I still want a process that is the thoughtful one we've gone through and that makes sure that gatekeeper processes are not just land use decisions, they go above and beyond and really give the public something more, which I think is what we were working on. So I would be willing to support those two tweaks and I hope you will as well because I think they're small.

[03:11:08] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you, Mayor. I am planning to support the substitute motion. I would have gone farther had I been allowed, but I understood that this is not the time to do major policy changes. But these do seem like small reasonable changes. I'm actually surprised we actually make them go through a gatekeeper process when it's essentially two different kinds of requirements essentially that our city has.

[03:11:41] Councilmember Emily Ramos: So like if they meet one and the other one's like conflicting with it, it feels kind of weird. So getting that fixed is reasonable. And I remember I was talking to it was someone representing a developer a long time ago when we were there were being tours around when we were doing work around the housing element of like tours on El Camino.

[03:12:06] Councilmember Emily Ramos: And I remember talking to a developer saying that like they don't even understand why they would put floor plans into their gatekeeper process because it changes so much once it goes through staff and then comes back. They might as well just throw anything out there because then whatever comes back is they get a better sense of what staff wants, what they want as when they could finally turn in their application. So this feels like a reasonable tweak to the ordinance and not a major policy shift. I was willing to do a major policy shift, but I'm happy to this happy compromise.

[03:12:46] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: I just wanted to find out what motions are pending and make sure that we're following the process. If we have a motion to amend or a motion to substitute...

[03:12:56] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So we yeah, I can clarify. So I think the Vice Mayor was talking about a substitute motion that does not exist. Right now the motion on the floor is the existing motion which is the staff recommendation. There was I think nuance in comments that somebody might make a substitute motion but none of those were done as I think one of my colleagues was doing a temperature check.

[03:13:22] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Has the motion to amend been withdrawn?

[03:13:24] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: It was not supported by the original motion maker.

[03:13:28] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: But that's not how it works. That's why I was asking. A motion to amend needs a second before it can even be debated. So it's not the original...

[03:13:35] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I think it got a second from Pat.

[03:13:38] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Okay. But John did not agree to the amending. Lucas asked to amend, Pat, Councilmember Showalter agreed with that discussion, Councilmember McAlister said no. Then we started going through comments.

[03:13:54] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Okay, I understand, I just wanted to clarify. When a motion to amend is made and you have a second, you take a vote on the motion to amend. If you have majority to amend then you can debate the motion to amend and it becomes the main motion. So what you had was a motion and a second and no vote. It wasn't John that could kill it, you needed to vote on the motion to amend after it got a second.

[03:14:11] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: So right now it's a motion to amend and a second still. And so you have to vote on the motion to amend first. And so if you have majority support for amendment then you can move forward. Or you can withdraw and you can start over. But right now you've got a motion to amend and a second that needs to be dealt with.

[03:14:44] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I'm not following rules. I'm to simplify I'm happy to withdraw. I'm in the queue, I'll make the substitute motion to allow everyone to provide comments and ask questions.

[03:14:59] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I appreciate the opportunities to clarify. As I look to staff, staff is always welcome at any time to interject. Staff did not interject and the conversation continued because I looked in the queue and I looked to staff. I did not see that procedurally we needed to take a beat, which I'm always happy to do.

[03:15:21] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So this is now given the discussion, I'd like to understand how we will proceed. So I thought as is customary we ask our colleagues for a friendly amendment, which I find to not be as formal as I would call I guess a formal amendment. And my understanding in how Councilmember Ramirez asked Councilmember McAlister was that it was kind of a friendly 'would you be open to this'. If it was a more formal then that's fine because there was support of the discussion and Councilmember Showalter quickly said that she supported that discussion.

[03:16:07] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So shall we pause and take a vote on the amended item which had two items or shall we discontinue discussion and have a vote on the original motion?

[03:16:26] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I think I was unfamiliar with our rule set and how we deal with motions to amend. So I'm happy to withdraw that motion to allow Councilmember Clark and others to continue to provide comments or ask questions. And then when it's my turn in the queue then I'm happy to make the substitute.

[03:16:46] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay, so now I will ask for verbal confirmation from staff. Does that sound fine?

[03:16:52] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Yes.

[03:16:54] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yes. Okay. All right. So on the floor being discussed currently is the original motion which is the staff recommendation moved by Councilmember McAlister, seconded by Councilmember Clark. We have people in the queue who have not had the opportunity to speak including myself. So we'll go to Councilmember Clark since that was withdrawn. Okay, go ahead Councilmember Clark, thanks.

[03:17:18] Councilmember Chris Clark: Thank you. So it's just it was just a question about the two tweaks that are being proposed. Mostly for staff. So I assume allowing something that would conform to a conforming rezoning to to come forward probably at the end of the day makes people's lives easier including staff's or or not really? My guess is that it probably it makes policy sense. I just don't know what the impact is to you all.

[03:17:57] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Sure. I think on the surface yes it makes sense and it's common sense to have the zoning align with the general plan. I think in practice there will be some complications from time to time where a general plan land use designation may be very broad and so a particular zoning change could align with the general plan and be consistent, but perhaps not be exactly what the City Council would desire with the specificity that typically comes with zoning.

[03:18:24] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: So I think that's a potential outcome that would arise from this. But that wouldn't automatically approve the amendment, it would just put it on a simplified process to come before the council where council could ultimately make the decision. So there's a little bit of judgment at the staff stage to determine whether or not it's consistent with the general plan and then ultimately council would decide.

[03:18:45] Councilmember Chris Clark: Okay, that makes sense. And then I did pull up the draft ordinance and I was surprised that we actually list floor plans in the ordinance, not in the sort of the overall sort of implementation piece of it. If we were to eliminate the floor plans requirement from the from the ordinance... I assume it lists conceptual renderings, elevations, site plans.

[03:19:13] Councilmember Chris Clark: I assume we'd... really detailed floor plans for me bedroom you know exactly where bedrooms and bathrooms and other things are aren't as important as just understanding the floor plates. But I assume a site plan, conceptual renderings, elevations... I just don't know where you draw the line because a floor plan can be super-super detailed or it can not. So I just didn't know kind of how we strike the balance there.

[03:19:45] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Right. I think it's hard for me to imagine how we describe, you know, basic but not overly detailed floor plans in a sort of succinct way. I think you know this process will likely function largely as it's intended without the floor plans. When it comes time for staff to describe the project and if council has questions about how the project would function, we may be unable to answer those questions without having a floor plan.

[03:20:10] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Sometimes there is you know helpful detail about how much of the floor area and in what locations would be particular uses, would commercial be closer or more distant to residential or other sensitive uses. We won't be able to answer those questions potentially. But again, this is at a very preliminary stage. It's not an approval of the project. And ultimately the project will come before the council for a final decision with that significant additional detail in the way of floor plans at a later stage.

[03:20:36] Councilmember Chris Clark: Okay. And I think you said you ran this by at least one or two staff members before?

[03:20:46] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: All right. So before we get back to Councilmember Ramirez, I think that while these tweaks... let's see. I find excitement in moving forward with our gatekeeper process and I find it difficult to each time we talk about gatekeeper make tweak, tweak, tweak. It's difficult for me to understand what the final product is and we approved a new process with which we haven't even gone through one cycle.

[03:21:19] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And I am open to the greatest flexibility and while these two changes sound like they could be as Councilmember Showalter said very germane, it's difficult for me to have a perspective yet because we've made so many other changes to gatekeeper that I'd love to see in aggregate what else we might want to change after going through at least one round, one cycle. And I feel like I'd love that opportunity.

[03:21:50] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And then that way as we go through that first round I could be thinking about these two items and if there's honestly anything else that we would need to change. So I feel openness to it but this is the first time I'm hearing it and I think one of the things that Councilmember Hicks mentioned is something that I have found so important as we've gone through this gatekeeper process over the last two years and I think like eight meetings on discussing it, which is having the opportunity to hear from our full public and putting ideas and tweaks out there for them to comment versus getting an email a couple hours before our meeting and not having the opportunity for public discourse.

[03:22:41] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: It just puts me in a position where I would just prefer the opportunity to gain wider perspectives and I think finally approve our gatekeeper process so we can see just how well it works after all our hard work on it and our commissions and our staff. So I think should a substitute motion go forward, I just won't support it at this time but it's mostly just because I want to find learnings from our initial process before making tweaks and hopefully colleagues can understand that. Councilmember Ramirez.

[03:23:35] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to go ahead and make a substitute motion. So I'll move to approve the staff recommendation including introducing an ordinance of the City of Mountain View amending Chapter 36 zoning of the Mountain View City Code to update review procedures for private development applications with legislative amendments to zoning, General Plan, and Precise Plans and finding that the amendments are exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act to be read in title only, further reading waived, and set a second reading for October 28th, 2025.

[03:24:09] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And then include two changes to exempt conforming rezonings from the gatekeeper process and specifically those are rezonings that would align with the existing General Plan land use designation and then also to no longer require floor plans from the application package for an applicant seeking a gatekeeper.

[03:24:32] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And very quickly I think there's a lot of helpful and thoughtful remarks and perspectives shared. The most important change I think that we've made is we've taken a lot of the the key elements of the gatekeeper process out of the muni code and put it in a policy, which means it's a lot easier to change. So we can make changes as we find for instance, a lot of developers are choosing to pursue one route, right? Maybe that's not actually what we want to emphasize in our community benefit requirement for instance.

[03:25:07] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So a council can then modify the policy to say, you know, we're not interested in community facilities for interest for instance, you know, we want to focus on something else. So I think that's why you know I hear what you're saying, Mayor, and I agree. I think some a few cycles I think we will have a much better understanding of the impacts, you know what's working, where maybe we want to course correct a lot.

[03:25:32] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: There are a few things that are not in the policy though. So I want to I think different and valid equally valid perspectives. One way of of thinking about this at least in in my view is it's very rare that we have an opportunity to actually you know have on the agenda opening up the the zoning ordinance to include some of these changes. And you know I was certainly not intending to you know suggest that they were significant deviations from practice or policy or major things.

[03:26:07] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: It's things where it's like in my mind you know it feels like we're asking for a lot more than we really need to make the decision about whether to give permission for an application to be submitted. And then there's you know multiple years of design review, planning commission review and then the council often will have an opportunity to talk to developers. So there will appropriately be a lot of changes in the design.

[03:26:31] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: But if these things were in the policy I'd say absolutely let's wait for the policy to come back for review but they're not. And I think you know if if we don't take the opportunity now to make some of these tactical changes, it it may not be for a very long time that we'll have the opportunity to go open up the zoning ordinance and and make these changes. It's just a lot harder. But I appreciate a lot of the comments and staff's engagement on this. So you know happy to answer questions that are directed at me but I think probably most appropriately directed at staff at this point but those are the comments I wanted to share.

[03:27:08] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Pardon me, Mayor. When it's appropriate, I would like to read specific language for that amendment for the Council's consideration related to the zoning amendments to conform with the general plan.

[03:27:22] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: We'll go to Councilmember McAlister, then we'll go to you and then I have... I can pass this.

[03:27:31] Councilmember John McAlister: I understand that these are maybe considered simple adjustments. But I'm going to not support this because I've seen the the time that staff puts into things, the opportunity to get feedback, and it's more of a principle no that as a council we need to be cognizant aware of what the staff puts into it. And anytime we tweak something it always has a tendency to drag on a project or delays a project.

[03:28:07] Councilmember John McAlister: And these type of last-minute things as the Mayor said doesn't give council an opportunity to really understand what's being asked. And we need to take the time to thoroughly investigate or understand or have a dialogue or discussion about any of these tweaks. Now yes, this might be simple but I've seen other times where people will come along and they do something at the last minute and I don't think that's good governance.

[03:28:39] Councilmember John McAlister: So when we do these the tweaks or adjustments, we need to take it seriously and be mindful that staff has been involved in the beginning, that your council has a chance to really understand these things. And we just need to make things sometimes easier because in this particular not necessarily easier but this particular project there are going to be opportunities to do it.

[03:29:04] Councilmember John McAlister: And again, to the Mayor's point, we should let these policies or something vent and air and breathe and see what happens before we start immediately making tweaks to them before we actually got them implemented. So going forward, please consider that. So that's the only comments I want to say is we need to just take some time and thoroughly let the process take its place.

[03:29:31] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yeah, I'm going to be supporting this new motion because I do think that these are relatively small changes but I do share the reservations of the Councilmembers who've said they are not voting for it because I do feel like this came to us at after a long period of consideration when I think most people in the public and members of Council thought this was going to be a frankly a rubber stamp of things that we talked about.

[03:30:05] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And I do think in particular, like we did get, I guess the Mayor said this, we did get letters from from the development community and business community mainly at the very last minute, several hours before the council meeting. And the rest of our community I think was pretty left out. So I don't want to repeat that in the future. I will be voting for this one because I think the changes are relatively small.

[03:30:31] Councilmember Pat Showalter: I'm going to be voting for it too, but I just want to say that I'm a little nonplussed by the comments about getting the responses at the last minute. I mean the Council report comes out on Thursday, we have the meeting on Tuesday. Yeah, I I would like to get the letters, you know, by noon at least on on Tuesday. But it's hard to get those letters together. They don't have that much lead time.

[03:31:06] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So I think that that's just the nature of our process, that you know people hear about items that are coming before us for a long time, but they don't they don't really know the specifics of it until Thursday night when that that packet drops. And then people start to read it. And so anyway, I just I think it's just part of the process. I think we have to respect that the people who have put those letters together felt strongly enough that they felt it was worth the rush that they would have to do. So anyway, I just think it's just part of the process.

[03:31:41] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I'll turn it over to Director Murdock.

[03:31:45] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Thank you, Mayor. Regarding the two components to Councilmember Ramirez's motion, I think the second component, the floor plan component, rather is pretty straightforward. We'll delete that from the application requirements for General Plan, Zoning, and Precise Plan application requirements.

[03:32:00] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: For the other component related to conforming zoning amendments, I'd like to draw the Council's attention to attachment one, top of page 10. We're looking at section 36.52.55E, which currently reads... I think the language that staff would recommend to accomplish that amendment, adding to the end of that paragraph E the following: 'However, applications for zoning amendments to achieve consistency with a parcel's existing General Plan land use designation may proceed directly to a formal planning application and are exempt from the requirements of City Council policy G9 Gatekeeper Application Policy and Procedures'.

[03:33:23] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So the motion maker gave a thumbs up, the seconder... that's just what why I was in the queue. I didn't second the... oh, it's a carry-over. Okay. I can't second the substitute, that'd be awkward. I'll withdraw my... okay, perfect. All right, any other questions to what Director Murdock put forward? All right, let's vote.

[03:33:44] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And that passes 4-3. Thank you to staff. We'll move on to item seven which is Council, staff, committee reports. Does anyone have a report? Councilmember Showalter.

[03:34:09] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, I have a couple of them actually. I I got to be the Marshall of the Trailblazer race again this year, which was great fun. And I brought enough finisher medals for everybody. I think the... did I find a few more of them? Yeah, here we go.

[03:34:34] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, the Stevens Creek Trail is something that is a great amenity in the city of Mountain View and the Friends of Stevens Creek have this race every year and this was the 31st. and they support the trail and do cleanups and help figure out projects that need to be done and just really appreciate their assistance for the city.

[03:35:05] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And then the other thing I wanted to share with you is I went to the Silicon Valley Clean Energy October meeting and the vast majority of it was an evaluation of the CEO. But before that, we also talked about clean power procurement. and Silicon Valley Clean Energy has been investing in lots of projects, literally billions of dollars, so that we have certainty in the future about clean energy.

[03:35:42] Councilmember Pat Showalter: You know, these projects produce clean energy and they're mostly solar projects with batteries, but we've also invested in quite a few wind projects. Most of the wind projects are out of state however, because the pervasive winds aren't as common in California. Then we also heard a presentation on the challenges that Silicon Valley Clean Energy faces.

[03:36:48] Councilmember Pat Showalter: They're not surprising, but they're real. Regulatory uncertainty is certainly a big one. Load growth uncertainty, you know with the advent of AI, nobody really knows how much power that's going to take. We are heavily dominated another challenge is we're heavily dominated by solar and so that means that in the middle of the day we have more, we're producing more energy than we need. But at other times of the day, it's not quite so good.

[03:37:33] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And then project costs, we've all heard about how construction costs have really shot up over the last five years. That's a big issue for Silicon Valley Clean Energy too. We've recently been required to look at energy use not just on a kind of a whole year basis, but actually on an hour-by-hour basis.

[03:38:20] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And so they've developed some charts of where our clean energy comes from on an hour-by-hour basis and it's not surprising that the vast majority of the chart is covered by solar pretty much as long as the sun is up. In this area, we're being powered by solar. But in the middle of the night, fortunately when our power needs are less, we import a lot of wind energy and that's where that comes from.

[03:39:14] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So the requirements as time goes on have become not just that overall we have to provide clean energy, but that on an hour-by-hour basis we want to move to make sure we have clean energy. So if you have any questions about that, I'd be glad to answer it either now or just offline. Thank you.

[03:39:28] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right and I'll go next. It's been a long time since we've had a council meeting so there's a lot of stuff going on. So there was the meet and greet on Castro Street where our very own Community Development Director Christian Murdock moderated a panel with local businesses on Castro Street to see how our city can encourage more economic development in our downtown.

[03:39:41] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I went to the housing and childcare symposium, and it was really cool because they actually did a tour, it was in Redwood City and they did a tour of an affordable housing project with the ground level being childcare, which was really cool. Next was the Council Youth Services Committee, which was a joint meeting with the Youth Advisory Committee, which was really good. So it was me and Councilmember Clark leading the youth to greener pastures.

[03:40:14] Councilmember Emily Ramos: And then there was a Celebration of Service and pretty much most of our colleagues were there. The big thing though was I did go to the California League of Cities or Cal Cities this past last week where and that was paid for by the city, thank you city. And I got to check out some of the panels. I now also sit as the Secretary of the API caucus for Cal Cities, so yay, fun times. I think that is it. Oh there was the ribbon cutting for the Caltrans bike lanes. Yay bike lanes. And that's it for me.

[03:40:58] Councilmember John McAlister: I also had the privilege to represent the City of Mountain View at the California League of Cities. Attended a couple of classes on parking, transportation. I along with the Mayor had a photo opportunity for our beacon award that we had, which will be coming along in a 12-foot size bronze statue of the two of us holding this thing, so that should be nice.

[03:41:30] Councilmember John McAlister: And I also attended the Peninsula Division of California League and made contact with the new president who is Sergio Lopez, who's also the Mayor of Campbell, and we discussed being appointed to the California League of Cities on Transportation and he said I will be appointed to that committee. So we will have representation at the statewide on the on transportation, which is always important.

[03:41:56] Councilmember John McAlister: So that's what... oh and then I went to a VTA board meeting, I was sitting on the board, and I brought up grade crossing, grade separation with the director of Caltrans and I asked where is Mountain View's going, how we doing, what's our priorities. And I also asked them if they're going to have deficits, are we still going to be getting our grade crossings. and they said well, to be determined like anything else with money. So that's a little update on myself. Thank you.

[03:42:28] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thanks. All right, just a quick update. At the end of September, we had our last Concert on the Plaza. It's so exciting, got a lot of great feedback from folks about how they're happy that our concerts extend all the way through into September because everyone else's fun ends at summer. So that's really great. The 63rd Readiness Unit has a new Major General. And so got to attend that on behalf of the city.

[03:42:55] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Attended the Denver AI, they call it DenAI talking about how our partnership with Google and how cities can responsibly use AI. We talked about our Celebration of Service. We had our Mountain View Firefighter Pancake Breakfast and then FAMO had their 15th anniversary, which I got to see Councilmember Showalter at. And then we had our Caltrans State Route 82 ribbon cutting. That is it for my report.

[03:43:06] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So we'll move on to item eight, which is our adjournment. The next City Council meeting will be held on October 28th, 2025. This meeting is adjourned at 9:10. Have a great night.

• ← Previous
• Next →