June 30, 2020 Joint Special Meeting of Mountain View City Council and Shoreline Regional Park Community

Video

Transcript

[00:05:23] Unknown Speaker: I pledge you later. Do the flag. Of the United States, America. And to the reach of the Republic. One nation. I'm under... The routine, just, just, just from.

[00:05:43] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you very much. So a quick announcement. This meeting will be conducted in accordance with the state of California executive order N 2920 dated March 17, 2020. All members of the city council are participating in this meeting by video conference with no physical meeting location. Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting live, meeting so at mountain view.legistar.com on YouTube at mountain view.gov slash youtube and on Comcast channel 26. As noted on the meeting agenda, members of the public proviral public comments online during the public comment period for an item by signing up at. mountain view.com slash cc underscore speakers or by phone by dialing 669-9009128 and entering webinar ID 94023057436. Any emails received before 5 p.m. today, we're forwarded to the city council. Emails received after 5 PM will not be read during the meeting that will be entered into the record for the meeting. Um, and because of the large number of, um, uh, items and also participants, we will be, um, setting the speaker time to one. 5 minutes and all votes will be taken by will call vote and now I'd like to ask the city clerk to do roll call, please.

[00:07:10] City Clerk: You, Council member Clark.

[00:07:12] Councilmember Chris Clark: Here.

[00:07:13] City Clerk: Council member Hicks.

[00:07:15] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Here.

[00:07:16] City Clerk: Council member got a check.

[00:07:17] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Here,

[00:07:18] City Clerk: council member McAllister.

[00:07:20] Councilmember John McAlister: Aloha here.

[00:07:22] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez.

[00:07:24] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Here.

[00:07:24] City Clerk: Nice mayor, come May.

[00:07:27] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Here.

[00:07:27] City Clerk: Mayor, I become back.

[00:07:29] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Here. Thank you. Thank you. All members are present and we will go on to item 4 the consent calendar. These items will be approved by one motion unless any member of the council wishes to remove an item for discussion. The reading of the full text of resolutions will be waived unless the council member requests otherwise. With any member of the council like to pull an item. Council member McAllister.

[00:07:53] Councilmember John McAlister: I would like to comment on 4.6 and a question, not 4.0.0.

[00:08:02] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hey, thank you. Counselor I'm at a check.

[00:08:06] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Like to pull item 4.4 please.

[00:08:12] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: And council member Hicks. Oh, Counselor, could you unmute yourself, please? Oh, you should be unmuted, Council number Hicks. Oh Try again.

[00:08:43] Councilmember Alison Hicks: There, sorry. 4, 4.4, 6, and 10, we have some, and not just for comment. Not for anything special.

[00:08:56] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great. Um, So would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on an item on the consent calendar? If so, if you are in an attendee box, please click, raise hand at the bottom of the box, and if you are on the phone, please press star 9. The city clerk will display the timer on the screen. And we'll start with, um, in the Tandy box David page, please unmute yourself.

[00:09:26] David Page: Hi, thank you very much, everyone. I'm with a group called 350 Silicon Valley Telework team. We're, uh, we gathered together to promote, uh, remote work options. During this, uh, crisis, as you know, there's many employees that have been working from home, and consequently, there's been a tremendous reduction in air pollution. Um, we're trying to get as many private. and public employers to pursue uh, work from home arrangements uh, indefinitely because of the great uh, benefit of the reduced air pollution. You got, uh, an a, a resolution on your agenda tonight about telework and I, um, I, I just, um, happy to say that, you know, you're addressing the issue, but unfortunately, it seems way too weak. There's no mandates, there's no incentives. Perhaps it's a stepping zone to something bigger and greater. Um, but what I was thinking is, given the uh, recession and the uh, budgetary problems, this should be something that would be uh, a win-win for uh, the city council to tackle. You got, um, no change required. You've already made the change, it costs almost nothing and you get tremendous reduction in traffic and air pollution and so on. So please consider um, beefing up this uh, resolution and implementing something much stronger. Thank you very much.

[00:11:06] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you Um, well, go to Mr. Alex B. If you can unmute yourself, please.

[00:11:16] Alex B: Hello. Uh, I just wanted to take this opportunity to point out how valuable it is for the city to control the land use for businesses like the savvy seller wines and the shoreline amphitheater and how much power we have to be able to handle crises without, you know, resorting to shutting down businesses or compromising people's time and livelihoods. I think that it's a very valuable thing to the city to be able to have this control and it's something that we should keep in mind and expand, especially when it comes to public housing. Thank you.

[00:11:57] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Any other members of the public wishing to comment on the consent calendar? So please hit the raise hand button. I don't see any more hands. So I will close public comment and bring it back to council. So, um, item 4.4, 4.6 and 4.10 have been pulled. be happy to entertain a motion for the balance of the consent calendar. Councilman Ramirez.

[00:12:24] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, mayor. All move, uh, the balance of the consent calendar, including, uh, let's see. I I didn't have the cheat sheet here. It looks like, um, 4.6 was cold. I think we don't have anything else to eat. Okay, no, no, no. All right, I move the doctor, founder.

[00:12:47] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. I swear?

[00:12:49] Unknown Speaker: A 2nd.

[00:12:50] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you. Any other discussion on the balance of the consent calendar? If not, can we get a roll call vote, please, city clerk?

[00:12:59] City Clerk: Council member, Clark.

[00:13:00] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yes.

[00:13:01] City Clerk: Council member Hicks.

[00:13:03] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[00:13:03] City Clerk: Council member about a check.

[00:13:05] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[00:13:06] City Clerk: Council member McAllister.

[00:13:08] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes.

[00:13:09] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez.

[00:13:11] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[00:13:12] City Clerk: Ice America May.

[00:13:13] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[00:13:14] City Clerk: May I have the Koga?

[00:13:16] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi. Thank you. Thank you. Motion carry 70 with no abstensions. We'll go to item 4.4.4.

[00:13:24] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Uh, I had counseling on McAllister, you hold this?

[00:13:28] Councilmember John McAlister: No, castle number, Matt checked it.

[00:13:31] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I'm sorry, go ahead. Check.

[00:13:34] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thanks very much. So I was looking at the different options for the pool at Wingstore Park, and I think I have a different perspective on what I'm looking for. Um, and I was wondering if other council members felt the same way. Um, it was mentioned by the Parks and Recs commission that, you know, they wanted to understand how much of the open space at the park is being encroached on, um, not just by the pool, but by other projects we have in works. And, um, I share that concern. So I do want to understand that. And from that perspective, looking at the 3 options, it seems like, um, option, I think it's C, um, encroaches the least amount, uh, into the park. And actually, another reason why I like it is because there is a lot more, um, of the areas surrounding the pools, uh, that is park as opposed to building or, um, parking lot. And I think if I was in the pool, I'd much rather see the park, than I would a building or a parking lot. And so, um, I think I actually prefer option C over the other options. And I'm wondering if anyone else feels the same way.

[00:15:08] Unknown Speaker: That's what I'm saying.

[00:15:11] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: That's another hicks.

[00:15:13] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Sorry, I'm in trouble with my unmute. I pulled it just to comment. Um, but I had a similar, my comment is similar to the reason that, that, uh, that you pulled it. I, I was going to command the, the, I, I guess it was the Parks and Rec commission, for asking for an open space impact analysis because I do have an ongoing concern that where a resident wants to joke to me that we're a city that likes to build on parks. And that's not that's not what I want to be. And I think when we're built, when we're uh, putting sort of uh, citywide serving uh, services at a park, we have to be careful that the people who live in the neighborhood and this is a relatively low income neighborhood. Um, that that they still have, when I go to that park, there are people, well, they're lovely trees and there are people walking there all the time teaching their kids how to use a trike. You know, the paths and trees are really used. Now, I can't say I am, so I wanted to commend that analysis. I can't say that I looked over the 3 options and decided, you know, that I liked option C better, that I hadn't, that hadn't come to mind. But I was wondering whether John Marchant could comment about, What did residents and other people who commented on it? Was there strong preference for option A or were they were people like A, C, whatever, you know, how did that go? Maybe you can give us more detail.

[00:16:57] Community Services Director John Marchant: Like, good evening, John Marshawn Community Services director. So the PRC did look at this and the item related to open space, we said we would look at even further. If you look at option A, the the blue line as well as the red line showing the perimeter of the, uh, pool space. That can actually be changed. This was just a general idea of where that fence can go. So in the next, in the next iteration of design, we will be looking further at the actual location of the fence. So we will be determining kind of where that can shift and go through the trees, if you will. Um, in, as far as it goes with the alignment of the actual facility itself facing rainstorf, the PRC did like seeing the alignment with the community center. So having a pathway that goes from the front entrance of the pool to basically the front entrance of, um, the community center that that, they, they liked that. Um, and just from a, looking at option C, the facility will be costing us a little bit more so that they, I think they were taking that into a bit of a factor. And the option A was a preference of staff based on the ability of the layout compared to, um, the almost elbow shaped facility and option C. There was some efficiencies in the facility design that the staff saw in that as well. So happy to answer any other questions.

[00:18:33] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: This one McAllister?

[00:18:38] Councilmember John McAlister: I just was gonna comment on the, I remember having quite an extensive discussion on this, and we were leaning many ways. I think it was a, Lone duck, no pun intended about trying to get as many lanes as possible, but I wanted to pick up on the concept of infringing on the park, and I recall that was part of one of the discussions, uh, going forward that people were concerned was taking moving into park, but then. When the Councilman or Manachek mentioned other projects, We're also taking a look at Magic Bridge, and that's going to take more park space. So maybe we need to take a step back and take a full analysis of what is, Reading Star Park, which is a regional, I mean, it's a city way park. It, not a neighborhood park. It's designed for the city because of the space. And maybe look at, what are we trying to do? Are we putting stuff and putting too much stuff in there, taking away the intent of the park was to have an open space and lock. So, that's a couple of my thoughts for now.

[00:19:45] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, I wanted to jump in before we go 2nd round. So I guess I read the different options and I read in option C that it would increase the square footage and that's why I actually thought it was encroaching more on open space, but am I reading that incorrectly?

[00:20:07] Community Services Director John Marchant: Design C does have additional square footage. That is correct.

[00:20:10] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, so yes, I thought A actually had more open space to it. Counselor Mattercheck.

[00:20:18] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Well, then I have a question because the red dashed line, um, appears to be the same in all of the options. But for option, C, The, Um, The area that has like the, the, the parameter fence is in from that dash line. And so I thought we were gaining some open space. Versus A, where it's closer to that dashed line. Especially down in the, uh, lower left corner. So am I, am I not reading that correctly?

[00:21:08] Community Services Director John Marchant: Yeah, I will. That, uh, the, uh, project manager from public work is working on this, join us and give us a little more detail on those lines.

[00:21:21] Unknown Speaker: I'm sorry, John, could you repeat the name of the project manager?

[00:21:24] Community Services Director John Marchant: David printing?

[00:21:46] Unknown Speaker: There we go. David is in.

[00:21:49] Project Manager David Printy: Hello. Uh, can you hear me? Oh, um, some reason I'm having tentacle difficulties. I was on earlier and it crashed on me. Uh, apologize, you can't see my face. Um, So I heard the conversation and the question about the various schemes and which schemes encroached more or less on the open space, correct? That is the question before the panel. Um, what I can say is the perimeter fence on all of them, at this point, um, is, uh, malleable. It can be changed, um, and reduced or enlarged as needed to kind of finalize the design, that the line is not set in stone, if you will, on, on frankly, any of the schemes. And so it'll be a balance between the end user's enjoyment of the facility inside the fence and the park's needs on the outside of the fence. Um, I can say definitively that option C, this was brought up earlier. Um, requires a larger building, and therefore is more expensive, um, and has other, um, elements that, you know, make it maybe less desirable to the PRC and, um, those that we've talked to about the project, but, um, again, I'll defer to your preference at this point.

[00:23:12] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. I can't swim, I check. Did you have other comments?

[00:23:15] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Well, so I guess then, if the fence, um, I was mostly looking at the um, blue line for the fence versus the red dash line, and looking at which one took the least amount of open space away. And so if the fence can be moved, um, I'm more comfortable with option A, um, but, and I hear the comment about the, um, The building's more challenging, if it's an L. So, um, I guess I still prefer, uh, one of the other options. Um, so option B over option A, but you know, I'm not the expert on this. And so if the PRC and my colleagues, um, are okay with A, um, we can go with that.

[00:24:06] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Any other comments? And if not, I'm happy to entertain emotion.

[00:24:11] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, just follow up because I remember supporting an option that was building a bigger a complex for the future. That if I recall the conversation we were having. And I wanted, you know, the city's going to grow. And I wanted to add the excess capacity right now. Some say, well, there was plenty. But that added excess, you know, again, building more for the future. And appears, um, Option C would do that. So, John, if you were, if I don't know if you recall the conversation, but that's what's one of the things that I was looking at back then. And to see them build, other than the pool, I mean, the buildings larger, I recall that there was more lap lanes. In one pool over the other, but it looks like it says the lap pools are both the same size of that 6200. Was one in more lanes, was it, the front pool might have had more lanes?

[00:25:11] Community Services Director John Marchant: Correct. So if you look at option A, uh, and as part of the fun water, there is a shadow of additional lap lane, uh, lanes that could be added to the project. And so that is something that we will be bringing to council as part of the next iteration of the design and providing the additional cost for those additional lanes and then get some feedback regarding that. This is, um, we're looking for your direction on the location of the, the location of the pools itself, and then we'll be bringing additional options back to you in the fall.

[00:25:46] Unknown Speaker: So, only option they have, the optional to expand, uh, swimming lanes, the other beings, that is an vehicle the others do as well. Oh. Well, which one would eventually have the most lanes?

[00:26:00] Unknown Speaker: To tell you, each option has the same number of optional lanes.

[00:26:05] Unknown Speaker: Oh, exist. Thank you. That's what I require.

[00:26:11] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, so just getting the additional info from staff that, you know, we'll we'll see this again and and the vote at the PRC was unanimous. I'll go ahead and move the staff recommendation for item 4.4.4.

[00:26:22] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Is there a 2nd?

[00:26:25] Unknown Speaker: Oh, go ahead and 2nd that.

[00:26:28] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Any other discussion on item 4.4? If not, can we get a roll call vote, please?

[00:26:34] City Clerk: Council member Clark.

[00:26:35] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yep.

[00:26:37] City Clerk: Council member Hicks.

[00:26:38] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[00:26:39] City Clerk: Council number matter check.

[00:26:40] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[00:26:41] City Clerk: Council member McAllister.

[00:26:44] Councilmember John McAlister: No.

[00:26:44] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez.

[00:26:48] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[00:26:49] City Clerk: Ice Mayor Kme.

[00:26:50] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[00:26:51] City Clerk: May I be Coca?

[00:26:52] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi.

[00:26:54] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Thank you. Motion passes 61 with no abstensions.

[00:26:58] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: We'll go on to item 4.6 and Chiconsimo McAllister. Did you want to start?

[00:27:04] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes, thank you. So this one is, uh, And one topic I've been trying to get my colleagues to think about is there is this telecommunicating. And what is the number one thing you need for telecommunicating? Broadband. And I read this report, and if somebody wants to point out to me, where there's talk about increasing our broadband, increasing our fiber, building for the future, please point it out. Because basically this report says, well, we're going to reduce cars and we're going to single occupancy and spare the air. But if they don't, if we don't have the broadband and the fiber and the infrastructure to support telecommuting, It's not gonna happen. So staff. Is there anything talked about in here? Because I can't accept this report unless I see we are building infrastructure that can support the expansion of telecommunicating at home.

[00:28:03] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Thank you, council member McAllister. I can answer that and then I might need the assistance of the assistant city manager to talk further about the actual resolution and policy. So, When we think about fiber and building out the infrastructure in the city, there's a lot that has to be involved with that and a lot of planning and work with, um, not only, you know, developers or people who might be digging, but having a very robust plan and the situation where and now with COVID is such that we have over 400 staff already telecommuting. And that is not going to change anytime soon, especially as the order, the shelter in place order continues to be in effect. So, essentially, just in terms of our own city and our own staff, we are aware that we will need the Wi-Fi and the technology infrastructure for this. Uh, one of the things that we are planning to do in the upcoming fiscal year is to look at an IT strategic plan. And I think that, um, the telecommuning piece of it is just one aspect of different infrastructure that we may need to look at. So I can't necessarily speak to us putting in fiber right now because I'm not sure specifically what it is we would need to do for that because I know that as a large undertaking. But, um, in terms of just us encouraging telecommuting, that is something that we're interested in for all of the reasons that are cited in in the resolution. And I would ask the assistant city manager if she has any other insight on that.

[00:29:47] Assistant City Manager: Thank you, city manager and thank you, council member McAllister for the question. Um, I, I, um, concur with the city manager's comments that there's a range of things that we have done and are looking to do to support our own employees' ability to telecommute. And, um, and the, uh, internet connectivity has not been the biggest of our issues and truth, uh, in terms of, of what it takes for employees to be able to effectively do their work from a remote location. It has been a lot about changing the service delivery model so that we can connect with our customers and and our partners, um, in a remote way and and provide services to them. Um, and then a whole host of things just around managing people and managing work plans that require communication and collaboration. Um, and so we continue to work through those issues and would and would include certainly any issues around. internet connectivity and broadband that we had. Um, as it relates to our own employees, and then, as the city manager was, was stating, you know, for the community as a whole, and other employers, also being encouraged to telecommute, um, we would have to look at, um, how broadband fit, fit within that. It's not something that we had the staff level have looked at. I don't know if it's something that the commute free tomorrow working group has looked at, but I think the mayor could probably speak to that.

[00:31:20] Unknown Speaker: Well, true. Oh, go ahead. Got some information.

[00:31:23] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, you read your resolution, and it's all about cars. And when you say, you know, we're trying to do broadband, it says, well, CHP has these cars and cars reduce carbon, uh, produce carbon monoxide and we are doing a comprehensive benefits. But, you know, I thought we were building for a city, just, because your resolution to sport expanded telecommunicating, other measures to reduce single occupancy vehicle trips.

[00:31:51] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: That's the title of our, our resolution.

[00:31:56] Councilmember John McAlister: So if telecommunicating, there's, there's got to be an increase in broadband, and I think that, If we're going to be a leader as a city, we also got to provide for the, the businesses in our community. So, If you could result, you know, put a paragraph in there, whereas broadband or infrastructure, It would actually, I think, would get to the heart of what you're trying to accomplish and just not this residence of the employees amount here. But all the residents of Mount Duke, telecommute, and not just our city staff. And to do that, we need that infrastructure, not necessarily broadband, it can be rifle, but it needs to have. So, um, those are my comments, and I always hope staff would consider that, and my colleagues would start, so think about it too, and say, hey, maybe they can tweet this to make it a little better and more applicable to telecommuting. Thank you.

[00:32:52] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, um, oh, Council member Hicks. Do you have some comments?

[00:32:57] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Well, I'm just, I was just gonna say, say shortly, uh, that, although, uh, you know, more broad man may be necessary at some point. I think there are a number of different parties that are, I think corporations are delivering that in many places, so I wouldn't feel comfortable if what you're suggesting adding is that the city will be responsible for it. I mean, I think this is a jumping off point. I think it's very important. I pulled it because I just wanted members of the public to know, I didn't want it to fly by on us just to, um, you know, pass it with the rest of the consent items. But I wanted a little discussion and notice, I don't want to commit to the city, supplying certain things when we have, um, you know, when we're going to have revenue drops. I certainly, you know, exploring, increased, uh, various things that are necessary, broadband and so forth, I think is fine, but I don't want to commit to a city budget item when there could be other parties who could provide that.

[00:34:00] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, I wasn't recommending that we build, but we should recognize the importance of expanded broadband. And that's, it's not recognized the importance of increasing it. Yes, other companies are doing it, but the city needs to recognize that it's important for this to be successful. Broadband needs to be widely available.

[00:34:23] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, um, I was going to pull this to speak to it as well. Um, as you, you know, I was the one who, brought this forward as part of our, the task force that I've been on, the commute for tomorrow, task force that, um, County supervisor, Cindy Chavez, put together, um, wearing her hat as an air quality management district board member, which I serve on with her, and BTA chair and the counties, um, president board president. And so we've been meeting over the last, um, 6 weeks or so, uh, weekly and it's been a group of, um, folks from transportation, MTC, VTA, um, other, uh, agencies throughout Santa Clara County as well as the other, uh, counties in the Bay Area, um, air quality management district staff. And we've been bringing in speakers or county supervisors. Chavez has been bringing speakers from the private sector. Um, this last week, we had a pollster talk about, um, some polling they've done around telecommuting, um, nationally. And, um, and so this has been an effort to just get gauge the, um, interest of continuing telecommuting past sheltering in place in light of the fact that the lower, lower uh, commuting traffic congestion has um, resulted in cleaner air. So that was really the focus of this effort. And, um, we've been discussing next steps, though, to respond to the, um, gentleman, um, during public comment from 36350 Bay Area. This is really a launching pad, and we're actually the 1st city, the 1st agency to, um, hear it tonight. Um, the other and and mainly because we're going into summer break. I had asked that we agendize this this evening, but, um, this resolution was put together, um, with the, the committee's input. I know our staff was very helpful in providing information about transportation, demand, management, efforts. And so, um, it's, and I appreciate, Counselor, uh, McAllister, your comments. Um, I, I have, um, I have been told that there is a county effort to look at the digital divide and it's actually from, from the school perspective of students not having the same access, but, um, you know, it has been brought up to, brought to my attention that, that, um, issue, uh, permeates through other, um, factors or sectors such as like telehealth. And so, you know, as much as we've, um, listen to you over the years about Smart City and so forth. And I, you know, I chuckle a little bit, but I think you are actually spot on. And that's something that is being discussed county wide right now. And so I do expect that, and that's another effort taking place. So this is just really a starting point to get public agencies to commit to looking at telecommuting policies. And then there's a pledge attached to the um, council report that came, uh, that was also crafted. And the, the task force will be going out to companies to ask them to sign on to that pledge, but it was really mostly about looking at, how do we change our policies and procedures for our staff so that they can tele be able to telecommute and therefore not have to drive in and create um, air pollution, or GHD emissions? So that's the focus of us. There's a lot more coming forward. The polling, the pollsters, um, that conversation took us to, um, we should probably do a more focus polling in the Bay Area to get, um, better understanding of our, you know, residents, um, real preferences, um, and feelings, and that will, um, probably instruct us in terms of policies, public policies that we can look at adopting into the future. So apologies for the length of that, but I did want to just, um, give some background in context to what this, uh, resolution is. So with that, um, oh, if there's, I'll go ahead and make the notion to pass, uh, item 4.6 and I guess I have to read this. So, um, I will motion to adopt a resolution to support expanded telecommuting and other measures to reduce single occupancy vehicle trips, to be read entitled only for the reading waived. And council member Hicks?

[00:39:05] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I was going to second.

[00:39:06] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Any other discussion on this item? If not, can we get real call, though, please? Oh, the city manager want to say something, I think.

[00:39:15] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Oh, I'm sorry, yes. Oh, sorry, thank you, mayor. No, I just wanted to add to what you said about the smart cities and looking at the digital divide, that this is something that staff is working on right now, actually, and we've been communicating with the school districts on it. This will be part of our effort as we think through some of our equity efforts over the next year. Um, and also just touching on the smart city piece. We are actively looking at smart city projects right now. And looking at ways that we can bring fiber in just in terms of projects that can relate to our transportation projects or at least look at what we can do with IT in terms of broadband and expanding it. So these are all efforts that are underway. So just to add to what you said, I think that we are going to see movement on this over the course of the next fiscal year.

[00:40:11] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, city manager. Any other discussion on this item? If not, can we get the phone call, though, please?

[00:40:19] City Clerk: Council member Clark.

[00:40:21] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yeah.

[00:40:21] City Clerk: Council number Hicks.

[00:40:23] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[00:40:24] City Clerk: Council member Mattachek.

[00:40:26] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[00:40:27] City Clerk: Council member McAllister.

[00:40:29] Councilmember John McAlister: A reluctant, yes.

[00:40:31] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez. Mayor May.

[00:40:36] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[00:40:37] City Clerk: Yeah, big Koga.

[00:40:38] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I.

[00:40:40] City Clerk: Thank you, mission carry 70 with no extensions.

[00:40:43] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: We'll go on to item 4.10 and Counselor McAllister, I believe you pulled this.

[00:40:48] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, I just had a question for uh, the community service director. Oh, Mr. Mashad, good to see you. Um, I just wanted to clarify that. The, the, this item will, we'll be coming back to the city council for further discussion or, uh, Going forward.

[00:41:14] Community Services Director Mashad: That is correct. So tonight's action is just to defer the rent, um, to give staff as well as light nation opportunity over the summer to continue dialogue related to rent due, and be able to come back to the council in the fall, uh, with a strategy for, uh, how to, um, how to, how to manage the, the rent do at this and a path forward. So yes, this will be coming back in the fall.

[00:41:40] Councilmember John McAlister: Thank you. I make a motion that we approve item 4.10.

[00:41:45] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you for our 2nd.

[00:41:49] Unknown Speaker: I'll go ahead and 2nd it.

[00:41:50] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, any other discussion on this item? If not, can we get a roll call vote, please?

[00:41:57] City Clerk: Cancel number, Clark.

[00:41:59] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yes.

[00:42:00] City Clerk: Council member Hanks.

[00:42:01] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[00:42:02] City Clerk: Council member Mattachek.

[00:42:04] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[00:42:04] City Clerk: Council member McAllister.

[00:42:06] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes.

[00:42:07] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez.

[00:42:09] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[00:42:10] City Clerk: I'm May.

[00:42:11] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[00:42:12] City Clerk: Abby Koga.

[00:42:14] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I.

[00:42:14] City Clerk: Thank you, ocean carry 70 with no distensions.

[00:42:19] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: We go on to item 5 or 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 for one. 5 minutes this evening. And state law prohibits the council from acting on non-agenda items. With any member of the public, uh, on the wishing to speak, if you're in the attending box. Please hit the raised hand button at the bottom of the box. And if you are on the phone, please hit a star 9. And we'll start with Ellie.

[00:42:56] Ellie Green: Hi, counselor, can you hear me?

[00:42:59] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes.

[00:43:00] Ellie Green: Okay, great. Hi, my name is Ellie Green. I lived in Notting G for 17 years and coincidentally the length of my lifetime. I really want to say as I attended the subcommittee meeting earlier today. Um, one of the members of the subcommittee stated that it was in the council's uh, capabilities to authorize a commission went to the HSE to investigate police reform. As we previously re established at the subcommittee meeting and for those who weren't, I'll give a brief summary. Well, the subcommittee meeting was intended to address a broader scope of racial issues, the community and public has been calling for police reform. I know that the city council seems to shy away from the words, that is what we're calling for. And as we are aware that the city council holds power. To address police reform and to issue a commission. I would like to call upon the council. To both authorize a commission through the HRC, as well as, Put on the agenda. Come September, that they will be addressing and discussing the progress made by the subcommittee. To open have an open form for discussion to review the policies that the subcommittee has proposed and prove in a way the progress that has been made and show and demonstrate to the community that progress is going to be made. Thank you for your time.

[00:44:21] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thanks, we'll get a Dana Petey. Please unmute yourself.

[00:44:27] Dana Petey: Hi, can you hear me? Thank you so much for your time. This is Dana Petey. I've lived in the Bay Area. I'm a Mountain View resident. I lived in the Bay Area. Teaching middle school math to 6 and 7th graders in San Mateo for the past 6 years. I was also at the subcommittee and I just wanted to share a couple highlights for anyone who wasn't there. First of all, thank you so much to the council for making this space to tackle racism broadly in our community and for taking opportunity of this time here in 2020. Um, I'm pleased to report that the subcommittee is committed to exploring broader issues like redlining and zoning and hiring contracts and equity-based budgeting, obviously each of those requires an extensive look, but I'm really excited to see what you're able to learn um, in the future about that. And that they're letting the HRC take the lead on engaging the community around policing. I think that'll be really productive dialogue and uh, learning opportunities from each other moving forward. We also, as Ellie mentioned, we learned that the city council ultimately does have that authority to create the citizen led commission that we've been asking for. So I just want to make it clear to city council. Thank you so much for being interested in this conversation so far. We are calling for when you return in September. Please investigate this process of how this citizen led committee, uh, or commission can come to light because it felt a little bit like hot potato so far in terms of, is that subcommittee, is that general counsel? Who does what? Please, city council, put this on your general agenda in September. So we can figure out how to make this happen. And please also make sure to actively include the HRC in the process of putting that together commission together. Thanks for your time. Have a great evening, everybody.

[00:45:59] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: All right, thank you. That's good to Miriam C. Please unmute yourself.

[00:46:04] Miriam: Oh, hello. Hi.

[00:46:06] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: There you go.

[00:46:07] Miriam: Hi, my name is Miriam. I am a Mountain View resident. I've lived in the I live in the Rex Manor neighborhood. Um, and I worked in Mountain View for about several, uh, 7 years. So I'm also here with the Mountain View coalition for police reform and accountability and I want to echo the, the, um, requests. They ask that we have this wise and led commission, that the HRC be actively included in the process for the reasons that Dana and Ellie listed and that the general counsel, um, come back and investigate this process when they come back in September. I really care about the issue of police reform. I was really startled to see the statistic from 2018 that while only 2% of Mountain View residents identify as black, um, 12% of suspects and 10% of people arrested by the MVPD were black and that just worries me because I think it's really important that we have an inclusive and equitable community here in Mountain View. Um, And so, uh, I really care about the issue and I'm hoping that we can make progress on it in the fall because I think the nation is really activated around this. Thank you all so much for your time.

[00:47:17] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Well, go to Anna Marie Morelles. Please unmute yourself.

[00:47:23] Anna Marie Morelles: Hi there. So I lived in Yanagu for almost 40 years now. I wanted to say I was also on the subcommittee meeting today. Thank you to council and staff for that. That was a really great start for the city of Mountain View, and I think the best way for the council to facilitate this is to create a citizen led commission. The HRC art C should be a part of this process, and I ask that city council look into this process further when you guys reconvene in September. To keep transparency and to gain the confidence in Mountain View residents. This is the best way to proceed. Open dialogue between the community and our leaders is the way to go, since there are so many issues around this that need to be addressed. I am hopeful that this council will take that into consideration. And move forward with a citizen led commission. Thank you very much.

[00:48:15] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Okay. Please send me it yourself.

[00:48:23] Public Speaker: Hi, good evening, city council, and good evening again to members of the subcommittee, which I was watching earlier today. I'd like to point out that, And I applaud putting together the subcommittee to address, we're showing inequalities and issues of that nature in the city of Mountain View. However, these issues are particularly broad and In order to take a proper laser focus on dealing with the issues of policing, which I will remind the counselor, extremely important to deal with. I mean, we're still looking at a situation where a majority of arrests in Mountain View are, uh, Or, like for misdemeanors or drug possession, that shouldn't be arrested in the 1st place, where Mountain View experiences 68% more racial bias and arrests than, uh, 6 more racial bias and arrest than 60 per 8% of other police departments, with, with those kind of, um, With that being the situation we're in. We need to take a real serious focus on this, and that has to be a citizen led process, an independent commission organized for the HRC, which you as a council have the authority to do. So what we're asking for today is, uh, acknowledging that the, organizing the subcommittee is a good step, and we're proud that you guys are doing that. But that we need to have this independent citizen led commission to look specifically at police. you.

[00:49:59] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Let's get it, Kelsey Joseph. Please unmute yourself.

[00:50:05] Kelsey Joseph: Hi, um. For those who don't know me, I am also a Mountain View resident. I've lived here for a couple of years and I'm also with Mountain View coalition for police reform and accountability. As we move towards the summer break in the city council. I'm looking toward fall already. I'm eager to hear, when we reconvene, what progress the subcommittee on race equity and inclusion makes in the coming months, and you can rest assured that, uh, I'll be there to follow as it goes. Um, specifically, since we've learned today at the subcommittee meeting that it's within the council's power to create an additional independent citizen law commission. And since we've seen that the subcommittee has a lot on its plate and a lot of really important things that you guys are talking about addressing that are all really important to address. Uh, I urge you to use your authority to empower citizens when it comes to police reform. So, uh, please put a discussion in about how those most impacted by policing in our community can lead the way on addressing those issues. Thank you.

[00:51:12] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Go to LXB. Please send me yourself. Alex? Okay. There you go. And wait for the unmute button to show up.

[00:51:28] Alex Brown: Hey. Happy last meeting before the summer break, everybody. This is Alex Brown from the Mountain View Mobile Home Alliance, here to point out the fact that I and my neighbors are still receiving rent increases and now rate hikes in utilities, because we have no protections, and a lot of them are suffering from loss of income due to COVID-19. And with the eviction moratorium, they don't have to be afraid for now, but they will eventually have to come up with the money to pay off what they owe, which is increasing every year. And this is in contrast to their income from either social security or other fixed forms of income. And you guys know this because it was brought before you in January and have done nothing so far. Thanks.

[00:52:23] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: All right, we'll go to Joe Spalding. Please unmute yourself, Joe. Oh, hold on. There you go. We should be gone, Joe.

[00:52:35] Joe Spalding: Yep, this is Joe Spalding. Pronouns are he, him and his. I live in Oakland. I frequently am in Mountain View. Um, I just wanted to uh, encourage the uh, council to consider the independent uh, independent commission for uh, reviewing uh, police accountability. Um, we can see across the country that things are um, pretty intense and it's not something that just kind of happened in the vacuum. It's not something that happened because 25000000 people are bored. Um, people are risking their lives against a viral pandemic in order to make sure that we have accountability in our city governments. And part of me calling here, although I am a person of color. Um, is, is because I have a responsibility when I do have the opportunity to speak to local record officials to let them know that we need to do everything that we can to become actively anti-racist. It's not just enough to not be racist. Thanks, I yield my time.

[00:53:37] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Let's go to Eva Tang. Please unmute yourself.

[00:53:42] Eva Tang: Hello, sound check.

[00:53:44] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yeah, you're on.

[00:53:45] Eva Tang: All right, thank you. Um, so I'm even saying, um, with the Mountain View coalition, um, for police reform and accountability. I grew up in the Bay Area, all my life, have not moved past an hour away from my hometown of Santa Clara, but I am in Mountain View now, as an educator for underserved populations. Um, and I was also at the subcommittee, uh, meeting, and I am, uh, hoping that the HRC is not just a part, uh, of the conversation, but leads the conversation. I'm glad that we have a space to not only reflect on the fact that our population is 19% Latinx, but 48% of arrests are Latinx people. But we've also got redlining, zoning, disparities in health, including how COVID affects black and brown populations disproportionately, equity in our workplaces, including at Google, right in our backyard, um, which neighborhoods get resources like parks and swimming pools, um, and a plethora of other issues. Um, and we've learned that the General City Council ultimately has that authority to create the citizen led commission that we've ask, uh, we've been asking for. So, um, please include the HRC actively in uh, a citizen led commission formation. And uh, investigate this process when come back in September after your summer vacation. Thank you, yield my time.

[00:55:16] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Anyone else in the attendee box would like to speak? You can raise your hand. Oh, Sebastian, please unmute yourself.

[00:55:27] Sebastian: Hey, can you hear me?

[00:55:29] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes, go ahead.

[00:55:31] Sebastian: Okay. Hey, so yeah, my name is Sebastian. And I'm a resident of Mountain View and I'm a mechanical engineer. I've actually lived in the Bay Area my whole life and. Yeah, I was listening in on the subcommittee meeting earlier for race equity and inclusion, and I just wanted to thank you guys for getting that started. Um, you know, it's a promising start to see there be a discussion about this, especially in this time. when it's a very important issue, and I just think that, you know, Mountain View is, you know, pretty good in general, but, um, you know, the race and arrest, statistics, others are bringing up and that I've looked at myself and the police reports really worry me, you know, that there might be more that we can do to help these people not be unfairly targeted potentially. And so, I think that I just want to echo whatever, have said about the need for an independent citizen, the commission, run through the HRC, and yeah, I look forward to checking in in the fall and see how this is all going, and I'm looking forward to the future where we can hopefully be making some changes on these issues. Thank you.

[00:56:53] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. It's good, Anna. Please unmute yourself, Anna.

[00:56:59] Anna Ziger: Hello, my name is Anna Ziger. I was born in and have lived in Mountain V since 2004. I'm part of MV Cipra, and after attending the subcommittee meeting this afternoon, I'm pleased that the subcommittee is continuing to explore broader issues such as redlining zoning, hiring an equity-based budgeting. Also, they're asking the HRC to take the lead on engaging the community around policing. And finally, that council has the authority that to create the citizen led commission that we are asking for. We call on council to ensure that the topic of police reform and creating the independent commission will be on city council meeting agendas when we return in September. We're committed, and we look forward to continuing to work with you. I get my time.

[00:57:48] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: You look good, Nina. Please mute yourself, Nina.

[00:57:54] Nina: Hi, I'm a resident of Mountain View of the last 2 years and a member of the NBC PRA. I was also present for the subcommittee meeting earlier today, and I am so glad to hear the broad spoke of the subcom, given that our entire country was found out on racism at the mirror has pointed out in previous meetings. There is so much work to do and it is really important. In addition to this work, in order to make the moment and listen to the calls, the not for the silent majority that is called into meetings like this and taken to the streets in mountain view it all across the country. I like to echo the call from earlier, versus in my commission with HRZ to address police reforms specifically. Thank you.

[00:58:30] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, and Francisco Ochoa. Please unmute yourself.

[00:58:38] Francisco Ochoa: Good evening, council members and mayor. Thank you for taking the time to address this important issue. My name is Francisco Ochula. I'm a 38 year Mountain View resident, victory of the USMC as well as US Army. Mr. Smith, ethnicity, member of the community, emergency response team, cert, who participated in the past 3 presidential elections as a volunteer for the DNC. I'm also a small business owner here in Mount VNS. I've been a subject of excessive police force, uh, use of force by the MVPD. So this doesn't matter very close to my heart. And, uh, it has at times caused me great stress. I just want to reiterate what the MVCPRA is saying that the HRC, uh, should be an active part of uh, the changes that are going to hopefully occur here in Mountain View. I love our community. It a wonderful city to live in. We have educational benefits. We have work benefits beyond what I could have ever imagined when I grew up in this valley in the 60s and 70s.

[00:59:46] Public Speaker: So I implore you to uh, please make the HRC a part of uh, the commission that is going to oversee and uh, uh, the policing in Montreview. Thank you very much.

[01:00:00] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, any other members of the public machine to speak? You can raise your hand. I don't see any other hand, so I'm gonna close uh oral communication, and we will move on to the item 6.2. The, oh, I'm sorry, 6.one. I have public hearings under item 6 6.one is the Senate bill 743. Sequa transportation analysis, and we have a staff presentation by assistant city manager, community development director, RD Srivastava, and public groups director, Don Cameron. Welcome to both of you.

[01:00:37] Assistant City Manager RD Srivastava: Good evening, council members. I'm going to try to share my screen. And uh, Can you see the presentation? Great. Okay. Um, again, I do want to acknowledge all the wonderful work that's been done by staff. Um, our assistant planner, Sarush, Abutalebi, Martin Alkhire. Um, um, our transportation manager, real low as well as our consultants. Don and I are presenting tonight. So, okay. So we're going to talk about the purpose, the background of the timeline, go quickly through the policy recommendations, and Don's going to speak, um, about the multimodal transportation analysis framework that we had talked to you about last time. Again, um, SP 743 shifts are transportation related, environmental impacts are assessed, and requires projects to be reviewed by how they affect the environment and not by how they affect the flow of traffic. Uh, it replaces LOS with VMT as the primary measure of transportation impacts, um, in environmental review under sequel. However, LOS is not going away. Rather, it is going to be removed from sequel analysis and will be handled as operations analysis tool within the multimodal transportation. Um, Framework. Um, very quickly. Um, tonight is the 5th meeting. We have been working on this process since 2016. Um, and we have had a number of study sessions with the EPC, a study session with the council. Um, we had the, our EPC recommend adoption in May and we're at the council tonight. The policy recommendations include 2 sets. The 1st is screening criteria on the left-hand side of the screen. Um, projects that are screened out, do not require BMT analysis under sequel, and then on the right hand side, we're going to talk about thresholds of significance for projects that do require VMT analysis. In order to determine the metric to be used for either the threshold or for the screening. Um, we, we do have to look at what baseline we want to use when comparing them to the city. At the previous meeting, the council reviewed 2 main options for determining that baseline VMT. for residential uses as well as our office employment uses. The EPC and the council discussed this issue with the EPC recommending using the same geography and not different ones for the different residential and office VMT. And council discussed using the 9 County Bay Area geography as a preferred option. Since it was strict or on office development and less so on residential. Um, staff therefore recommended using the 9 County Bay Area, um, as a baseline, and the EPC uh, accepted this recommendation. Next, we'll go to small project screen. Um, OPR guidance does note that certain small projects should be presumed to have a less than significant impact since they generate few trips. Um, initially, staff had conducted a review of projects within the last 10 years, and it originally recommended a threshold for multifamily. Um, there was a little bit different than the OPR guidance at 30 units to the acre. However, after further analysis of local evidence, we have concluded that the 20 unit threshold better equates to the OPR benchmark of 110 trips per day. Um, and our recommendation now is consistent with OPR's recommendations. The EPC also agreed with this approach. For the map-based screening, um, using the 9 County Bay Area, um, rates, as discussed earlier, this map shows the variation between on the ground BMT and the comparison with the 9 County Bay Area average. Um, the green color indicates locations with the VMT that are at least 15% below the average, and projects in these areas would be presumed to be less than significant, but they would have to have certain characteristics that are, um, uh, consistent with OPR guidance. The 2nd map here, sorry. For me. Sorry. The 2nd map shows the variation between the underground VNT and the 9 County Bay Area average for office uses. As you can see, there's no green areas and no projects would be screened out um, from VNT analysis if they were office projects. On the issue of affordable project screening, Stafford recommended, consistent with OPR guidance, that projects with 100% affordable housing be presumed to have a less than significant impact. At the council study session, the topic of using a lower percentage was discussed. Um, we did find out that while Siquo allows agencies some discretion to deviate from OPR recommendations, they must be based on substantial local evidence to support those. Um, staff was not able to find any evidence that justified that projects with a much smaller um, proportion of affordable housing would have similar characteristics, um, or be substantially similar to those that were 100% affordable. And therefore, we are recommending consistency with OPR recommendations. Uh, however, we would like to note that even if such projects that are lower than 100% affordable housing go through an analysis, they would be credited with VMT reductions based on the amount of affordability. So there is a built in incentive under VNT analysis to provide more affordable housing, which is essentially what the council wanted to provide. Um, the EPC did accept this recommendation as well. Sorry. For projects that are required to go through VNT analysis. Staff is proposing using the 9 County Bay Area VMT average, as a reference for office and residential projects. Um, projects with the VNT of less than 15% for both residential and office would be presumed to have a less than significant impact. There was agreement on this issue at the council as well as the EPC, um, study sessions and the EPC agreed with this recommendation. Uh, for retail projects, council discussed, um, uh, using, um, making sure that neighborhood serving retail, um, was presumed to have a less than significant impact. Um, OPR recommends using a 50,000 square foot, um, a guideline uh, to consider a neighborhood serving, um, uses as neighborhood serving. Such uses would be presumed to have a lesson significant impact, and regional serving uses would go through VNT analysis, and would be presumed to have a significant impact if they did result in an increase in VMT. Finally, under the thresholds, for mixed use projects, we had originally recommended that each land use be independently analyzed, given project specific information, and this recommendation hasn't changed since the council saw it last time. We reserved this last category, um, for a little more discussion, because there was a fair amount of discussion, um, around the screening criterion. Um, projects that are, um, within a half mile of transit are recommended by OPR to be screened out of VMT analysis. Um, The transit proximity map, um, on the slide shows the half mile buffer within the thin black lines and projects within these areas would be screened out. Some council members did have concerns about the quality as well as the declining ridership, um, as well as the COVID issue, um, that reduced that ridership even further, and asked after review if the council had some flexibility to exclude certain stops, um, and quarters from this map. We did some research on the issue, and what we did find is that state law has 2 categories, exempting projects close to transit, from CCO requirements. The state mandates under SB 375, um, a sustainable community strategies that projects be required to be screened out, and those are on the left-hand side in the green column. Um, the SP 375 requirements um, are shown in dream, and then SP 743 casts a broader net and is more inclusive and it has projects on the right hand side. And projects under this category are um, the cities do have some flexibility. in determining those threshold and screening criteria. However, what we did find is that, um, there would have to be substantial local evidence to support any deviations from OPR recommendations. That evidence would need to justify how the new criteria would still promote the goals of SB 743 and would have to be weighed against the extensive body of research. Compiled by OPR. Um, Saf was not able to find research that was different from the OPR conclusions. And so we are recommending consistency with this approach. However, we would like to note that projects, even if they were screened out. From BMT analysis would not be screened out necessarily from the multimodal transportation analysis. Um, which would then identify uh, operational effects, including LOS, pedestrian, bike, and other transit, um, uh, impacts or effects. Um, and these would require improvements, some of which could result in requiring TDM measures in order to reduce trips. Um, the EPC had also expressed a similar concern. But ultimately, a majority accepted the staff recommendation when presented with this research. Um, I'm now going to turn the presentation over to Don Cameron, who will be discussing the MTA framework.

[01:12:10] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: Thank you, RT. I'm Don Cameron, public works director. If you could go to the next slide. So while BMT is an effective metric for evaluating a project's environmental impacts. It does not inform us about how the project may affect the functioning of local nearby roads. Nor what the project should be required to do to reduce any adverse impacts on the operations of a local transportation system. Separate from the sequoVMT process, it is proposed that projects be required to prepare a multimodal transportation analysis or MTA. BMTA will include the transportation impact analysis formally conducted under Sequa to evaluate the project's effects on nearby intersections, including mobile service and Q-lengths. However, this new MTA as proposed will include a more robust analysis of potential project effects on other modes such as walking, bicycling, and taking transit. The objectives of the MTA include ensuring projects, address, transportation effects, caused, or exasperated by the project, and encouraging projects to reduce single occupancy vehicle use and increase the mode share of other transportation options. Next slide. The MTA process will involve estimating a project's vehicle trips based on the typical trip generation for that particular land use, as is currently done for a transportation impact analysis. The MTA would evaluate the usual conditions, uh, considerations, excuse me, such as site access and circulation and signalized intersection operations. I will also take a deeper dive into assessing how the projects projected number of vehicle trips may affect bicycle and pedestrian facilities, transportation safety, and neighborhood impacts or spillover traffic. Next line. Staff proposes that small projects, as defined in the small project B and T screening, be exempt from having to prepare an MTA. MTA would focus on localized transportation effects. As such, it would analyze how a project's vehicle trips may affect pedestrian facilities within a half mile radius of the project, and within 2 miles for bicycling, transit, and vehicle operations. Next line. Should the MTA identify adverse effects to any mode. The project will be required to address or resolve these effects through conditions of approval. In some cases, such as issues with site access and circulation, this can be addressed with project design changes. For most adverse effects, however, the primary method will be to reduce the estimated vehicle trips through trip reduction requirements using TDM programs. In addition, if a project's mericotrips will adversely affect a bicycle or pedestrian facility or an intersection, the project would be required to provide or contribute towards operational improvements for active transportation or intersections. Also, the project may be required to contribute to offsite pedestrian or bicycle improvements if needed to support their trip reduction requirements to increase walking and bicycling mode splits. Next life. Well, we have been working with the transportation impact analysis process under sequel for many years. The expanded MTA approach is new and developing for us. A draft NTA handbook is nearly complete, and it will provide technical guidance to developers and consultants. Staff plans to refine the MTA process and technical guidance over the next few months through the development of the 1st couple of MTAs. After which staff will return to council for approval of a small project screening criteria, study areas, and overall process, based on what we learned from conducting those 1st couple of MTAs. With that, RT, I'm going to turn it back over to you.

[01:16:36] Assistant City Manager RD Srivastava: Thank you, Don. Um, well, um, this is the last slide, and it is a recommendation that the council adopt a resolution. To the policy implementing, um, the sequa to comply with, um, SB 743. Um, I do want to say that staff here, um, both the project manager, Sarush, and we are here, um, to answer questions, as is our consultant. Um, I'm going to stop sharing unless the council wants to um, go back to a slide. Um, thank you.

[01:17:12] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: and I, I, probably bring up the sides if anyone has a question on them, but are there any council members with questions, Councilman McAllister?

[01:17:23] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, is this sort of like a density bonus, is that? It's the law and we might as we just accept it. There's not much changing in it. More or less.

[01:17:36] Assistant City Manager RD Srivastava: Um, the law does require that cities begin this um, method of looking at sequa, uh, for, um, uh, transportation starting July 1st, which is tomorrow. So we squeaked in just before the deadline.

[01:17:55] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, thank you.

[01:17:57] Unknown Speaker: Thanks, Mayor. Great. Thank you. Um, I just had a quick question. Um, I recently, um, learned about BTA's, um, fast transit program and kind of the agency wide evaluations that they're going to be, um, doing related to their their ridership. And I wonder if there's a way to, I know that there's been some comments, particularly the last time this item came up about, um, you know, trying to understand ridership and increasing, um, ridership or trying to make sure that it's, um, efficient and and utilized. I haven't had the opportunity to ask staff, kind of, will we be able to use some of that information, that the ETA is creating, um, or how might that, that help in the, the city's implementation of SB 743. Um, Don, I don't know if it would play into the MTA at all, um, or or we could use that information to supplement our discussions.

[01:19:05] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: It could play into the MTA in terms of evaluating a project's potential effects on transit services. Um, what I'm aware of on terms of the fast transit program and part of that is is related to. We know that, um, transit is more attractive to writers, when it can, uh, provide good travel times, and compete well with the single argument automobile. So if through our MTA analysis, in terms of the impacts on transit effects, these increased vehicle trips could slow down transit, It may be possible then to working with VTA and working with the project to see how the project could mitigate that or provide some kind of improvement that could help speed transit back up and make it more viable option. For people that want to access that site as well as travel to other areas.

[01:20:01] Unknown Speaker: Great. Thank you. Appreciate that.

[01:20:05] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Council, Amanda, check.

[01:20:07] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. I had a couple questions. So, in the future, if VTA changed the bus routes or canceled the bus routes, discontinued them, or if changes were made to light rail, where either one of those no longer met the criteria that has been established for high quality transit, um, or any other categories that have been defined, around which there was a TPA. Um, would someone? OPR, the city, um, well, somebody, uh, take a look and see whether or not, um, this should be revised.

[01:20:55] Unknown Speaker: I would say yes, we would want to connect with VTA and OPR because there's a specific definition for how these transit stops and quarters are defined and they talk about 15 minute headways during peaks. So if they no longer were the case, then, you know, we would want to circle back and make sure that we were updating our maps.

[01:21:20] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So it would be our responsibility to update them, and that would be okay, uh, to do.

[01:21:26] Unknown Speaker: Well, typically, um, I haven't really had the experience in in my career of having a situation like this, but typically what we would do is circle back with OPR. Um, they're easy to connect with as, as big, um, of, um, you know, they have fairly large scope, but you can connect with them. And talk to them about the issue and they give you guidance or they talk to you about it. Um, and we usually are able to connect with the agencies through, uh, amend the maps so that we can then apply it. We weren't going to begin applying them immediately, but just start the process so we can amend the maps.

[01:22:07] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. And then my other question is, um, I appreciate having more detail on the MTA this time. Um, but in looking through it and then hearing about it more tonight. Um, I got to thinking that. Um, the level of service analysis that is done, often results in information that you kind of, Scratch your head and say, really? Um, that's uh, you know, functioning intersection when, you know, actually, if you go through that intersection, it might be absolutely miserable. Um, and so, do we have to use or are we planning on using the same approach that's used in the, like an EIR to evaluate the LOS or is there a different way of looking at it, different assumptions, different models, something that might result in an LOS that, um, seems more realistic for what's really happening at an intersection?

[01:23:18] Unknown Speaker: So actually, it is one of the advantages of looking at how an intersection is functioning under this new MTA format rather than doing it under sequel, which can be fairly prescriptive. And then you have the legal mitigations that are connected to that level of service analysis. So under the MTA, you know, 1st there is a technical way that you calculate level of service, you are correct, that it might not take into account Q spillbacks from uh, upstream intersection, that is now affecting this intersection, but we can do that when we uh, look at it on the MTA lens in terms of, so what is, what is causing this intersection not to function well, and it can look at the Q lengths. It can look like if there's a particular movement that's having a problem. Whereas the problem really at a different intersection, it's just having a residual impact on the intersection we were looking at. So the short answer is, yes, we will have more flexibility in how we look out and intersection is operating under the MTA.

[01:24:24] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. Great, thank you. Those are the only questions I had. Thank you.

[01:24:30] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Any other questions from council members? I don't see any hands, so I will open this up for public comment. If you are in the attendee box, again, on Zoom, please hit the raised hand button at the bottom. And if you are on the phone, please hit Star 9. Any members of the public wishing to speak on this item? Don't see any hands, so I will bring it back to council. Council member Ramirez.

[01:25:02] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, mayor. I appreciate staff's efforts too. Address the questions and concerns from the council and the EPC. Um, I think there's, uh, you know, there's been a lot of concerns about, uh, the, uh, priority area and, um, that we, we were talking about the, the, uh, the data, uh, used to generate the heat maps in our last study session, and I think, you know, it'll probably be an iterative process as we, um, better understand the implications of this policy change. Uh, I think Council member McAllister asked, um, the key question and that's related to the discretion that we have in modifying the policy. And based on my understanding of, uh, staff presentation and, um, the, the lack of discretion that we have. I'm going to go ahead and move to adopt a resolution, uh, to adopt a policy implementing the California environmental quality act, to comply with California Senate bill 743 regarding the use of vehicle miles traveled in transportation analysis, to be read entitled only for the reading lakes.

[01:26:12] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Counselor Ramirez. Is there a 2nd on the mission, vice mayor may have your hand up?

[01:26:18] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes, I'd like to 2nd the motion and want to echo the thanks to staff. I feel like, uh, this is a big shift for, for the state and for uh, local jurisdictions and really appreciate kind of all of the information given. Um, and really also want to share that, you know, I think it's incumbent upon, um, cities, policy failures, stakeholders, to, you know, support making transit successful and providing these other options so that people can can drive less and taking into account. what we do have purview over, whether that be traffic signaling or kind of using our data in conjunction with other, um, you know, quasi-governmental agencies to make sure that we're kind of making the changes necessary. Um, are really critical for us moving into VMT. Thank you.

[01:27:15] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Council number Hicks. Yeah, comments.

[01:27:19] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes, I was, I, um, concur with, with what other council members are saying, and, and, uh, in going with the staff recommendations. And my, my main comment is that I think that what's going to really make a difference in terms of whether we're designing, uh, you know, more livable communities in this case is the, uh, multi- multimodal transportation. uh, analysis, and also other associated documents like the bike pad master plan, maybe updates to our general plan, and other things that can uh, allow us to, um, sort of easily use other forms of transportation, whether they be, you know, bikes, all sorts of other vehicles or walk further more pleasantly, whether we're young or old. Um, so I really think we're going through a paradigm shift. Both in terms of this kind of traffic analysis, but also in terms of, you know, clearly because of the pandemic, the way we're getting around and because of, um, because of global warming and wanting to reduce our carbon footprint. And I really hope that we, because of that paradigm shift, we can take a very close look at some of those things. I even think our parkland ordinance to make sure that we're creating the kinds of places that not only that we can walk and bike around, but that we really want to walk and bike around, you know, pleasant neighborhoods for being in and doing those things. So with that, I will be supporting the motion.

[01:28:54] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Counselor Metachek.

[01:28:57] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. I just want to sort of reiterate. My concern about the TPAs, and so it's good to know that, um, if things change, we can, um, look into changing, um, projects that are screened out. Um, and, um, I'm looking forward to the MTA because I think it's going to be really critical to make sure that it is analyzing and addressing the things we want it to. Um, and similar to council member Hicks. Um, you know, while intersections are used by vehicles, they're also used by people and bicycles. And so we do want to make sure they work for everyone. Um, as well as the streets in general work for everyone in the sidewalks. So, um, I'm hopeful, uh, that the MTA is going to do this, so I'm looking forward to reading the whole thing, and then actually like working with it with a few projects to see, you know, is it really doing what we want it to do and if not tweaking it so that it does. So um, I will support the motion. Thank you. Thank you.

[01:30:12] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Any other discussion on the motion by Counselor Ramirez and 2nded by the vice mayor. I just, uh, also want to thank staff. I know when we had this study session. It seemed like we had some desperate, disparate, um, opinions, that, uh, like it, you've all, uh, called it quite well and, um, and so I'm very, um, pleased with the results and as mentioned, I, I, this is the 1st time I had been a long time in coming. We've talked about this for many, many years, so, um, I think, uh, we've, you know, hit that milestone and getting it done and we look forward to how it works and I do expect that there will be some tweaks along the way. So with that, I will ask for a will call vote, please, city clerk. Thank you.

[01:30:59] City Clerk: Council member Clark.

[01:31:01] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yep.

[01:31:02] City Clerk: Council member Hicks.

[01:31:03] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[01:31:04] City Clerk: Council number Mattachek.

[01:31:06] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[01:31:07] City Clerk: Council member McAllister.

[01:31:08] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes.

[01:31:09] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez.

[01:31:12] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[01:31:13] City Clerk: IS Mayor Kime.

[01:31:14] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[01:31:15] City Clerk: Abby Koka.

[01:31:16] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi. Thank you. Thank you, motion carries 70 with no abstentions. If you don't mind, I'll keep going. So, uh, item 6.2 The new mixed use development at 1001 North Shoreline Boulevard. And do any council members wish to make any disclosures such as contacts with the applicant or site visits at this time? Council member Medachek?

[01:31:47] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Sorry, I will disclose that I have, um, talked to the applicant, um, probably had several meetings with them over the years, and I have absolutely been by the site many, many times. Thank you.

[01:32:01] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Nice to there for me.

[01:32:04] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes, I want to disclose that I met with the applicant.

[01:32:07] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Councilman Ramirez.

[01:32:10] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I also met with the applicant.

[01:32:13] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, council member Hicks.

[01:32:16] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Oh, I met with the applicant. I met with community members and I have, um, been by the site.

[01:32:22] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, council member Clark.

[01:32:27] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yes, I've also met with the African a number of times over the years and have been out to the site a few, a few different times now.

[01:32:34] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: You. Um, and I also have met with the applicant, uh, viewed the site and met with uh, neighbors in the area. Constinor McAllister.

[01:32:44] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes, to all the above.

[01:32:46] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great. Thank you very much. So then we will go to the staff presentation by senior planner Diana Pancholi. Welcome.

[01:33:11] Senior Planner Diana Pancholi: Good evening and thank you. My name is Diana Pancholi, senior planner, and um, uh, with the city's planning division. I'm trying to say, sorry. So how do I just be slides? Just a minute? P better. Okay, sorry. So I'll start again. Um, the item in front of you tonight is a mixed use development at 1001 Marshall Line Boulevard. The 7.81 acre project site is located to the northeast corner of Turbo Avenue and Shoreline Boulevard. The project site is currently zone industrial and is currently developed with an office building and a surface parking lot. The developer, Sarah Swigis, is proposing to develop the project site by replacing the surface parking lot, with a mixed use development, consisting of 27 story residential buildings, a 6 story parking garage, and a 3000 square foot of ground for commercial space. The residential portion of the project would include a 203 unit apartment building closer to the 101 highway ramp. A 100 unit condominium building closer to the Cherabala Avenue. And both the buildings will include 2 levels of podium parking for the resident. The project will also include the 6 story parking garage, which would serve the parking needs for the existing office use on the site. And the project is also proposing a shared parking arrangement between various users on site, as described in the stock report. As part of the project, the applicant is also requesting to remove 23 Heritage Street, and 238 non-heritage rates because of conflict with the new building footprints and the impact from the construction. The applicant is proposing that if approved, they will plant 192 new trees with a total new canopy coverage of 52% at maturity. The project is proposing a vesting tentative map to develop all the developments that I just described. Located at the Shoreline Boulevard, the project is designated to create a strong sense of arrival into the city. The proposed building, employee contemporary architectural style, with the use of high quality material and finishes. The project has 2 street frontages along Turbala Avenue and Shoreline Boulevard, and the design intent is to create a distinct presence along each of the uh, each of the frontages, using various the architectural styles and material to create a pedestrian level engagement and a clearly defined building facade. The project is also designed around a newly centrally located, um, public plaza that will provide as a, you know, a key hub space for pedestrian access throughout the site and also for daily interaction between the, you know, people coming to different users on site, as well as it will provide a space for the community gathering. As part of the gatekeeper project itself, the applicant is proposing 4.100000 as community benefit contribution. 2800000 of this one contribution will go towards the sewer and war easement credit. And one. 1290000 will go towards the city CIP one. The UN water easement credit is required for future infrastructure growth of the city. In addition to this, the applicant has also offered 1500000 as a voluntary school contribution above and beyond the state mandated school impact fee. A project specific traffic impact analysis was prepared to evaluate the potential effects of the project on the road based system. The study determined and reviewed 12 signalized intersections around the project site. And it determined that the study intersections will operate at an acceptable level during the AM and PM peak hours, except 2 intersections which would not operate at an acceptable level. However, based on the um BTA traffic impact analysis guidelines, the project would not have results in a significant impact at either of these intersections. And would not push any of the intersections below the level of service threshold. But in addition to that, we do have some future priority transportation improvements in the area, which such as the reversible bus lane, which would further reduce the delays on the roadway and improve the circulation around the site. And in one more impact report was prepared for the project in conformance with the California and Normal Quality Act sequin. The draft EIR includes the project mitigation measures that will reduce most potential environment impacts to less than significant levels. The mitigation measures have been included as part of the conditions of the pool, as well as they're being added to the mitigation monitoring program. The project has gone through several rounds of review, including the early council on EPC, gatekeeper authorization in in 2015, followed with study sessions in 2017. The development review committee, reviewed the project and recommended approval in October 2019. Followed by the airport landing commission recommendation for approval in August 2019. The environmental planning commission reviewed the project at the May 2020 public hearing and recommended approval to the city council with a modified conditional pool for the use of regional space proposed as part of the project. The EPC also recommended, the city council to consider, um, using the community benefit funds towards the upgrade of the San Juan own part and other infrastructure improvement for bicycle and pedestrian use in the area. This includes staff presentation, in conclusion, the APC and staff would recommend city council to approve the project, the associated map and the informal impact report. I would just like to say that uh, staff and our environment consultants are present here tonight if council have any questions for us. Thank you.

[01:40:01] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you very much. Um, I now would like to go to the applicant. Um, Mr. Hopkins from Sarah Regis, do you have a presentation? There you are.

[01:40:26] Dave Hopkins: Am I in? All right. It's always an adventure these days. So thank you. I'm going to share my screen. And Hopefully that worked. Great. Okay, well, thank you very much, mayor vice mayor, city council members. My name's Dave Hopkins. I'm the chief operating officer, Saras Regis, um, of our residential development team, and, uh, Very excited to be here, like Diana said, it's been a, it's been a journey. It's been, uh, It's been a great experience, though, working with staff and, um, particularly as we, you know, rounded into the current, um, conditions, uh, all the efforts to uh, work with us to get to this evening. We greatly appreciate. Um, Out of respect for your time. I'm going to try to keep my comments brief, um, and leave plenty for questions and answers. Quickly on who we are at Circe Regis, um, Most know us because we've been around for 30 years and most of that time had some active work in Mountain View. Um, we, we build homes uh, near jobs, near services, near transit, both for rent and for sale. Um, we really focus on the home, the product, the uh, experience and and, the environment that it provides for families, um, looking at sites and figuring out how to create the best home we can on any given particular site. Most recently we completed 52 condominiums on El Camino. Um, between Castro and Miramonte. And um, you know, we're very excited to be back here with both apartments and condominiums. In terms of the property. So, this property central, the 1000s of jobs really, and, you know, it's in an existing older light industrial neighborhood. Um, it currently has a 71 foot tall uh, office building on it. It's adjacent to a site that's owned by formerly Palo Alto housing and Alta housing. And uh, eventually that will bring some some much needed affordable housing to this neighborhood. On the other side of 101. There's through the precise plan that's been completed in North Bay Shore. Very high density residential, as an allowable use. A lot of, um, that vision includes uh, mixed use, walkable streets, a lot of uh, integration of housing and jobs. This location, you know, if you go back to the gatekeeper approval. Um, several years ago, the vision was to put housing in your jobs, to put height where it could be accommodated without directly imposing on single family residences, and to put housing and development in general where it doesn't displace residents or either residential or um, existing commercial uses. And in a location where future residents who live here could walk, bike, take a bus, and be proximate to services and the things that they need on a daily basis. And then lastly, it was very important at that point in time to have both rental and ownership housing. So to accomplish that, This site offered an opportunity to repurpose parking lots and you repurpose parking lots by replacing the parking in a more, uh, you know, efficient structure that accommodates the same number of parking cells, but does so in a well-designed and smart way. In addition, this project brought to the city an opportunity to create some really important infrastructure, a key link between North Bay Shore and the other side of the freeway that's really critical for the future growth over in North Bay Shore. Part of this project includes, and always has included an easement that'll be dedicated, uh, in perpetuity, that would allow for these 2 very large um, pieces of infrastructure to run through the site. And clearly, we planned our buildings directly around them. The project also is always and continues to include both apartments and for sale condominiums. Um, but more importantly, it provides a range of housing types and and um, options for people, which we call the latter of opportunities that relates to housing such that folks from many, many different levels of income can can qualify to live here and can afford to live here. Um, because of the ownership component, there's your, your, your income levels are going up towards the um, moderate level and in the apartment homes there are a number of units at the low level. We also understand the priority of the city to maintain affordability, so there's not a situation where it needs to be preserved, um, is this happening quite frequently currently, and um, we're prepared to uh, offer these in perpetuity as polo market, right? As it relates to mobility. I think, um, you know, if you're going to start with the right site. What's important is to thoughtfully connect to the existing infrastructure that's around you. Um, we really started by looking at creating a place, you know, district that, um, had mobility solutions for many different, uses of mobility from your feet to a bike to a car, to a bus and other options as it relates to transit. The parking garage itself is the best utilization of parking one could come up with where it's working hard during the day for the office use and it's working hard during the evening and the mornings and the weekends for the residential use. It just optimizes the use of that structure. Um, there will be access through the site from all surrounding streets for pedestrians and bikes. There's over 300 secure indoor storage blockers or bikes to encourage the use. We're going to add revenue to the Mountain View TMA, which has been mentioned this evening, very important, great organization. Um, the MV ghost stop is right at the corner of our site. Uh, we understand that there's an interest in a dedicated bus lane and I would further, um, create efficient transit to this particular location, uh, down in the long shoreline. And then, of course, the bike and pedestrian overpass project, if that, um, continues on the path, it, it sounds like it's on, um, would certainly provide wonderful access for bikes and pedestrians directly to North Bay Shore in a very convenient and short manner. We've also included some space to serve as neighborhood retails, was mentioned by staff, um, which we hope the tenants and residents of the buildings and the community and neighborhood will access for convenience. And finally, we've included in the pink shaded area here, a community closet, which will remain open and accessible with high quality landscaping and fixtures to allow people to gather and relax outside. We worked really hard on the design. We've met multiple times with staff and then eventually the design review committee. Um, and you know, ended up in a great place. Um, we have a design that, that, uh, announces itself. It's at a gateway location. It's an important building, and it doesn't compete with the buildings that are right next to it, as it relates to the existing office building. We looked at key locations to have distinctive elements. as you can see here. There's some curvature expressed on the, this is from the 101 perspective, tower element, which is enhanced with metal panels, and a very discernible different top to the building. If you look from Terabella, this was mentioned a little bit by staff, you can see the apartment building in front, and this is really the heart of the, the, the new place district, and it's, um, you know, the point here is to draw interest, and rather than have the property turn its back on the street on Terabella, and bite people in to come and see what's there. And then finally, the condos were designed, you know, very thoughtfully, as it relates to a transition. You know, right now I transition to a light neighborhood, um, light industrial neighborhood. Uh, clearly uh, a neighborhood that's going to change over time. And so we looked at ways to articulate the building. It's incredibly articulated in many different ways, horizontally and vertically. And it steps up en masse as you go along the sidewalk. The fact that the courtyard is facing Terabella creates an instant break in the mass. So roughly a 3rd of it is just that 2 story volume that you see at the street. And then, um, we push the top floor back here on the side that is closest to this view so that we're matching, uh, the office building height has has, uh, has sort of a data point, um, from this elevation. As you're experiencing this from the pedestrians, um, experience, you're, you're gonna walk on the sidewalk and have about 12 feet to the home, and in it, if you, if you look at the entire step back, uh, or set back from the curb to the structure, it's, it's on the order of 30 feet. So there's a very generous, um, combination of sidewalk landscaping on 2 sides, and then these, um, walkways to the front entrances of these, of these, uh, homes that are flats that are designed to look like really brownstone townhomes. Sustainability perspective, you know, we've really followed the city's aspirations as it relates to sustainability. Now he's been a leader. Um, and we're we're right in line with that. Our buildings are all electric. you know, among the 1st. These are very high performing buildings. Um, we've, we've uh, committed to the solar PV. There will be plenty of electric vehicle charging, and a lot of new trees. Well, the footprints of the buildings do displace some trees we are replacing, as you can see, 192. So the community benefits has been an ongoing conversation. We've worked very closely with staff over some time, and put a plan together, but also working with the community to understand really where the priorities are. And, and we love the idea of of community benefit dollars going towards the local, um, community that's gonna, and, you know, being impacted and benefit from the, from the project. Um, in addition to the Eastman previously mentioned, we've included a voluntary contribution to the schools, understanding the importance of the schools, uh, on the community and, and the students that, that, uh, we hope live here, and a community, um, benefit contribution to the city.

[01:51:19] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I'm sorry. Um, yeah, 10 minutes is up, so could you wrap up?

[01:51:23] Dave Hopkins: Oh, of course. Sorry. Well, um, I'll just say that we, uh, we work closely with the the neighbors to come up with within the community benefit, uh, contribution amount. Um, some improvements that they would like to see to bikes and traffic. We fully support it, and there's plenty of funding within, um, that amount for it in the park fee as well. will support plenty of improvements at San Vernon Park. And with that, I will close and say thank you. We have our entire team here to answer any questions. Thanks.

[01:51:53] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Sorry. Thank you. Any questions from council members for either staff or the applicants? Let's see, Council member Hicks.

[01:52:10] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Couple of questions probably for staff or or and the applicant as well, I guess. One is, did I hear you say that you would offer the below market, uh, the BMR units in perpetuity because I thought I read differently in the staff report, but I would be very happy if, if what you said in the presentation that they would be in perpetuity is correct.

[01:52:37] Dave Hopkins: Sorry, if that was directed to me. Yes, I did say that, and yes, that is that was the intent, and I do believe it's a change to the staff report.

[01:52:46] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay, thank you. Um, that makes me happy. Um, and then I also, just out of curiosity, something that I've always been curious about, I under, so with gatekeepers, how do we decide on the sidewalk width changing, I understand that with this project, the sidewalks have already been widened, but I'm just curious how that works as you add more people who hopefully will be walking, uh, to some degree. When you decide to, like, was the sidewalk width that was recently changed in this area on Terabella? Was that in anticipation of the volume of new units or can you fill me on on how that works?

[01:53:39] Unknown Speaker: Castle member Hicks, I wanted to clarify the question. Are you talking about the site and in and around the site itself?

[01:53:47] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes, I asked like on Terabella, one of my council questions was how wide the sidewalk. is and how wide it would be with the increased, you know, use of the property. And the answer I got back was that it was 7 feet with a 5 foot planning strip, and then it had already been recently widened. So I just wonder, you know, as we go through gatekeepers like this, when we determine what the width will be and, you know, how that whole process happened.

[01:54:20] Unknown Speaker: Well, um, in, in this case, I could say that a lot of it depends on the site design, I believe the sidewalk and maybe Diana can correct me if I'm wrong, the set because of the original, um, because of the office building that was built. But we do go through design review in what you saw that in the description about the setbacks, about the brownstone look, uh, about the landscaping, is all part of the pedestrian experience. Um, so, uh, the sidewalks themselves had already been built. But, you know, we're trying to fit the project within a certain envelope, within on a certain site. But we're trying to make sure that at every stage in the design review process, we are looking at how does a pedestrian experience this visually and as they walk. So it's more of a project by project site by site design for gatekeepers. Whereas in precise plans, you can look more holistically at um, an entire area. Um, and set standards for that.

[01:55:27] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay, well, I, yeah, I don't want to make too much of a comment at this point because it's a, it's time for council questions, not comments, but I do appreciate the pedestrian experience. I, you know, I think it's a fabulous landscaper and the, the paths leading up to the, um, to the condos. But um, or the townhomes. Yeah, but I just wondered what the process was and how we made sure we got wide enough sidewalks as we scale up and the other amenities that make it a pleasant place to walk. So thanks for filling me.

[01:56:03] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Councilman Ramirez.

[01:56:06] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple of quick questions based on, um, some of the questions I received from, uh, from the public. Uh, so 1st um, regarding purple piping and expansion of recycled water infrastructure, um, staff and the written responses to council questions indicated that that wasn't currently within, um, that there's no plan for that. It's not really within the scope of this project, but, um, I want to make sure that we're not precluding the possibility in the future. So can staff provide, um, some assurance that if we wanted to expand the recycled water infrastructure to the Terabella neighborhood, um, that, uh, we would be able to do so, even if we're not sort of explicitly incorporating that expansion into this project.

[01:57:00] Unknown Speaker: Um, this might be a question. I can't remember Ramirez, are you asking if this purple piping in the project because it's my understanding that you actually have to build it into the project. You can't retrofit the project after the fact. Um, so maybe, maybe we're, maybe we're not answering the question the way you would like us to, but if you could clarify a question.

[01:57:28] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, sure. Well, I'm, I'm primarily interested in, in the expansion of the recycled water infrastructure from North Bay Shore into the Terrabella neighborhood, and I, um, there was some interest, uh, from the public in, in, since we're, we're creating this public easement, you know, for, for utilities. And you know, there, there was, uh, some, some consideration for, you know, maybe this is an opportunity to do that. Staff made clear in the written responses that that's not possible, but I want to make sure that we're not precluding the possibility of such an extension down the road. And if we were to do that what would it look like? Thank you.

[01:58:09] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: RT, I'll take this, Don Cameron. So in checking with staff, we are not precluding the potential in the future to bring recycled water into the Terabella area. And in fact, uh, one of the things is we designed a new bike pit bridge at Shoreline Ober 101. I'm being told that it is being designed in such a way that it could carry a recycled water pipeline. Underneath that bridge to provide that connection in the future to Terabella.

[01:58:41] Unknown Speaker: Well, that's good to know. Thank you. Um one other quick question. Um, there were, I thought several good ideas from the neighbors about the investment of the community benefit funding and maybe some of the, the parkland dedication and little funds and and the incent of our own part. Uh, so if we wanted to explore those, conduct a feasibility analysis or create, um, you know, uh, capital improvement project associated with that, would that have to be wrapped up in the motion and can staff provide maybe some language for how best to accomplish that?

[01:59:17] Unknown Speaker: Um, we talked a little bit about this council member, and I think, um, if, if, if the council would like to create a capital improvement project, It's probably something that could be talked about, um, um, typically under council comments, to agendize a discussion, or to ask staff to follow up and then come back with some information. Um, because, um, our understanding is that there are processes to be followed if the projects are large enough, if it was just a replacement of a park bench or something, I think, that's something that could be accommodated. But, um, Dawn, you might be able to speak a little bit more to the, the traffic related improvements in the process that needs to be followed, um, before it could be implemented.

[02:00:07] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: Um, yes, we, we, we do request that you not try to commit the funds to a specific project before we have completed a feasibility and cost analysis as well as done, uh, community outreach related to the project. However, if the council wants to provide general direction that for these community benefit funds, you would like to see staff, uh, study and consider them towards uh, various active transportation type improvements in the Terabella area. And bring that back to you as part of the 5 year CIP planning process. We can do that and then we can bring back feasibility studies as part of the CIP, that type of thing.

[02:00:49] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great. you. That's where McAllister.

[02:00:53] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes, thank you. So I got a, a couple of questions concerning, uh, the economic study report, and I'd like to give an understanding of it. Uh, is concerning the retail space that there was a consultant said that there could support 3500 to 5000 square feet of retail. And yet, there was comments from the EPC saying they didn't think it would be viable and the space was 3000. So, What made the EPC say it wouldn't be viable, yet the consultant said it would be viable, kind of, and it would also be at a larger retail square footage wise?

[02:01:40] Senior Planner Diana Petroli: So, um, Diana Petroli, senior planner. Um, The EPC concerns were um, around the existing pandemic, um, uh, issues with COVID-19 and how that's going to affect the businesses and what does the future of retail, um, business looks like. And they wanted to make sure that if we are incorporating a retail commercial space in the, uh, in the building, and if a quote unquote, typical retail space can't go in there, then they would wanted to make sure that some other kind of uses, for another kind of commercial users, but, you know, those which will be serving the neighborhood. Um, there would be a provision to allow such use if retail can be, um, you know, a region, retail can, tenant cannot occupy that space or the applicant is not able to leave it out to them. So I think the, the concerns of viability was not related to the economic feasibility study, but it was more related to the, the effect on the economy because of COVID-19.

[02:02:46] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, hopefully COVID-19 is going to be done in 4 years by the time this project gets rolling. So, uh, that's a. Interesting. Okay. Because, you know, if we do have these, that's a comment, so I won't do that. Also, there is a another comment that the consultant said that there is no value uplift from the proposal, Prose project, and therefore it cannot support a community benefits contribution. So was the consultant saying that uh, we need to reconsider our community benefits to make this project profitable.

[02:03:22] Unknown Speaker: I'm trying to answer that, council member, McAllister, um, So this, this, um, gatekeeper project was part of an earlier slated project, um, that didn't come in recommending or proposing certain community benefits, um, that we're seeing typically. So the council direction to staff was that we conduct an economic analysis to see how much uplift that was in the project and then put together a community benefit package based on that. Uh, we did conduct an analysis, and what our economic consultant found was that, um, residential projects of this type. Um, are not able to, beyond the, the typical assumptions of developer profit, um, as well as when you, when you put into, when you take into account. Construction and labor costs, there isn't much uplift, and there isn't much cushion to provide community benefits. Now, that analysis, again, is based on generic information. Um, it's not based on atypical, like a specific developers performer. Um, um, so most of the analysis that we see are based on general information that the consultants are able to get based on land transactions and other other data. So again, and this with this project, there was not any evidence of an uplift. Um, and so then it fell to the applicant themselves to look at their own performa and look at what they could contribute. Um, Using their looking at their own specific performer. So I hope that explains it. Uh, we are again changing the process moving forward so things are clearer, but in this situation, um, that's what happened.

[02:05:24] Councilmember John McAlister: We've had this before where the consultant actually works for the applicant and not for the city and says, okay, but that's comments coming down the street. Okay, another question I had is, the intersection of Terabella, and so we're going to put in, 300 units, potentially, we're going to have alta housings going to be putting in some units in there. We're going to get uh, 777's going to be building and 555's going to be building. And we're going to get a lot of cars, and this Terabella neighborhood is, doesn't have a lot of access and streets going through it. And, I'm a little concerned about how the traffic flow is going to be impacting this neighborhood. And one of them is, we have these, this, uh, project. But we're going to be cutting off. There's a lot of jobs going south on highway 85, SR 85, State Route 85, and for people, you know, because people, just because they live here, doesn't mean they're going to work here. They're going to be possibly going east, west, north, south. So they're all going to be going all over the place. And since it's right next to a freeway, it's going to have easy access. So, is there a way to figure out how many people are going to need to take SR 85 because we aren't cutting off the left turn off of shoreline to get out of 85 and the only way to get to 85 from this project is to go through the neighborhood or go down middlefield and then shoreline to middlefield to get onto SR 85. So when you were doing your traffic impacts, was, was that considered? That's the long question to get to, but I need to get to. The context, yeah.

[02:07:09] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, sure. I'm going to defer that question to our, um, to our traffic consultant, um, Michelle from Hectagon is present.

[02:07:27] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: That Michelle Hunt. Oh, there she is.

[02:07:36] Traffic Consultant Michelle Hunt: Hi, can you hear me?

[02:07:39] Unknown Speaker: Yes.

[02:07:40] Traffic Consultant Michelle Hunt: Okay, great. So, um, let me just pull up our, uh, the distribution because we did have, and the traffic study, it does, um, show that estimate of how much traffic we believe we would be going to and from the south in 85. So, just need to go to the right page. So for the residential portion of the project. We estimated about 10% would be going to the south on Highway 85.

[02:08:14] Councilmember John McAlister: So what does 10% mean? How many cars does that mean?

[02:08:18] Traffic Consultant Michelle Hunt: Okay, so of the residential project, we estimated, would generate, let's see. Um, well, the total project, including both the residential and the retail was 168 um, outbound trips, um, in addition in the AMP hour, um, and so it'd be, you know, between 15 and 20 trips, added going southbound and on state route 85 in the morning.

[02:08:51] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. In a one hour period. And so did you route them going through the neighborhood or going, turning left on the shoreline down the middle field? I think we're running on an 8 85.

[02:09:04] Traffic Consultant Michelle Hunt: Yeah, we assume to split about 50-50?

[02:09:08] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. And then, was there any, um, reverse for like people cutting through the neighborhood to bypass the middle field Terabella intersection? Was there any with 777 getting increased in 555? Was there, was that included in part of your study, people going on to San Veron Park and then going on to Linda Vista, hitting sort of taking a shortcut?

[02:09:39] Traffic Consultant Michelle Hunt: So our traffic study included traffic from previously approved projects, but I don't believe that we assumed that any of them would be cutting through the neighborhood.

[02:09:53] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, that's, uh, so why did you assume no one would bypass the traffic at Middlefield. And make a shortcut. Potentially hypothetically.

[02:10:09] Traffic Consultant Michelle Hunt: Uh, um, well, our traffic studies usually assume the most direct route, even if it's congested, and we do that um, mainly because we don't want to underestimate the impact of traffic on the arterial streets, which is the streets that are intended to carry that traffic. So, um, we we don't want to, um, be seen as trying to, um, look like we are trying to cook the books to avoid an impact there by, uh, um, assuming traffic would, would take other routes that were less direct.

[02:10:45] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. Okay. Um, I have a question for, uh, John my Scott. Community service director, sir? So the community, when I met with them, they were talking about what I thought were very reasonable requests to improve the park, was to clean up the basketball park, the replace that, get some IV back, put in some benches, put in some tables. Is that something that we have available funding that we could do sooner than a 5 year feasibility CIP program?

[02:11:26] Community Services Director John Marchant: Let me start with the basketball courts. Each, um, each year, our parts department does go through and look at areas that needs that need improvement throughout our park system. Sam Brown was already identified for the basketball court to get improved this fall. So, uh, we already completed a, um, a bid for that, uh, pre-bid walkthrough was last week. We're waiting for those bids to come in, and so that is already on the table to be repaired. So happy to say that. As far as additional benches and tables, if council would like to provide us some direction. Yes, there is some funding available at this point for some of those minor improvements that I would call it. Otherwise, anything above and beyond a minor improvement, as Dawn said, uh, should be made in a motion for us to review and um, take another look at and bring back to council in the future.

[02:12:20] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, thanks. Well, I have you there. I was kicking around the idea that this area, with all the various projects being developed, that the potential, just hypothetical, of using the San Leandro property that we have down there at Carabella, the recycling plant. Potentially as a new park. for this area. And if I was to propose it to my fellow council members just to look for a feasibility study of that. What's the best way to do that, John?

[02:12:59] Community Services Director John Marchant: I know that the public works director has been working on this as well. Um, and so I will allow her some time to to speak to that.

[02:13:10] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: Um, thank you. So I think, um, in terms of process, that's not really related to this agenda item, so it might be more later in your agenda under some kind of council referral type situation, if you want a direct staff to come back. With a response about looking at the feasibility of that site being a park. Um, that's purely in terms of process, I will point out for the council that that site is currently use as the Mountain View recycling center. So it provides customer service related to recycling for the community, as well as the office location and storage for recology, under contract to the city. So if the council were to at some point ask staff to look at the feasibility of that becoming a park, We would also have to bring it back to you in the context of the next ecology agreement in the fall, in terms of whether or not there would be a a mountain view recycling center or not.

[02:14:16] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. That's why I was just thinking, hypothetical, just to get discussed. So the next question I have is that there was some discussion at the Terabella, saw, uh, undercrossing, going underneath shoreline, connecting east and west Terabella as a potential underpass, and that could be potentially something that we were thinking about with community benefits. If we wanted to, would that also be another item to, or if the council felt that that would be a, um, bed, uh, bike ped improvement, that that could be sort of given directions through tonight to try to get that, uh, reviewed sooner than later?

[02:15:01] Unknown Speaker: Council member McAllister, if I could just speak to that, um, uh, We've typically done these with precise plans when you've connected improvements with community benefits. In this case, I think the council did not want to move forward with one. But if there was interest in taking a look at the Terabella area and potential conversions, I think what we might want to do is take a look at. Um, you know, what kinds of uses we need, what kind of improvements we need and put together some kind of a package and then develop a community benefit. Um, contribution amount similar to East Wisman. Um, alternatively, I guess the council could always ask staff to look at adding that particular improvement to the CIP. But it wouldn't be easy to link it to community benefits and have a comprehensive program in that case.

[02:15:57] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, aren't we supposed to try to keep the community benefits within the neighborhood?

[02:16:03] Unknown Speaker: There isn't a policy, but we always try to do that. But at this point, we don't have any other gatekeepers in that area.

[02:16:11] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. And I do have another question for the applicant, Dave. So they, could you confirm that you said you were going to keep the apartments in perpetuity, but did that also go to the condos in perpetuity?

[02:16:30] Applicant Dave: Yes, applies to both. Plies to both.

[02:16:33] Councilmember John McAlister: Great. Okay. Good to hear that. So there's also one other. I got one more ask of you if possible. Um, I was talking about broadband for, you know, earlier on and I know a lot of the, Below Market Red housing people are always having a tough time with all kinds of expenses. Is it possible that you guys would be willing to cover the cost of Wi-Fi or broadband for those 30 below market units?

[02:17:04] Developer: Yeah, that's a that's a great idea. 1st of all, I think having broadband service easily set up an accessible for households that don't have to make the phone calls and figure it out on their own is just a good idea. Um, so fully supported. Um, we need to work with the providers. And I think the question you're asking is, let me confirm the question. It's that when you move in, you have access in your home, to wireless, right?

[02:17:32] Councilmember John McAlister: So there's a lot less free that you can use from your home. You don't need to be in a community room or a public area.

[02:17:39] Councilmember John McAlister: That is correct.

[02:17:40] Developer: Yeah. Yes, we can, we can work with that.

[02:17:43] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. That's it. Thank you.

[02:17:47] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Any other questions from counseling bears? I don't see any hands, so I will take this to public comment. So if you are in the attendee box. Uh, please hit the raised hand button at the bottom of the box and if you are on the phone, please press star 9. And uh, we'll start off with Richard Splane. Please unmute yourself.

[02:18:17] Richard Splane: Hello, can you hear me?

[02:18:18] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes. Bye.

[02:18:20] Richard Splane: Yes, so, I'm to explain, I live in Stu in the States, which is the neighborhood right outside of the proposed site. And, um, You know, I've been working with the communities with the community here. Uh, folks like, you know, Albert, Kati, um, as well as people from, you know, across Mountain View, like Eric, and Astabelle, and what we've been doing is we've been looking at what the impact this project is going to have on our neighborhoods might be. And it seems like it's unavoidable that it's going to have a massive impact, not just because of this one project, but because of the precedent that it's going to set and allow future projects of similar magnitude to be built. So, um, needless to say, I'm opposed to the project, but I do think that there are significant community benefits that would, uh, or at least intelligent ways to direct community benefits that would help the current residents as well as future residents that would move into the project once it's built. Um, and I wanted to highlight a few of those. So, um, I have to fully support having the recology center be a park. I think that there should be permanent traffic, uh, you know, permitted traffic or basically not allow parking in the neighborhood nearby because there's going to be overage parking. And ideally bike lanes along Terabella, stop signs, and potentially even access to Stevens Creek. So please consider that. And thank you for your time.

[02:19:51] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Good is, Jim, where, Cesaros? If you could and meet yourself, please.

[02:20:02] Public Speaker: Uh, good evening, mayor and council member, Siomada, Siomada, Siomada, Siomada, C, and I, with the Bary, C, C, C, C, and I, I focus on housing and in the housing world. What's top of mind is this next arena cycle, and we're involved with the arena methodology, housing methodology process, and I just got to say, I'm very impressed with now used record. I looked at the 2007 and 2014 arena cycle and you guys got it A plus plus. Um, I did notice some shortfalls in the moderate and low income housing categories. And for this and several reasons, we support this project, it'll deliver 40 below market rate units in perpetuity. I was really excited to hear about that. Um, they're both much needed, missing middle housing, low income housing units. And I especially appreciate that they will be on site delivering mixed income and an inclusive community. Uh, visit a TOD project, a TOD project that offers alternative forms of transportation, with bicycle amenities. It's near VTA station. And with COVID-19, now more than ever, we're realizing the porns of connecting residents with well-designed open spaces, and this project does exactly that with the public plazas, courtyards. Um, it has a very generous community benefits package. Um, for this, we support EPCs and staff recommendations to approve this excellent project that will bring 100s of much needed homes in this area and your jobs. Thank you.

[02:21:25] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Thank you. Oops. I'm sorry. I going, Rohein Gauche. Please unmute yourself.

[02:21:35] Rohein Gauche: Hi, counsel, uh, I would 1st like to take a moment to, uh, Thank the city of Mountain View for really actually taking a pretty strong lead on building housing. I think we've, Mountain View, done a pretty good job so far. I think it's very important to keep up that good work. That's why I think that we should approve this project here tonight. I think that, uh, 300 new units of housing is really important, especially because there's a fairly significant uh, below market rate. Uh, piece in there. And I think it's really important. We build that housing, build places for people to live in this city and keep up that good work. So, like to thank the council for their work so far on this and encourage you guys to keep up your good work. Thank you.

[02:22:28] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Let's go. I was my time. Could you please unmute yourself, Stephen? Stephen, you should be on.

[02:22:44] Steven Tu: There it took a while for... Hi, yes, my name is Steven 2, director of transportation policy. That's Sofon Valley Leadership. And on behalf of our over 350 member companies. We're excited to support this project as proposed by Saras Regis. Um, one of the top concerns for our members of nature group is a need for higher quality and affordable housing here in the Bay Area. especially close to jobs in transit. And this project provides an opportunity to provide just that. This project, as you know, is close to the North Bay Shore and downtown employment areas. It's also close, um, in proximity to, um, easy access to transit with 4 BTA bus lines and the MV go and the go shuttle, for access to North Bay Shore and the downtown Caltrain station, along with built-in, like facilities. Uh, and at a time when the Bay Area is in a dire housing crisis, dance housing on scarce land is an effective solution. We're really pleased to see a variety of income levels and home types within this development proposal, and as the developer mentioned, in perpetuity. So I'm getting really excited about that. Uh, It is rare to see new high quality for sale homes built in this time. So we're excited for this opportunity in Mountain View and for sale housing allows for residents to put down routes in the community for years to come. And I'll just close by saying that the leadership group really appreciates Mountain View for being a regional leader in prioritizing housing at all income levels, and we hope to see that work continued with approval of this project this evening, and thanks for your time.

[02:24:12] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Well, good. David Watson. Please. Oh, I'm sorry. David. Yes, that's right. David Watson. My eyes are blurring. Uh, please, I meet yourself.

[02:24:26] David Watson: Hi, I'm David Watson. I've been a resident of Newton View all my life. I've, I think I've actually talked to each one of you before at some point or another, but um, uh, as we heard earlier tonight, uh, just the previous item, I think, 6.one in uh, RT's presentation, the city has a serious lack of housing. The, uh, the, Office uses are generating the majority of vehicle miles traveled into the city because there aren't enough homes here for the people to live near their jobs, ideally walking distance to their jobs. There's a terrific opportunity for city council to help get those missing homes built as soon as possible. Please approve this project to help make Mountain View a place where anyone can live. Uh, Finally, I actually have met with the residents of Strolling States earlier this year, uh, back January or February, I think. Um, and uh, at the time, uh, they, uh, they said they didn't have any major concerns about this project since it's on the edge of Terabella. So I'm a bit surprised to hear that they're, uh, no longer in favor of it, but, uh, I would say that, um, it's this looks like an excellent project that council should approve. Thank you.

[02:25:44] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, that's good. Albert James, please unmute yourself, Albert.

[02:25:52] Albert James: Okay, can you hear me?

[02:25:55] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes, please.

[02:25:56] Albert James: Okay, I have a presentation.

[02:26:06] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: It's a presentation on? I can't see it.

[02:26:09] Albert James: Okay, here we go. Okay, good evening. My name is Albert James. I'm going to repeat this because I have to make this fast. My neighbors and I have spoken with many of you offline, so I'm sure you know where objection to this project are. We're not opposed to developing our housing, just to scale this particular project in this area. I'm concerned about the precedent of the sets where future development is in the city. Next slide, please. I'd like to refer back to the Mountain View 2030 General Plan, which is supposed to serve as a roadmap for measured sustainable growth in our city. The plan seeks to may tear high quality of life by preserving neighborhood character and making sure that parks and open space keep up with the population growth. Of course, times change and so much of the plan. They're shown on the right, that change should take place in designated areas, and exceptions are to be made as in the case of building heights, there should be significant public benefits. So let me talk about some of these. Make 5 please. Here we see what 1001 North Shrine used to look like and what do it look like if when the project is completed? Nobody can deny if this is a drastic change in the character of this wide industrial area. Mountain View has few, 7 story buildings, and Terre Bell is only 45 feet wide. We'll be adding over 600 people, but instead of providing park, the applicant will pay in woofies, even though this area of the city is running well below the 3 acres, for a 1000 residents, open space, so the general plan recommends, next flight, please.

[02:27:34] Public Speaker: Thanks, council member, McAllister for justice, but I also uh, favor, yeah, turning the ecology site into a park. It's just the right size matches this, um, this development. And if it, if more residential is coming to Terrebell area. It shouldn't make sense to, you know, get rid of all those large trucks running on terrible and make it a lot safer. And there's also a possible connection to Steven's Creek Trail. Next slide, please.

[02:28:01] Albert James: Okay, city's own studies somehow found that the project could not support any public benefits, but the Apple is voluntary contributing over 4 million. However, most of that is going towards a capital improvement project, benefiting North Bayshore, leaving only 13000000 for the community. To put that in perspective, the annual property tax for the site is almost $2000000 In addition, staff estimates that the assessive value will almost double once the project's completed. This is on top of the $100000000 made by the original owners who sold the project in 2018 to the current owners. The city is enabling these windfall profits, not reaping any other rewards. I'm probably out of time. So, I'll have to leave it with that, but I sent you the rest of the slides and I'll help you look at them. Thank you.

[02:28:40] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Well, go to Alex B. Please unmute yourself.

[02:28:46] Alex Brown: Alex Brown and the Santiago Villa Neighbors Association. Unlike many of the other developers in the area, Eden Sobrato, Si West, and a few, Sarah Sweeders has not met with us, discussed their project. They did label this on their map. I'll try not to hold it against them. I speak tonight in support of additional housing in our backyard. In order to continue to develop both North Bay Shore and Tarabella, we need housing. Complete neighborhoods are not complete without neighbors. The more residents we have, the better the chances of success for businesses that depend on foot traffic and regular business. I, for one, really want a grocery store in walking distance. And honestly, lockups are kind of ugly and I wish it were really platinum and I much prefer public or exclusively affordable nonprofit housing, but I'll take what I can get because we need more housing. And John, I want municipal broadband and more park like parks. Shoreline is big, but it is not a community park. Thanks.

[02:29:34] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: You'll go to Alex Nudez, please unmute yourself.

[02:29:40] Alex Nuñez: Everyone, this is Alex Nunez, Alex Brown. Thank you for your comment too. It's always great to talk after Alex. Uh, I'm very much excited about this project. Uh, you know, 303 new homes, 40 of them, just like John McAllister said, uh, for the BMR people. Uh, definitely a very good outcome for Mountain View. Um, there's almost no downside to this project, no displacement, uh, a lot of walking distance, uh, Starbucks is around the corner. I think that's really all you need to live these days. Um, I'm, I'm extremely looking forward to having new neighbors and maybe even buying a house there so that I can be uh, a longtime resident of Mountain View one day as well. Um, this is exactly the kind of project that we need to be able to sustain our economy in the future. Uh, and I, I just, you know, really call on the council to, to approve this project. I love the walkability of it. Uh, I love that it's, you know, close to the 101. Um, really looking forward to this approval. Um, and I also thank uh, the developer for for engaging the community. Sorry, Alex, I, I, I, wish they would have spoken to the Santague Villa residents as well. Um, you know, and my interactions with them, you know, they, they, they did, I think, some outreach in terms of what they, what they knew they could do and, and, and I found it pretty compelling. So I definitely appreciate all of that and call in the council to approve the project. Thank you.

[02:31:12] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Go to Joe Spalding next, please unmute yourself, Joe.

[02:31:21] Joe Spalding: Hi, um, So, uh, I, I work on social media for grassroots, uh, groups and I'm, I'm from Oakland. Um, usually, I work on affordable housing in one energy and uh, Um, usually, uh, the wind energy stuff's more in rural areas. Um, I ran a campaign before, uh, in Michigan that involved ending gerrymandering there. Um, but recently I just got off a successful project, uh, where I was tweeting out, um, you know, um, council meetings from a place like Palo Alto, Cupertino and Mountain View, and, uh, I just wanted to say that, um, with Mountain View, you guys are, uh, um, pretty fantastic. Uh, in terms of going through and being thorough and making sure you're uh, looking for the right considerations. I was very impressed on this call just a few minutes ago, seeing the developer be asked about broadband and having that get introduced to this project. Um, so I just wanted to encourage the city council to, uh, Approve this project. I'd love to see a few parking lots, uh, near where I live, become, uh, 303, uh, unit of housing, uh, with uh, 40 affordable homes, now with uh, broadband guarantee to the residents. So I think that's pretty cool. So, uh, thanks for your time.

[02:32:44] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Well, good at Katie Peterson, please unmute yourself, Katie. You should be on your name.

[02:32:57] Katie Peterson: Sorry. Um, hi, my name is Katie Peterson and I'm here on behalf of the Bay Area Housing Advocacy Coalition. As a lifelong resident of Santa Clara County. I've always been aware of the housing shortage and affordability crisis in the Bay Area. But working with Bay helped me realize that homes, like the ones that proposed at 1001 North Shoreline Boulevard are critical in solving this issue. This project creates well designed, well located homes, with a myriad of environmental and transit features, because 1000000s of fees, they'll go towards our community. Like giving these homes, you're taking an important step in solving our housing shortage, creating a more equitable city, and showing the leadership necessary to combat one of our region's most pressing issues. Thank you for your time.

[02:33:40] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: You will go to Kelsey Baines. Chelsea, please unmute yourself.

[02:33:49] Kelsey Baines: Hi there, my name is Kelsey Baines. I am with, um, the group peninsula for everyone. We are a grassroots housing advocacy group. We advocate for, um, we're neighbors for more neighbors and we advocate for housing at all income levels. Um, so I want to thank the city council of Mountain View for continuing to uh, lead in our region on housing production. Um, I think this project uh, looks great, um, and it will have a positive impact on the neighborhood, um, and the region, um, and be a great change, um, in allowing more people to live here. Um, I think COVID in some ways has made the housing crisis less visible because we have less traffic on our roads right now. Um, but it's important to recognize that we still have neighbors who are living in vehicles. neighbors who are burdened by high rents, and um, neighbors who are spending several hours in their cars coming to service jobs, uh, here in our community. So I think it's really important still that we need more housing. We need more housing for public health reasons, for climate reasons, for equity reasons. So thank you very much for all that you're doing to support housing production in this region. Thank you.

[02:35:08] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Craig from Sterling Estates. Please unmute yourself.

[02:35:17] Craig: Did I do that right?

[02:35:18] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes, you're on.

[02:35:20] Craig: Okay. Thank you, everybody. This is Craig and Stearland States, and.

[02:35:32] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Oh, I'm sorry, I think I lost you, Craig. Did you go?

[02:35:38] Craig: Hmm. Oh. Am I sorry? There you are. I'm sorry. I lost you for. All right. So, um, if this project is approved, uh, we're gonna see an increase in traffic in cars. And so we would like to see four-way stops, put a Terabella, Linda Vista, um, intersection, and the Terabella San Rafael intersection, to slow Terabella traffic, and make the intersection safer. If we can eliminate high profile vehicle parking in East Carabella, and get rid of big rigs and motor homes, it can allow some space for potential overflow parking. We expect overflow parking from surrounding projects into stirring estates, and we would like to see a meaningful parking restriction program for the neighborhood. Installing protected bike planes on Terabella, from San Rafael to shoreline, will improve bicycle safety and visibility at the intersections. We need new and improved parking space, park space. So adding group tables and restrooms to San Verone Park will improve the demand on the park. And if we could convert the one. 8 acre racology site to a park, it would provide much needed new part space. And I sent a presentation to the council earlier today, outlining a connection to Stevens Creek trail. And I would suggest that that be considered, uh, during the next uh, pedestrian bike uh, review. Thank you.

[02:37:34] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Well, good as Steve Garth, please unmute yourself, Steve.

[02:37:41] Steve Garth: Good evening, mayor and city council members. I would like to thank you for giving me the time to speak. I've been a resident of the city of Mountain View, and more specifically, the neighborhood in question where this project is being developed. Uh, I fondly remember, you know, dining along shoreline, enjoying margaritas at Fiesta del Mar, uh, you know, until until it was demolished for this current Google monolith, um, and now, you know, you want to put up 2 more close to 70 foot monoliths there. Um, I live in this neighborhood. When there's a concert at Shoreline, I can't leave my house or get to my house. So what Councilman McAllister said is 100% accurate. People cut through this neighborhood to get to the concert. They park in this neighborhood. It's insane. When Google comes in the morning, they're traffic. I can't get out of the neighborhood to get to 85. I can't get out of the neighborhood to get on 101 south, all right? So their traffic announcement. by the traffic person who did their study. If you spent 5 minutes on the corner of Shoreline for a week, At any given day, you'd know that that is total BS, all right? Excuse my language, all right? More companies and organizations are on this call supporting this project that I don't actually live in this neighborhood. And I don't agree with any of the, any of the things I have to say. We do need more affordable housing. We do need more housing, but this project is too big, too large, and just not the right thing. It doesn't connect us to Terabella, to the other side of Stevens Creek Trail, it doesn't do any of that. So as a resident and clearly a passionate resident, I really hope you consider against this. Thank you.

[02:39:17] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Go to Eva Tank. Can you please unmute yourself, Eva?

[02:39:23] Eva Tang: Hello, can you hear me?

[02:39:25] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes.

[02:39:25] Eva Tang: Great, thank you. Um, my name's Eva Tang. As I've said earlier, I grew up in the Bay Area. My whole life and I have not moved. Uh, more than an hour away from my hometown. So I really, really love the area and something that has been really sad about growing up in the Bay Area. Is, um, seeing all of my friends move away, seeing all families move away because they can't afford living here. Um, it's also been sad to see that I might never own a home in the Bay Area. Thanks to my teacher's salary. And um, But this development makes me really excited. Um, there's affordable housing being added to our stock. Housing in general being added to our stock. It's close to transit, there's open space planned. Um, the community benefits seem to be abundant, and so I hope that you support this. Thanks, I yield my time.

[02:40:20] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: We'll go to Nicole. Oh, Nicole, please unmute yourself.

[02:40:26] Nicole Martin: Hi, can you hear me?

[02:40:27] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes.

[02:40:28] Nicole Martin: Great. Hi, good evening. My name is Nicole Martin. I'm a resident of Mountain View. I urge the council to support this development. Info development allows for the protection of other sensitive environmental areas. And moreover, this development will support diverse housing needs. I yield my time.

[02:40:48] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Uh, thanks. Let's go to Katie. Please unmute yourself, Katie.

[02:40:59] Katie: Hi, you can hear me?

[02:41:00] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes.

[02:41:01] Katie: Hi, thank you. Okay. Uh, just what I, uh, quickly, um, correct Alex, it's not Starbucks. it's Taco Bell across the street. And uh, David, maybe he can, the developer can uh, clarify. I don't think it was 30 feet from the curb. I think it's 25 So maybe I'm wrong, but I think I would like to get clarification on that. Okay, let me read this my notes quickly. My name is Kathy. I live in Sterling Estate. Just wanted to add that it's very confusing and actually upsetting to be in this position again after Talabella. Bella visioning plan process. I thought that before approving any additional significant project. We will have a better understanding and vision for the area. Approving one project at a time without looking at the area as a whole is basically hit or miss. People that support this project who don't live in Stern and the States, have nothing to lose. These people are not fully aware of any existing issues. Pre-COVID-19 teams. We have plenty of existing traffic on that corner without 7 stories. Um, we can send a picture to Michelle if she interested to see. Changing a character of existing neighborhood should be planned very carefully. And if there are people that disagree with this project. This means it's not planned very carefully. I just want to be clear that once again, I'm not against development, Terabella, please develop. I just wanna, want a better planned community as a whole, and not be restricted in my own neighborhood. With the 2 entrances or exits. Thank you.

[02:42:40] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: If you, let's go to Celine DeMerji. To unmute yourself.

[02:42:48] Celine DeMerji: Hi, counsel. Um, so 1st I would just like to say, uh, it is really difficult being a council member in the middle of a global pandemic, economic lapse, and, uh, unrest due to racial injustice. Um, and I just want to thank you for continuing to, you know, doing uh, the public good, uh, despite all the challenges you're facing. Um, so thank you. It's a tough job. Um, so I'm speaking in favor of 1001 North Shoreline. Um, this project would bring 40 BMR units. Uh, which, you know, is 5 times the amount of affordable housing that Los Altos built in 2019. So it's nothing to scoff at. I think this is incredibly significant. It's true. a large project, but that's why it has such a great impact for affordable housing in Mountain View. Um, so that's one reason I strongly support it. I also think it's important to know that, uh, it's very close by major offices and campuses, both Microsoft and Google, uh, and being able to have, you know, a uh, a large, you know, place to rent, one of these offices would reduce traffic overall for Mountain View, um, by decreasing the amount of commute time that people have. Uh, you know, it's near bus lanes. It's in walking distance of these campuses. Overall, uh, it seems like a great way for Mountain View to be both a greener city, um, and also a healthier city with uh, shorter commute times. Um, so once again, thanks. I really appreciate it. Take care.

[02:44:19] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. I'll go to, um, this is a phone number that ends in 026. If you could please unmute yourself.

[02:44:31] Public Speaker: Let's see. Me try again. Can you hear me?

[02:44:35] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: There you go. Welcome.

[02:44:38] Public Speaker: Hello, this is House on 10 calling. I lived in the Talabao neighborhood for more than 5 years as a neighbor with Katie, Rick and Albert. I wanted to call and plus one to all the confirms sure from the neighborhood, uh just to shout out the huge potential traffic issues, you if you were to sort of like say develop a 7 story high, high rise building, just right at their corner of their neighborhood. I, um, my, my commute is like probably better compared to others because like, uh, uh, work at Google and now Lincoln, but then what really, uh, uh, bothers me on the day to day basis is the huge traffic line to make the right turn to, to the highway, and I can't imagine that, like, say, uh, building like the 7th story right, uh, at the, at the bottleneck, uh, would, would add to some of the, like, say, the, the, uh, really the current situation. So just uh wanted to call that out. Um, I'm not again, you know, not uh, against uh, building uh, uh, you know, solving how affordable housing issues, but just, you know, want to question why do we choose that precise location that, you know, at the expense of the neighborhood. Thank you.

[02:45:51] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. And Matt Reynold, will you, uh, please unmute yourself, oh, let's see. You have an older version of Zoom, so, uh, city clerk, we need to uh, promote them to panelists to talk. Could you please help me? Oh, actually, I think I can do it. Let's see if that works.

[02:46:15] Matt Reynold: Yes, I can hear me

[02:46:16] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes.

[02:46:17] Matt Reynold: Okay, great. Thanks everybody. Yeah, I've got a Chromebook version of Zoom. different, but it's great to be here. Thank you for doing this. I'm here on behalf of Mountain View, Yimby group. I'm a huge fan of this project for all the reasons listed already, the low displacement, the location close to transit and to work. I totally agree that Mountain View has done a good job compared with a lot of our neighbors in terms of building housing, and I think this is a great extra step forward. In terms of other things mentioned, I'd love to see the city and the developer work together to fund the improvements suggested like our park and connection to Stevens Creek and other trails. And also, I would suggest not stop sign intersections, but roundabouts, because Terabella, I believe, is wide enough for a one lay roundabout at the intersections mentioned. But finally, people talk a lot about the character and preserving the character of Mountain View, and I always feel like neighborhoods and cities are preserved by the people living there more than the architecture, and I'd love to see a project like this go through that helps keep people here. Thank you.

[02:47:17] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Any other members of the public wishing to speak? You can hit the raised hand button if you're in the 10 D box. Yes, Sean Corrigan. Please unmute yourself, Sean.

[02:47:30] Sean Corrigan: Hi, good evening. My name's Sean Corrigan. My family and I are property owners on Terabella. We've been owners of a commercial building on Terabella, uh, at the corner of Linda Vista for nearly 2 decades. Um, We now own a couple of other properties directly across from the proposed project. And, um, we are in full support of uh, the proposed project. We really think that this is, um, gonna be a great improvement for the neighborhood. Um, the, the, 1001 shoreline building on the corner is truly a gem. It's really kind of set the stage for how that neighborhood can transition into, um, uh, uh, uh, uh, place, you know, not only housing, but um, just a real true improvement for the neighborhood. And I really encourage the city council to approve this proposal. Thank you very much.

[02:48:32] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Next, uh, Vishal Mishra. Do you have mute yourself, please, Vishal? Michelle. Shell, can you unmute yourself, we shall?

[02:48:53] Vishal Mishra: Hello, can you hear me?

[02:48:55] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes, there you go. Welcome.

[02:48:58] Vishal Mishra: Hello. Hello. Yeah hi, you can hear me, right?

[02:49:02] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes please.

[02:49:03] Vishal Mishra: Yeah, hi. Hi, this is Vishal. I live in Stanton Place townhome community. in Mountain View, and uh, 1st of all, I really would like to thank, thanks a lot to Mountain View City Council members for actually taking our time in the current time and actually discussing this idea. I think this is a great idea overall, we really need housing, uh, a lot more housing in mountain view. Uh, so that that is a great uh, uh, overall benefit uh, to the presidents of Mountain View. But at the same time, I think what is not great is this is like a huge influx of traffic and a huge influx of people that could come. So I think what we should try to do is reduce the story of the apartment complex, which is being proposed, to reduce it from a 7 story to something like max 4 or 5 story, not more than that. And that's gonna be a lot more better than what we have currently. Additionally, I think there would be few recommendations I would give, uh, definitely 4 way stop at terrible end in Novista. Bike lanes on all of Arabella and in the Vista. Uh, Definitely a lot more trees and plants, along Terabilla and in the vista, which will definitely maintain the charm of mountain view of the city. And then additional park, what is being proposed instead of the ecology site, that would also be very, very helpful.

[02:50:34] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thanks a lot. Thank you. And uh, this next one is the phone number, the last, it's a 1425, last 3 digits, 982. Please unmute yourself.

[02:50:49] Public Speaker: Hello. Hi. Uh, this is sodium, too. I live in the Tarabella, uh, neighborhood for almost uh, 5 years. So, uh, I will, actually support uh, more affordable housing in the area. Uh, but one thing that I want to call out is I think about, like, when you are moving into this new complex with your family, with your kids, and you have a job at Google. Great, now you can just go cross the bridge and go to your office. But wait a minute. You cannot find a child care facility nearby. So now you have to send your kids to Sunnywell and come back. How about that? Get into the traffic again. It doesn't help. So, the thing I want to point out is in all these plans, it's like lacking the support on building childcare getting screwed in this area. And with 300 Units +4, uh, 40 like photo unit. There could be like 100s of kids moving into this area and need care. So, I would like to, um, urge like, um, uh, city council members to ask the developer to, like, provide enough support for the whole areas, screws, and childcare facility, or, maybe they should just, for them to open some childcare facility on site. Uh, I think that would be helping the community. Thank you.

[02:52:26] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Any other members of the public wishing a comment? Uh, Barbara Hartford, me? Would you please unmute yourself?

[02:52:37] Barbara Hartford: Hello, council and mayor, thank you for the meeting today. Um, I live, um, I've been here for 32 years, and uh, I live behind the West Terabella area and actively participated in the Terabella vision plan and all of those discussions. And one of the main factors in all of our discussions there, um, we're regarding building heights. And this is a great concern that, um, you know, we're for development. I'm for development. I'm for, uh, reasonable and thoughtful development. I know we need more affordable housing. But I am begging the council. Um, if you approve this project, please not let the development of a 1001 North Shoreline set a precedent for building heights within the entire Terabella area. Thank you.

[02:53:36] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Any other members of the public wishing to speak? I think that is it. So I will close public comment and bring it back to the council and here I have. Uh, Counselor McEllister.

[02:53:55] Councilmember John McAlister: Thank you, Mayor. Well, since this project started with Chris and I, we're the only 2 ones that were here at the beginning, um, I think it's uh, somewhat appropriate that I, take a, speak a little bit about this, and then, um, I want to make a motion. So that it was a go for it. So, I think I'll make the motion and then give you guys an opportunity to think about it, then I like to make some comments. So, one, adopt a resolution certifying the residential at Shoreline gateway project, final environmental impact report, and adopting California Environment, Quality Act Finding, including mitigation measures, and a mitigation, mitigation monitoring, or reporting program to be read entitled only, further reading, wave, attachment much to the council report. Two. Adapt a resolution, approving amendment to the general planned land use map of the property located at 101 North Shoreline Boulevard from general, Industrial to Mixed Use Center, and to related text amendments to be read entitled only further reading wave attachment to the council report. Three, introduce an ordinance amending the zoning map for the property located at 101 North Shoreline Boulevard from Light Industrial, to General Industrial, zoning districts, to the P planning community, zoning district, to be read entitled only further reading wave and study 2nd reading for August 25th, 2020, attachment 3 to the council report. Four, adapt a resolution, approving a planned community permit and development review permit to construct a 7th story, 203 apartment building with 2 levels of polarium parking at 3000 square foot at Brown Ford commercial space. 7s. Comma, 7 story, 100 condominium unit residential building with 2 levels of podium parking, and a 6 level office parking structure, project, and a heritage tree removal permit for the removal of 23 heritage trees, 7.8 an acre site located at 101 North Shoreline Boulevard to be read entitled only further reading wave attachment forward to the council report. Five, adopt a resolution approving, invested. Tentative map to create 4 lots of which 3 are condominium purpose and a common lot at 101 North Shoreline Boulevard to be read entitled only further reading wave attachment 5 to the council court. Item 6 that the below market rate units, both the residential and the ownership will be in perpetuity. Seven, that the BMR units will be supplied broadband or internet or Wi-Fi service for the life of the, of the project. Seven, to direct staff to look at the feasibility of improving San Verono Park and the potential of, The modifying the, um, Recycling site for a future park. That's it for the moment.

[02:57:11] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Uh, thank you for the motion. Is there a 2nd on the motion? Council member Meta check? Did you want a 2nd or do you have comments?

[02:57:23] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Um, well, um, I have comments, but I guess I'll also 2nd it.

[02:57:27] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, great. Thank you. Are you done, Mr. McAllister?

[02:57:32] Councilmember John McAlister: I was going to make some comments, but, uh, go ahead. I can wait.

[02:57:37] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Go ahead. So I just thought you were done.

[02:57:40] Councilmember John McAlister: No, I was. I just want to do that, but I said I want to do some comments. I looked at this project way back in 2015. And I looked at the area, and I was, well, just get context. I am one of very concerned about where properties are built, how big they are, how they impact the neighborhoods. And when I looked at this location. It's, to me, it's somewhat isolated. It's close to the freeway. away from neighborhoods. It had industrial on the west. It has some light industrial to the south, and it was a freeway to the north. So I think. My concerns about traffic and all work would be tempered just because of the location. And so when people were concerned about the height, Yeah, if height is a concern, but not necessarily this area. What I liked about this project. Was that, one, it was ownership. And at the time when we looked at this in 2015, a lot of ownership wasn't being done, and I thought, and I knew this was important, because as the city grows, we need to have a balance of ownership, rentals, blue old market rates, we need a, Smorgus board of housing options, and this presented it to it. The other part about this thing that I liked. Was that, now that they've talked about it, that the broadband, that was personal thing I like, the perpetuity of the units. I like the design that there are balconies on it. And I think it's going to be served well in that particular, well designed. What concerns me about this project. And to address some bigger concern is that we need different zoning for this city because we have different job requirements, different needs for all types of people. And if we continue to go after our general industrial or limited industrial zoning, It's going to affect people's lives, people job. And people say, well, let's take all this land and convert it into housing because there's no displacement. Well, there is displacement. You're displacing people's livelihood, jobs, and the variety of businesses that will sustain the city of Mountain View. Another thing that concerns me about this particular project. And although I'll help you to trust, and I didn't think the traffic consultant was, could have been a little more thorough, is one that cut through traffic. I'm very concerned about the 85 traffic, SR 85 traffic, and the traffic going from middlefield going north. I live over by El Camino Hospital, and I can tell you, cutthrough traffic is horrendous on Grant Road. It is, oh, you know, 3 hours in the morning and in the afternoon. And what are and what are people cutting through? They're getting off the SR 85, going down grant route and bypassing that route. So I know people will find the quickest route, and there will be cut through traffic. And so the answer is, well, we didn't look at it. We didn't think about it. I think as we go forward, the staff needs to really take another look at the traffic cut through and be prepared to put in mitigation, um, devices, if it's 4 way stops, as it speed bumps, because I think Linda Vista is going to be really impacted. When I was talking with somebody in the neighborhood, they were concerned that they used the children in that area. Cannot, they don't feel comfortable going on middlefield to get to Crittenden and the elementary school. And so they use Terabella as sort of the back road to get to those 2 schools. And that's why they were also asking about bicycle, uh, safety measures in there. So that's something we got to consider about. There was also an economic report. And I hope we, we sort of, and I think, uh, our community works, uh, director said, okay, we might be getting away from that or the community, uh, public works director, that, We had a consultant said, well, there's no real benefit, but there's no extra dollars that the developer is gonna have. So we're going to keep our community benefits low. Or we're not going to ask for any. But that is the wrong approach. We have a great place to build. We have a great place to live, and I think it's a very attractive place and people will be willing to pay premium dollars to do it. And therefore, I think that that whole idea of looking at that should be resolved. I like to thank the developer for his persistence for hanging in there and willingness to talk to everybody. Uh, again, it's 5 years. We had another project last time that was 5 years in the making, the landings. So um, persistent does work out. And I hope the community will be able to gain some improvements in the park. Improvements in the bike pit, hopefully get a new park in that area. And that will get that whole area sort of in par with the rest of the city. So, I hope my fellow council members support this, and I'm willing, I'm anxious to hear from them. Thank you.

[03:02:59] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. We'll go to Counseloromatic check now.

[03:03:01] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Thanks for your patience. Thank you. Um, so I really would have preferred if this project uh, came forward after we had a precise plan for this area. Um, it's, uh, too bad that this was a gatekeeper and got ahead of everything else, uh, because I feel like it's really important to have that vision and plan for an area and not do one offs, uh, like we're doing here. Um, I heard the concern about this not setting a precedent and I agree. And this should not set a precedent for, uh, what happens in the Terabella area. Um, as we if we if we ever have time. Uh, for staff to work on a precise plan for the area. Um, I do appreciate uh, staff giving, um, Sarah's Regis, a heads up that we might ask for the, um, BMR units or the, all of the affordable units to be, um, affordable in perpetuity and not just 55 years. Uh, so when I brought it up with Mr. Hopkins, he was well prepared to uh, answer that question. So, um, I appreciate my staff and, um, Mr. Hopkins being open to changing that. And actually, I'm going to bring this up under item 7 tonight, um, to see if we want to potentially change our ordinance permanently. So we're not doing this one off every time. Um, I also appreciate council member McAllister's uh, suggestion to do a park, where the city already owns property, um, and see if we can find another location for the recycling center. Um, you know, it's great that we have that property and I think it would add a lot to this neighborhood. Um, it is underserved in terms of parkland. So, I really appreciate that suggestion. And um, absolutely supportive of directing staff to take a look at that. Um, I do have some concerns about this project. Some of them have already been mentioned. Um, I am concerned about the, not just the traffic in general, but the cut through traffic, and um, do want to make sure we are monitoring that. And while it has been suggested that we do stop signs on Terabella. I kind of feel like we need to take a look at the whole area and figure out, um, what is best to calm traffic and potentially even, um, like, not make it easy for people to cut through. Um, because that is a concern of mine, uh, my captain's on Grant Road, very familiar with that one. Um, you kind of avoid it at certain times during the day. And I don't want to see the same thing happen here. So I do want to look at the whole area, uh, to figure out how do we not do that. Um, I also, uh, appreciate the comments about, uh, folks riding their bikes, um, on Terabella to get to Crittenden rather than middle field. And I do want to take a look at adding bike lanes, um, especially along Terabella. I sent in the question about whether or not that was in the bike head plan, and apparently it wasn't, but, um, I think we should look at that for this area, especially because we will then have the overpass over 101, we might see increased bike traffic in this area, and I want to make sure it's safe. Um, It's I'm disappointed in the traffic analysis. I feel like I'm always disappointed in the traffic analysis. Um, no matter where it's done and what part of town because it just doesn't seem realistic that in general, no matter what happens. Um, an EIR or the traffic analysis will say, it's really not a problem. I can only think of a couple times in the past 10 years where, you know, significant changes have been made to address traffic. Um, so the Terabella shoreline intersection is one that, Kind of is, um, confusing because people are definitely figuring out ways around what you might think they would normally do. Um, like get off the freeway and turn right and then make a U-turn at Terabella to go the other way on shoreline. You know, the lineup there of cars is unbelievable in the morning. Um, so that's my concern about, you know, in the neighborhood. People are going to try to figure out how to get where they want to go, um, without hitting traffic. Um. So, um, I also have some concerns about uh, the design of the building. And I think it would have been much better if the condos were uh, stepped back uh, as you go up in stories. There's a very minor step back. Um of the 3rd story. But from the 3rd story to the 7th, it's pretty much a wall. And I feel like we've said many times that we do want to see step backs. Um, and so I feel like I'm going to bring this one up too under item 7. You know, that if we need to talk about this and direct staff in the DRC to, um, look at that as projects come forward, then I think we should do that because I know some of us brought it up. Um, but it isn't reflected here, probably because not everybody or the majority didn't bring it up. Um. I do support, um, council member McAllister's additions to the motion. Um, and I want to see if I could add, um, Taking a look at, uh, traffic overall in the neighborhood and traffic calming measures, um, whether they be stop signs on Terabella or other things that, um, need to happen to calm and potentially discourage cut through traffic. If you would be open to adding that direction to staff.

[03:09:28] Councilmember John McAlister: Uh, I have no pro- that, that's, I brought it up, so I, I can support that. If staff was going to do that anyway, or because if they do go with it, yeah, no, but I support that.

[03:09:41] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[03:09:42] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So I guess, um, your motion includes some stuff that was directly related to the project, but also direction to staff. Um, and I don't know if we want to do those all together, um, or if we want to do them separately.

[03:09:55] Councilmember John McAlister: Look, if, Put it on the table. I mean, let's, let's, Let's see, Apple come back, at least they know what we're asking.

[03:10:03] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Oh, hello there. I think we got a whoa pony there from our city manager. Oh. That dawns, except come back.

[03:10:17] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Thank you, mayor, council members. Yes. I just, I just wanted to provide some context on one of the portions of the motion, which includes the look at the feasibility of the park, uh, where wecology is now and just wanted to provide a little bit of context for that. So right now, uh, staff is scheduled to bring a new contract forward for council consideration of uh, new racology contract in the fall of uh, 2020. So we we have a lease that expires in October 2021 and there are a number of considerations that I think staff would like to present to counsel 1st. before studying the feasibility of this. So if we were to do this, after we bring counsel more information about this, and then I would ask that you direct staff, um, to bring a feasibility study back, and then we could perhaps include it as part of the 5 year CIP. Um, I think just given the, the, the timing that we're in right now with the contract, that that would make more sense for staff to do. So that would be my recommendation and I would ask for, um, Dawn to provide any other insight into that because I know she's been working on this contract for a while.

[03:11:37] Dawn: Thank you. appreciate that. Yes, um, staff does suggest you give us a chance to bring you back more information and considerations both in the context of the Mountain View recycling center and what other possibilities there may be and how this may affect the next weekology contract. Plus other aspects about whether a park should be there or not before directing staff to initiate a full-fledged feasibility study. And it is something we can bring back to you in the fall as part of your, um, contemplation of the extracology contract and what that may require as well.

[03:12:16] Councilmember John McAlister: I can, I hear you and um, I'll take, I, I can live with taking out the word feasibility study. But yeah, to give us, what's the lower, what's the lower level of taking out the word feasibility study? to give us, um, to still give you direction to look at it.

[03:12:38] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Council member McAllister, I think we can just bring back an item and the fall for council to study this issue holistically with all the items that Don said. So I would just take out the word, as you said, feasibility study and just bring it back as a general item. Um, for you to understand what's happening with the contract now and and essentially the other items that Don said, the park piece of it, what we would do, what would happen, discussions that we would need to have with racology, et cetera.

[03:13:09] Unknown Speaker: I'm comfortable with that as the 2nd comfortable with that.

[03:13:12] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes. Okay, uh, but the part where I was asking the community service director about what things they could do now, I would like to keep that in there.

[03:13:25] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: At Pers San Veron Park?

[03:13:27] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes.

[03:13:28] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay. Right. So, council member McAllister, um, I was trying to write down all of the additions you made, and, um, I wasn't sure I heard, um, take a look at bike lanes on Terabella protected bike lanes. Was that part of your emotion?

[03:13:45] Councilmember John McAlister: I think that, uh, I don't think I included that because I was interested in doing the underpass. Um, under, under Shoreline to do terrible, but I thought that that would be, Dawn said that that would be better served at item 7. Because it's it's sort of independent of the project. And so if we're going to do a holistic look of the bike pad, It'd probably be better if we say let's bring it back under 7. And that would clarify it so it's not tied in directly and I could give, uh, a clearer guidance to staff, if that sounds correct to Don.

[03:14:26] Dawn: Uh, Yes, item 7 would be good since it's not directly connected to this project and this agenda item. Um, Generally, in terms of all of the transportation improvement, whether it be protected bikeways, um, other connections, Our, our request would be that you direct staff to bring forward possibility of feasibility studies because they do require feasibility studies in the context of the next 5 years CIP. So that you can consider this in in context of overall staff workload and all of the priorities of where you want it placed. As opposed to asking us to take something on right now outside the context, be able to look at the entire workload and CIP.

[03:15:17] Councilmember John McAlister: So, I, I, that's why I said I want to bring it back at 7, but Don, what concerns me is, this neighborhood's going to be impacted within the next years, 5 years. And I would like to be more proactive in finding solutions to mitigate it than to put it into a process that this neighborhood or any neighborhood when it gets a major project coming through will be affected. So, um, That's why, let's, yeah, we could bring it back when you say in a 5 year, I know a day would like to get this built in 2 years, but I'm sure it's going to take another 4 years to get built, but it would be nice to have any mitigation done before occupancy takes place.

[03:15:59] Dawn: And and that, That could be direction the council provides in looking at the 5 year CIP next spring of saying they want this to be a year one or year 2 project, in which case we might do some other things out of what was going to be year one and year 2. in order to ensure that we have the staffing capabilities, as well as the funding to do that work. But again, it's better if the council looks at it in the full city wide CIP and prioritizing. Uh, and but by directing us to make sure we bring it to you as part of the 5 year CIP. Then that's what we do.

[03:16:37] Councilmember John McAlister: I can live with that. Can you? Lisa.

[03:16:42] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes, yes. So my comment there is, um, You know, I guess I have, uh, maybe a different perspective on community benefits than was put forth with this project. Well, we don't necessarily have a policy. I do believe we have a practice and I personally have the philosophy that community benefits should be spent in the neighborhood that has the project that is generating the community benefits. And, um, to me, the easement that is 2.900000 is not a huge benefit to the Terabella neighborhood. Um, it, it's a, like a citywide or a North Bay shore or, you know, it's an infrastructure project that is important. Um, and I actually think it should be funded some other way. I get what you're doing here, but I guess I would say, you know, we have 2800000 in community benefits that, um, you know, other CIPs maybe get pushed out, um, if we're going to use CIP money to do some of the things that I think are needed in this neighborhood. Um, so, You know, I get what you're trying to do, but I don't necessarily agree with it, but I feel like we need to find a way to accomplish what I would like to do. Um, which is benefit the neighborhood from this uh, development. Um, so one other thing that we haven't talked about much, although Council member McAllister, you briefly touched on it. Um, and that is, um, The timeline to get a retail tenant for the space, um, around the plaza. And when I read the staff report and saw that, um, it was 2 years, my initial sort of reaction to that was, Gosh, I hope it doesn't take 2 years, but what if it does take 2 years, and they still don't have, um, a traditional retail tenant. I don't think I want that space empty for 2 years. So I would be open to maybe a shorter time frame than 2 years before it's opened up to other uses, but not office use. Um, the other uses listed that were um, allowed, um, Or maybe just open it up, um, like as soon as it's built to those other uses. Um, and I'm kind of wondering what you um, think about modifying that.

[03:19:29] Councilmember John McAlister: No. Not interested. Because it came up on another project on El Camino, that we were, say, they required retail. And, and, and we got to get retail, retail's getting squeezed out of town. So let's give retail a chance. I mean, especially when this COVID-19 ends, we don't know what's going to be left standing. But we need to give retail an opportunity, and if it doesn't work in 2 years, then fine. But if we say we automatically going to make it something else. I think that's a little too early because there was another project on El Camino. It took a while, but it's a doggy daycare right now. Over next to Didim's. They have some retail in there. It took a little bit, but they got it in there. So no, I'd rather give retail a chance.

[03:20:17] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So, um, I hear what you're saying. I would love to have retail there. I'm just concerned that it might take a very long time and I don't really want that place to be empty. Um, it seems like when it is, you know, the same goes, retail loves retail. Um, and when we have a small amount of retail, that is not around other retail, it's much harder to fill the space. Um, I can think of many conversations I've had with other, um, developers, uh, where we do have that one off and they're struggling to fill them. So, um, Would you compromise on one year?

[03:21:07] Councilmember John McAlister: Uh, uh, no. Because I think if worst, I would like to see a daycare in there myself personally. But I think, look, look it. It's going to take 4 years, probably to get this thing built. So the developer has time to get somebody plus more. So let's give it a chance. In that time frame, Oh, and I'll just leave it at that. I think staff recommended or EPC said 2 years, so. Let's give it a chance.

[03:21:33] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So, um, I thought daycare required dedicated, uh, outdoor space.

[03:21:39] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yeah, well, at this point, um, has not agreed to the amendment of them. Okay, so we're gonna, and I'd like, I have others in queue, so I'd like to move on to other council members to speak, but I also have the city attorney, so would you like to say?

[03:21:57] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Yes, I just have one brief clarifying suggestion for the project related BMR in perpetuity requirement. I believe that would be memorialized and the broadband, that would be appropriately included in resolution, which is number 4 in your recommendations. And I'm just checking with the community development department to see which specific conditions would need to be amended, and they're pretty straightforward requirements, and if we can't locate the exact number, we would just get direction to modify those conditions accordingly.

[03:22:39] Project Planner Diana: So, if I may, um, again, Diana, eventually, project planner, the, um, the perpetuity condition, if a council decides to add it, that will be a modification to 82 and 83. Um, For the project conditions of approval and the broadband, um, adding that language around broadband would be to condition number 60 which is the community benefit package.

[03:23:11] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hey, thank you. So we'll just add that when we um, Repeat the motion if we have to repeat the motion. Uh, was it that?

[03:23:23] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, well, that's actually part of what I was going to get at, so maybe I won't speak very long and we can move on, but I just wanted to clarify sort of where, where we stand here, because I've talked about the project previously, I'm generally supportive of ever since the, the office went in there at the corner. Um, I've been excited to sort of try and bring some additional housing to the area to match that and and offset that because I think with the, with the overpass and all the additional infrastructure improvements that we're doing. Um, I just think that that area up against the freeway where it's farthest away from the neighborhood, um, is hopefully not that it won't be impactful, but hopefully the least impactful area and a, in a good area to do. Um, not necessarily set a precedent for the rest of the neighborhood, but if we're going to do something, you know, tall and dense, that, that is sort of generally the area where we should do it, and in this case, we get a lot of additional benefits for doing that, um, with the, with the affordable housing components and the community benefits. So, um, I just wanted to clarify, John. So we're, we're basically we're voting on the, the staff recommendation, um, for a 1001 North Shoreline. Um, you said 101 a few times and I just want to make sure we don't want to rezone the overpass. It was... Yeah. Um, And, um, And, uh, and then your, your additions were the, yeah, having the units affordable in perpetuity. Sorry for looking down, looking at my notes. Um, the, um, and then I wanted to clarify, you know, staff might be help, might be able to help us sort of word this correctly, but I wanted under, and I appreciate the, the intent of the, the broadband piece, but I just want to make sure I understand sort of what would be acceptable to you. Um, if the property were to, both the apartments, uh, apartments in the condos were to have, basically community Wi-Fi and they gave free access codes to, uh, for free access to that Wi-Fi to the BMR units or even to the entire complex, that would be something that would be one, one sort of, permutation of that that you'd be okay with.

[03:25:32] Councilmember John McAlister: Are you asking me or staff?

[03:25:34] Unknown Speaker: I guess, I guess you, uh, and maybe staff. I guess what I'm really getting at is I just want to give staff a little bit of leeway to 5 years is a long time in the technology, um, time frame and just give them leeway that like we under, they understand the intent that there's, you know, free, free broadband access in one way, shape, or form. For those units and how that's provided can be determined by the VA at the time or whoever it is.

[03:26:00] Councilmember John McAlister: Do you believe they're running fiber? Dave, correct me.

[03:26:03] Dave: They will, yeah.

[03:26:05] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah. So, yeah. That, that, yeah. One way or the other, they're going to get free. Internet access.

[03:26:13] Unknown Speaker: Okay. Um, and then the other piece was to, Um, so I think we clarified this with staff earlier, basically what we're going to do is look at the, 3, well, when we get the recology contract back, you know, they'll remind us that you consider this in the context of maybe you want to park here and whether or not that's feasible. So that that will come back to us in the fall. And then what was the other, there was one more. And then council member matters, I could mention one too.

[03:26:46] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Oh, the bike pit? Or...

[03:26:48] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I said traffic coming throughout the whole neighborhood and cut through traffic to address that.

[03:26:55] Unknown Speaker: Okay, and that's what I wanted to get at is, um, are we basically telling staff they have to do a neighborhood traffic management program at this stage? Is that sort of what the intent was or was this outside of that program and just were directing them to, to look at this someday or, or when, or if the project moves forward, because I'm not even sure it will, um, in the current time. So, I don't know, and maybe, maybe staff has a better understanding, but, um, It just seemed. I don't know, if I were a stab, I wouldn't really know what to do with that. Like when and how extensively do I look at this and, um, do we do it outside the context of the neighborhood traffic management? uh, framework or not?

[03:27:43] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So do you want me to respond to that?

[03:27:45] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, so what what the intent was or what you're hoping?

[03:27:48] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So from my perspective, once the buildings are built and there are people living there. Um, taking a look at the traffic patterns to see, is there country traffic happening? Um, and should we do traffic calming, especially on Terabella, whether it be stop signs or something else? It is outside of the NTMP. It's looking at the issues that were previously brought up.

[03:28:12] Councilmember John McAlister: That makes complete sense. I, I, I, I, um, I don't have any issue with sort of putting in a monterey condition. Um, where we're, where we're monitoring, you know, those specific hotspots and making sure that we're adapting quickly if we need to. Um, and then I don't think we added anything else to that point, right? We talked about a few things, but um, okay.

[03:28:33] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: But I did, okay, I did ask about,

[03:28:36] Unknown Speaker: Well, the, the, the basketball court was going to be approved and putting some benches in.

[03:28:40] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yeah, sorry. Yeah, right. and that they were going to do that with current funding. Yeah, in San Veron Park.

[03:28:47] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. I think I fully understand enough for I'll stop talking. Thanks.

[03:28:52] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Right, council number Hicks?

[03:28:56] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I, I do support the motion and I support the general direction that other council people have been going in. I, um, share the concern about cut through traffic. I actually also have a concern about, um, because the parking is, is, some of the parking is unbundled in situations like that. I, I actually have, uh, and I have this concern in other neighborhoods, as well, where there are lower parking ratios that in order to actually, uh, encourage people to get out of their cars instead of parking all over the neighborhood, that we have some kind of... Street parking program. That we have some kind of street parking program that, um, that actually makes that those choices for people who say, uh, decide not to buy into the unbundled parking, you know, makes it so that they're actually reducing car use rather than parking all over the neighborhood. Now, I don't know if that's something we can incorporate right now, but it's something that I would like to look at increasingly in situations where we're reducing parking in either a, a, um, in either a residential or an office project. Um, make sure we're not just dumping the problem on the neighborhood. Um, so I'll set that aside for the moment. The other thing, another thing I was going to say is that, um, I actually, uh, agree with council member Mattachek that John, if you decide you're open to it, that, um, I would like to open up the, uh, retail use to other uses. And I also want to call attention at the same time to something I appreciate about the project that's linked to the reasoning for doing that. I actually really like the public square. I think it's a fabulous example of what you can do with public squares and public gathering places, kind of the commons. Um, uh, with the fact that there are urban permeable pavers, um, that there are trees growing out of the public square, there's a lot of storm water treatment with some uh, pervious grasses that are very attractive. There, when I talk to the applicant, well, I talk to residents who were concerned about some people who are currently selling things on the street, but the applicant, uh, said that they may be open to uh, pop-up programming in the square. They actually, and their visuals showed, um, showed food trucks, for example, but other pop-up programming may be possible to permit as well. Um, given all that, I think it's also a very appropriate place for um, for a restaurant because you could put, you could put tables out in the square. So, um, if that convinces you, uh, um, If that convinces you, John, maybe you can add that to your, to your motion.

[03:32:13] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Uh, Vice mayor, you're next.

[03:32:17] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Oh, okay. Great. Thank you. Um, so uh, I want to thank my colleagues for making this sausage. This is why I'm a vegetarian. Um, no, but in all seriousness, I really do want to thank everyone who gave public comment. Um, in particular, the community. Um, I know that this has been along a drawn out process for all of them. Um, Terabella, not being part of the general plan change area, then to talk about Terabella, the Terabella visioning process, and then talking about a precise plan. And I know it's been a lot for the community. So I want to really thank them for sticking with us. Um, and providing um, ideas of what we could do as a community benefit. And what we could do as part of the mitigation in the, in the area. I think that that's really important to try to work together to find a way to make, um, projects, um, usually beneficial, those for future residents, but also for residents that live there, um, and are looking for, you know, some infrastructure improvements. Um, So, uh, I'm gonna support the motion, but some things that I would like to bring forward for staff are, um, the public noticing process. So I think something that the residents within this community had brought forward was kind of the radius with which the public noticing happens. I believe the 1st time it was like 300 feet, the 2nd time was 500 feet. Considering that this is a light industrial change area, um, perhaps we, when we're looking at this. Um, we can expand our noticing so that residents feel like, um, you know, they have that community outreach from the city. But also it's kind of an invitation for engagement so that, um, they don't, they don't feel like they're learning about things late in the process. And so I think that that part is something that's critical and the lesson. I feel like I've learned from this. Um, and so we'd really like to see that change, particularly as we're kind of moving through different pockets of the city, um, and looking at development. Thank you.

[03:34:35] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: It's not Ramirez.

[03:34:37] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, mayor. Um, I don't, um, have too much more to add, so I'll be brief, but I just wanted to 2nd the Visner's uh, concerns. That was something that, uh, the, uh, residents in the neighborhood had also brought up in my meeting with them. Uh, I think the modifications to the gatekeeper process that the council approved, um, a little while back, um, are helpful, but if we need to continue to improve that process to ensure greater, um, uh, participation from the public, then I'm very open to that. Um I'll be supporting the motion. I appreciate, um, every member of the council who, uh, who has sort of contributed to it, so BMRs and perpetuity, uh, internet access, exploring, uh, transportation, improvements, traffic calming in the area. Um, those are all uh, uh, and good ideas and uh, in line with what we've heard from the neighborhood. Uh, the only other thing I want to do is is echo, um, the concern that uh, council member McAllister had shared. I've got, um, the, uh, general plan, land use designation map behind me, and if you, you know, if you can see it, there's not a lot of that, uh, dark blue color, the, the industrial use, and there is a very real risk of, of losing that, and, um, I, I often heard, uh, it said, you know, um, residentialists like diamonds, it's forever, so this conversion is something that we do need to be mindful of. Um, and that's part partly, we talked about it in the context of the Carabella visioning. Um, I think, you know, as these conversions occur in the future, we need to be very, uh, careful about losing a use that will probably not going to see come back. Uh, so captain member of McAllister. I'll, I'll continue um to, to echo that um, you know, past your, uh, your, your time here on council, but I think it's a, it's an important point. It's one that I really hadn't been. I think appreciative of until relatively recently, so I, I appreciate you bringing it up, but uh, otherwise, uh, I think it's a, it's a good and important project, and I'm glad that we've been, um, doing our best to be sensitive to the concerns of the neighborhood. Thank you.

[03:36:48] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, um, I'm gonna add my comments before we go 2nd round. Um, actually, it's one of, I had a couple of questions that have come up as we've been discussing, um, and one has to do with the public utility easement, um, from what it sounds like, the benefit is really for North Bay Shore, if I'm correct. Um, and or even if it was for the entire um, city. Um, if part of it is benefiting North Bay Shore. Could we be, um, funding it through the North Bay Shore, um, or I'm sorry, the shoreline district. Fund, so that we save the community benefit dollars for this neighborhood. Because I know like if we have something that benefits the entire city, usually about 20% of it is charged to the shoreline fund. So if not the whole amount, could we at least charge that some percentage of it to the shoreline fund?

[03:37:49] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Uh, wait, I may need uh, the community development director to pop in about this as well, but there's a difference between the developer providing an easement uh, over their property that has value. Uh, versus asking them to provide cash. To the city.

[03:38:10] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So I guess my, I would, my thought was, could we essentially take shoreline funds to reimburse this neighborhood or whatever community benefits would have been generated from this? I mean, or apply that amount. I'm sorry, from the Shortline fund to this neighborhood.

[03:38:31] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: I think we would have to go back and look at it with the assistance of city attorney's office, our finance, uh, director and so on in terms of, as you said, 1st looking at how much this utility easement benefits North Bayshore versus other parts of the city so that, you know, a right percentage and then is it possible to have, The North Bay Shore Fund, uh, you know, shoreline, um, regional park, community fund, excuse me. Uh, kind of, sort of pay for this easement, you're suggesting, and uh, I could not answer that right now in terms of, whether that world, we can do that. We would look at it.

[03:39:16] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So maybe I, could I, I would ask the motion maker, Counselor McAllister, could we, could we add that to your motion that we direct staff to look at the, um, possibility of shoreline funds being applied to this area to.

[03:39:30] Councilmember John McAlister: Absolutely. I think council member Matterachek had the same concerns.

[03:39:34] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thanks. Yeah, thank you. Does the secondary accept that edition?

[03:39:44] Unknown Speaker: Absolutely. That's kind of what I was saying that I felt like we had 280000000 of other funds from somewhere. Great idea for shoreline.

[03:39:51] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So thank you. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Sausage making at its best. Um, and then the 2nd item was, uh, regarding the, um, bike lanes on Terabella. Um, I know it was mentioned that there would be a feasibility study that would need to be, um, Be done. Um, and my question is, is the feasibility based on the parking on the streets and, um, yeah, is that the main issue?

[03:40:25] Unknown Speaker: Yes, the main issue is the way to, um, get the room necessary for the bike lanes would be to let go of parking along at least one side of the street. But also, you know, in general, taking an engineering look at it, you know, Terabella curves, it moves, you know, what it would take to put in bike lanes. The other piece of it is being able to do substantial community outreach on it. Um, we often find that, um, one of the biggest roadblocks, not to use a pun, 2 bike lanes, can be the idea of removing parking and that can generate a certain amount of community concern. So we can.

[03:41:07] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Do you know where have a sense of where the parking is coming from right now? Like, technically, shouldn't the projects um, be accommodating the parking?

[03:41:19] Unknown Speaker: Well, a lot of this is older development, um, And technically, yes, but again, a lot of it's older development before, you know, we had some of the requirements we have today. We just, It's an area that has a lot of parking on the street, so we would want to do that community outreach and and do a parking study. Similar to what we did with the El Camino real. That was very intensive,

[03:41:45] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: sure. No, it is understandable because of the retail, but um, this area doesn't have retail. It has a Google Office right now and they should be, you know, all the parking should be on the site. So I guess I'm just, yeah, was curious to know where the parking's coming from and if how difficult it would be to remove parking on the street. So, um, but if that's part of the feasibility study, I can understand that. Great. So okay. Also, um, just general comments, um, I, I, uh, I echo what other, uh, my colleagues have already said, I think in a perfect world. Um, my preference would have been for us to look at this area, um, is a, um, precise plan area, if we were supposed to, it was not in the general plan update originally. So, um, I know it came later and I think it's an example of why gatekeepers are a challenge. Um, but in light of, um, what was there, the office. Um, it does make sense to add housing. And my hope really is, is that this, um, this, uh, combination of office next to housing will really, um, be an example of what we keep talking about, especially in North Bay sure about internalization of vehicle mile trips and so forth. So my hope is that, um, that with the shared parking and the proximity of the housing to the office right next door and even across the uh, freeway to North Bay Shore that we really will see a reduction of trips. And I think that's my concern that if we don't, then we have a real issue about just our whole thought process in terms of putting housing next to jobs. And I have heard from, you know, the neighborhood that, um, there are quite a few folks who already, uh, live in the Terrell neighborhood, the Sterling Estates neighborhood, who work at, um, in North Bay Shore, and that they're the ones actually driving. You can see that with the backup on Shoreline. Um, and I think part of that might be the challenge of not having, um, transit, um, in the, like the, frankly, from what I've learned, like Google, Google is great at taking folks on long distances from like San Francisco to, to here in Mountain View, but there are no shuttles, the program, there's not a shuttle program within Mountain View. I think they're working on something, but I hope that we can really improve the transit options for those short distances, or really try to encourage people to bike or walk over if it's only like a quarter mile. And, um, frankly, I think that that actually would point to the bigger issue of, um, you know, SOV reduction in North Bay Shore, and that goes back to some of the TDN, um, strategies where you touched on when we were talking about the Stevens Creek transit bridge and, and moving towards more like parking reductions and um, and potential congestion pricing. So, um, that's the hope um, that we'll get there and and also with telecommuting too. I hope that we can like see reduction and trips. Um, so, um, That, that, that's my concern. Um, I, I, so I think it is important to do the traffic monitoring. And overall, frankly, I, I appreciate all of the additions that the council, uh, counselor McAllister added to the motion. I support most um, I support all of them. Um, I think what this shows to me, though, is the need for us to look at doing a precise plan in this area before we allow any more development, or I know we have one more, I think, um, but other major developments to happen, um, I think we really need to plan for the area, and the biggest challenge here or the issue that comes to mind is the circulation, the traffic circulation, and whether it's adding more bike lanes or, um, you know, trying to encourage alternative modes of transportation. I think we do need to look, have a holistic look of the area before we add any more, um, major developments. And, um, so I, I, that's something I think we should be thinking about down the road. Um, So with that, um, otherwise, I, you know, I look forward to the ownership housing, the BMR units are great. I love the broadband idea, Counselor McAllister. Um, definitely Samuram Park Improvements. Um, and I know we've changed the ecology item. Um, I, yeah, that was my concern is that before we decide to make it a park. Um, let's look at the feasibility of that. But also, if we do start to look at a precise plan, that's when we can start looking at, you know, what areas we should have parks for and bike lanes for. So again, I think it just strengthens the case that we need to look at this area as a whole rather than piecemeal. Um, so, and then, um, I think that pretty much cover. Oh, the retail. So, I, I, this Port Councilman O'Allister giving that 2 years. Um, I think with the economy slowing down, it might just take a little while longer. And, um, I, you know, I, I thought the city dog, uh, doggy daycare was really clever and even mentioned that to the developer on this project and that might be something that works really well here too, if not a daycare for children. So, I think there are some creative opportunities and I'd like to give those a chance. So with that, um, I'll go to council number Clark if there's a 2nd round with comments.

[03:47:32] Councilmember Chris Clark: It was more a question. Um, so I actually agree with, um, I'm not sure what we get to for, but I, I agree with Council member Matachek that I, I just don't want another San Antonio situation where it's just so heartbreaking to see those nice ground floor empty spaces sit empty for 2 plus years and knowing that they could be utilized by a non-profit or something during that interim period even, um, And so I guess my, my 1st question is the, in the staff report on page 6, um, There was sort of the, the, the EPC discussion and sort of what they had suggested and then there was the staff recommended, um, condition. And so is, um, It is the staff recommended condition, sort of what, what came out of that, um, was it modified from your original recommendation of the EPC before it came to us to, to have this, um, because, because it's, uh, 2 years, but then there's some slightly different language where its neighborhood serving use is listed in the CN district. Is that what's in the recommendation?

[03:48:40] Unknown Speaker: So my EPC recommendation. Um, was, uh, specifically about the 2 year time frame and a neighborhood serving use. What staff did, uh, was to further refine the language to kind of add more structure to it in terms of the existing zoning regulations that we have. We already have a new, you know, uh, neighborhood serving commercial zone, uh, and, um, uses this under, under the, uh, CN zoning district that can provide more guidance to, you know, what kind of uses that we would like to see, um, you know, which will be truly serving the neighborhood. But the other thing that I would like to point out right now, since we are discussing so much about the time frame, is that EPC did mention in their recommendation that they would like counsel to know that they are flexible on the 2 year period. They didn't say more than 2 years or less than 2 years, but they were just not sure what is a good time frame and it was very difficult to say at that moment. At the diet, you know, with the uncertainty of, you know, what's gonna, what the reality is gonna look like after COVID-19. So, the staff has not changed that part of the condition and has not refined the 2 year time frame. Um, the only thing you refined was adding more uh, language regarding specific zoning district.

[03:50:10] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yeah, and I, I think that was a, that was a good. I like the way that you you cleaned it up and just made sure it was neighborhood serving uses in addition to retail that are listed in the district. I would, just for the record, I would support an amendment to make it, um, to make it a year, um, um, just because I don't want it to sit empty, but, um, but if there isn't support for that, then, then that's fine too. That's my

[03:50:35] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: McAllister?

[03:50:37] Councilmember John McAlister: Uh, a couple of comments. Um, since this was started, this is for uh, the vice mayor and council member, we're mayors. So, um, just to clarify a little bit about the notification. So remember this started 5 years ago, and at the time it was 300 feet. Council moved it to 500 and recently, council moved it to 750. So that sort of put things in context of how we felt. At the time, I've always felt, and I was the one that made the motion to move it to 750 and 10 day notice and not a 7 day notice. So we expended the time frame to make it a notice, so that was good. And doggone it. There was so much so I forgot what the other point was, but uh, In retail? Oh, oh, no. Oh, so the no, the retail, I'm sticking with my... But the holistic reproach that, uh, public work struck her talking about, uh, The traffic was that there was proposed to the bike ped about a connection from Stevens Creek Trail, going all the way across the Permanetti Trail. And so, uh, Was that, uh, when you were taking a look at a holistic approach to traffic, Is that part of, uh, Don, have you heard that about that moving, uh, getting a, from Stevens Creek Trail to Permanente Trail along Terabella along Middlefield? Would that be something that would be looked at a holistic, or were used more looking at traffic callistic stuff.

[03:52:10] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: You mean in the context of this project and its traffic study?

[03:52:15] Councilmember John McAlister: No, no, not this bike. Well, I mean, yeah, well, no, I don't think, because that was a, that was a bike connection.

[03:52:21] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: You mean when it's time to update the bicycle transportation plan, is this something that could be looked at? Absolutely.

[03:52:29] Councilmember John McAlister: Um, Yes. Because we're looking at bike lanes. We looking at this. We're looking at, you know, I like to see an underpass. But that would be quite an accomplishment to get a connection from Stevens Creek to Permanetti. And so that might, but that's what I was just, wanted to make sure that it's still on the radar.

[03:52:46] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay. All right. And, Counselor, I'm Met a check.

[03:52:52] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I just have a quick process question. So I don't know if there's enough support to change the, uh, retail from 2 years to one year, but could we vote on the motion on the floor and then do a separate motion on that? To see if there's support for changing that.

[03:53:13] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: It's going to be up to the motion maker. I have no control over word emotion.

[03:53:20] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I could just make a separate motion, right, after we vote on the one on the floor, right?

[03:53:27] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Maybe the city attorney could say.

[03:53:31] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Well, the motion right now does not include, uh, the motion right now is a comprehensive motion on the whole, uh, project. So, uh, if the motion maker is not, uh, interested in, in,

[03:53:49] Unknown Speaker: I didn't get that. Sorry, this stuff. Excuse me.

[03:53:56] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: The motion on the floor does not, uh, include, uh, that, uh, change from 2 years to one year, what you, uh, could do is uh, make a motion now and that would have to be disposed of before the motion on the floor to see if there's a 2nd and support for that particular item.

[03:54:22] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Oh, okay. Well, then I would like to do that. Um, to change the, I don't know if this is a condition number, but if after one year from the certificate of occupancy of the apartment building, if they're unable to find, Um, It's applicant is unable despite their reasonable efforts to market the retail space, so change that from 2 years to one years. Then other neighborhood serving retail could be used there. So that's finished under 23. Thank you.

[03:54:57] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Is there a 2nd Council member, Matt, checks, motion, council member Hicks?

[03:55:04] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I would 2nd.

[03:55:06] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, so any other discussion on, I don't know what you'd call it, also in a pre-motion or alternate motion, alternate?

[03:55:16] Unknown Speaker: Emotion 10 men.

[03:55:17] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Uh, if not, we will take a roll call vote on the amendment.

[03:55:23] City Clerk: Motion to mend? Counselor Clark.

[03:55:26] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yeah.

[03:55:27] City Clerk: Council member Hicks.

[03:55:28] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[03:55:29] City Clerk: Council member Mattachek.

[03:55:32] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Um, yes, but I think RT wanted to say something. say that before the vote? She was waving her hand.

[03:55:38] Unknown Speaker: Sorry, I didn't, I didn't want to interrupt, but I, I just, uh, we've been making notes and we want to make sure we've got captured everything in the motion because we have a lot of moving parts and I just want to, don't want to delay council, but we want to make sure we're taking the motion and right.

[03:55:55] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Um, So this is just emotion on one element, which is at the bottom of page 5 of the staff report.

[03:56:03] Unknown Speaker: Right. So it would be to amend council member, um, McAllister's motion.

[03:56:09] Unknown Speaker: No, it's not. This is only the retail piece, right?

[03:56:12] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, I get it now. Thank you. And then we'll just re read the original motion of council member McAllister's to make sure we have every item covered here. Unless we...

[03:56:28] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: We gotta finish that. Yes, so, uh, city clerk, can you start the phone call, please again?

[03:56:33] City Clerk: Sure, sure. So I had council member Clark?

[03:56:36] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yes,

[03:56:36] City Clerk: council member Hicks.

[03:56:37] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes,

[03:56:38] City Clerk: council member Mattachek?

[03:56:39] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[03:56:41] City Clerk: Council member McAllister?

[03:56:43] Councilmember John McAlister: No.

[03:56:44] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez?

[03:56:46] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[03:56:49] City Clerk: Vice Mayor May?

[03:56:50] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[03:56:51] City Clerk: Mirabi Koga.

[03:56:52] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: No.

[03:56:54] City Clerk: So motion carries 52 no abstensions.

[03:56:59] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So then we'll go back to the original motion. Council member McAllister, so can we dispensive reading the, um, items and just go through the editions?

[03:57:11] Unknown Speaker: Yeah. We need to start from scratch.

[03:57:15] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, so the attorney, I knew you were taking notes. Would you like to give us a recap?

[03:57:21] Unknown Speaker: Uh, uh, the city, for me, do you mind if um, planning staff reads that out?

[03:57:26] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Oh, that would be fine. That'd be fine.

[03:57:29] Unknown Speaker: Um, So Diana, do you want to start and then we can go maybe have uh, public works, read out the uh, the public works portions.

[03:57:40] Planner Diana: So I think the 1st one is, um, amending condition number 82 and 83 related to the uh below market rate housing that the applicant will provide the um, below market rate housing in um, in perpetuity. Then the 2nd one that I have is amending condition number 60 regarding community benefit contribution to include that the project applicant will provide, um, Wi-Fi, uh, internet connection for all the units in the project.

[03:58:22] Councilmember John McAlister: Just a BMI unit, it's not all units.

[03:58:25] Planner Diana: Yes, all the BMR, the bill of market rate, uh, units in the project. So. And then the 3rd one I have is to the, and maybe I need some help from maybe John. Um, and uh, probably John, if he's still there, to use the community benefit funds to upgrade, or look into upgrade if of the San Bernon Park. I don't know if we have decided on where the funding will be coming in for that particular amendment.

[03:58:58] Councilmember John McAlister: I believe the motion was to review the feasibility of the sand grown improvements discussed. And I thought it was also too. Well, we were talking about the uh, basketball court, benches and tables, use existing funds. And then the other major improvements would be studied.

[03:59:26] Planner Diana: So then we will not include the San Baron improvement since they're already being funded. And, um, then we can ask Don maybe to read the, The issue of the recology site, maybe help us. Craft that, craft that in motion.

[03:59:50] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: Well, I think where we landed was to direct staff to bring back, um, considerations in, converting the, um, I think it's 937 Terabella site. From the uh, Mountain View recycling center to a possible park, as part of when we, as part of the ecology agreement to be discussed in the fall. So I also, um, I also, um, What I also have is um, And yes, I'm putting my own, um, spent on this. You have to let me know if I'm capturing it right, but, you know, we do have the community benefit funding of about, I think it's 1200000 in cash. And what I'm hearing is um, to consider, um, allocating that community benefit funding to various transportation improvements. Generally active transportation improvements in the Terabella app. Tell about Bella area. Uh for consideration in the 5 years CIP. You were going to look at it within the 1st year or two. to try to.

[04:01:13] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, but then you, but you said, remember, we wanted it done before the project was done. We want to help mitigate it so that it would be brought to the council within the 1st or 2nd year.

[04:01:24] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: It can be proposed to that in the 5 year CIP, you know, and and council can see what that means in terms of other priorities.

[04:01:32] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes.

[04:01:34] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay. Okay. Don, would that encapsulate the um, the, um, traffic calming and the bike lanes.

[04:01:44] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: So, um, I heard 2 things here. One is definitely want to, want the community benefits that are being to go towards the Terrebella neighborhood in consideration of, you know, transportation, active transportation. Um, but also, what, what I heard was that wanting some kind of monitoring, after the project is completed and occupied, of the traffic conditions and cut through traffic to determine if further traffic calming is necessary.

[04:02:21] Dawn Cameron: Correct. So then that would be a separate condition or part of this list.

[04:02:30] Unknown Speaker: Well, yeah, I don't know if that's a condition on the project, that they're going to monitor it or it's something that city staff is being asked to do. The applicant's supposed to look at the parking, but city staff, I would.

[04:02:46] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, if we can get the applicant to be paid for it. That's fine with me to monitor the traffic.

[04:02:54] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: But we really haven't done that before.

[04:02:56] Dawn Cameron: No, I know.

[04:02:57] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: And and there. I really think it's what you're basically, it really is going to fall on city staff and it will fall under the auspices of the traffic, uh, neighborhood management program, TNMP.

[04:03:15] Unknown Speaker: But basically you're saying initiate it after the project's occupied so that we could see what kind of traffic impacts to the neighborhood is being created by the project.

[04:03:25] Dawn Cameron: Correct.

[04:03:30] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: I think so, what I'm hearing is, um, consider allocating funds, um, for a 5 year CIP to look at active transportation. And then a separate look at the NTMP program after the project is in place.

[04:03:44] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes. And um, my addition was to look at direct staff to look at uh, Shoreline funds to, um, offset the, the cost of, or the, the value of the public utility easement to be, um, to use funds. in the neighborhood for community benefit.

[04:04:08] Dawn Cameron: Yes, that would be item six. I'm writing these down.

[04:04:11] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes. Yes. Great. Uh, Counselor, anything else, Counselor?

[04:04:16] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I checked? Do you have? I said a quick question. So when you were talking about traffic monitoring in the NTMP, To me, the MTMP means that the neighborhood has to vote on the improvements, and I wasn't thinking the neighborhood would that we, if we see a problem, we address it.

[04:04:37] Dawn Cameron: Well, wait, do you just stay on this is it depends upon what, what? What measure is going to be used to address it? If it does turn out to be something like stop signs. Yes, we we do not do a neighborhood vote for it. It is based upon stop warrants, engineering study. It's needed to be done. But if the uh, measures to be used to affect traffic calming and reduce any cut through traffic turns out to be something like speed humps. That is something that we would want to put to a neighborhood vote. Part of when staff had the study session on changes to the NTMP program and we do need to bring back to you, then the revised program guidelines. Was breaking out that there would be some measures that the city traffic engineer would just authorized to do based upon traffic engineering studies, but other measures would still require a vote. So it can all be still encompassed under NTMP.

[04:05:45] Unknown Speaker: Okay, thanks. Great. Did we capture everything? I just have one last thing, and I wanted to confirm with Dawn, that the bike lanes on Terabella would be part of the active transportation measures looked at.

[04:06:01] Dawn Cameron: So was they such as bike lanes? Okay?

[04:06:03] Unknown Speaker: I think that's it Thank you for indulging me.

[04:06:06] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Uh, counselor, man, check the chip, something else?

[04:06:13] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Um, and then just for clarity, I just wanted to make sure our team, um, we have the language we want to use for using the shoreline funds as, um, mayor, um, just suggested.

[04:06:26] Dawn Cameron: Yeah, it says look at shoreline funds to offset the cost of easements that could be applied to the community benefits for the neighborhood.

[04:06:37] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you. All right, any other discussion on the motion? If not, uh, city quick, we get a real call, but please.

[04:06:48] City Clerk: Council member, Clark.

[04:06:50] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yeah.

[04:06:51] City Clerk: Council member Hicks.

[04:06:52] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[04:06:53] City Clerk: Council member Mattachek.

[04:06:55] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[04:06:56] City Clerk: Council member McAllister.

[04:06:58] Councilmember John McAlister: Oh, yes.

[04:06:59] City Clerk: Counselor of Ramirez.

[04:07:02] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[04:07:02] City Clerk: Vice Mayor Kamei.

[04:07:04] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes,

[04:07:04] City Clerk: may I be Koga?

[04:07:06] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi.

[04:07:07] City Clerk: Thank you.

[04:07:08] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. So emotion carry 7 0 with no abstensions. Um, it's past 10 o'clock, so I do need to entertain a motion to continue. We have one last item to go. Council member Clark.

[04:07:24] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yeah, I'll move that we, this is our last meeting, hopefully, um, before we take a summer recess. I'll move the week, continue past 10 PM to the remaining item.

[04:07:33] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Um, I'm gonna go ahead and 2nd that and and, uh, Uh, I'd like to actually call a short break too before we start the item. Um, is there any discussion? If not, can we get a roll call vote, please?

[04:07:51] City Clerk: Also number Clark.

[04:07:52] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yes, sir.

[04:07:53] City Clerk: Council member Hicks.

[04:07:55] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes, just because it's our last meeting.

[04:07:58] City Clerk: Council member, Matt, check.

[04:07:59] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[04:08:00] City Clerk: Council member McAllister.

[04:08:02] Councilmember John McAlister: Oh, you know, no. No.

[04:08:08] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez.

[04:08:10] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[04:08:11] City Clerk: Vice Mayor Kmei.

[04:08:12] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[04:08:13] City Clerk: May I be Coco?

[04:03:08] (archive recording) Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I, the motion carries, uh, 70 with no abstention. I'm sorry, 61 with no extensions. Three old man votes. I'd like to take a, can we say a 7 minute break and be back at 1045. Let's see you in a bit. Thanks.

[04:03:37] (archive recording) Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, Oh, there's four. Okay, so welcome back. Everyone, we'll go on to item 6.3, the adoption of the consolidated plan and approval of fiscal year 2021 CDBG home funding cycle in our staff presenter, staff presenter, is our assistant community development director Wayne Chen.

[04:16:58] Assistant Community Development Director Wayne Chen: Great. Thank you very much. Let me just take a moment to pull up the presentation. Um, as you may have heard there were a little bit of a technical difficulty, so let me, Just try it again. I apologize. Okay. Okay, can everyone see the screen? Okay, great. Thank you very much, mayor and council. Um, uh, again, this item is regarding the adoption of the uh, consolidated plan and approval of the FY 2021 CBG Hong Funding Cycle. I did also want to thank and recognize Orlando Reyes, our CDPG program manager and Tim Wong, our housing manager for their work on this item. The slide is a summary of the recommendations, um, along with the 2nd slide. Um, these encapsulate the um, recommendation to adopt both the consolidated plan and the annual action plan. As long as various funding amounts as part of this year's annual action plan, as required by HUD. Let's begin with the consolidated plan first. Uh, what is a consolidated plan? It is a plan that's required every 5 years by CBG and home recipients, and Mountain View is one of those recipients. The purpose is to conduct an assessment of local housing and community development needs for lower income persons and households. And then to identify priorities, goals, and target outcomes for the investment of those city BGN home funds in order to achieve those local needs and goals. It is implemented through the development and implementation of annual action plans. In this FY 20 uh 21 annual action plan is the 1st of 5 years of uh, this consolidated plan. Quick background on the process to begin with the regional process that started last year. In coordination with the county and other participating jurisdictions, it was led by a consultant who conducted the public outreach, the needs assessment, and market evaluation per HUD requirements, and drafted the consolidated plan. The draft did become available early this year, and it was considered by the HRC. Along with the annual action plan and HRC recommended council approval for both items. Uh, staff did work with the consultant afterwards to tailor the document to Bacon more, uh, Mountain View specific, and the draft was released for public comment, uh, on June 1st. And of course, tonight is council consideration of the plans. Um, any input by council, and final modifications will be made and submitted um, after tonight's meeting and submitted to HUD by the August deadline. I did want to also note that between the time of the HRC meetings, and the release of the draft of the consolidated plan, um, COVID-19 did rapidly emerge, um, and there are 2 impacts. The 1st one is, staff also did do work on um, various COVID-19 uh, responses, such as the COVID-19 uh, rent relief program. And that program, it was funded in part and facilitated by a substantial amendment of the FY 1920 annual action plan in mid-April. And that included using CDBG from the Cares Act, as well as this FY 2021 CDBG allocation to be used earlier than the beginning of next fiscal year, because there was such a need on a rent relief program. And the 2nd impact is that as it emerged, um, staff, um, really became aware of the current and also potential, um, unforeseen feature impacts of COVID-19. And so understood that uh, we also did have to review the consolidated plan. Which was developed before the emergence of COVID-19 that we had to read the whole thing through that lens of mind. So, um, it did become clear that it was important to have cleared the broad. No flexible goals to allow the city to respond to current and emerging needs over the next 5 years. Um, but this was a, a fairly significant and unanticipated workload to, uh, since you, uh, review and consolidated plan through, through this lens. The consolidated plant is an extensive document. These slides essentially summarize the wide range of needs that were identified through the public process, through the needs, assessment and market evaluation, and also staff's evaluation, um, um, in coordination with um, city staff from other departments. Um, such as the city manager's office, CSD public work, uh, works in the police department. Um, essentially the 6 needs summarized at a high level is the need to increase affordable housing opportunities, uh, responding to homelessness. Enhancing social services. Strengthening neighborhoods, promoting fair housing, and then supporting economic development and resiliency. Again, these needs were, um, identified, uh, uh, prior to COVID-19 uh, emergence, but also uh, evaluated again for, um, uh, after the COVID-19 uh, emerged. These goals pair up with those priority needs that were identified. And the goals then guide the investments for the next 5 years. Um, they look very similar to the needs. Um, so there are 6 goals, um, along with target outcomes as required by HUD. Uh, so the 6 goals are to increase affordable housing, and this could be through new supply or for example, um, acquisition and preservation and deed restricting existing units, responding to homelessness, through variety of services and programs, enhancing social services across a wide range of uh, needs. Enhancing physical infrastructure, this could be the infrastructure of nonprofit facility, but it could also include public infrastructure as well. Um, uh, projects that the city might undertake. Uh, addressing and promoting fair housing and then supporting economic uh, resiliency. So to, um, transition to the FY 2021 annual action plan again, the 1st year of this, um, 5 year cycle. And then what is the interaction plan? Again, it implements the consolidated pen goals. Um, just to note that while this is the 1st year of the five-year plan. It's the 2nd year of the funding cycle for public services, and so the services will be funded um, the same as as last year, that is the recommendation. Um, but the new um, projects are 3 capital projects that you'll see in just the moment. Quick summary on funding availability. This is just a quick summary, but it comprises this year's allocation. Uh, we do receive program income when, um, sub recipients pay the city back. And then, um, there are funds that we um, are able to reprogram for from previous years' files. But in summary, there is about 537,000. Of CDBG funding, uh, available and about one point um, about 1100000 for home funding per capital and uh, housing projects. These are the 3 projects. Um, the 1st as you may um, be, uh, familiar with is the Mariposa, uh, apartments, um, that came through alongside the Prometheus Project. The 2nd project is rehab of the graduate house, which does serve formerly homeless individuals. And the 3rd is the construction of Moor Park. The 1st project is connected to go one, increasing affordable housing opportunities. The 2nd project is connected to goal 2, responding to homelessness, and uh, the construction moral park is connected to goal 4, uh, enhancing physical infrastructure to strengthen neighborhoods. Um, that concludes now's presentation. These are the recommendations here once again, and happy to answer any questions you may have.

[04:25:33] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you very much. Mr. Chen, any questions from council members? I don't see any hands. So with that, I'll open this up for public public comment. Any members of the public wishing to speak on this item if you are in the uh, participant attendee box. Please hit the raised hand button at the bottom. Um, and if you're on the phone, please hit Star Night. And we'll start with Joanne Price. If you can unmute yourself, please, Joanne.

[04:26:08] Joanne Price: I am a muted. Oh, you are now? I'm there in city council members. Thank you for your time and late evening. I'm Joanne Price. and BP Real Estate for Life Moves, and I'm here tonight to request the additional funding to support the remodel of our facility graduate house. And I am familiar with Mountain View, and I work tirelessly on the Maple Mall Housing Project, and that also took 5 years to approve back in 2008. And I'll say if there's opportunity to use any community benefits. Well, part of the 15000000 park fees from the last project to build a small 100 bed shelter and show the homeless population in Mountain View could be eliminated from the 600 today to effective 0 in a few years. Um, so for those of you who are in familiar with our organization, we are the largest provider of shelter and support services in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. And we've had a substantial and successful history of providing services to mountain view residents experience in homelessness. A graduate house provides transitional housing to low-income individuals who have been homeless, including formally chronically homeless individuals. It serves up to 10 mountain view residents every year, and who would otherwise be living on the street, or in cars, or other places not meant for human habitation. The average length of stay is about 12 to 18 months. And the residents are required to work and engage in preparing themselves to live independently.

[04:27:52] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Your time is up. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else from the public wishing to comment on this item? Uh, yes, Brad Whiplin. Please unmute yourself, Brad.

[04:28:09] Brad Wibbling: Uh, good evening, uh, mayor, council and staff. Uh, tonight I'll call you housing warriors, the people that are still up. promoting housing. Brad Wibbling with bridge housing. We are in the queue for some home money tonight. Just wanted to do a quick reminder. The Mariposa Apartments is a 48 unit. Um, 1960s era building that we will be acquiring about a month. Uh, we're doing a significant rehab to that. We'll be recording a regulatory agreement in perpetuity. Um, We expect to start construction in about 90 days. These home funds here, although we plan to use them for acquisition. They really are having a very desirous effect of reducing debt, which will be, you know, have reduced pressure on the rents long term in this building. Uh, we've already, um, left rents where they are and decided not to raise rents going forward at the scheduled rate for all the obvious reasons, um, uh, the housing crisis, uh, COVID-19, et cetera. Uh, were deep into design work, our general contractors on board. I know, we look very forward to getting started. Thank you.

[04:29:29] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. And next, Alex B. Please send me it yourself. Alex?

[04:29:41] Alex B: Okay. Now I can unmute myself. I don't know why it takes so long for the button to show up. I'd like to thank Joanne and Brad and all the other people who are working on the ground. helping all the people who are left behind by these other policies and projects that aren't helping them attain reasonable, good housing. Uh, people like that are doing great work and solving problems and uh, it makes me feel really good to see that there are people who care and are willing to put in the effort. So, thank you.

[04:30:18] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: And that's good at Kathleen King. Please unmute yourself.

[04:30:25] Kathleen King: Hi, I'm Kathleen King, and I just want to check that this is also the item on the public service funds. Mayor Abby Koga? Okay. Thank you. I thought so. Uh, so I am here for Healthier Kids Foundation, I'm the CEO and I see staff recommends funding again, and I really appreciate it. I, I do want to state that it helps to get city funds because we usually match that uh, $2 for every dollar we receive from you. So, when we say we'll do vision screening and case management. We also have funding. From the county that allows us to do dental and hearing. So, when we do one, we usually do all 3 and we're finding with COVID-19 that it is difficult to get children. The healthcare they need and this gives us the perfect opportunity to go into preschools and schools, to work with the children, and the plan is we will continue to do that, little slower this next year than we've been doing during, uh, because of the shelter in place and the social distancing. So we will be slower this year than we have been in the past. But we still plan to do what we've been doing each year. And we appreciate the support of the Mountain View city council. And thank you for working so late. I know how that goes.

[04:31:56] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. And we'll go to Kelly Batson. Please unmute yourself.

[04:32:05] Kelly Batson: Hi there. My name is Kelly Batson. I'm with United Way Bay Area, and thank you to Mayor Council and staff, um, for, for staying up so late and and supporting this important part of the work. Um, I'm I'm actually representing our a specific program, um, our 211 program, um, where we answer calls and texts to, um, help people get connected to services, um, in Mountain View and throughout the county and actually throughout the Bay Area. And last year we, um, helped a little over 300 folks in Mountain View, um, get connected to services with our, with our top call being about housing. So I know that this is on the mind of everyone right now. Um, this year, actually, so far, we've already helped over 500. Um, you know, with COVID-19 that we've had a close partnership with the county. We're seeing lots of calls coming in about the pandemic and resources around testing and essential workers, but we're also connecting people to rent payment assistance, et cetera. So, um, thank you for the recommendation to support 211 again, um, and appreciate you all and all yield the rest of my time. Thank you.

[04:33:11] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Any other members of the public machine to speak on this item? Kate T dash H. If you can unmute yourself, please.

[04:33:25] Kate: Good evening. Uh, yes, I'm Kate. I'm with Junior Achievement of Northern California, just to keep this very brief and quick, but just wanted to thank you for the recommendation to continue funding with one of the grant recipients, and we provide financial literacy and work readiness curriculum, uh, which is not typically provided in the school district. So, um, this is really important to kind of provide that foundation of economic prosperity, um, and lay, um, a strong foundation in education and financial health, uh, the future generation. So thank you so much.

[04:34:00] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. And Mark Fisler, please, uh, unmute yourself, Mark.

[04:34:11] Mark Fisler: Good evening, everyone. This is Mark Fisler. I am with parents helping parents. We have the privilege of serving families with children with special needs here in the valley and appreciate the long partnership we've had with the city of Mountain View. Just want to, uh, again, thank you for the recommendation to fund us again and in the coming fiscal year. Just a couple of words about the families that we serve. I think the pandemic has been hard and everybody, as you know, but I think it's hit and there are a lot of studies that show, it's hitting families with children, special needs even harder. The incidence rate of catching COVID is double the general population. Unfortunately, deaths fall in the same category, and economic impacts have been very hard for these families. And, uh, when you also think about the fact that special education for these children have been, uh, disrupted, day programs for the older people with disabilities have been disrupted. So the continued support of the city will be very important. so we continue to serve these families. Thank you very much for staying up late with us.

[04:35:16] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? I don't see any more hands in public comments, I will close public comment and bring it back to council or discussion in a potential motion, and I have Council member McAllister.

[04:35:34] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, I don't like being around the bush. I'm going to make a motion. Since I don't see any council questions, we can go from there. Okay. Uh, 6.3. So adopt the fiscal year 2020 to 25 consolidated.

[04:35:53] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: I'm just going to say you could you could move the staff recommendation, none of them require a legal reading. But your colleagues be into it.

[04:36:02] Councilmember John McAlister: That makes no sense. Staff recommendations. Thank you, sir. Lucas wanted to do it, but I beat him to it.

[04:36:11] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Counselor McAllister and Council member Ramirez.

[04:36:15] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. I'll go ahead and 2nd the motion. Just really briefly. I don't want to take too much time. Um, I, I, I don't want to, you know, change things at the last minute, but I, longer term, you know, I, I do, as much as I appreciate the flexibility that having multiple goals towards us, it means that we're, um, or spreading ourselves pretty thin. We don't get a lot of money, and uh giving out small amounts of money, um, helps a lot more organizations, but it also means that the impact will be pretty limited, so I, I do think, um, you know, it may be worth exploring, uh, in future consolidated plans, uh, a more limited set of goals, uh, where we can have greater impacts with the limited funds that we get. Um, just for whatever it's worth. I you know, I appreciated, um, from all the public speakers, but, uh, you know, one of my personal priorities is, uh, working aggressively to reduce and eliminate homelessness. Um, and I'd like to see, you know, again, not a lot of money that's coming from the federal government, but, um, because the consolidated plan is part of the, the broader, uh, you know, uh, component of the broader policy framework that we're working with for, for homeless policy. You know, I do think we, we, might want to spend a little bit of time when it's appropriate exploring some more uh innovative uh service models. I know, um, in there and maybe other members of the council have talked about, uh, tiny homes or, or, you know, modular units that can serve as transitional housing. Uh, I'd like to explore facilities just generally appreciating that the safe parking program that we have is temporary. Um, and I don't expect the homeless population to, to disappear anytime soon. So, um, I support the motion. Um, I appreciate all of the work that stuff is put into this, um, grateful for all of our, uh, nonprofit partnerships. Um, but I, I do think we may want to evaluate at some point whether spreading the limited amount of money that we have so thinly is, is really the best way to serve uh, our community. Thank you.

[04:38:34] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: You. And counselor Metachek.

[04:38:38] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Yeah, I agree with those comments that council member Ramirez just made. Um, I sort of had the same reaction that there is so much in here. Um, and maybe we ought to have more focus. And because it didn't like jump out at me, what the top priorities were, because there were so many examples of things we could do and we are spread pretty thin. Um, and we could be spread even more thin if we did all the things that were listed there. Um, I would just add that, um, I do feel like the, both the documents need one more run through in terms of, um, a couple things. Um, if there is mountain view data, I'd love to see it added. Uh, at 1st I didn't realize that, um, this was a document done with other cities and like sort of a county perspective. And so when I came across one of the 1st numbers, I thought, wow, that seems really high. And I thought, oh, that's because it's the county, not mountain view. So I think it'd be good if we have mountain view statistics to include those maybe in place up. Or in addition to the county. Um, I also, one of the other things that kind of, um, concerned me is, um, sometimes it seems like we're overestimating the number of people that, um, might be helped. And, um, You know, I want to make sure we're not like double counting and saying, you know, we're going to help. 5000 people um, or 3000 people this year. So over 5 years, it's 15,000 people, when it could be some of the same people. Um, so I feel like, let's make it clear if we're talking about how many people per year and there is some double counting in there. Because it does seem like for a lot of these things. It's in a very large number of people who are being helped and I, I just don't think that's, the number of individual people. Um, and then I do one more run through on, um, just sort of, you know, sorry, grammar and spelling. Uh, let's make this really tight, um, before we send it in. Um, but I will be supporting motion. Thank you.

[04:40:54] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. We have some more comments, council member Clark.

[04:40:59] Councilmember Chris Clark: It's super brief just before we, um, just before we vote. I just want to say, um, you know, you thanked us for staying up late, but really, this is one of those times, um, when we should be thanking the organizations and and all the people who work and volunteer for them for everything that they're doing right now during these very trying times, and I know, not only are your, are you getting more requests for service, but you are, uh, fundraising is probably more difficult right now, and so I just want to, Um, I just want to thank everyone who's in, involved in these organizations, whether you're, at the top and running it or you're, or you're a volunteer. um, I think, um, that, you know, these are the organizations that are going to help us get through this, and I just wanted to say thank you um, before we go.

[04:41:48] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you Council member Hicks.

[04:41:52] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So, I 2nd that, that, uh, thanks, and, um, just to be a contrarian, I'll say, I kind of like the 6 categories and the broadness of it. Particularly because of the, hopefully, well, particularly because of the pandemic. I thought it gave us the flexibility to, um, address a variety of needs and maybe see how this plays out and what the needs are in the future. I think we could be seeing a paradigm shift, and I think the flexibility leaves us open to addressing the numerous needs that, um, that will come out of that. Um, I'm hoping that possibly one of the things that happens is we'll see some, um, maybe some, uh, retail space that will be underused that maybe we can buy up as a, you know, homeless or affordable housing solution. Um, you know, if both good and bad things come out of the pandemic, that's one of the good things I'm hoping for. So, thank you.

[04:42:59] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: And vice mayor?

[04:43:04] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Um, so just a couple things. Um, just want to echo what council member Clark was mentioning, I was thinking, oh, they're so kind to thank us, but really, you know, thank you for staying up late to provide the comment. Um, and um, I actually agree with council member. Hicks, I think, um, I'm I'm fine with, um, the way things have been presented by staff. The one comment I do have is, you know, we kind of review CDBG funds, uh, you know, once a year, um, and then this consolidated plan is, you know, uh, irregular as well, and I know because many service models are shifting, funding and resources are shifting. I'd really like to find opportunities to continue conversations with our community partners outside of this process. And, um, you know, find good ways for that information to, um, funnel to counsel, um, in how we can be helpful and supportive. Um, of the various programs, um, as they're going through these massive changes. And I don't think that that dialogue always happens. Um, and so I would really like to to just put that out there. Thank you.

[04:44:22] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. And um, just my few comments. I actually agree with counselor Hickson, the vice mayor. Um, what I've, I've been reminded of is that, um, the, the funding that the, that we provide, however small it is, can be leveraged to gain funding, um, and, uh, from other sources. Um, oftentimes, um, finders look for, you know, broad participation and and, um, broad support. And so, um, even though it might be small amounts, it actually does help these organizations. And frankly, a lot of these organizations have been with us for a very long time. And so, um, I think it might be challenging to look at, um, you know, not funding some of them down the road. So, as I'm open to revisiting everything, but, um, I do want to be mindful of the long relationships that we have, um, built with a lot of these organizations and I've seen it 12 times already. So, um, so that's um, something to consider. Um, so with that, if there are any other discussion? If not, can we get a roll call vote, please?

[04:45:34] City Clerk: All right, cancel number Clark.

[04:45:36] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yep.

[04:45:37] City Clerk: Council member Hicks.

[04:45:38] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[04:45:39] City Clerk: Council member Mattachek.

[04:45:41] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[04:45:42] City Clerk: Council member McAllister.

[04:45:43] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes.

[04:45:44] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez.

[04:45:47] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[04:45:48] City Clerk: Vice Mayor May.

[04:45:49] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[04:45:50] City Clerk: Yeah, B Koga.

[04:45:51] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I, thank you. Thank you. We should carry 70 with no extensions, and we will go on to item 7 council staff committee reports. Do any council numbers have reports? Or items to ring up? No? Oh, okay, here we go. Vice mayor,

[04:46:10] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: can I? Sorry about that. Couldn't get the hand up. Um, so I did want to report to our colleagues that the subcommittee on race equity inclusion met today at four. Um, I believe some of you joined us virtually as well, um, and sharing the update, um, because my colleagues, uh, kindly elected me to chair that subcommittee. Um, I think we got a lot of really great ideas and feedback on next steps from the public. Um, and as was mentioned, the human relations commission will be working on community listening sessions. Um, and we'll work with staff. And the goal is for the subcommittee, um, to meet again and we're hoping mid-August. And, um, in the meantime, we'll be working with staff to have both formal and informal conversations, um, with the community and residents. Um, and making sure that while we're doing that, we're also, um, doing outreach and um, translation services. Um, And so that's the, that's that date. Thank you.

[04:47:23] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Counselor McAllister?

[04:47:26] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, I would a couple of things, but I had a question about your subcommittee. So there was a lot of talk of this independent community thing, now that's, you're going to make that recommendation to the council, or you're just exploring it at this point in time.

[04:47:45] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: We received a lot of public comment. And so my understanding and electricity manager McCarthy on this, is that staff is going to take all of that input and come back, um, in mid-August with kind of the research that they've done. And when we come back, when the subcommittee comes back to the full council in the fall, we'll have some ideas to share. And I look to the city manager if you want to add anything.

[04:48:12] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor May. that is accurate. The intention would be to just research the different models and methods there are out there. Um, some ideas were raised today that um, I think could be feasible. So we just need some time to look through that and think through it, and then the recommendation would be brought before the full council in the fall.

[04:48:33] Councilmember John McAlister: Oh, because I was listening to the comments and it sounded like, well, the subcommittee said HRC is going to do this and then we're going to do this community review thing and I was just wanted to get clarity on that. So. That will be coming back to the full council then.

[04:48:48] Unknown Speaker: Correct.

[04:48:49] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. Hey, I just, this is for, for a city manager and for my fellow council members. So, we said this last item, not this one, the one before the 6.2 is sausage making. And there was a lot of things that we brought forward. And I'm thinking, was it under the context that since this was a fight, it was a gatekeeper 5 years ago, that we evolved in what we, our expectations were? And I was wondering if it's possible that staff, We'll see what we've been adding to the projects so that this becomes a regular, I mean, it's part of the program. I know Council member, Manachek and I were talking about the perpetuity should just be an automatic. It shouldn't be, well, we're going to ask the guy, no, if you want your project, this is it, or I like my broadband or whatever, that we did look at a lot of things to add, do we think, made it a better project for the community. And I was hoping staff would pick up on, okay, well this is what they're looking at. This is what's important. Let's go that direction and make sure it's included in the project. So, is that a reasonable request in the city manager that, Hey, you saw what this was because we really did it. Is that, would you respond to that a little bit?

[04:50:09] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Sure, yes. Council member McAllister, I think we are definitely seeing themes and obviously as I begin my tenure and have more meetings and see more of these projects and I will start to understand more and be able to talk to staff about the, the priorities and the, um, items that this council's interested in seeing. So, yes, I think that is certainly something that, um, will be, um, on the table for staff so that we know going forward the sort of community benefits and things that council's interested in.

[04:50:46] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, good. There was one item on that project that I was going to bring up with that staff learned about earlier. They wanted credit for that community park. Community Square, and the council and staff said no. And I want to pre-sert if, Artie's still on her, just tell him I appreciate... that she heard staff. I mean, the council say, no, we're not going to be continually giving credit for things that really don't belong. So I just wanted to say thank you to already. And actually the applicant was quite, uh, Appraising of Artie House. She was very well held her ground on that one and he said, okay, we give up on that one. But the last item I wanted to bring up was, we keep getting all these, I'm a member of this community group, and I'm a member of this community group and this and this, and if there's any way, and I'm going to look into the city attorney that, you know, we got, um, affordable Mountain View affordable housing. There could be 2 or 3 people or we're this. So, 2 people could form a group and they come to us. Is there any way that we can get a better sense of these groups that they don't all slay spring up and gives themselves instant credibility? Because I know, This is for council member Ramirez, he was very, when the election came by a couple of years ago, he said, hey, people need to identify themselves. And he was more looking at the money behind it. But is there a way we can get a better sense that these groups are, you know, they're here today gone tomorrow, and just how we can get a better sense of giving them credibility or just recognize them for what they are?

[04:52:26] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Yeah, I just want to make sure I understand your question. Are you, are you asking, uh, if there's a way to have them identify themselves in more detail or you would like to learn more about them.

[04:52:38] Councilmember John McAlister: Or register that, and here's, you know, there's their goal. you know, what they're trying to do. Who's in charge of the program? Yada, yada, yada.

[04:52:47] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: You know, if you're talking about it in the context of public comment, no, we cannot require people to provide information. We actually can't even require, uh, people to, uh, provide their name and where they live. That's a voluntary thing. So, uh, if, uh, there's really no way to, uh, require somebody to prove up who they are. I hope I'm answering your question.

[04:53:15] Councilmember John McAlister: But not then, but their group that they keep saying, I'm with this group or so forth. So just, is there a way to get, figure out these groups and what they really mean and who, who, who they represent?

[04:53:27] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: We certainly, if we receive a letter or a staff receives a letter or correspondence from a group, Uh, certainly we could, uh, staff could, uh, do some very basic research on, on the parameters of that group. And, um, It's challenging though. Are you asking for a report to council on the various groups?

[04:53:52] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, I'm asking that they would be required to maybe fill out some kind of a form that that they're using a name that they're represent, what they represent. So, you know, it's just like nobody, you know, we get 2 people, we make a group, and then we stand in front and say, well, we're with the world, you know, hot dog foundation, we like it.

[04:54:14] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Yeah, unfortunately, it goes back and I want to make sure we're talking about in the context of public comment, there's no way to verify or require a person or a group to verify what they're saying is true, verify whether they belong to a group or describe what that group stands for. Public comment is virtually unrestricted unless somebody's disrupting a meeting. So, uh,

[04:54:43] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, could they be considered lobbyists? Not, you know, when we have a project, we have an item and they're they're lobbying safe.

[04:54:53] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: And are you now talking outside of public comment?

[04:54:58] Councilmember John McAlister: No, just during a, you know, council meeting.

[04:55:02] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: No, there's really, uh, There, again, there are very few restrictions on public comment. Uh, provided at a public meeting.

[04:55:12] Councilmember John McAlister: So you can be, you can make up an affiliation and we just go with it.

[04:55:17] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Yeah, unfortunately, that that is, um, There are very few restrictions on public comment.

[04:55:25] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. That's all I got.

[04:55:27] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: you. Counselor Metachek.

[04:55:31] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thanks. So, um, I said earlier that, um, under this item, I was going to see if there is support for asking staff to bring back a modification of our rental and ownership, affordable housing ordinances, to change the term from 55 years to in perpetuity, so that we don't have the conversation with the applicant for every single project, although this one. I appreciate that staff did exactly what, um, we said earlier, which was they let the applicant know that we were likely to ask for it. So it made it much easier to have that conversation. But, um, Can we see if there's a, enough support to bring those back? Do I make motion or just, is this a strong? Show hands.

[04:56:22] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Well, um, I just wanted to clarify. I thought that when we did the phase 2 of BMR, um, formal housing strategy, geez, we did include it, it was just that these projects were prior to that, but am I mistaken in my memory. I don't know if Wayne's still around.

[04:56:43] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I think we ask that, um, at a recent council meeting. I can't remember which one. And I believe the answer was in the ordinance, it's 55 years.

[04:56:54] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay. Um, we can just do a can boat. Folks want to look at that? So that one, do, do, for everyone. So could we bring that back then to change the BMR requirement to in perpetuity instead of 55 years? Great.

[04:57:15] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, oh, cancel. Sorry. Yes. Oh, my understanding was the same as yours, Mayor, that we did make that requirement and that these are exempt just because they were far enough in the process. So, in the event, staff confirms that we already have that requirement in the ordinance, then it wouldn't need to come back to us, right?

[04:57:36] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, great. you. I staff to check and then, yeah.

[04:57:40] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Yeah. And I'll check with the community development department and the ordinance. So we'll check on that.

[04:57:46] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Right. Thank you. Um, and then the other thing is, um, I attended the A Bag General Assembly meeting. Um, I just attended as a member of the public. Um, because I wanted to hear what they had to say regarding um, the Rena allocation. And, um, it was interesting. Um, Artie's no longer, I don't think, here with us, but, um, there was a discussion about, um, different factors that should be taken into consideration or not, um, when it comes to the allocation for the individual cities. And the folks who were on the methodology committee, um, either, uh, held up a piece of paper that said green, yellow, or red. Unfortunately, as a member of the public, we couldn't see any of those. Um, but if it was green, if there were a majority green, um, then the, um, factor would be, um, included for discussion, uh, about how are we going to factor this in? Um, if it was read? Nope, it's going to be excluded in yellow was. Not sure. We gonna have to talk about it. Um, but for me, one of the interesting aspects of the meeting was, um, the public comment and there was quite a bit. Um, and the vast majority of the comments were that the, uh, Rena numbers were too low. And that they needed to be much, much higher. Not for individual cities. Sorry, they were, because right now we just have the larger number. I guess it's the county level, right? Um, and a lot of people or for the Bay Area. They wanted those numbers to be uh, that big number to be much, much larger than it currently is. Um, in order to um, address the housing situation. Um, So I thought that was really interesting. Um, but I spoke with the city manager, um, about the meeting and apparently, um, we are going to get, uh, a memo. I can't remember when, um, but Archie's going to provide us with a memo on the status of what's going on and we'll have a discussion at a council meeting. Sorry not to, don't mean to put words in your mouth, but, um, I think that was the summary, right?

[05:00:06] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Yes, thank you. I'm at a check, yes. Yes. You should have a memo shortly. If not this week, then next week. Um, just outlining the different, um, background and what's happened so far. And then the plan is to bring an item for council consideration and feedback. Um, likely it will be one of the meetings in September. So council will be able to provide input before the decisions are made by A-Bag.

[05:00:34] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: And then just one more thing and this, um, maybe doesn't traditionally fall into item 7, but I was really happy tonight to hear. So many people say, Mountain View is a leader in housing. I think this is the 1st council meeting that I've been a part of where so many people from the audience said that. It's good that people recognize that and are now saying it. That's it. Thank you.

[05:01:03] Unknown Speaker: You're here. 2nd that.

[05:01:05] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, Anyone else with comments? Um, I just had a couple of items. Um, I signed on to a letter uh recently. I know, council member McAllister is aware of it, um, to uh, MTC. Uh, they are in charge of the carers funding that transportation agencies get. And for whatever reason, um, VTA has been, was recommended as getting less than, um, other agencies are less than our fair share. And so, uh, we, the mayors were asked to write a letter, um, to the blue ribbon task force of MTC, asking that BTA get its full, full funding. Um, I think that vote was to happen yesterday. I don't know. I haven't heard yet what the result was and it's a recommendation that will go to the full MTC board later on this summer, I believe. Um, but I, if I, I find out, I will let you know. Um, the other item was um, our uh, Saturday morning call about test COVID testing. Um, I think you may have heard that we should be hearing something tomorrow from Dr. Cody. Um, the plan was that, um, instead of focusing on reopening of certain businesses, they would actually start looking at reopening of, um, activities that could be done safely. Um, but in light of the uptick that we've, uh, been experiencing. I'm not sure if that's gonna happen tomorrow. So stay tuned for that. Um, and then as we discussed earlier under the telecommute resolution, um, we did have this um, polling, uh, pollster, give us some data and uh, uh, she sent us the slides. I'm happy to share that with all of you. It was very interesting to see, um, the attitudes of uh, uh, folks here in the Bay Area towards telecommuting. Overall, people like it. Um, maybe not full time, but some part of the week. And, um, so again, uh, we're looking at doing more, more polling in hopes that that helping us shape uh, future policies. So with that, um, is there anything else from staff? And if not, city attorney, do we have a closed session?

[05:03:24] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: No post at your report tonight.

[05:03:26] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: All right. Well, thank you everyone. Thank you, colleagues. I hope you have a great summer vacation, and we will stand adjourned until Tuesday, August 25th. So have a great summer and uh, enjoy. Hope you get some.

[05:03:45] Unknown Speaker: Take care. Thank you. Yeah.

• ← Previous
• Next →