October 24, 2023 Joint Meeting of Mountain View City Council and Shoreline Regional Park Community

Video

Transcript

[00:00:00] Mayor Alison Hicks: Tony Loeb will make a closed session announcement, and then the city council welcomes public comment on the item listed for closed session.

[00:00:10] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Good evening, council members. This is City Attorney Jennifer Logue. There's one item on this evening's closed session agenda. Item 2. is a conference with legal counsel regarding existing litigation under government code section 54956.9. The name of the case is San Francisco Baykeeper versus the city of Mountain View, United States District Court case number 20 dash CV dash 00824. Thank you.

[00:00:36] Mayor Alison Hicks: Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on the closed session item for tonight? If so, either raise your hand in Zoom or submit us a blue speaker card. See no in-person speakers. And also, I see no virtual speakers. So we will now recess to the plaza conference room for closed session and return to the council chambers at the close to continue to the regular session. Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the joint meeting of the Mountain View City Council in Shoreline Regional Park Community of October 24, 2023. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

[00:01:35] Unknown Speaker: Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic, for which it stands, one nation, under God, invisible, with liberty, and justice for all.

[00:01:57] Mayor Alison Hicks: We're now on item number 2 of your agenda, the assistant city clerk, will take attendance by roll call.

[00:02:05] Unknown Speaker: I'll council members present.

[00:02:06] Mayor Alison Hicks: Oh, nice. That was fast. Thank you. Unfortunately, I need to announce that in recent weeks, several of our neighboring elected decision making bodies have been subjected to disruptive racist verbal attacks by anonymous callers during virtual public comments. The city of Mountain View is fully committed to racial, religious, and cultural equity and justice, as we strive to create a welcoming, safe, and inclusive community for all. The council welcomes respectful and non threatening public comments regarding matters over which the council has jurisdiction. Comments deemed otherwise, pursuant to the council code of conduct and the government code, may be grounds for terminating a speaker's comment period. With that said, we'll move on to item number three, which is presentations, please note that this is a presentation only. The city council will not take any action, and public comment will occur after the presentation item. If you'd like to speak on this item in person, submittedly, blue speaker card to the city clerk now. So, um, I will come, I will come up to the podium, and the presentation today is on the National Domestic Domestic Violence Awareness Month. So it's a proclamation regarding that. We are happy to be joined this evening by Shabana Ansari. Legal advocacy coordinator, Matri, to accept this proclamation. Matri is a Santa Clara County based domestic violence organization, dedicated to helping families and individuals from South Asia, facing domestic violence, emotionally abuse, cultural alienation, and family conflict. Will you please join me at the lectern?

[00:04:26] Mayor Alison Hicks: So, this is a very long proclamation, which you can bring home with you, I will not read the whole thing, but I'll read some selections. So it's a city of Mountain View proclamation, reading, whereas, although progress has been made towards preventing and ending domestic violence, and providing support to survivors and their families, important work remains to be done. And, whereas domestic violence programs in California provide essential lifesaving services for survivors, their children, and communities. And, whereas there's a need to provide education, awareness, and understanding of domestic violence, and its causes. And whereas there is a need to support and amplify prevention programs, and community based strategies, to create healthy environments, and decrease the likelihood of perpetration, thereby stopping domestic violence, from occurring in the first place, and whereas there were 84 domestic violence related homicides in California in 2022. of which 63 of the fatalities were female, and 17 were male. And whereas domestic violence affects people of all genders, sexual orientations, ages, racial, ethnic, cultural, social, religious, and economic groups in the United States, and here in California. Now, therefore, I, Alison Hicks, mayor of the city of Mountain View, along with my colleagues on the city council, do hereby proclaim the month of October as national domestic of violence awareness month. So here's a gift, you can take that home. And I hope you have some comments for us. Thank you.

[00:06:19] Shabana Ansari: Thank you. Good evening, honorable mayor, council member, city staffs, and members of the public. My name is Shabana Ansari, and I'm a resident of Mountain View. Today, I stand here as an advocate for victims and survivors of domestic violence. I represent Maitri, an organization devoted to serving victims and survivors optimistic violence since 1991. And want to take a few moments to talk about an epidemic that is pervasive in our home, city, states, country and all over the world. Domestic violence exist in all communities, irrespective of culture, religion, sexual orientation, financial status, and immigration realities. Domestic violence is a pattern, of course, of controlling behavior, then that can include physical abuse, emotional, psychological abuse, sexual or financial, using money and financial tools to exert control. Research shows that nearly 20 people per minute are abused by an intimate partner in the United States. Domestic violent programs receives more than 20,000 calls a day in an average. The presence of firearms increases the risk of homicide by 500% in situation involving domestic violence. We were reassured about the need of prevention of domestic violence. In the past few years, as pandemic opened our eyes to the severity of the situation. State based responses, community based organizations, and members of the community in general. We all have our path to play. The need of comprehensive plan to address domestic violence in our communities is urgent. And we thank the city of Mountain View for providing much needed assistance in many areas, as well as requests to stepping up the effort. I request the city council to continue to enact and support policies that address intersectional approach, to address domestic violence, homelessness, pay, equity, reproductive rights, poverty, reduction, reproductive justice, banning child marriages to name a few. Support funding for domestic violence, subways providers at the federal, state, county, and city levels. Rethink law enforcement responses to crisis situation, with special focus on stopping brutality against people of color and training on domestic violence. Evaluate an improved language, accent at city facilities, offer training on cultural responsiveness to various local government employees and agencies, involve non-governmental organization as thought partners while planning city activities. Uplift the voices of the minority group whenever possible as they lack representation in committees and other policy spaces. Mitri has been a provider for a long time. We are happy to support the city of Mountain View and its resident and needed. To the community members, I urge you to recognize domestic violence as a pressing issue. Exemplify healthy relationship for the children at home, elect leaders and promote policies that contribute towards building a just and equitable future for all of us. Thank you for adopting this proclamation and commemorating October's domestic violence awareness. Thank you.

[00:09:50] Mayor Alison Hicks: Thank you for coming and speaking on an often difficult subject to speak about publicly and working on it in general. Do other members of council have comments? Okay, thank you then. Um... Now, next on our agenda is, um... Okay, next on our agenda is the consent calendar. item number four. These items will be approved by one motion, unless any member of the council wishes to remove an item for discussion. If you'd like to speak on this item or the next item, oral communications on non-agenda items, in person, please submit a blue speaker card, and if you'd like to speak virtually, please raise your hand in Zoom. Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comments on these items? Or pollen item. I see no comments. So we're back for council action. Is there anyone pulling an item speaking to an item? I see the vice mayor.

[00:11:10] Vice Mayor Pat Showalter: Yes, I would just like to speak to an item. Item 4.2. The safe parking lot, B, adding parking for commuter vehicles. This safe parking lot was designed to provide room for RVs and vans that people are living in there. It's a great program to get RVs off their city streets and connect these residents to services, to help them move forward with their lives, and find permanent housing. But like most other residents, the people in safe parking need to commute to their jobs. They need a place to park their cars. This item adds more than 20 spaces for commuter vehicle parking at the Lot B site. And that's important because otherwise, they were having to do surface street parking. And there's very little on street parking in the neighborhoods around where Lot B is. So it was quite a hike for them to this on street parking. So whenever there's a big project like this, there's a lot of thank yous that need to go out. And in this one, there's serval organizations that we really need to thank. First, I think, is live nation. We want to thank you for being willing to share a little more of the parking lot that you have leased from the city. And we want to thank the county of Santa Clara, who's the operator of the safe parking lot, and has helped us with getting the waiver, so we can operate a 24/7. We want to thank Move Mountain View, who is our local nonprofit, that is the contract service provider, and, of course, all the city of Mountain View staff who worked diligently on this. There's also many volunteers who bring these issues to our attention and help us figure out ways to solve them. Anyway, projects like this are a lot more complicated than they seem at first glass, glance, and this one wasn't any exception to that rule. As you hear when the consent calendar motion is read. Three legal documents had to be amended to allow for the addition of these spaces. It took time, but now those amendments have been made, and the extra parking spots can happen. It should improve the quality of the residents of Lot B considerably. So I'm really glad that this is happening, and I'd just like to thank everyone who had a hand in that.

[00:13:40] Mayor Alison Hicks: Thank you, Council member Mattercheck.

[00:13:42] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. I'd like to pull item 4.6 for separate consideration.

[00:13:46] Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay. Anyone else? Okay, are there, is there a, for the, I see a motion, for the remainder of the consent calendar, uh, by Council member, Kameh, a second by Council member, Kameh, Um, I believe, uh, council member Ramos, that you need to read the title of the resolutions attached to items 4, 2, 4, 3, and 4, 4.

[00:14:18] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you, Mayor. I move to approve the balance of the consent calendar -4.6. Um, and that would include item 4.2, adopt the resolution of the Shoreline Regional Park, community authorizing the community manager or Designee, to amend the amended and restated amphitheater ground lease agreement with Live Nation to expand a portion of Lot B that may be used for safe parking to include a new commuter parking area, and finding these actions to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under sequel guidelines section 15301. And 15061 B3. To be read entitled only, were further reading waived, and adopt the resolution of the city of Mountain View, authorizing the city manager, or designate to, one, amend the amended, restated amphitheater ground lease, agreement with Live Nation to expand the portion of Lot B that may be used for safe parking to include a new commuter parking area, two, amend the Shoreline Ampitheater Lot B lease agreement with the County of Santa Clara to add a new commuter parking area, and three, amend funding agreement with the county of Santa Clara for preventing and ending homelessness in Mountain View to add a new commuter parking area at Shoreline Lot B. And binding these actions to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Sequel Guidelines section 15301 and 15061 B3. To be read in title or only further reading waived. Item 4.3, adopt a resolution of the city council, the city of Mountain View, authorizing the middle of application for all cal recycle grants for which the city is eligible to be read in title only, further reading, waived. Item 4.4 Adopt a resolution of the city council, city and mountain view, authorizing the city manager or designate to reimburse the Mountain View Wisman School District. A total of $550,000 as the city's share of the cost to install the traffic signal and make related improvements at the intersection of North Wisman Road and Pacific Drive, to be read in title only, further reading waived.

[00:16:34] Mayor Alison Hicks: Thank you. Now we can vote. It always takes a while. Hmm. No, is there a technical difficulty? Now we can. Okay, passes unanimously. Now, we're on 4.6. Council member Medicare?

[00:17:38] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So, I pulled this, but I want to make it clear that I am supportive of creating the JPA. I had several questions about it, and I appreciate folks chatting with me about this. Um, I guess my concern is more about, um, the interaction of the legislative action committee, um, of the city's association JPA, um, with our own, um, legislative platform and the advocacy we do. And, um, you know, things have gotten perhaps more complicated and more, um, potentially um, polarized, um, between cities. And, um, I guess what I would like to do, and not as part of the JPA, but, um, ask the city's association in their bylaws to clarify, um, the process they are going to use to take positions on proposed legislation. And as part of that, come up with a way to make it clear, which cities are in support of that and which ones are not. Um, because I could imagine a scenario, when based upon our own legislative platform, we might, um, support something, and then the majority of the cities and the cities association might oppose it. And then the letter comes out, and it kind of sounds like we oppose it when, in fact, we supported it. Um, and so I, you know, I don't have the answer for how, you know, we should solve that. And I don't want to be prescriptive. I think there's lots of different ways to solve that. But as part of this, and either as part of the motion to approve the JPA or separately, if people want to do that, I'm fine either way. Um, ask the city's association to, um, include in their bylaws, the way they're gonna make this clear.

[00:19:40] Mayor Alison Hicks: So, I do see, council member, Abbe Koga, I just wanted to clarify from members of the public, I should have done this in the beginning, in case you don't have an agenda in front of you, that item 4.6 is titled The City's Association of Santa Clara County, request for approval of joint powers agreement to establish the City's Association of Santa Clara County Joint Powers Agency. Now, I don't know if that clarifies for people in the audience more what's going on, but it's, um, basically a more official organization that the city's rubric under which the city's association can, uh, operate. That's what we're talking about, whether to support that. So, with that, council member Abikoga?

[00:20:23] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Council member Medachek, for your suggestions. So, we certainly are, and I'm speaking, I'm the president of the Cities Association right now, and so I've been working on this issue for a few years. But certainly we're taking, part of this process is to take suggestions and recommendations and, you know, certainly will take that back. I think you're absolutely right. I think things have just gotten more complicated. And in a way, I like to look at it as the city's association's role has grown in that legislators are coming to ask, you know, ask our association. How do the cities feel about certain pieces of legislation or issues? So I agree with you. I think we do need to spend some time, good time. And I envision a lot of this as part of the bylaws process, in all honesty. I didn't think we could do the JPA and the bylaws together at the same time. This has been a 6 year effort in itself for just the JPA. So my hope was that once we can form as a JPA, then obviously we need to do the bylaws, and I think that would be the appropriate place to outline how the legislative action committee would work. So thank you for that. I'll definitely bring it take it back.

[00:21:54] Mayor Alison Hicks: Vice mayor?

[00:21:57] Vice Mayor Pat Showalter: Yeah, I was just going to say that I served on the executive committee of the JPA for several years. And, um, I mean, the JP of the Cities Association. And we talked about how that really would be the ideal form, but it was quite a bit of effort to get there. So I just want to applaud you for taking that effort, because it just clarifies so many things. So thank you.

[00:22:25] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So I guess I'm wondering, do we need to, um, formally, um, provide that input? Um, and do we want to take this separate way? We, um, vote on the formation of the JPA, and then separately provide, um, input to the, uh, cities association, JPA, city manager?

[00:22:46] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Yes, thank you, Council member Mattachek. So, I know that council member Abbe Koga and the other executive board members are collecting feedback from all the cities, but certainly, I've been working on this along with council member Abbe Koga with the city managers group, and I will take that feedback and transmit that to the executive director. I know there's going to be feedback from other cities as well. So I think it's fine if you go ahead and vote on this item and then we'll just take that feedback and provide it to the group.

[00:23:21] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay, so we don't need to take any formal action on providing that feedback. Because you 2 will take it. Okay, so then I will move, um, item 4.6 and I should have looked to see if I have to read anything.

[00:23:37] Unknown Speaker: I don't think you do.

[00:23:38] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay, then I'll just move 4.7.

[00:23:41] Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, so we have a motion to approve by council member Mattachek, and a second by council member Ramos. Passes unanimously. So, we now go to, uh, item number five, which is oral communications. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter, not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic within the city council's subject matter jurisdiction for up to 3 minutes during this section. State law prohibits the council from acting on nonagenda items. So if you would like to speak on this item or the next item in person, submit a blue speaker card, and if you'd like to speak via Zoom, raise your hand in Zoom. And there we have, so in person, we have Chester Haley.

[00:25:00] Chester Haley: Can you hear me?

[00:25:01] Mayor Alison Hicks: Yeah. We can.

[00:25:03] Chester Haley: All right. How you guys doing? Good evening, city council. My name is Chester Haley. I'm a representative from the Carpenters Local Union 405. I'm speaking on behalf of approximately 36,000 carpenters, men and women, across to Northern California. I'm here tonight to voice our values as a union member, and to make sure responsible contractors will be used in the future projects in the Mountain View community. That they honor area standards, and give our brothers and sisters the proper livable wages they deserve. Carpenters deserve, the earn the fair wages, with medical and retirement benefits, that allow workers and their families to live in the communities they work in, to continue to have local opportunities and avoid huge commutes to provide for their families. Those wages will be reinvested back into the community. As they spend their earnings and their tax dollars, will help fund local schools and government. A few more of our values come with the commitment to the apprenticeship program, to guarantee we will continue to have a trained, skilled, and experienced workforce that is able to complete high quality projects in a safe and timely manner. This provides opportunity for career paths for many men and women who have or will go through our apprenticeship program. We additionally proudly participate in the helmets to hardhead program for our veterans returning from service. Construction workers look forward to more than their income. They're excited to have a chance to revitalize their own communities, and we, as a committee, strive to elevate, and protect, and honest, and just livable for all our brothers and sisters. Thank you for your time.

[00:27:08] Mayor Alison Hicks: Thank you. I see no other in person speakers, and I see no hands raised in Zoom. So we will close public comment, period, and go on to item number six, public hearings. Uh, this item is the HUD pro housing grant application, and our housing analyst 2, Joshua Tovar, will present the item.

[00:28:46] Housing Analyst Joshua Tovar: Good evening, Mayor Hicks, and members of the city council. My name is Joshua Tobar, analysts with the Housing Department and Community Development Department. Joining me today is Housing Director Wayne Chen. The purpose of tonight's presentation is to seek council authorization for staff to submit an application to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, pathways to removing obstacles to housing, also referred to as the Pro Housing Grant. Pursuing the pro housing grant is an opportunity to address much needed affordable housing funding. Currently, there are 12 affordable housing projects in the pipeline with estimated 1300 new units being completed in the next 5 years. Estimated funding gap presently is expected to be at least 50 million, and that's factoring in projected city housing housing fee revenues. Pursuing the pro housing grant also aligns with prior council direction on August 30th, 2022. The study session on the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan, Council Unanimously Supported Strategy one and Strategy one B4, as shown on the screen here. On December 29th, 2022, Congress passed the Consolidated Appropriations Act. This released approximately 85 million in nationwide competitive funding to address barriers to affordable housing, including the lack of affordable housing funding. On September 7, 2023, HUD released the final notice of funding opportunity with the expectation of awarding up to 20 applicants ranging between $1000000 and $10 million. Eligible uses of the grant include activities that further develop, evaluate and implement housing policy plans, improve housing strategies, and facilitate affordable housing production, and preservation. The snowflow does have public hearing and certain noticing requirements, including tonight's public hearing. Staff have adhered to these public noticing requirements, and have received no public comments as of tonight. And pending council feedback tonight, staff anticipates submitting the application by HUDS October 30th, 2023 deadline. So how does using 5 criteria to evaluate each application, including need, soundness of approach, capacity, leverage, and long term effect? The evaluation process will look closely at each applicant's ability to align with the grant objectives? This includes financing affordable housing development. But it's also paying particular attention to applicants that demonstrate both progress and a commitment to overcoming local bears to affordable housing, as well as an acute demand for housing options that are affordable to households with incomes below 100% of the area immediate income. Based on this criteria, staff worked with the city's legislative consultant, RPPG, and put together a competitive application with proposing Evelyn as the top recommendation for the pro housing program. Evelyn was identified as a top recommendation because it's the next project in the city's pipeline to require funding. It's a city owned site, and it meets several key grant objectives, including addressing the acute demand for housing with for households earning less than 60% of the area meeting income. Its proximity to public transit and demonstration of strong partnerships with other public agencies. On September 26, 2023, council selected affirmed housing as the preferred development team for the Evelyn Project, affirmed housing proposal articulated a plan to build approximately 268 affordable housing units, of which 42 units will be set aside for the Santa Clara County's rapid rehousing program, and 15 reserved for the unhouse household using project based vouchers. As such, staff in RPPG believe that these project features position the city favorably in terms of competitive scoring under the pro housing criteria. The city is requesting 5 million in these pro housing funding to support the phase one of the Evelyn project, which will facilitate moving this project expeditiously. This timeline here shows the past and future activities related to the pro housing grant. Depending on feedback tonight, staff anticipates submitting the application by October 30th. We anticipate HUD announcing awards by January 31st of 2024 with a project expenditure deadline of September 30th, 2029. If we are recipients of this award, staff will work with the developer to incorporate the funding and the city's loan and regulatory agreement. With this, staff has several recommendations for city council, as shown here on the screen. This concludes my presentation, and housing director, Wayne, and myself are available for any questions.

[00:34:29] Mayor Alison Hicks: Thank you. Do any members of council have questions, in addition to the written questions you submitted? Council member Abekoga.

[00:34:42] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor, and thank you for the presentation. I... apologize, because it just dawned on me, um, at MTC, uh, last meeting, a few weeks ago, we had a hearing on a HEDPro housing grant application, and I saw VTA on there, and so I guess I just thought it was our project, but it's actually the Blossom Hill project in San Jose. And so that was my question is, did we coordinate in any way, was there any indication that BTA was going to go out for this other project? And how does that? Yeah, and you have a sense of, I mean, and I can go back and ask VTA staff this too, but how does that work or how does that affect our chances of being awarded a project if, you know, same agency is applying for funds for another project?

[00:35:47] Housing Director Wayne Chen: Thank you for the question. I'll take the 1st cut and then see if Josh has any additional details in terms of geographic sort of distribution. It is $85 million for the entire nation. We had not, you know, coordinated with VTA. This was really determined with RPPG and with staff in terms of what would be the best project as part of our pipeline to submit. We are aware that VJ has a Blossom Hill project as well, but we didn't coordinate that. I'll turn it over to Josh to see if there were any geographic discussions in terms of distribution as part of the grant.

[00:36:27] Housing Analyst Joshua Tovar: From what we know, HUD intentionally created a short time period for applicants to submit application. So there are very few in the Bay Area, and I only know of 2 cities in addition to the VTA and MTC you have applied. So other than that, I'm not aware of any other...

[00:36:46] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Yeah, I'll follow up with them. MTC staff about those things.

[00:36:57] Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, any other council questions? Seeing none. This is time when members of the public may comment, submit a blue card, if you'd like to speak in person, or raise your hand in Zoom, I see no speakers. So, um, we're now bringing the item back for council deliberation and action. I see a motion by council member Ramirez, and a 2nd by council member Ramos.

[00:37:31] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Oh, I'm moving to approve the staff recommendation.

[00:37:53] Mayor Alison Hicks: Yeah, so remember Abbe Koka, please vote? Okay, pass this unanimously. We now move on to uh, item 6.2, which is 918 Rich Avenue residential condominium project. Uh, senior planner, Aki Snelling and Deputy Zoning Administrator, Aaron Hollister, will present the item.

[00:40:19] Mayor Alison Hicks: May I ask for a quick recess while we figure out the technology challenges, 5 minutes? Thank you.

[00:44:49] Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, thank you for your patience. We're back in business, and again, we're on item 6.2, which is 918 Richmond Avenue residential Condo Project, and senior planner, Aki Snelling, and Deputy Zoning Administrator, Aaron Hollister, are going to present the item.

[00:45:08] Senior Planner Aki Snelling: Good evening, mayor, vice mayor and members of the council. I'll apologize for the technical difficulty earlier. But my name is Aki Snelling, senior planner. I'm joined here by Aaron Ollister, who's our deputy zoning administrator. Also in the audience, our Amber Bluesinski, who's our assistant community development director, and RT Shravostova, who is our assistant city manager, and community development director. And they're in the audience to help answering questions as well. So the item before you tonight is the proposed Rich Avenue Condominium Project. The project is a .71 acre, vacant site on Rich Avenue on the west side of Rich Avenue. The site has a general plan designation of medium high density residential, which is 26 to 35 dwelling units per acre, and is owned R31. The parcel is surrounded by two story apartments to the north and east, one story and two story single family residences, and a church parking lot to the south, and also to the west, is an existing commercial lot and office, one story office, development. However, in the future. That site to the west, which is the office development site, will be redeveloped with a 4 story affordable. It's a senior assisted care physically. Sorry about that. The development project before you tonight consists of a 5 story building, 32 unit residential condominium units, 4 of them, which will be affordable housing units, with one level of underground parking, a 27.5% state density bonus, with one concession and waivers from development standards. The project also consists of a vesting tentative map, including 32 residential condominium units, and one lot, and also a heritage tree removal permit application to remove 2 coast live oak trees. The parcel is a 50 foot wide entry entryway from Rich Avenue that spans approximately 190 feet. The flagpole portion of this lot contains the driveway, the emergency vehicle access, utility easements, and a 4 foot wide ADA accessible pedestrian walkway. The 5 story residential building will be constructed at the rear of the lot, which is about 20,000 square feet, and we'll have a plaza entry along the front of the building, raised planter boxes, with trees and shreds, private patios and balconies, and a 2,300 square foot, common open space terrace on the roof. The site also contains four trees, including two which are non heritage trees, all located on the south side of the property, where the building and driveway entrance will be located above the underground garage that will be constructed for the project. The 2 Heritage Coast live oak trees are in poor condition with structural defects. The applicant's arborist note that due to these conditions, the trees cannot be relocated, and the city arborist concurs with the condition of the trees as well. The non-heritage trees include a 4 inch diameter, breast height, London plane tree, and a 13 inch diameter breast height, Chinese elm tree. These trees are these non-heritage trees are volunteer trees that sprout it up on their own on the property. The Chinese elm is in poor condition and has no dominant structure. The London plane tree is in moderate condition, but is small and located in the future utility area. Therefore, these trees are recommended for removal. The project will plant 49 new 24 inch box trees, including six replacement trees for the removal of the two heritage coast live oak trees. The landscaping will be located along the north and south sides of the driveway entrance, and also in the above ground planners. The new trees are Mediterranean trees, mixed with California native trees, including golden wattle, common manzanita and coast live oak trees. Landscaping will be within raised podium planters around the building and along the front entry plaza to the building. 87% of the landscaping will be native in drought tolerance. At full growth, the tree canopy will be at 23% of the site area versus 9% of the tree canopy of the site currently. This is just to give you an example of the proposed landscaping. So at the top right is the plaza entry, and then the raised podium planters will be around the building. So those will give you kind of a view, what it'll look like. The proposed project has been designed to accommodate 29, 2 bedroom units and 31 bedroom units. The building is designed with a contemporary architectural style, with a variety of exterior building materials, including a darker brown shiplap siding, along the first three stories, or the base of the building. A base stucco along the recess first through 4th floors of the building, and a lighter cream color at the 5th floor of the building. Additional ornamentation is provided with matching bronze colored balcony guardrails, metallic canopies, and illuminum window doors. The project also incorporates a variety of building articulations to reduce the visual massing and height of the building, including stepping back the fourth and fifth floors. Based on the development review committee review and coordination with staff, conditions of approval are recommended for this project to further refine the landscape buffer and trast dating, enclosure, the steer tower, siding color, and the main entry awning. During the review process for this project. The project went through several public meetings, including applicant host in neighborhood meetings, to development review committee meetings, and an administrative zoning and subdivision committee meeting. Neighborhood meetings were attended by 37 members in total between the 2 1st 2 meetings in January and February of 2022. And the comments raised were concerns about the 5 story building height, privacy and noise impacts, a desire to see additional landscaping, construction noise impacts, traffic and parking along Rich Avenue, a request for the applicant to move the pedestrian walkway to the north side of the driveway entrance rather than the south side. And for a warmer color scheme to be used on the building. The applicant made modifications in response to these comments, resulting in stepping back the upper floors, revising balconies with more solid materials to address noise and privacy impacts, increasing the trees on site, particularly along the southern elevation, providing warmer colors to the building, moving the pedestrian pathway to the northern side of the driveway, and indicating the construction noise would be mitigated through the mitigation measures as conditioned in the project. also included in the initial study and mitigating negative declaration. In terms of the affordable housing and state density bonus requirements. The project includes a 27.5% state density bonus, which requires that the applicant provide 2 very low income units at an area meeting income or AMI of 50%. The city's affordable housing ordinance requires 4 below market rate units, as proposed by the applicant, which include the 2 very low income units, and also 2 moderating communits. Additionally, the city's affordable housing ordinance requires a weighted average of 100% of the area median income. The applicant's one concession is to allow for a weighted average of 80% of the AMI. For waivers, the applicant is proposing increases in density, floor area ratio, and height, and reduce development standards for setbacks and personal storage. In terms of the environmental review, the city prepared and initial study and mitigated negative declaration, noise vibration and air quality greenhouse gas were identified as the potential significant impacts. However, these impacts can be mitigated to a less and significant level, um, through mitigation measures that are included in the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting program of the mitigated negative declaration, and in the conditions of approval. During the public comment period, the city received 3 letters, comments raised, uh, concerns about traffic, parking, building height, privacy, and noise impacts. For additional landscaping. On August 28th, a response to comment memo responded to these comments. Additionally, the applicant modified the project by adding landscaping along the southern elevation of the building, move the pedestrian pathway to the northern perimeter of the driveway, and incorporating ground level parking in the parking garage rather than using the mechanical parking. The applicant recently indicated to staff, a preference to rent the condominium units, since for sale projects are not currently financially feasible at this time, as a result, staff is proposing to amend condition number 71, 72, and 74, and add condition 71 A, to allow for initial rental of the condominium units. This would be memorialized through a recorded agreement. The 4 rental units would be rented at 2 units at 50% AMI, or very low income, and 2 units at 80% AMI or low income. And that together would be a weighted average of 65% for the rental period. At the time the applicant decides to convert the BMR rental units to for sale condominium units, the applicant shall be required to comply with all applicable laws, including the tenant relocation assistance ordinance and the BMR regulations. The 4 for sale units would be sold in accordance with the concession request, and the request is for an 85%, AMI weighted average, rather than 100%, which would be 2 units at very low income, and 2 units at modern income. The zoning administrator and subdivision committee meeting of September 27th, at that time, the committee made a recommendation that the council adopt the resolutions before you tonight, adopting the initial initial study and mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting program, approving the development review permit with the 27.5% state density bonus, and the heritage tree removal and the vesting tentative map. And also included with that, um, uh, are the amended conditions of approval that are before you tonight, um, to allow the applicant to um, initially rent those condominium units. And so those additional conditions are brought for you tonight. This concludes staff's report. Staff would be happy to answer any questions, if you have any. And the applicant's representative, Ellis Burns, and Cynthia Munoz are here as well. They would like to present a brief presentation as well to you.

[00:57:10] Unknown Speaker: Yes.

[00:57:11] Ellis Burns: Is that presentation now? Okay, no, now I hear it. Okay, thanks. Good evening, Honorable Mayor, Vice Mayor, and city council members. I'm Ellis Burns entitlement consultant, and I've been asked by Greg Sean, the property owner developer to present this evening, along with Cynthia M&Os, principal architect from Stecker and Northway Architects, for night, regarding 918 Rich Avenue. We also have other members of our team to answer any questions you might have about the project, including Lee Prince, land use attorney for Rothschild, Fox and Rothschild, who is present, but it's Virtual, who is on the phone. So I think, I hope Lee is on. I did want to provide, I thought, it'd be appropriate to provide a brief background of Greg's development experience, and he's been involved in the San Francisco Bay Area in real estate development since approximately 2005. He's done a variety of small residential projects in various communities around Mountain View, in Palo Alto, Los Altos, Menlo Park, Sunnyvale, and then he did complete a project here in Mountain View, approximately 2012, four lot subdivision on Petra Avenue. Before I go on, I think it would be important to just, I really think it's important to thank staff, over the last several months, particularly Aki Snelling, who has helped us get through this process, and also RT Schvosteva, and some of the other staff, that we have been introduced to, and to Wayne, who's helped us over the most recent discussion related to, um, related to the potential rental of the condominium project. So we just want to thank everybody for this effort. What I'd like to do is, I think, we'd like to start with a brief presentation. I know we have a short period of time. Again, you've already seen it from hockey. We started this, I guess, started this journey way back in August of 2020, we've had, you know, through the various submittals, we've had, as you heard, three different community meetings. I did go back and look at my files, and we did send out for at least two of the three meetings, we sent out close to 750 notices for each of these community meetings. And, as you heard. We did have several people that showed up. And then we've gone through, through the DRCs, zoning administrator, and here we are, here we are this evening. So with that, I would just like to turn this over to Cynthia, who will briefly walk you through some of the highlights of the project and answer any questions you might have about it. So thank you very much.

[01:00:24] Cynthia Munoz: Thank you, Ellis, Honorable Mayor, vice mayor, city council members, and members of city staff. It's very nice to be here tonight. Can I see the next slide, please? So, it's been mentioned the location of the lot, but we wanted to, in case you haven't had a chance to see the lot in person, share a few photos to highlight that it truly is a vacant, empty lot of dirt. The upper photo shows a vantage point from Rich Avenue looking in towards the property, and the lower photo is standing at the back of the property, looking towards Rich Avenue. The lot is one that had a lot of constraints that we had to work with, including the flaglock configuration, a 10 foot street dedication that was existing, and also the city of Los Altos, Storm Drain, easement that cut basically down the length of the property and cuts across, down to the south, tying into a three-party storm drain, easement, or three-party storm drain agreement. that Greg had to work very closely in collaboration with neighbors to get an agreement to tie into that. Next slide, please. AkiRD did a very nice job describing where the lot is and the mixture of uses surrounding it, so I won't go over that too much, but we did want to share, as it was mentioned, that waivers being used included FAR and height and setbacks. So just to give you some reference, what is proposed as a one. 141 FAR as opposed to the normal one. that's required per zoning. The height being proposed overall is 54 foot 11 from the lowest adjacent curb, where 45 feet is normally required. And then the setbacks, those vary, because we tried very hard to concentrate the height of the building towards the commercial properties, and keep the lower volumes towards the residential sides. And so, therefore, the north and the west sides of the project are the ones that are less in conformance than the others. Next side please. We just wanted to share that this site seems quite ideal for this kind of project for small and young families, just looking at the maps and sharing walking and biking times from the property, an easy 4 minute walk to the closest bus stops on El Camino, walking distance to downtown using the Mountain View public library. is a destination of about 20 minutes, walking 7 minutes by bike, and both the downtown Caltrain station and the San Antonio station, if some were more really wanted to get their steps in, about a 30 minute walk to each of those stations and an 11 minute bike ride to those. We also wanted to share its proximity to local schools, the elementary, middle and high schools, um, certainly for the older children, middle school, high school, 10 minutes by bike, 30 minutes or so, um, walking. So thank you. Next flight, please. Um, Aki also shared the images and concepts of the landscaping around the project, which we really worked very hard or the landscape architects, and I should say, worked very hard to create a very um, lush and robust, uh, perimeter, um, that addressed neighbors' concerns for as much screening and planting between, uh, their properties and screening views towards the projects. The lot coverage that's proposed is just under 35%, which is 35% is what's normally required, or allowed. The open area proposed is just under 70% where typically the minimum would be 55%. And the landscape area is just over 21% with Azaki mentioned, 87% native species plantings. Next slide, please. There was also reference to the trees to be removed. We just thought it'd be helpful to give some visuals on the conditions of those trees. When the project 1st started, the 5 trees that are indicated were slated to be removed since then in the last storm, tree number 5 that's being pointed to has already fallen down in the last storm. So trees 4 and 6 are the 2 heritage trees that you see in the images on the right, that are to be removed. Next slide, please. And this is to give you some graphic on the existing tree canopy that's just over 9% in the proposed, which would be just over 23%. Next slide please. Again, Aki already talked about a lot of the process that we worked on together collaboratively to address staff comments and community comments. We just wanted to share the original project that was submitted, and then this current one that is in the proposal. We really feel we worked quite closely with Aki and staff to get to this good result. Next slide, please. And this is just to show you, um, a spin around the building. The 1st one upper left is the rich avenue facing side, upper right, spins around to the north, the end facing El Camino, and then lower left is the 5 story side that faces the morning star senior housing. And then the lower right is the south end of the building. Next slide place. And then just to give you a little bit of context on the distances between the proposed project and adjacent projects, um, and tried to, we tried to estimate some of the heights of the adjacent buildings just for reference. So we do know from the submittal package that the Morningstar development is 48 foot three, if my eyes don't fail me. And then roughly the commercial building to the north is about 25 feet. Um, apartments about 27 feet to the peak, and then the 2 story residences, um, to the southeast close to that we estimate about 28 feet to the peaks. And so on the west and north sides, the distance between the exterior of our project and adjacent properties or buildings are just under 50 feet. I did want to share the setback from the two-story apartments to the partial 5th floor, which is more substantial at over 128 feet. And so that's always been the strategy is to concentrate all the bulk and the height towards the west side. Next slide, please. And then just to share a little bit of the exercises we did to try to address community concerns about views and what they would see towards our project. These are just a few examples of a number of them. So every arrow you see represents one or 2 views that we tried to simulate, depending on if they were one story or 2 story houses, just to give you a little bit of a sense. The views that you're seeing here, the 3 in the middle are from a property on Hollingsworth, that we felt had the worst, you know, the best view line. Um, if you were to put it that way, and then the other 2 from the 2 story apartments. Next slide please. And Aki mentioned the work we did to collaborate list staff on relocating the walkway to the north side of the driveway to address the neighbor's comments. Next slide, please. And just an image of the 5th floor rooftop terrace, where we also made a lot of effort to address community concerns by having a very robust planter edge, tall screens, um, and focusing inward, um, the as much activity and noise as possible. And Greg has also agreed to limited hours of use as per the conditions of approval. Next slide, please. And we just wanted to share some of the shadow studies that we did, um, looking at the summer and winter solstices and what the, um, shadow impacts would be of our building on the adjacent properties throughout certain times of the day. Next slide. And then I think Ellis, you wanted to come back and wrap up?

[01:10:27] Ellis Burns: Thank you. Thank you. Cynthia. I just want to conclude, first of all, the project highlights, as you know, we're really pleased to be able to present to you this project, condominium project, which now I'm talking with many of you. It's not, there have not been many in Mountain View. So we're quite excited to be able to bring this for sale project to you. This project, particularly, has had some challenges, because it is a flag a lot. We also, which, um, not to get into a lot of detail at all, but we also had to work with the city of Los Altos, because there is a storm drainagement that runs across the property, which I think in one of the earlier slides. You saw that. We also work cooperatively with the Rich Avenue Homers Association, and St. Paul Lutheran Church, in terms of an agreement with Greg for the storm drain. So we were able to negotiate those agreements, both with the city as well as with the other two parties. We've already talked about the canopy, the tree, tree canopy. The final thing I want to say in terms of conclusion, as we said, and you've heard, and I know you know, is that it's a very challenging economic time. And so one of the things, and mentioned my staff earlier, is given these current economic conditions for development, Greg has been seeking some flexibility, and I think it was brought up earlier, Aki had brought that up. And we're hoping that in a few years, the economics may change, and Greg will be able to proceed and construct the approved project with a recorded condo map. However, the condo market may continue to be a little challenging if you will. So, as stated by staff, earlier, We'd like to have the flexibility to develop with the condo, and put a condo map on the property, but potentially lease the units until the condo market improves, and then sell the condos at a later time. So we have reviewed and talked extensively with staff, about this possibility, and Aki outlined the different conditions that are being proposed to just have that option. Our intent is to eventually move forward as a condo project, but there may be this interim basis, that it may make more sense, to carry the project, to get it constructed, carry the project, possibly leasing the units, and then moving forward to moving forward to the condos. So with that, thank you for your time, and if you have questions, we'd be glad to elaborate. on any of these. Thank you. Thank you.

[01:13:18] Mayor Alison Hicks: Now, do any council members have questions or declarations regarding meeting with the applicant?

[01:13:28] Mayor Alison Hicks: Uh, Council member Ramirez.

[01:13:30] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Mayor, and thank you for the reminder. I will disclose that I met with the applicant prior to this meeting. And I also would like to share, first, my thanks to staff for working on this project and also to the applicant for your extensive outreach to the community and willingness to voluntarily incorporate many of the recommendations that you've heard. Um, I do have a couple of, I think, hopefully quick questions. So I wanted to understand, the project is subject to SB 330, which has a limit on the number of meetings that we can require an applicant to participate in. And I'm curious to know if that includes community meetings, because if it does, then we're over the 5 limit.

[01:14:16] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: Thank you for that question, council member, our teacher of Astaba, assistant, um, city manager, community divine director. The applicant, held meetings, don't qualify as public meetings, but any meetings at the city holds, including if the city holds a neighborhood meeting, they would be a public meeting. We typically, so we've had 3 to date, 2 DRC, which the public does attend, and one ZA meeting.

[01:14:44] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So the community meetings were voluntarily held by the applicant?

[01:14:49] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: Yes. We ordinarily require that applicants hold community. We suggest that they do, just because it helps them understand some of the neighbors' concerns, and as they design the project, and we try to get them to hold them early on so that they hear early.

[01:15:06] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay, but those meetings don't count against the SV 330.

[01:15:11] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: No, they're not official city meetings.

[01:15:13] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Have we ever required a community meeting?

[01:15:16] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: We have, the city holds their own meetings. And when, um, we don't require them, but we do, we do suggest them.

[01:15:24] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yeah. Okay, that's helpful. Thank you. Um, and then, um, a question for the applicant, so I'm also sensitive to, uh, market conditions and financial feasibility. Are there, so I appreciate that you're voluntarily accepting the conditions that are going before the council for review. Are there any conditions that you think could result in financial hardship to the project that we should be aware of? Thank you.

[01:16:02] Ellis: We did look at the conditions, we discussed the condition most recently that were identified today, and we don't think, as long as we don't have any major changes to design, I mean, the applicant has a budget. He's kind of, he's developed that based on what we think is the final product. I think it's hoping that we don't, we don't, because we're right on the edge. In fact, we're not on the edge. We're kind of still underwater on this project. from a pro forma standpoint, which is why the developer hopes that the market will change. But I think we're okay from a financial perspective, as long as there aren't a lot of other requirements. And we've gone through the conditions, we have a lot of conditions for this project. We think we can be addressed. as well as the conditions that were talked about this afternoon, this evening. With, for example, the HOA and so on. So we are, we understand that. Okay.

[01:17:02] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Part of the reason why I ask is, with a couple of affordable housing projects, the council has provided direction that any subsequent design changes, be cost neutral. And I'm curious if that would be helpful direction for us to provide for this project as well.

[01:17:24] Ellis: I think it would be helpful. I think then it gives, it begins to give the developer a feeling like, okay, you know, we're willing to make changes, but then we, and this has come up with a couple other projects, I've worked on, willing to make certain changes, but if it's extensive, then that really poses some economic problems for the developer.

[01:17:44] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Thank you very much. So it would be helpful. I appreciate the input. Thank you.

[01:17:50] Mayor Alison Hicks: Vice mayor.

[01:17:53] Vice Mayor Pat Showalter: Yes, I have a couple of questions. Um, I noticed that the personal storage was one of the things that, uh, there isn't going to be as much personal storage as we normally require. What's the story on that? And how big, the square footage? What's the square footage of the units expected to be?

[01:18:15] Cynthia: So the range of unit size is roughly the smallest, I believe, was 780, some odd square feet to just under 1200 square feet, one in 2 bedrooms. So the reason for the shortfall in the bulk storage is we do provide every unit with some storage in the underground parking garage, and we did also provide additional bulk storage closets within the units. However, it was clarified for us that if the bulk storage was located inside the units, it could not count towards the required amount. And so that's why we have a shortage.

[01:19:01] Vice Mayor Pat Showalter: Oh, okay. Because certainly, if you're going to live there a long time. You need some storage room, but, okay, but there is some storage room, particularly, the garage, storage in the garage can help. Okay, thank you. And then, um, another thing that we talked about when I met with you. Oh, and I didn't meet with the applicant. I wanted to let you know that, I had a great discussion. One of the things we talked about is pedestrian access in other directions than Outrich Avenue. And, um, uh, you know, for instance, I live in a, a development in Richmond that has all sorts of, um, well, not all sorts, but three or four cut throughs between, um, courts and, uh, and, um, parks and things that mean that, um, you can, you can walk someplace much faster or bike, much faster than you can drive, if you go through these cut through that are just, you know, they're just 10 feet wide. So that's the sort of the Cadillac, I guess, of access to, you know, either to El Monte or, and or to the shopping center. But there could also just be gates in the, in the fence, the most secure, I suppose, would be with a, you know, a keypad with the number that the residents had. So I'm interested in the ability to provide that. Because I think it makes the, um, it makes living in a place much more, um, much more pleasant and particularly the roots to school. It improves the roots to school dramatically.

[01:20:52] Cynthia: I may need staff's assistance on some of this, but the, we did talk a little bit about potential pass throughs and walkways across adjoining properties, but because they are private properties, We didn't feel that we had the leeway to do that.

[01:21:14] Vice Mayor Pat Showalter: Well, is it that you don't have the leeway to do it now? I mean, are you willing to work on it, or is it something that you... I mean, you can't commit to it until you get the permission of the other owners, obviously, but is it something you're interested in working on?

[01:21:28] Cynthia: I think... Sure, we... Yeah, this is great shields sometimes. So...

[01:21:35] Unknown Speaker: Yeah. Yeah. the microphone. So people at home can hear you better. All right, thank you.

[01:21:40] Public Speaker: So, this is Correction. the project, the owner. So, I believe we can work, you know, was the, um, the neighbors, 'cause, basically, we have a couple neighbors, the pharmacy, uh, the morning star, and the church. The rest are the apartments and single family houses. So I don't think they, you know, would allow us, but the other one, we can look at that, even though it would be quite challenging, but I'm not up in a, you know, put it this way. I had lived in a 20 some years ago when I lived in a north San Jose, in a townhouse. The town called community, next to the, the, the, the, the, the shopping parks. So there's a gate and opens to it, like you said, walk is 5 minutes, driving is maybe 8 minutes. So I understand what you're saying. Yeah, we can, we can certainly, you know, talking again to our neighbors. We talked about that. Yeah.

[01:22:48] Vice Mayor Pat Showalter: Well, good, because I think, you know, what we're really interested in producing is a very, um, you know, pleasant to live, um, community, and things like how, how long it takes to walk from one place to another, are just part of that. So, at least to me, this is an, you know, important thing to consider. Um, and then the other, speaking about walkability, another thing, I, um, I wondered about is, is the movement of the walkway against the building, I mean, against the fence instead of under the trees. It just seems like, you know, the place that it was previously, would be much more pleasant for the people who live there. Now, I know that there was some, um, there were some comments from adjoining neighbors that they disliked that. But I wondered what kind of landscape protection could be offered to the adjacent neighbors to allow that covered walkway with foliage. Again, I think that as our, as our climate gets warmer, walking under shaded, shaded situations just gets much more, uh, more important.

[01:24:18] Cynthia: Vice mayor, we actually did look at those different scenarios. So, the reason why the southern, so the southern and northern portions of that 50 foot wide, which is very narrow entryway, has easements, which prevent us from growing trees in certain parts of those areas. The reason why the The walkway was moved to the northern side is because the adjacent neighbor who, the houses on that side on those one story, single family homes, which are small lots, are about 5 feet from that side property line. And so they had actually asked for privacy and because of the lights, can that walkway and noise be moved over to the north side? So that's one of the reasons we did that. And one of the benefits that occurred, is that we were able to create a widened landscape area on that southern perimeter of that entryway, which now allows us to put trees, which did not allow that before with the walkway. So we weren't able to fit the 26 foot wide EVA access and the walkway and landscaping with trees. So that was the reason for that change, though. And then the EVA access also includes part of that walkway as well. I did also want to answer the question you had beforehand about the pedestrian, the ability to access through properties. So some of the neighbors did comment on that before, but we did have to indicate that we can't really condition the project to require any kind of pastors through other property, since those are other properties owned by other property owners. So that was the reason why they were not able to pursue that.

[01:26:13] Vice Mayor Pat Showalter: As a condition.

[01:26:14] Cynthia: Correct. It doesn't mean that it couldn't happen. It just means we can't require it.

[01:26:17] Vice Mayor Pat Showalter: Yeah, I get that. I get that. But particularly if you look at those maps that you've drawn of, you know, how long it would take to walk various places, you know, walking, for instance, to Los Altos High School would be much faster if you didn't and safer if you didn't have to go on El Camino, and that kind of thing. So, I hope it's something that, in the future, you'll be able to work out. And I just, you know, I think it's important to bring that kind of thing up. And this discussion, or it might fall through the cracks. So that's why. But I'm also interested, very interested to hear the explanation about, you know, how widening the landscaping area on the South, the South Edge, allows you to have much more tree cover. And I didn't realize that the setback was so small. Five feet is very small. Okay, well, then that makes sense. Thanks for explaining that to me.

[01:27:14] Mayor Alison Hicks: Council member Ramos.

[01:27:17] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I just want to disclose that I had met with the applicant, and ironically, I also ended up knocking on doors in that area for another reason. when I 1st met with the applicant. I was like, hey, I know that area. However, when I did meet with the applicant, um, I had not heard of this possibility of, um, going to apartment then doing condos, what was the timeline of, of this option being floated to the city?

[01:27:53] Assistant City Manager Aarti Shrivastava: The timeline of condominium as the original request and then now requesting. Just within the last few weeks, I would say. That, um, that, um, actually last week. Last week is when staff became aware of it. Sorry.

[01:28:10] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay. Because when I met with the applicant, that wasn't bloated and I met with them last week. So I'm, that's slightly concerning. I feel a little flat footed on that because I think I even expressed. I was like, yay, it's a condo project. So, um, all right, that's all the questions I had.

[01:28:35] Mayor Alison Hicks: Council member Matic.

[01:28:36] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. I want to start by disclosing that I met with the applicant, and I have also been to the property on my own. Um, just a couple questions. Um, What if they start with apartments, and actually the applicant did mention that to me when I met with them, um, that they were thinking about that, but now I guess thinking has progressed. Um, How does that work? Do all of the existing residents, uh, have to move out at the same time, or does it happen as people leave, or what does that process look like?

[01:29:15] Mayor Alison Hicks: You know, I think I'm going to defer to, um, Wayne Chen, our, um, housing director on that, in terms of how that would work at the time, and also the applicant did be like to discuss that.

[01:29:34] Housing Director Wayne Chen: Thank you very much.

[01:29:35] Wayne Chen: Could I ask you to repeat the question, please?

[01:29:37] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes, I was curious, how what the process looks like for people who are living there in apartments, if they are turned into condos for sale. Are they sold one at a time? Is it all at once? How does that work?

[01:29:55] Wayne Chen: Sure, thank you for the question. Just at a high level, the city's tenant relocation assistance ordinance does cover condominium conversion. So when we were discussing this topic with applicant earlier today in over the last few weeks or a couple days. excuse me, we were trying to put a process in place. And so we would be looking at a notification process that would align with what's required in the trail. And what we are looking at would be, um, 120 days of a termination notice to be provided to the tenants, and to the city for sort of regular situations, and then there is a one-year provision for special situations for elderly households and disabled households. So what that would be is prior to the sale of the 1st unit. We wouldn't be looking for the applicant to be providing these notices to the tenants and unto the city as well. So it has to happen all at once as opposed to unit by unit. I believe the approach that we would take as, starting with the 1st unit, our assumption and the applicant could provide any clarification that once they begin selling one unit, they would be looking at selling all the units. But perhaps the applicant may have a clarification on the timing or the process of that..

[01:31:42] Greg: Okay, so, uh, Wayne, so you are saying, I mean, I heard from you as, uh, uh, waiting to have the certain days, uh, before, before we, uh, uh, I have to notify the tenants, um, is that 120 days, right? So prior, give them this advanced notice, before we are going to sell the 1st unit as a condo. So you are questioned. So, uh, uh, uh, Councilwoman and Bad Chuck is, uh, how do we handle all of the tenants, let's say, 32 tenants, am I right? Am I, this is your question. So I guess I'm wondering if there's, um, any legal restrictions or your preference to, like, maybe you decide, um, we're gonna sell 10 of the units. Um, and so you notify 10 of the current renters, that these 10 units are gonna be sold, and the rest stay apartments, or is it the entire building, all 32, is it, um, are notified at the same time, and the entire building turns over at the same time? I guess I don't know if there's any legal restrictions on that, or, um, or do you have flexibility to do that? Honestly, we... Because, uh, we have not given this the complete thorough thought as to what's the legal, you know, restriction, even though my attorney need, you know, like, she is, uh, attending the meeting. I mean, I mean, just to be, uh, to be frank, we, I have not considered all those scenarios, uh, because it may involve many other, you know, related, you know, legal requirements, but very reason for me for my company to, uh, float this, uh, yeah, to answer, uh, uh, uh, uh, Councilwoman, Emily Romans, uh, your question was, this came to us very recently, because really because of the, the condominium, construction, development, the, the numbers. Do not really make sense to me. As of the day, I used the city, provided the acre land, the venue, plus the quotes I got from other subcontructors. That's my cost. Of course, I have to pay the obligation, CDV, park fee. Then, it exceeded the fell marked the value, as of today, if I sell it to the market, as of the day. So I do have a somewhat difficult. But, but anyhow, so that's why I want to keep this option, and this supports your counter project as well, proportion, yes, for sure, no problem. So, then I don't think I have the exact answer to your question to that point... Because I don't want to see something, you know, randomly and then, you know, without, you know, you know, be responsible.

[01:35:03] Mayor Alison Hicks: I think our city attorney has a command.

[01:35:08] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: I just wanted to say that we noticed in the queue that, um, I believe it is the applicant's attorney, Lee Prince, has had her hand up, and so she may, you may want to call on her to answer some of these questions.

[01:35:20] Mayor Alison Hicks: Thank you. Thank you. Yes, that... So you print? Yes.

[01:35:25] Mayor Alison Hicks: You want to speak?

[01:35:27] Lee Prince: Yeah, sure. Can you hear me?

[01:35:29] Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes, we can.

[01:35:31] Lee Prince: Okay, great. I think the answer to the question really is, it depends. Um, if for some reason, uh, the current property owner were to sell the entire building, all at once to a single new owner, then I think it would happen all at once, but I think from a practical perspective, as with any condo project. You know, Greg's gonna have to give notice and comply with the relocation ordinance, but sales are gonna happen. You know, one at a time. Um, and so it is going to be, you know, a process and I don't think we can guarantee, you know, how that will play out as we move forward. But, you know, so I guess nobody likes the answer. It depends, but I think that's the answer here.

[01:36:11] Mayor Alison Hicks: That's okay. Strategy. you have more to add?

[01:36:17] Unknown Speaker: Uh, yes, I can provide, I'm also a little bit more information for counsel consideration. Uh, when the applicant is ready to actually convert the units back to a for so product. There is a filing that is required to the state Department of Real Estate. And my understanding is that once that's a file, there's a five-year window in which units can be sold, and at the end of the 5 years, if there are still units to be sold, then they can apply for another 5 years. And so if there is a, um, kind of a phasing approach, we can work with the applicant when we develop the BMR, a regulatory agreement in terms of how a phasing approach will be handled in terms of uh, Trao uh, notices in in agreement with uh, the city's relocation consultant. Primarily, it will most impact the BMR units, of course. There could be perhaps a strange situation in which a tenant lives in a market rate unit, and that needs relocation, but that's highly unlikely, but we would want the notification, obviously, for all the units, but most likely it would just be for those 4 BMR units that will really, you know, be impactful with the trail. So we can work out, you know, a sort of a phasing approach, as we develop the regulatory agreements, if the council has any direction on that.

[01:37:33] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay, thank you. Um, you know, I have a related question, so I'm going to ask it now. Um, and I'm expecting the answer is no, but I'm still curious. So when you rent these units out and they're condo mapped, and there's the intention to eventually, um, seldom as condos, Is there any notification that's required of people who are renting, that that's, uh, possible, that that's a near term possibility.

[01:38:02] Wayne Chen: Honestly, I would want to know if I were running, but I don't know if there are any legal requirements. So in consultation with Assistant City Manager, um, and CDD director, or teacher Rostava. There is none on the planning land you site, and there's none that we are aware of on the housing side.

[01:38:22] Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, thank you. And did you have more questions?

[01:38:25] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yeah. I sent in the question about the low number of native trees, and I guess I'm wondering, is there any concern about increasing that number?

[01:38:45] Unknown Speaker: To my knowledge, there's no concern about increasing that number. If the applicant, you know, is agreeable to that. Um, staff did request that the applicant provide more native landscaping, um, the applicant did indicate that they really wanted to provide kind of a Mediterranean palette for this site. So I believe that's what, you know, was proposed, was this more Mediterranean palate. They did add some more native trees to the palate, but I guess that would be for council to ask the applicant if they would be willing to do so. If you all had a comment about that,

[01:39:24] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I guess when I was thinking, you know, we talked about this years ago about having a certain percentage of native landscape. I guess at the time, I wasn't thinking that it would be mostly like shrubs as opposed to trees. But I was wondering if you are open to having more native trees, um, as long as that doesn't pose problems or it doesn't, um, provide less, uh, let's see, what's the word, um, less, um, shading or screening. That's the word, screening for the neighbors. Right.

[01:40:02] Kevin Mottswog: Good evening. My name's Kevin Mottswog. with the landscape architecture team on the project. Um, We have looked into substitute trees that are native, I will say, one of the main reasons why, uh, like, some of our trees aren't native are because, um, some of the forms uh, that can provide screening are hard to find in more native species, um, as well as evergreen trees. And then there's also some trees that we're using that are more easy to maintain, but also fire resistant for safety reasons. But we do have a number of trees, um, that we've looked into that are native, um, that can be substituted, uh, at the cost of some of the screening, which was a high priority for some of the neighbors' comments. So that would be our reasoning.

[01:40:56] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So, all of those are at the cost of screening. if they were swapped.

[01:41:01] Kevin Mottswog: Not all of them, no. All of them. Some of the, some of the larger trees, um, really help with the, the high level of vertical, um, accounts. Sorry and...

[01:41:14] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Uh, I guess I'm asking... For the ones that are screening, um, you're saying that none of those should be replaced, because, um, the native trees don't do as good a job at screening as the non natives.

[01:41:34] Kevin Mottswog: Um, no, uh, there are only uh, one of the species, which is, it's, um, Aser Freemanii, um, it's just a tall columnar tree, which we had a very hard time finding a native tree that would fulfill the form that could screen, um, but there are several species, um, other than that tree that can be, uh, replaced by native trees.

[01:41:56] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. Thank you. Mm hmm. Um, let's see... I think that's it for now. Thank you.

[01:42:08] Mayor Alison Hicks: And City Attorney Log, I see your name's still up to you for further comment.

[01:42:12] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Oh, okay.

[01:42:13] Mayor Alison Hicks: Council member, command.

[01:42:18] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Um, I want to disclose that I met with the applicant. And, um, I just have a, um, questions that I'm not sure who it's for. So I think I'm trying to understand the potential timeline if we move forward with this change. So it sounds like the applicant, you're not sure yet. I guess 2 questions. Should this move forward is the final application to move forward with leasing than sale. It's no long, because in my mind, it's no longer for so condo units. We're looking at lease to sell at a later date. So is that what we are looking at tonight, or are we looking at the original proposal? Because I know that council has sent the modifications? I think about four. So I just want to, I guess, get clarity on what the actual motion or recommendation is for tonight's meeting. Thank you.

[01:43:26] Wayne Chen: Thank you for that question. And it's a good clarification to have. The project before you still contains a map. So they will be moving forward with the map. We have asked them that and they intend to move forward. However, because they've told us about their intent to rent, we wanted to make sure that while they were renting, they met our BMR requirements, and that when it transitioned from a rental to a condo, that the trail requirements were met. So, um, they do have a choice to rent if they wish, even though they have a condo map on it. We have several units in town that have a condo map that are being rented. But in this case, it's one of the few projects that have started including inclusionary units. And so we want to make sure they meet the requirements of both the BMR and Trao. So the modifications just handle the transition. Council will be acting on the map itself and the condo map tonight.

[01:44:25] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So, just, I guess, to further clarify, so, in the recommendation, item 2 says, to construct a 5 story condominium project with 32 residential 4 sale units. So because this is project condo mapped, it's still considered for sale units, even though it will move forward tonight with rental first.

[01:44:48] Wayne Chen: Right. They're still for sale, as in the applicant has the ability to sell. If it weren't a map, then they would not have the ability to sell the units.

[01:44:58] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Interesting. Yeah. Okay. I think that's just an interesting clarification, because we looked at other things in the past, and it hasn't...

[01:45:05] Wayne Chen: There's a nuance.

[01:45:07] Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay. A statement, not a question.

[01:45:10] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay, and then perhaps for the applicant, will there be a deciding point on, um, if things change in the market in the next couple months, what do you think you would go forward with it as originally intended with just for sale? I know there's so many moving pieces. Is there a, I know it's, um, your turn you're saying, it depends, um, is there, is there any type of timeline? I know one of the, one of the things I had heard mentioned by staff was, you know, sometimes it can be for within 10 years, and then you can have an option. I'm not sure. So can you clarify what you might think in terms of timing or maybe some indicators in the market, that you'd like counsel to know, that could change things.

[01:46:03] Greg: Thank you for the question. So, I'm just a show with the council here of the practical timeline of this project from my perspective. So, if it were, uh, approved today, let's see, in October of 2023, so, uh, practically, it will take us, I mean, the whole team, let's say, another 12 month to get the construction joint, get everything ready, before we break the ground, so that is one year. And then, when I have that building permit ready, let's say it takes me a month to pay all the fees, to get my building permit stamped. Okay, I'm gonna start deconstruction. So that will be a typically a list scale of the project. 30 months, so 2.5 years. So, actually, what we are talking about, you know, I mean, I'm preserving the option as a, uh, you know, for rent. So this would be put us in. I think that is in the summer or in the fall of 2027. So I, I really, I'm hoping for the economy to be on a better ramp rather than sort of stagnant, uh, from a house in market perspective in the last for 5 years. However, I, I, I really could not, you know, commit or predict too much on it, yet, yet I'm hoping for debt, as now as for this one, I do not have this a deficit in this project, because I have held this property for 16 years, so to the tea. It is 3.5 years in the making before we are here presented to the council with the project. So I've held it for 16 years, and there had been a couple chances came to me in the latest one in 2021, later 2020, early 2021, people approached me saying that, Greg, you want to sell your project, and even before that, there were a couple times. But it is my desire that if there's a way for me to develop this one. I will do that. And as it is proposed. So, I hope this just, you know, I hope this answers your question.

[01:48:51] Unknown Speaker: It does. Thank you very much. I think it's helpful to get that information. So thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor.

[01:48:59] Mayor Alison Hicks: Council member, Abi Coca.

[01:49:01] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple of questions. So regarding the, let's see, the BMR unit. So, if it becomes a rental project, then the, is it the four units would have to be an average of 65% AMI, is that right?

[01:49:22] Unknown Speaker: The 4 units as a rental project, correct? 65%, weighted average, 8 average. Correct. So it would go from 85% to 65%. Correct. And that's because it's the rental, so it would be too VLI and too low income. Okay.

[01:49:38] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Is there anything with the conversion? I mean, I think it's more SV 330, but the 1st ride of refusal for the venture to buy, or is there anything like that, a condition like that?

[01:49:53] Unknown Speaker: Just refer to uh, Wayne Jenkin.

[01:50:00] Wayne Jenkin: Thank you for the question. So, um, SP 330 in terms of sort of replacement requirements don't don't apply to this project, but, um, the BMR guidelines do have language in terms of 1st rite of refusal. So that part is part of the BMR program as well, as part of the condo conversion project. So the 4 units that they're converted would have to be offered to the tenant for as 1st rider refusal.

[01:50:27] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Correct. Thank you. And I guess just curious, just for my own knowledge, um, earlier questions, in regards to, um, making it a rental project first, um, is the challenge, the financing piece. Um, because of interest rates or is it that housing prices are coming down? I mean, it was, yeah, just curious as to what in this market, why a rental project is stronger.

[01:51:06] Unknown Speaker: Rental project. I think one of the things, I believe, I mean, we're just looking as rental as an option. I mean, ideally we'd like the project to go as condominium. And it would just, it would begin to create a cash flow if it's rental. It would begin to have a cash flow that would then help the developer carry the project until such time as he can then convert it over to condominiums.

[01:51:36] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: I think that would be... cash flow is important for the finance.

[01:51:40] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, and for the financing, yes.

[01:51:43] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: So... Thank you.

[01:51:45] Unknown Speaker: I hope that answers your question.

[01:51:47] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes, it does. Thank you. Um, I had another question, but it just escaped me. So, I'll just leave it at that for now. Thanks.

[01:51:58] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I have a 2nd round. So I'm gonna ask, most of my questions have been answered. Most of them were on the rent to condo. I guess my remaining question is the, um, the driveway in. It's a rather, you know, it's the flag lot situation. It's a long, wide driveway. It's not the most welcoming entrance to the property, not your fault, because it's an unusually shaped lot. Um, and you seem to be doing what you can with the trees, but, you know, some of our other, and this emergency access is always a situation, with apartments and condos, that you have this big expansive concrete. Some other developers have broken it up with permeable paving or with, um, large pavers with ground cover, growing between them. I think those are two situations that we've done on other projects recently since I've been on serving on the city council. So I'm wondering if that's something that you would be willing to look at to make it more welcoming and, you know, if it were relatively cost neutral.

[01:53:16] Brian Glick: Good evening, everyone. I'm Brian Glick with HMH, the civil engineer and landscape architect on the project. There's enhanced decorative pavement at the drive entry. That is directly adjacent to Rich Avenue, right of way. This gives sort of that welcome carpet. That welcome Matte feel like your home, like that as the entrance, as well as pervious pavement underneath the parking stalls, and the crosswalk of the pedestrian crossing, and the plaza itself, which also doubles as the EVA. So in the areas that we could put it in from a decorative standpoint, or put it from a practical standpoint. We did that. We needed to remove it based on staff requests to not have it in the trash bin rollout area, that's one of the requirements, but we've put it in the other locations, and I don't know if it would necessarily be cost neutral to add it into the remaining pavement areas.

[01:54:18] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. So, yeah, I was just wondering if it could be expanded to extended to a larger extent, I guess.

[01:54:28] Brian Glick: Everything's possible for our price.

[01:54:30] Public Works Director Don Cameron: Okay. Mayor, I did want to just add that.

[01:54:33] Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes.

[01:54:34] Public Works Director Don Cameron: The fire department did kind of clarify that, um, they want to make sure that the area where the fire trucks would have to drive over for the EPA should be paved. Um, I guess there used to be grass creed at one time, but what happens with projects is that, um, you know, projects don't maintain that landscaping, and, and so it becomes a problem, and then, um, they don't like to travel, uh, drive over the gravel, because it's a 7,000 pound, uh, fire. fire trucks, so they actually do need it to be paved area where the trucks can drive over. So I just kind of wanted to clarify that. Thank you.

[01:55:09] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Good to know. Yeah, I've seen various alternatives, but it sounds like you've done, you know, maybe as much as you can.

[01:55:16] Brian Glick: Our... Our first submittal contained grassroad pavers, so we can make it pervious and green, and as it relates to staff agency requirements, pair that down to the appropriate driving surface material.

[01:55:32] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. Well, that's good to know. I'll... to know that you tried, and I'll have to look at different alternatives that we've used elsewhere in the cities. I'll be more knowledgeable next time that I...

[01:55:43] Brian Glick: Thank you.

[01:55:43] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: have a meeting, and I would like to declare that I did meet with you. Would you like to declare that as well?

[01:55:50] Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes.

[01:55:51] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[01:55:51] Mayor Alison Hicks: I will declare that I met with the applicant and visited the site.

[01:55:54] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[01:55:56] Mayor Alison Hicks: Council member Ramirez.

[01:55:59] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Mayor. My apologies for the second round of questions, but Council member Mattachek's questions inspired, um, some additional questions about, um, uh, the, uh, rent to for sale, uh, transition. It's not the first time that we've seen this, the Google North Bayshore Master Plan, also includes condo mapping of units that they intend to rent for the foreseeable future. I'm curious about the practical. if we included this condition, number 71 A, to include trail requirements for when the rented units are sold in that master plan approval, but and there's a difference in that that doesn't include BMR units, but it could in the future, if there's an opportunity to modify the DA. But I would like to better understand what this condition does that our ordinance, our trail, as it exists, couldn't do. So what is the additional value of this condition? If, you know, we were to include BMR units and the Google North Bay Shore Master Plan? This is something that we should maybe think about including as a standard condition moving forward? I'm not sure I fully understand what this is doing that our ordinance doesn't already require.

[01:57:21] Unknown Speaker: This clarifies basically our ordinance requirements, and it addresses the transition when units are included in projects, and transition from rental to condo. We are planning to make this a standard condition, because it pulls all the pieces together for a project. In this case, we learned late, and so we had to change it. And we haven't yet had a project that does this, but if we do, then this will be a standard condition.

[01:57:51] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Great. Thank you for the clarification.

[01:57:56] Mayor Alison Hicks: So last call for council questions. Council member Abbe Kogo, did you think of your second question?

[01:58:01] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mary, for remembering. So, the, um, I don't know if we ever resolved this issue, and I can't remember which way it was, but there was this BMR requirement, I thought, and when they do the conversion, and this, and from talking with developers, that was the deterrent for mate doing these conversions. Did we resolve that? So that it's no longer an issue.

[01:58:34] Unknown Speaker: This is not technically a conversion because it starts out as a condo map. A conversion would be if there was an existing apartment building, and they came in and said, we want to turn this into condos. And yes, you would now have a BMR requirement, it would trigger a lot of things. Um, you know, We have not resolved that issue. Will we be resolving that issue? We will likely have to. And we will likely have to. We haven't had many in the past, but we did in the early 2000s. There were a lot of apartments that converted into condos.

[01:59:10] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you.

[01:59:14] Mayor Alison Hicks: So again, last call for council questions. Saying none. It's now time for members of the public to make comments. If anybody in person wants to make a comment, submit a speaker card. And if you are virtual and want to make a comment, please raise your hand now, I see no public comments at all. So, I'll now bring the item back for council deliberation and action, and note that a motion to approve the recommendation should also include reading the title of the resolutions attached to the report. I see, uh... I see a motion, uh... Vice council member Ramirez, and a second by the Vice Mayor.

[02:00:06] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Mm hmm. Uh, thank you, Mayor. So, uh, thank you again to staff and the applicant for your work on this. I'll go ahead and move the staff recommendation, including, one, adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View, adopting the initial study, mitigated, mitigated, negative declaration, and mitigation, monitoring, and reporting program for a five story, 32 unit residential condominium project, located at 918 Rich Avenue, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, to be read in title only, further reading waived, to adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View, approving a development review permit to construct a five story condominium project with 32 residential for sale units, including 4 below market rate, BMR, affordable units, with one level of underground parking, a 27.5% state density bonus, with one concession and end waivers from development standards, and a heritage tree removal permit to remove 2 heritage trees to be read in title only for the reading waived, with modifications to project condition 71, 72, and 74. The addition of condition 71A, related to the BMR program and tenant relocation assistance, as set forth in the supplemental staff memo to council dated October 24th, 2023, posted with the council agenda, and three, adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Mountain View, approving a vesting tentative map for condominium purposes for 32 residential units at 918, rich avenue, to be read entitled only further reading waived, and I'd also like to include direction, as we've provided before, that any design related changes post-approval be cost neutral. I'm sure I am concerned about the financial feasibility of the project. I would hate to entitle another project that doesn't get built. And, you know, I'm supportive of the allowance to rent in the interim, but I feel confident that the intent is to sell the units. And so I appreciate your flexibility in meeting our affordable or BMR requirements in that interim period. And I'm looking forward to the project actually getting built. Thank you.

[02:02:19] Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, now we have several comments. Council member Romos?

[02:02:24] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I actually will start with a quick question that I forgot, but, um, I remember a while back, uh, when we had ownership units and then we had BMR ownership units, that there was a requirement to deal with, there was this issue where, in BMR units, there was homeowner fees, and, and we asked the, uh, the developer to, to, like, prefund that it's in there. But what happens as it starts out with rental, and then it becomes ownership, do they have to do that? 1st before it rents? Mr. Cheng, can you clarify?

[02:03:03] Mr. Cheng: Yes, thank you for the questions. So the applicant has agreed to establish and fund the HOA reserve prior to the issuance of the 1st building permit, whether it's rental or for sale.

[02:03:16] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. I just had trouble grasping that when it was last minute. Um, so overall, um, I, I, I've been really excited that it's a condo project, um, I don't recall, um, many condo projects coming before council. And I remember as we, this is an R3 property. This was one of the things that everyone was talking about, about trying to encourage more condominium development, with this. And I'm sensitive to the feasibility issues that the applicant and our overall market has been facing with this. So I'm inclined to be supportive of the project. I had this memory way back when the market initially crashed back in 2008, driving down the freeway in 87. It was down San Jose, and I remembered it was like this new condominium project, and it was like ready to own, and then the market crashed, and then you could see the banner change from ownership to rental. And I have a feeling that that was kind of a similar reasoning. I actually don't even recall if they ever managed to get back to being condos. I hope they did, and I hope that this project will eventually become condos, and I hope that what we're voting on now will help enable that. But overall, I'm generally supportive of the project. Thank you.

[02:04:43] Mayor Alison Hicks: Council member Mattachek.

[02:04:45] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Um, see, I'm supportive of the project, and um, I do appreciate that it will be condos eventually, um, even if it starts out as rentals. Um, I, maybe I should have brought this up under questions, but it feels like more of a comment. I reached out to the applicant as well as staff about the location of the mailboxes and ask if there was a location also for package delivery. And I feel like I'd like to make sure that as you finish designing the interior of this, that you work with staff to find a location that's not visible, when you're standing at the front door, and that the mailboxes and a package delivery place are behind another level of security, I guess I would say. So there's somebody follows you into the building, and you don't expect that, they don't have access to the mailboxes and the packages sitting there. Um, you know, times have changed, and I feel like we need to respond to that. unfortunately. And I'd like to make sure the mail and the packages are secure. So, um, You know, I don't know if that needs to be, I think the applicant is open to doing that. I see heads nodding. Um, and so I'm assuming we could add that um, to, uh, let's see, number 16 in attachment 2, where it says all the things that they'll continue to work with staff on. Um, and that would be, um, one of them. If the maker of the motion is open to that friendly amendment.

[02:06:25] Unknown Speaker: With the consent of the applicant, yes.

[02:06:36] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[02:06:42] Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, thank you. Council member Kameh.

[02:06:48] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. Thanks so much, Mayor. So, I just a couple comments, which is, I want to thank staff. I want to thank the applicant. Um, I do want to say that, um, there were things that change, and I think that's the the difficult part of being in Silicon Valley is sometimes things just change, um, very quickly. But I do appreciate that both the applicant and staff worked very hard and diligently too, instead of pulling the item, or deferring the item, to try to find a way for it to come forward to counsel. And, um, while I think for myself, I would have preferred condos right away to, in my mind, this is something council talked about a long time ago, which is stacked flat condo opportunities, entry level home ownership. It's one of the things that is very important to the council important to me to make sure people have, um, you know, middle income housing opportunities. It just sounds like we'll have to wait a little bit. Um, but it's one of the strategies council's been working on, and I think that's where a lot of the questions are coming from. But I think, in a lot of ways, I appreciate that though some of the information we got in real time tonight with the changes, we have found a way to kind of come together and make the best of the situation and make the best of the market under difficult situation. And I just want to say thank you. I think that's a heavy lift between maybe some of the council briefings we all received last week to today with venue moving parts. And so I just think it's important to express gratitude, and that's why I'll be supporting the project. I would say, too, that perhaps if there's a little bit of a heads up from future applicants, if there's changes, please let us know sooner rather than later. Um, and I would ask the applicant if there's any way that if you know what timing might look like, um, in sometime in the future, I think we'd all be interested to know when these condos will come on the market. So please let us know. Thank you, ma'am. you.

[02:09:04] Mayor Alison Hicks: So I will also be supporting the project. I did, I did like the suggestion that the vice mayor made about exploring the, um, gateways or access to other, other properties cut throughs, particularly the shopping area. I don't know if it, you know, I tried to look over the map, and I don't know whether it would actually work or whether it's like you end up when you go through the gate, you end up in a truck loading station that you don't really want to be in. Um, but, um, but I'm wondering whether you're, uh, willing to explore that as well.

[02:09:44] Public Speaker: On behalf of the applicant, I think you heard, we'd be willing to explore. It'd also be something that, at some point, um, we'd probably need some that would want some cooperation, which I know we would get from the city as well, because I think it would take a pretty good effort just to get people, because there's a whole, um, issue associated with easement, access easements, liability, things of that nature. So, I, we would, you know, voluntarily we would try to see what we could do.

[02:10:15] Mayor Alison Hicks: So you can try.

[02:10:17] Public Speaker: We can try. But it may entail, yeah, easements and ending up in the wrong place when you get to the other side of the gate. Right.

[02:10:24] Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, do we need to add that? Or just volunteer? We can't? Okay, voluntarily, then. Okay. Okay. With that, are there any other comments? Then I think we're ready to vote. Passes unanimously. So now we're on item 7.one, which is compensation for council appointees. Vice Mayor Pat Showalter. We'll present the item, vice mayor.

[02:11:15] Vice Mayor Pat Showalter: Yes. Every year, the council reviews the performance and compensation of our council appointees, and the council appointees includes our city manager, our city attorney and our city clerk. And as the vice mayor, That's one of your most important duties, is to oversee this evaluation process. So, um, uh, we've been working with a professional facilitator, Nelson Fialo. for about six months on this. He's from Renee Public Management Group, and he was the city manager of Pleasanton for many years. So he was, you know, really knowledgeable about how these things work and very helpful. Anyway, the city council has completed the evaluations. And so the purpose of this item, it brings us kind of to the end of the path on this, is to consider the adjustments to compensation. All of the council appointees have really provided exceptional service to the city of Mountain View this year. And we, you know, myself, along with all my council members, really would like to offer our profound thanks to you for that service. And we look forward to many more years of exceptional service. We hope. And, you know, this really, your service has really impressed us, and it's provided lots of accomplishments, and it's, it just, you know, it makes the city a better place to live and work. Anyway, the Brown Act requires us to orally report, a summary of the council action on salaries, and the salary schedules or French benefits of council employees during an open meeting, which is tonight. And to satisfy this requirement, I just want to provide the report of the recommended adjustments for the city attorney, the city clerk, and the city manager. So, a merit increase of 5%, and $100, cell phone allowance is recommended for the city attorney. A merit increase and a city contribution to deferred compensation in the amount of 1% of salary for the city clerk. And we are also recommending a 5% merit increase, and 2% salary as an ongoing contribution to a 401A deferred compensation plan for the city manager. And the reason some of these are different are because the applicants, I mean, the appointees requested different things. And so we were responsive to those personal requests. So, with that, I'd be glad to answer any questions, and, um, we, uh, we need emotion.

[02:14:13] Mayor Alison Hicks: Thank you. Do members of council have questions? I see no questions. Would any member of the public, joining us virtually or in person, like to provide comment on this item? If so, either raise your hand in Zoom, or give us a blue speaker card if you're in person. I see no. Uh, I say no, uh, public speakers. So I'll bring back the item for counsel deliberation and action. We would need a motion to approve.

[02:14:58] Vice Mayor Pat Showalter: I'll be glad to make the motion.

[02:15:02] Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, so we have a motion to adopt by, um, by the vice mayor and a 2nd by council member Kame, so we can vote. Passes unanimously. We are now on item number eight, which is council staff committee reports. Um, Do we have reports, council member commit?

[02:15:35] Unknown Speaker: Great. Thank you. Since our last council meeting, I attended the VTA Pac Commuting, the policy advisory committee, and also the Leadership Mountain View Government Day.

[02:15:46] Mayor Alison Hicks: Thank you. Thank you. Council member Mattachek.

[02:15:51] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Since the last meeting, I attended the Moffat Field Restoration Advisory Board meeting. They have changed in recent years where they're just focused now on the property that the Navy is on at Moffat Field, and they shared information, very technical information, on how remediation of the contamination is going on their sites.

[02:16:19] Mayor Alison Hicks: Thank you. Thank you. Vice mayor.

[02:16:23] Vice Mayor Pat Showalter: Yes, I also attended the Leadership Mountain View panel on Friday and we had a great discussion. It was lots of fun, and hopefully, we'll inspire some people to, in that class, to step up for advisory boards, and maybe run for city council someday. I also wanted to report that I attended a BCDC meeting. And, um, the public topic of the meeting was really kind of a celebration of the passage of SB 272. That's the layered bill. And what that does is require that there be plans on sea level rise protection for the bay region, and that BCDC take the lead on those plans. So, you know, we have a plan, but every town doesn't. And there will be a lot about how we collaborate technically, you know, so that the plans all match around the edge, going forward. So, over time, I'll be bringing back more information about that, but it was, it was very exciting to get that authorization from the city legislature, I mean, from the state legislature to be the agency that does take the lead, in concert with several other agencies, on sea level rise planning. Thank you.

[02:18:01] Mayor Alison Hicks: I actually have I have an announcement to make. Uh, and that is, this is just an announcement of public interest, that the diversity, equity, and inclusion committee of the MVLA Speech, and, that's the Mountain View Los Altos Speech and debate team, is on a mission to make professional attire accessible to all students. They're looking for donations of professional attire, such as blazers, slacks, blouses, and other items like that. Those items may be dropped at the teens center in Mountain View from Monday to Friday, between the hours of 3:30 and 7 p.m. Saturday from one to 6 p.m. or during the speech and debate practices held on Monday from 6 to 9 p.m. at the Los Altos High School Library, and also on Wednesdays from 7 to 9 p.m. at the Mountain View High School Library. Um, questions about this may be directed to Julie Herman, at the email address, J U L I E, H E R M A N, at M-V-L-A-S-D-B dot O R G. I also wanted to say I attended the Google Visitor Center. We all had a ribbon cutting for that a few weeks ago. I attended their 1st public event, which was also attended by hundreds, if not thousands of people. There were a lot of people there. I think just kind of proving that people are ready to come out of the pandemic, out of their homes, off their screens, to public places. And I hope we'll do more place making around the city. Are there other council members with things to announce? Okay. If not, where on item number 10, which is adjournment, the next city council meeting will be held on.

[02:20:07] Unknown Speaker: We've skipped item nine.

[02:20:09] Mayor Alison Hicks: Oh, skipped item nine. Thank you. Uh, closed session report, City Attorney Logue, do you have a closed session report?

[02:20:16] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: No, there's no report from close session this evening.

[02:20:18] Mayor Alison Hicks: Thank you. That's why I skipped it. So we're now on item 10. The next city council meeting will be held on November 7th, 2024, and this meeting is adjourned at 9:10.

• ← Previous
• Next →