January 27, 2026 City Council Meeting

Video

Agenda

• 1. CALL TO ORDER: 1. CALL TO ORDER (00:01:11)
• 2. ROLL CALL: 2. ROLL CALL (00:01:21)
• 3.1 Senate Bill 79 and Assembly Bill 130 - Impact on Development Review Process and Operations: 3.1 Senate Bill 79 and Assembly Bill 130 - Impact on Development Review Process and Operations (00:01:34)
• 1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (02:46:58)
• 2. ROLL CALL: 2. ROLL CALL (02:47:42)
• 3. PRESENTATION: 3. PRESENTATION (02:48:00)
• 3.1 National Poverty in America Awareness Month Proclamation: 3.1 National Poverty in America Awareness Month Proclamation (02:48:21)
• 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4. CONSENT CALENDAR (02:53:39)
• 4.2 Housing Element Program 1.1(g)-Zoning/Precise Plan and General Plan Amendments (Second Reading): 4.2 Housing Element Program 1.1(g)-Zoning/Precise Plan and General Plan Amendments (Second Reading) (03:22:04)
• 4.5 Miramonte Avenue Complete Streets Study, Project 23-31-Final Report; Street Reconstruction (Miramonte Avenue), Project 25-28-Professional Services Agreement: 4.5 Miramonte Avenue Complete Streets Study, Project 23-31-Final Report; Street Reconstruction (Miramonte Avenue), Project 25-28-Professional Services Agreement (03:25:46)
• 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC ON NONAGENDIZED ITEMS: 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC ON NONAGENDIZED ITEMS (03:36:34)
• 6.1 Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan - Draft Review: 6.1 Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan - Draft Review (03:49:56)
• 7. COUNCIL, STAFF/COMMITTEE REPORTS: 7. COUNCIL, STAFF/COMMITTEE REPORTS (06:00:35)
• 8. ADJOURNMENT: 8. ADJOURNMENT (06:13:41)

Transcript

1. CALL TO ORDER

[00:01:11] Mayor Emily Ramos: Okay. All right, good evening everyone, thank you for joining us for our study session. The City Clerk will take roll call.

2. ROLL CALL

[00:01:21] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Hicks.

[00:01:23] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Here.

[00:01:24] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Kamei.

[00:01:25] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Here.

[00:01:25] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember McAlister.

[00:01:26] Councilmember John McAlister: Here comes McAlister.

[00:01:28] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Ramirez.

[00:01:29] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Here.

[00:01:29] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Showalter.

[00:01:30] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Here.

[00:01:30] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Vice Mayor Clark.

[00:01:32] Councilmember Chris Clark: Here.

[00:01:32] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Mayor Ramos.

[00:01:33] Mayor Emily Ramos: Here.

[00:01:33] City Clerk Heather Glaser: You have a quorum.

3.1 Senate Bill 79 and Assembly Bill 130 - Impact on Development Review Process and Operations

[00:01:34] Mayor Emily Ramos: Great. So we'll begin with uh Item 3.1, Senate Bill 79 and Assembly Bill 130, Impact on Development Review Process and Operations. The purpose of this study session is to receive Council input on potential approaches to addressing Senate Bill 79 and Assembly Bill 130.

[00:01:56] Mayor Emily Ramos: Community Development Director Christian Murdock and Advanced Planning Manager Eric Anderson will present the item. If you would like to speak on this item, please submit a blue speaker card to the City Clerk now.

[00:02:10] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Thank you. Good evening Honorable Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Councilmembers. I'm Community Development Director Christian Murdock. I'm joined on the dais by Planning Manager Eric Anderson. In recent years, the California legislature has enacted a range of laws aimed at addressing housing affordability.

[00:02:25] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Two bills passed in 2025 have major implications for land use regulations and the development review process in Mountain View. Senate Bill, SB 79, will take effect on July 1st, 2026, and will require the city to approve high-density housing projects located within one-half mile of Caltrain and Valley Transportation Authority, or VTA, light rail stations.

[00:02:46] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: SB 79 includes a process to adopt local alternative provisions, which will be the focus of Council's discussion this evening. Assembly Bill, AB 130, is already effective and included a broad range of provisions.

[00:02:58] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Relevant to this evening's discussion by Council, AB 130 created a new statutory exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, for certain housing development projects. It also created a new streamlined process for requiring final action on these projects within 30 days of certain project milestones.

[00:03:16] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Projects will be deemed approved if the city does not act within the required timeline. SB 79's provisions apply to areas within one-half mile of transit-oriented development, or TOD, stops. There are five TOD stops in Mountain View.

[00:03:30] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Two Caltrain stops at the San Antonio and Downtown stations, and three VTA light rail stops at the Downtown, Whisman Station, and Middlefield stations. There is an additional TOD stop, the Bayshore NASA VTA light rail station, that's located in unincorporated Santa Clara County, but which has about half of its area located within the City of Mountain View.

[00:03:50] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: These TOD zones comprise approximately 21% of the city's land area. There are detailed qualifying criteria in SB 79 which are included in the staff report. Some of the major criteria are that a project must be located on a site zoned for residential, commercial, or mixed-use,

[00:04:06] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: that it not be located on a site with three or more units that requires demolition of housing subject to local rent control, and the units are or have been occupied by tenants within the last seven years. Similarly, the site cannot have had demolition of rent-controlled units within the last seven years.

[00:04:22] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: And the project must propose at least five dwelling units. Projects must also result in a density of at least 30 dwelling units per acre, or the minimum density under local zoning, whichever is greater. And projects must not result in a net loss of existing residential units.

[00:04:37] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: There are limits on the average size of units as well as requirements to comply with local anti-displacement standards. Projects must also comply with other local standards including inclusionary zoning and objective development standards, provided they do not prevent projects from achieving the allowable SB 79 densities.

[00:04:54] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: SB 79 supersedes local General Plan and zoning standards for height, density, and residential floor area ratio, or FAR. There are three categories of development standards under SB 79, based on the distance from a pedestrian access point to a TOD stop.

[00:05:08] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Those within either a quarter-mile or half-mile radius, known as Tier 1 and Tier 2 stops respectively, and those adjacent to a TOD stop, meaning within 200 feet. Adjacent sites receive additional allowances for height, density, and residential FAR above the Tier 1 and Tier 2 allowances.

[00:05:25] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: SB 79 projects are also eligible for State Density Bonus Law. SB 79 has many complex requirements that require detailed technical analysis. The figure on screen shows properties that staff believes are eligible under SB 79 based on a preliminary initial analysis.

[00:05:45] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Staff has described several options for how to prepare a TOD alternative plan under SB 79 in the staff report. All of these options will require trade-offs involving deferral of Council priority work plan items that are already in progress.

[00:05:58] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The Community Development Department would have primary responsibility to prepare a TOD alternative plan. The department already has a heavy workload of ongoing advanced planning items prioritized by Council in the previous and current Council priority work plans, in addition to numerous ongoing housing element implementation programs.

[00:06:16] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The department's advanced planning team, consisting of two staff dedicated to this type of work, has three items with primary responsibility in the current Council work plan and four such items that are still ongoing from the prior Council work plan.

[00:06:27] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: As described in the staff report, the overall level of effort for individual items as well as the phase of work for each item will determine how much staff capacity can be created by deferral of one or more items.

[00:06:38] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: As Council considers work plan item trade-offs, it's helpful to consider why a TOD alternative plan will take so long to prepare. TOD alternative plans are different from traditional planning processes.

[00:06:50] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Net new density and residential FAR must be transferred to other sites. Existing density and residential FAR information is not immediately available for every site and requires parcel-level analysis of numerous sites.

[00:07:04] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: There is a need to be thoughtful with where density is transferred and ensure we create workable objective standards for projects in those locations. Environmental review is required for receiving sites, which has technical work as well as process requirements associated with it.

[00:07:19] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Council may want community engagement to also be part of the planning process, which takes time and effort. And lastly, TOD alternative plans require review and approval by HCD, the California Department of Housing and Community Development.

[00:07:31] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: All in all, this work may resemble a precise plan type of process in terms of effort, time, and other resources required. In light of these considerations, staff recommends Approach B described in the staff report.

[00:07:44] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Approach B is a combined approach consisting of limited-effort option number one and number two. Limited-effort option number one would exempt sites as allowed in SB 79, including those shown on the slide, and notably sites listed on the city's local register of historic resources as of January 1st, 2025.

[00:08:02] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The colored areas in the figure show those sites with the minimum density and residential FAR allowances to be excluded, and also includes sites that do not have a residential, commercial, or mixed-use zoning.

[00:08:14] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Also, while staff has not completed the mapping and analysis, a very small number of sites would require more than one mile of walking distance to a TOD stop and could be excluded on that basis.

[00:08:24] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Limited-effort option number one would apply until one year after the next housing element adoption, or until approximately January 2032. Limited-effort option number two would focus on the adoption of development standards relevant for implementation of SB 79 developments.

[00:08:44] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: This option would build off the objective development standards currently being prepared for the R3 zoning update, which includes standards for development comparable in density and intensity to those allowable under SB 79.

[00:08:55] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Staff recommends beginning this work after completion of the R3 zoning update, currently anticipated to be completed by the fourth quarter of 2026.

[00:09:04] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Staff recommends Approach B because it balances the benefits from TOD alternative plan work with the most limited deferral of Council priority work plan items. The plan would exclude SB 79 from many properties, including those with historic resources already listed by the city, and other properties that already allow sufficient development intensity relative to SB 79.

[00:09:24] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: It would also improve development outcomes under SB 79 by putting in place local standards suited for the types of development allowed under SB 79.

[00:09:34] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Staff could start work immediately on limited-effort option number one, and initiate work on limited-effort option number two once the R3 zoning update is finished.

[00:09:42] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Approach B would require immediate deferral of work on the Dark Sky Ordinance, citywide objective design standards, downtown precise plan update, and Moffett Boulevard precise plan to complete the approach within the timelines estimated by staff.

[00:09:57] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Shifting now to AB 130. AB 130 has many provisions that are beyond the scope of this study session. This evening, the focus will be on two provisions in AB 130. The new statutory exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA,

[00:10:11] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: and the requirement for final action on housing projects qualifying for the new statutory exemption within 30 days of certain application milestones. AB 130 created a new statutory exemption from CEQA. Unlike categorical exemptions, the new statutory exemption is not subject to any of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

[00:10:32] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: It applies to housing projects meeting the criteria established in AB 130, and also requires tribal consultation. The other key provision, rather, of AB 130, is a new deadline for final action on projects subject to the statutory exemption.

[00:10:48] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The city must take final action no later than 30 days after one of two project milestones. The conclusion of tribal consultation, or the completion of the objective standards consistency analysis, whichever occurs later.

[00:11:01] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The tribal consultation process in particular makes predicting the deadline for final action difficult. Consultation can conclude before or after the 30 or 60-day objective standards consistency analysis deadline.

[00:11:14] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Under the city's current process, staff has had difficulty preparing for and conducting the required public hearings within the new deadline. AB 130 provides that projects will be deemed approved if the city does not take final action consistent with the deadline.

[00:11:28] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: AB 130 establishes no limits on the number of units a project may propose. There is a minimum density requirement, which in Mountain View is at least 15 dwelling units per acre.

[00:11:38] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The main limitation on number of units under AB 130 comes from the maximum allowable site area, with regular projects limited to 20 acres, and builder's remedy projects limited to four acres.

[00:11:49] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Mixed-use projects must have at least two-thirds of their floor area dedicated to residential use. Other criteria require the project to be located on an infill site, previously developed with an urban use.

[00:12:00] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: AB 130 does require consistency with General Plan, zoning, and precise plan standards, although projects may deviate from these standards with application of waivers and concessions through State Density Bonus Law.

[00:12:13] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: There are limitations on certain mixed uses, with AB 130 prohibiting transient lodging uses like hotels and motels, but allowing residential motels.

[00:12:23] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: AB 130 also does not apply to projects that involve demolition of historic resources on a local, state, or national register as of the date of the project's preliminary application.

[00:12:32] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: AB 130 does not apply to projects on a hazardous waste sites database, or those located in certain other sensitive locations such as wetlands, flood zones, or delineated earthquake fault zones.

[00:12:43] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: AB 130 includes other various requirements. These include payment of prevailing wage for projects above 85 feet in height. Certain project design requirements apply within 500 feet of a freeway, including filtration requirements for mechanical ventilation systems, and requiring air intakes and balconies not to face freeways.

[00:13:01] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Hazardous substance contamination must be evaluated through a Phase 1 environmental site assessment, and follow-on preliminary endangerment assessment if necessary. Identified releases must be mitigated to levels required by federal and state standards before issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

[00:13:18] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The city's existing development review process for housing development projects varies depending on project type and location. The Zoning Administrator can take final action on many projects after a public hearing. These are usually projects located outside of precise plan areas.

[00:13:32] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The Zoning Administrator combines review with the Subdivision Committee when a project proposes a subdivision map with five or more parcels. The Environmental Planning Commission, or EPC, does not take final action on any types of projects. Its project review role is limited to recommendations to City Council on some projects located within precise plan areas.

[00:13:51] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The City Council has final approval authority for projects with subdivision maps as recommended by the Zoning Administrator and Subdivision Committee, and projects recommended by the EPC. The Council also has final authority on appeals of final actions taken by the Zoning Administrator.

[00:14:06] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: As currently established, the city's review process requires at least one, commonly requires two, and sometimes requires three public hearings for housing development projects.

[00:14:15] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: With public noticing, agenda materials preparation, review and publication, meeting one public hearing within the AB 130 timeline may be possible in most cases, but meeting two or more public hearing requirements is not feasible without compromising the hearing process.

[00:14:29] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: For instance, taking a project to EPC for a recommendation before the objective standards consistency review has been completed. As explained on the prior slide and further detailed in the staff report, the city's existing development review process for housing development projects presents significant challenges for compliance with AB 130 timelines.

[00:14:48] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The two-step review process required for many project types, and the limited scheduling opportunities for EPC and City Council meetings are particular challenges. The variable timelines for required action by the city based on tribal consultation also complicate meeting planning and agenda management.

[00:15:04] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Additionally, state law has significantly restricted local decision-making discretion when reviewing housing development projects, meaning there's little opportunity for public hearing bodies to modify projects based on their judgment or input from the public.

[00:15:18] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: In light of these considerations, staff recommends Option Number One in the staff report. Option Number One would create a ministerial review and approval process for projects qualifying for AB 130.

[00:15:28] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Staff sees this approach as balancing the need to preserve community awareness about housing development project activity through the issuance of courtesy notices and potentially a written public comment opportunity, with the reality that the city has extremely limited discretion when reviewing housing development projects.

[00:15:44] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: This option also recognizes the city's obligations under state law to comply with accelerated project approval timelines, and ensures the city can meet its timing obligations in all cases without risking that projects will be deemed approved.

[00:15:57] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Reliance on any public hearing process, especially an EPC or Council hearing, could jeopardize the city's ability to act on qualifying projects within the timelines required by AB 130.

[00:16:06] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The two state laws discussed in this study session materially affect the city's existing land use regulations and housing development project review processes. Staff will take next steps based on input provided by Council at this study session.

[00:16:20] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Modifications to the development review process in response to AB 130, and preparing any TOD alternative plan will require ordinance and precise plan amendments. The timeline for completion of these ordinances and precise plan amendments will depend in large part on the work item deferrals authorized by Council.

[00:16:37] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Lastly, depending on the work directed, staff will determine if it's necessary to return to Council to seek a budget appropriation to carry out the work. This concludes staff's presentation, and staff respectfully requests Council's input on the four study session questions in the staff report at the appropriate time. Thank you.

[00:16:56] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you, Community Development Director Murdock. Um, we would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide public comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or submit a blue speaker card to the City Clerk. We will take in-person speakers first. Um, so it looks like

[00:17:21] Mayor Emily Ramos: trying to see how many people... one, two, three, four, five...

[00:17:30] Mayor Emily Ramos: So it looks like we have over 10 people speaking, so we're dropping down the time to about, uh, 2 minutes.

[00:17:39] Mayor Emily Ramos: So our first speaker will be Robert Cox.

[00:17:48] Robert Cox: Where is the clock? Oh. Thanks, you, um, members of the City Council, Mayor Ramos and Vice Mayor Clark, and for being able to speak here. Um, I'm going to speak on SB 79 alternative plan.

[00:18:02] Robert Cox: I'm appro- uh, speaking for Livable Mountain View, and supporting Approach C and a tighter timeline. I understand from looking at the, uh, list of items that you want to go through for coming up with an alternative plan should you go in that direction, that you, uh, say that it'll take a substantial amount of time.

[00:18:22] Robert Cox: Um, I would advise you to direct yourself to the items needed by HCD in order to approve substantial compliance, rather than a complete plan. Um, the deadline of January, uh, July 1st, uh, was set up with the idea that, you know, this must be able to be done in a reasonable amount of time. So, um, I ask you to take a look at that and figure out what the essentials are.

[00:18:45] Robert Cox: Um, I want to also just repeat in a letter that we sent to you, uh, there are certain characteristics of what we're suggesting that are important to call out. The first thing is that even though a transit-oriented development site, um, may exclude 10% for, uh, alternate use, um, we're only asking for 3% of the downtown district. We think that's quite reasonable.

[00:19:12] Robert Cox: The density so-called transfer, uh, can be done over to the East Whisman Precise Plan which already exceeds SB 79 in terms of its zoning now, and so no re rezoning would be needed.

[00:19:26] Robert Cox: And the third thing is I urge you to, uh, look into an SB 79 local alternative plan because it preserves the Council's ability to make the decisions about what can be done with our downtown, which is a key beloved area of our city, and we really do want the Council people rather than a state mandate making the detailed decisions of the future of that part of our city. Thank you very much.

[00:19:51] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. Next up we have Nancy Steer, followed by, uh, Lorraine Wormald.

[00:20:10] Public Speaker: I was going to agree with someone who hasn't spoken yet. So. Okay, um, I would echo everything that Robert Cox said. I think our downtown is something it's vital. It's vitally important, and anything we can do to try to preserve it and parts of it should be done. I know it's a lot of work. I know it's a lot of, uh, trouble for y'all, but I just can't imagine losing our downtown. I mean after all the city government makes its home here. So it must be pretty important. Um, so I agree that we should go for Option C and I agree with everything that Robert Cox said and I will cede the rest of my time. Thank you.

[00:20:54] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. Next we have Lorraine, followed by Robert... Swirick? Swerick?

[00:21:02] Public Speaker: Hello. First time I've ever done this. Um, I echo what Robert has said and what Maureen has said. Um, anyway, um, I was born and raised in Mountain View. My family came here in 1910. My aunt was, uh, Woman of the Year. Um, she helped develop parks and rec at the beginning.

[00:21:24] Public Speaker: Um, we had the, uh, Armani drugstore right on the corner of Castro and Dana. This city is in my heart. Um, I value Option C. Once a downtown historical area is gone, it is gone. It will never come back.

[00:21:46] Public Speaker: Um, Santa Clara lost theirs. And I had family who were involved with that and just cried over what happened. The City Council, you are our trustees. You are trustees of our heart, of our history, of how things are developed.

[00:22:04] Public Speaker: I understand the major time crunches and staff crunches. I worked too. When we had issues that involved more work than we had staff, we hired more staff. We realized... we just realized that it needed to be done.

[00:22:21] Public Speaker: Um, I would imagine that most people in the City of Mountain View don't know what's going on here about downtown, that the possibility of our historic downtown could be wiped out tonight. Or soon. And I just don't think that that's what they want.

[00:22:38] Public Speaker: I only know about it because I live downtown, and I've been trying to keep aware of what's going on. Anyway, I just want to thank you. I want to thank you for being our trustees and for thinking with... with knowledge and with data, but also with your heart. Thank you.

[00:22:58] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. Robert Swirick, followed by Louise Katz.

[00:23:05] Robert Swirick: Good evening members of the Council, uh, City Staff. My name is Robert Swirick. I'm a principal planner at VTA. I'm also a Mountain View resident but I'm here representing VTA this evening.

[00:23:16] Robert Swirick: On SB 79, VTA has been following the implementation very closely, and we're interested in continued dialogue with local jurisdictions about the implementation process. Um, we've been involved in a number of countywide meetings including some of the colleagues here, um, in the Council Chambers tonight, and, um, we believe that SB 79, if implemented, uh, well, can play an important role in creating more complete vibrant communities around rail stations, helping reduce vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions.

[00:23:45] Robert Swirick: We recognize that implementation is complex and nuanced. We're still waiting on some guidance from HCD at the state and mapping from the region, MTC, but we stand ready to serve, um, helping Mountain View and other jurisdictions in implementation. So don't hesitate to reach out.

[00:24:01] Robert Swirick: On SB, excuse me, on AB 130, um, we recognize the challenges, the timeline, uh, in AB 130 poses for local jurisdiction review and approval of development projects. Also the limitations on discretionary review and approval that other state housing laws in recent years have placed on local jurisdictions.

[00:24:20] Robert Swirick: Um, however, we're interested and we believe the city is also interested in making sure that, uh, development projects are accompanied by good multimodal transportation improvements. Bicycle, pedestrian, transit, TDM improvements, um, as they're approved, particularly larger projects.

[00:24:35] Robert Swirick: Um, it places an importance, a greater importance on precise plans, on active transportation plans, on transportation impact fee programs of projects and so forth. So we hope that with the options for implementing AB 130, excuse me, SB 79, that the city is still able to find a way to holistically plan ahead for transportation improvements along with development. So thanks very much.

[00:24:57] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. Next we have Louise Katz, followed by Jim Zarowski.

[00:25:05] Public Speaker: Thank you Mayor and Councilmembers. Speaking on behalf of Livable Mountain View. Um, it's notable that all homeowners have consistently been told to put aside having concerns about how zoning for density, things such as four to six story buildings next to single family homes, affects property and entire neighborhoods because the law allows this, and it's for the greater good of the community.

[00:25:31] Public Speaker: Now comes the issue of more laws per SB 79 and more changes, but this time the issue is the irreplaceable buildings of our historic business district. A district that dates back over 162 years and has clearly conferred benefits to the community. It's their only downtown. It's our legacy of the city and state's pioneer founders. And it's the unique space that brings people together and provides revenue.

[00:26:00] Public Speaker: Per past meetings we've heard how Council is now being asked to exempt a select few property owners on Castro Street from the overreaching standard that is being applied to others in the city.

[00:26:14] Public Speaker: That change happens and property owners need to accept that it is in the best interest of the community, I'm sorry, in the best interest of the community, even if there is a perceived impact on their personal property.

[00:26:27] Public Speaker: And I use the term perceived intentionally, because it should be noted that the density projected for Moffett and other areas and new transportation programs will in fact provide hundreds, perhaps thousands, of new customers for Castro Street businesses.

[00:26:46] Public Speaker: As we densify and add thousands more housing units, preservation is a win for the community and businesses. If, uh, we have a need for more consultants to get this done, we should make it a priority. The deadlines are not of our doing, but it must be done. I wanted to also thank you for hearing our story tonight. Thank you.

[00:27:10] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. Jim Zarowski, followed by Hala Alshawani.

[00:27:17] Public Speaker: Thank you members of Council. I hadn't planned to speak on this tonight but I very much agree with what, um, Robert Cox has said and what some of the other speakers have said.

[00:27:28] Public Speaker: I'll be honest, most people in the Mountain View community do not know about SB 79. What I worry about is they're going to find out on August 1st or August 15th and all hell's going to break loose.

[00:27:40] Public Speaker: The people that do know are very fearful. They're very upset. They see the end of the community that they've lived in for some 30, 40, 50 years and they don't know what's going to happen. I would very much highly recommend that we go with Option C, because we want to avoid the builder's remedy fiasco that happened in 2022 that's probably going to cost this town $100 million when we think about all the fees that we're not going to be able to collect and all the building that we're not going to be able to do.

[00:28:09] Public Speaker: I know it's a lot of work, but I think we deserve to maintain as much control as we possibly can over our own destiny. I don't think that the state knows what they want us to do, and if we allow the state to come in and give developers permits in August because we haven't had an alternative plan filed yet, and we don't know what we're going to do, we could see a scattershot approach where three or four buildings are built scattershot around the old Mountain View, around downtown, and around Monta Loma, which will cause people to abandon their block, abandon their line.

[00:28:43] Public Speaker: Nobody wants a seven-story building over their garden. Nobody wants a street with no parking on it. So I realize it's a lot of work and I realize the staff is overwhelmed with a lot of things, but this is almost like a, empty the armories. We have to do it. And unless we have a plan that we can ensure that we don't get cannibalized prior to having a plan done, I don't think we have a choice. Thank you very much.

[00:29:09] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. Hala, you're next.

[00:29:18] Hala Alshawani: Uh, good evening. Good evening Mayor Ramos, Councilmembers, and City Staff. My name is Hala Alshawani. I'm a longtime resident of Mountain View since 1984.

[00:29:31] Hala Alshawani: Um, I am here to urge you to support Approach C in the staff report in order to save and preserve our downtown commercial and historic district in and around the 100 to 300 blocks of Castro Street. And I urge you to please make this a top priority so that the plan can be submitted to HCD before July 1st, 2026.

[00:29:57] Hala Alshawani: City documents have always called our downtown the historic center and focus of the community, and the heartbeat of the city. It is a major source of sales tax revenue that supports the city's economic vitality.

[00:30:13] Hala Alshawani: 75% of the visitors that come to Mountain View are actually from outside of Mountain View. Um, and that's because of our downtown unique irreplaceable characteristics and history.

[00:30:29] Hala Alshawani: Um, frankly we're the envy of countless Bay Area cities. I mean nowhere else, Sunnyvale, Cupertino, dare I say even Palo Alto, we have a very unique history that connects us to, as Louise said, 160 years ago when the pioneers came, established the transit center and the first three blocks and the adjacent buildings around that.

[00:30:57] Hala Alshawani: So, um, I have every faith that the staff can pull this off. I know it's a lot of work, and I think with the resources, uh, they have and maybe consultant services if needed, that this can be, can be accomplished, and I hope the, um, Council can provide guidance and support so this can happen. Thank you.

[00:31:21] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. We will now take virtual speakers. Be sure to raise your, click the raise hand button on Zoom. Um, so our first virtual speaker is Cliff Chambers.

[00:31:59] Mayor Emily Ramos: So Cliff Chambers, if you could try to unmute yourself...

[00:32:18] Cliff Chambers: Sorry, I had a, a spinning rainbow. Uh, my name is Cliff Chambers, and resident of Mountain View...

[00:32:20] Cliff Chambers: My name is Cliff Chambers, and resident of Mountain View. And I'd first like to really thank staff for an excellent report. And it really laid out, um, a lot of really important options on a very complex, um, subject. I, I really do, uh, agree with the staff recommendation on, on Approach B. With major caveats. I really do feel the concern about downtown is really important, but I think we can leverage the R3, uh, development standards. We can work through some of this, uh, historic preservation in a timely manner and really address downtown at the same time. I'll let you figure out exactly how we should proceed with that. I, I know you have some really complex issues to deal with tonight, so I'm not going to spend much more time other than I hope that we can integrate the R3 update that comes before you in February with the findings that you have tonight, and also continue to address the middle-income, uh, ownership issue, because it's really going to happen in the SB 79 and the R3 area. So please pay attention to that. And then thank you very much for your time. Thanks.

[00:33:43] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. Next virtual speaker is Leslie Friedman.

[00:33:53] Public Speaker: Hello. Thank you for this opportunity to describe our feelings about these very important circumstances. I'd like to thank Louise, and Robert, and Hala, and Lorraine. Um, I agree with all of their very reasonable points.

[00:34:14] Public Speaker: I'd like to mention that Santa Clara destroyed their downtown, then decided it was a mistake, but it was too late. It is gone and won't come back.

[00:34:25] Public Speaker: I have friends from Oakland who go to football, but they eat and browse around and shop here in Mountain View. Also, Sunnyvale has set up an historic district for Murphy Avenue. They plan to file an SB 79 local alternative, alternative plan to preserve it.

[00:34:48] Public Speaker: I have lived in Mountain View for more than 20 years. It would be terrible to destroy something that is really an addition to everyone here. Thank you.

[00:35:06] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. Next speaker is Maureen Blondo.

[00:35:14] Public Speaker: Good evening. Thank you Mayor Ramos, and City Council, and the City Staff. I appreciate this opportunity to speak in favor of Option C. Uh, from my perspective of Mountain View, one of the things that makes it so desirable is, are the historical buildings in the first couple of blocks of Mountain View.

[00:35:38] Public Speaker: I'm not a radical who thinks that everything should stay the way it is. My second favorite part of downtown Mountain View is the, let's call it a plaza by the, um, the lot, the big law firm, I'm forgetting the name of the law firm. Where the Cascal outdoor dining is, Peet's, where you can meet people there.

[00:36:06] Public Speaker: That particular area I think is very nice, and I welcome more development of that type. But what will continue to draw people are the historical buildings that we have.

[00:36:20] Public Speaker: To have the alternative plan, I want to remind people who may not be familiar with some of these issues, does not compel the City Council to have no building in that district. It just preserves the Council's opportunity to make decisions in the future to preserve historical buildings.

[00:36:40] Public Speaker: That's everything I would like to say tonight, and I thank you for the opportunity and for the work that the city has put into this planning.

[00:36:56] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you so much. Next virtual speaker is Jerry Steach.

[00:37:04] Public Speaker: Good evening ladies and gentlemen. Can you hear me?

[00:37:08] Mayor Emily Ramos: Yes we can hear you.

[00:37:10] Public Speaker: Fantastic. Fantastic. Good evening ladies and gentlemen. Um, thank you for the opportunity to speak. I wish I could be there in person, but I'm presently a bit under the weather, and honestly nobody would want to be near me and get my cooties. So, I'll just, uh, call in here.

[00:37:26] Public Speaker: Um, real quickly, when I moved to Mountain View a generation ago, I was immediately impressed with its downtown. It didn't try to be anything forced or ungenuine. I felt then, as I do now, that this city has, uh, this city, it's a city that knows how. How to embrace commerce while preserving its unique character.

[00:37:48] Public Speaker: How to draw residents and visitors alike to our downtown with an inviting atmosphere that evokes both vibrancy and history. As Hala just mentioned, it's the envy of countless Bay Area cities.

[00:38:00] Public Speaker: And a small part of that allure, of course, is the number of architecturally rich and in many cases historically significant buildings along and around Castro Street. Uh, most of which are very bit, every bit as functional today as they were a century or more ago.

[00:38:18] Public Speaker: SB 79 is already disruptive and threatens those attributes. With good news, the good news here is ladies and gentlemen, you have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to ensure a vibrant historical downtown remains just that. Alluring, for generations to come.

[00:38:34] Public Speaker: And you can do that by supporting Approach C that, among other benefits, will serve to preserve our downtown's unique character. Your support will contribute greatly to our city and your legacies as City Councilmembers. Thank you.

[00:38:49] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. Next virtual speaker is David Watson.

[00:38:57] Public Speaker: Ah, rats. I'm just a moment too late. I'm almost to Council, but that's fine. I'll, uh. My comment is, uh, that, um, the, it's, it's worth remembering, uh, why it is that, uh, Santa Clara lost their downtown. It, it wasn't because they, uh, allowed gradual development. It's because they, on purpose, uh, demolished their historic downtown, uh, under the, um, uh, popular at the time concept of urban blight.

[00:39:27] Public Speaker: Uh, basically, uh, that's not really something that modern American urban planners think is a real thing, and is not something that I am worried that the current City Council or staff or the state or really anyone else involved thinks is a real plan that we're trying to fix, a real problem of urban blight that we're trying to fix. So I don't think that the City Council should go into this with a concern that, uh, suddenly, uh, our, our downtown is going to be, uh, demolished with, uh, due to, due to this state law.

[00:39:56] Public Speaker: Um, however, uh, as much as, uh, uh, the folks from Livable Mountain View have in the past shown up and been, uh, extremely worried about the, the loss of downtown, ah, they, they haven't really gotten into, uh, details of what exactly it is, uh, specifically that they're worried about. Are they worried about a, the, the actual loss of the businesses, of the buildings, of something else?

[00:40:24] Public Speaker: Um, and I think that it's a good idea for, if Council really is worried about these things, to think about which part of this they're actually worried about. Are you worried about, uh, a loss of the buildings or of the business as, uh, as, you know, is highlighted by many of the, the, those commenters?

[00:40:41] Public Speaker: Um, I, I think that, uh, if, if we, uh, believe that the success of our downtown is, uh, due to the, you know, mix of good restaurants and, uh, other amenities, um, then, uh, that's the kind of thing that we should be, uh, looking for development of. If we're worried about the facades of the buildings, um, that's also something that I understand our downtown precise plan is going to address. So overall I would say we should not be, um, uh, wasting staff time with huge, uh, attempts to do significant changes as staff estimated. Thank you.

[00:41:06] Mayor Emily Ramos: The time is up David. Thank you. Um, next up is Nazanin.

[00:41:29] Mayor Emily Ramos: Nazanin, if you could unmute yourself, you should be able to do it now.

[00:41:42] Mayor Emily Ramos: All right. We're going to move on, and we're going to loop back to you, oh... to JC.

[00:42:01] Jessica Chohan: Hi there. Uh, thank you to staff and Council for letting me speak today. This is Jessica Chohan. Um, I just want to ask that alternatives be considered that will be more operationally efficient, and keep our neighborhoods from, uh, being impacted and becoming disjointed.

[00:42:20] Jessica Chohan: Um, you know, there, there are options presented in here that will, uh, contain the building to areas where it could be better planned and executed, rather than being disjointed throughout neighborhoods. Uh, so I hope that you will consider those options. Um, and that Council will do what they think is right, um, not just what the staff recommended options are. So thank you.

[00:42:50] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. And our final speaker is Matthew Marting.

[00:42:58] Public Speaker: Hey, can you hear me?

[00:42:59] Mayor Emily Ramos: Yes I can.

[00:43:01] Public Speaker: Uh, great. Um, I just want to say, um, some people have been saying that, you know, a lot of people don't know about SB 79 and they may not like it when they find out about it. I just want to say, um, that doesn't speak for everyone. I know exactly what's going on with SB 79 and I am really excited about it and really happy about it.

[00:43:21] Public Speaker: Um, concerning downtown itself, people are, you know, concerned about we might lose our downtown, lose our historic district. I don't go downtown because there are old buildings there. I go down there because of the vibrant businesses there, the walkable environment in general, uh, and the transit center.

[00:43:40] Public Speaker: Um, and when you upzone downtown, um, you know, the best thing you can have for businesses is a large customer base. When you have dense housing downtown, that's more people who can enjoy that walkable environment and visit those businesses there. Uh, that's all, thank you.

[00:44:02] Mayor Emily Ramos: Thank you. And that ends public comment. Yay! Um, Council will now have the opportunity to ask questions and then discuss and provide feedback on the following questions. Does any member of the Council have questions? I see Councilmember Ramirez.

[00:44:19] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Mayor. Um, I, there's a lot to digest here. Uh, and it's tough, in particular, tackling at the same time two, uh, significant pieces of, of legislation.

[00:44:31] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, so I'm, I'm grateful to staff for, um, uh, doing the best you can to try and break that information down and, and put it in a staff report that, um, I think includes, uh, a number of helpful recommendations and, and some guidance for us how to approach each of these complex questions. Um, I have a few questions about, uh, SB 79, uh, and most of which I think you've...

[00:45:00] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: responded to either in the presentation or in the written questions, but um, just I think because some of this is complex it might be helpful to to sort of break it down further.

[00:45:09] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So, the historic resource exemption is statutorily exempt from CEQA, right?

[00:45:19] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So there is an option under SP 79 to uh adopt an ordinance that would exclude certain properties um and that would be exempt from environmental review under CEQA and historic resources um on a local register as of January 1st 2025 could be included in such an ordinance.

[00:45:37] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Uh, thank you, that's helpful. Um, but TOD alternative plans are not exempt from CEQA. That requires potentially an EIR.

[00:45:49] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Uh correct. Environmental review would be required uh potentially including an environmental impact report depending on the magnitude of potential environmental impacts.

[00:45:57] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Um, and then the uh moderate effort downtown focus option, which I think is the option members of the community have suggested we explore, is a TOD alternative plan, right?

[00:46:14] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Correct.

[00:46:15] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Which means it's subject to CEQA, in addition to the uh site by site analysis that would be required for transfers of residential capacity.

[00:46:28] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Correct.

[00:46:29] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Uh and then on top of that, uh there's also the HCD review and approval process which uh is a non-trivial period of time.

[00:46:39] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Yes.

[00:46:40] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: But even beyond that, um the the work, I think this this was a response you provided in the written questions, the work uh to create a TOD alternative plan is akin to the work that you would put into a precise plan, is that right?

[00:46:57] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: I think that's likely to be the case um if it's anything more than a a small subset of parcels um that the technical analysis, the thought and sighting in other locations, consideration of standards, community engagement and so forth, quickly begins to resemble a a precise plan type of of planning effort.

[00:47:20] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay, and that that's in part because one, you would want objective standards to help facilitate development that achieves community and council goals, um and then you would also want to be thoughtful about not, you know, while we have members of the community who are concerned about downtown preservation, if we shift that residential capacity to somewhere else, those residents may not be as um uh interested in sort of being the recipient site for that increased density and FAR, is that right?

[00:47:47] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: I think it's reasonable to expect that um care should be taken um when thinking about the places where the density would shift and engaging them uh accordingly.

[00:47:54] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay. That that's helpful. Um, and then I the last question is um the the residential capacity, I don't think that's it's um not something that I think we've spent a great deal of time processing. What does that analysis really entail?

[00:48:13] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Uh in terms of the work that would be required to determine how much density would need to shift to another location?

[00:48:19] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Right.

[00:48:20] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um so I think um you know we don't have a full answer, I think our initial assessment is that you would need to look at each parcel where the city's considering shifting the density. You would need to determine the existing density on the site, compare that to the SB 79 maximum density,

[00:48:36] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: do the same process for residential floor area ratio on the site currently versus the maximum permissible. That difference um we understand to be the amount of development intensity if we'll call it that, that needs to shift to another location.

[00:48:51] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um it may not necessarily need to go to a single parcel, it could potentially be broken up in multiple locations, but that cumulative net capacity that's removed needs to be moved to someplace else.

[00:49:02] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: And again it may not be all of the capacity on the site, the choice might be made to reduce it to the 50% maximum that's allowable or to some other percentage, but whatever's removed needs to be shifted to some other location.

[00:49:14] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay, that that's helpful. In um in a previous council meeting um one revelation uh I I thought was uh you had described that even though SP 79 sort of as an overlay includes residential capacity, there is also the underlying residential capacity of of the existing zoning and general plan land use designation.

[00:49:40] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So is that... we now kind of have to think about two sets of residential capacity? Is that how you anticipate working through this for the TOD alternative plan as well?

[00:49:50] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: I think that's one of the important considerations. So I think the example I used may have been um Castro Street as an example. And so considering um concerns about SP 79 development intensity um but recognizing we probably don't want to try to drive it to zero, not that we could necessarily do that.

[00:50:08] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So how do we get it as close to the current downtown precise plan or future downtown precise plan uh density, FAR, and so forth, and try to use the local alternative plan to match that so that there's no more, no less sort of incentive um or catalyst to redevelop those sites if that's not what's intended.

[00:50:26] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: What is the existing uh residential capacity for or the the density for um area H in the downtown precise plan?

[00:50:34] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Area H currently allows 50 units per acre.

[00:50:38] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay. And then that's... you could also apply the state density bonus on top of that.

[00:50:42] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: That's correct.

[00:50:43] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Great. Those are my questions for now. Thank you.

[00:50:46] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Ramirez. Uh next in questions is uh Councilmember Hicks.

[00:50:51] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So before my questions I'll say thank you so much for making a a very complex subject much easier to understand, but I still have questions. Um even after my council questions too.

[00:51:04] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um so first, you know, initially when I was talking to people about this subject, um uh it seemed like a TOD alternative plan was like a one-time thing, but as I talk about it more with people it's a part of a process which I don't think we've really... you know you could have added another 50 pages to your staff report and and described that.

[00:51:32] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um but maybe more briefly, my understanding... I guess the simple way to ask this question is some people have said to me why would we do some of these exemptions that are temporary, they'll expire in several years, but when I talk to people with more expertise they say that all the things we do or most of the things we do here, the TOD alternative plan, the exemptions, they roll into a a future process uh which intersects with the next time we do the housing element.

[00:52:04] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So it's not like if you do some of those steps in several years you throw them away and you pre pretty much wasted your time. So can you explain how it's an ongoing process? Because of course planning is an ongoing process.

[00:52:21] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Certainly. Um SP 79 provides that um any approval by um HCD, the California Department of Housing and Community Development, is valid through the next uh housing element adoption essentially.

[00:52:34] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So um while that planning work may be able to be reused, it will be necessary to go through that review and approval process again by HCD. So if everyone's fine with the status quo, the housing element process and requirements don't inject some sort of new unknown or requirement that requires adjustment to the TOD plan,

[00:52:53] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: you know maybe you could sort of dust it off and submit it again for reapproval and the work would not be wasted. So it's it's hard to speculate but I think that work will likely continue to pay dividends uh over time.

[00:53:04] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Or you could learn something from the TOD alternative plan and improve it. It's not our last chance and it's not something we throw away. It's basically what I wanted to confirm.

[00:53:14] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Right, the only way there would be a one-time and you don't do it again is if you don't care about having a TOD alternative plan after your next housing element adoption.

[00:53:22] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um okay. Uh... so I've had a concern and I asked this in my written council questions about um whether under a TOD alternative plan or just the objective standards that we're allowed to do, whether we can require commercial, because that's one of the more important things I think.

[00:53:47] Councilmember Alison Hicks: People have talked a lot about historic but I think also people have well people have talked about commercial too. One of the things that makes our pedestrian mall work is that there's a continuous string of commercial as opposed to a block where it... in fact a block where it's not is where people stop walking. So we don't want to lose that.

[00:54:08] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Now I've been told if there's enough space, we can put in a we can require a floor of commercial, but I'm not sure exactly what enough space means, particularly the beginning of the block, the 100 block closest to the transit station.

[00:54:24] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Aren't we allowed like the most historic block aren't we allowed like 90... wait doesn't it prescribe 95 ft is that, am I getting that wrong? It's 75 feet in some areas which is maybe seven stories and 95 feet is nine stories of residential approximately?

[00:54:47] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So the height limit within a quarter mile of the Caltrain station downtown is 75 feet. Within 200 feet which is the adjacent uh definition under SP 79 an additional 20 feet, so 95 feet of height would be allowable under SP 79's basic provisions.

[00:55:06] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So if I wanted to require commercial there, would I have to make it, and if that's 10 feet, 105 feet? Would I have to add that?

[00:55:19] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Right I think what you're talking about I would describe as what SP 79 um you know contemplates as standards that would pr- prohibit or prevent achieving the densities and heights that the law requires the city to allow.

[00:55:33] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So if we were to think about requiring ground floor commercial in a set of adopted standards, we would need to very carefully analyze whether that required ground floor commercial could reasonably uh prevent someone from achieving the height or the density or the residential floor area ratio to which they're entitled in that location.

[00:55:50] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So I think it's possible that more height could be needed as an example, or flexibility in other standards perhaps that would allow them to sort of make up for that ground floor commercial area and some way needed to achieve residential development density.

[00:56:04] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay thank you that's what I have been told but I wanted to confirm. And then also what about I'm building market rate housing and I want to have cars a lot I want the residents to have cars.

[00:56:18] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Uh do I am I allowed to say I need some space for that? I mean I know parking's not required but most people doing market rate housing say to have it pencil out they actually do need to put cars space for cars.

[00:56:35] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So we're seeing a lot of developers um not dig underground anymore for parking but put the parking on the first and second floor. Is that something that we could also possibly have?

[00:56:48] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Would we have to raise the height to prevent that sort of configuration on our pedestrian mall, a couple of floors of of parking garage?

[00:57:21] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: That's a that's a question I don't think we can simply answer. Um there are a number of considerations that we just briefly discussed. I think one in my mind is if the city's not requiring it is it our standard that's preventing them from achieving their floor area ratio or density, probably not, and so maybe from a technical standpoint there's not a a problem.

[00:57:41] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: But the interface with state density bonus law is where I think it gets more complicated where if the developer wants parking they may seek to have a waiver or a concession for some other requirement to enable them to provide the parking. Um I think more more work and analysis would be required to give a firmer answer than that.

[00:58:00] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay. Um and there's been some talk of uh leveraging the R3 development standards. I really like those by the way. Um for our down for our downtown development standards.

[00:58:15] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I'm wondering what you think the overlap is because there's we have within the current downtown precise plan we have design standards that are more specific to the downtown. So I'm wondering how much would the R3 development standards help or how much do we already have it in the downtown precise plan, or maybe you have a third idea.

[00:58:38] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Yeah I think one of the key challenges is the densities that SP 79 requires the city to permit um far exceed the densities for which the development standards have been created in the existing downtown precise plan as one example.

[00:58:53] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um there may be elements uh of existing objective design standards in the downtown precise plan that are easily lifted and put into a local alternative plan if that's what council wants to pursue.

[00:59:06] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um but more broadly it's sort of the physical development standards that would enable a well-designed building of the densities that SP 79 requires the city to allow that's missing currently in our um in our process, that the R3 zoning update would get us much closer to having for SP 79.

[00:59:24] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay, I think that's my last question. Um so if I can remember it, let's see. Um actually maybe I will oh do you think so this being a lot of work do you think that Opticos could do some of a uh of a TOD alternative plan?

[00:59:50] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: It's currently not scoped in the uh R3 work that we're doing. Um and uh I well...

[01:00:07] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: I think it's it's hard to understand how that would work currently um as Christian mentioned. Um they're not currently scoped, that's sort of a functional limitation.

[01:00:20] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um also their work is more focused on some of the uh design and development standards intended for R3. So they may have a starting point but again um further refinement would be needed given the small lots that SP 79 would apply to that we haven't sort of worked through in the R3 um high intensity or density context.

[01:00:37] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay, thank you. That's all I have for now.

[01:00:41] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Hicks. Uh Councilmember Showalter.

[01:00:45] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, I have a couple of quick questions I think for SP 79 and then a little more for um SB 130.

[01:00:54] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um uh one I just wanted to talk a little bit about how long it takes to get a consultant on board. It seems to me um when I remember doing it that um it really took about three months to get an RFP written and approved and out and then another three months to get somebody on board. So that's 6 months. Is that um does that ring true?

[01:01:22] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Uh that's our experience on recent larger projects. Um there uh you know I'm not familiar with all of the finance department's um you know uh uh requirements for uh pulling getting um this uh process for getting uh hiring consultants um but yeah that's a that's a pretty familiar time frame for getting consultants on board uh especially if you do need to go out in that public um open process.

[01:01:58] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Do we have a list of people who we could call on for this, like I know in public works we have some, you know, lists of qualified um vendors we we can go to for street work for instance.

[01:02:09] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Um so we we do have uh planning consultants already um under contract for staff augmentation work.

[01:02:18] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Um their contracts, the amounts as well as the scopes of work aren't really established for this broad type of work program that we would really be talking about. And so we would potentially have to go through the contracting process to to bring on board a consultant for this you know robust purpose potentially.

[01:02:36] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay. Um another question that came up was the use of prevailing wage. Um something can you talk about when prevailing wage is required and when it's not?

[01:02:50] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Sure. Um so the the key trigger um in both AB 130 and SP 79 is buildings uh over 85 ft in height.

[01:02:59] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay thank you. Alright. Alright well then moving on to 130 um I did ask a couple questions and I'm just kind of going to repeat them because I think it's um I don't think the the public reads the answers to our questions and a few hours before the meeting starts.

[01:03:22] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um one thing that um I was concerned about is um some of the environmental protections. We have a a couple of toxic ground water plumes in Mountain View and standard practice for protecting um residential development over them has been to install vapor barriers.

[01:03:39] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And um I just wanted I I understood that basically if if a residential property were proposed in those areas then um we would require a um an initial study which would identify the problem and... so could you just go talk a little bit about how that would be handled so that our community would be safeguarded.

[01:04:02] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Certainly. Um so I think there's there's sort of two circumstances. AB 130 does not eliminate these environmental protections it changes the process through which we achieve them essentially.

[01:04:13] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um the first circumstance is where a site is actually listed in a database of hazardous sites. AB 130 would not apply to those projects and so period. Period. Some other CEQA process would be needed, maybe another exemption, maybe actual CEQA analysis.

[01:04:31] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um perhaps the more common scenario is that the site's not listed and a phase one environmental site assessment must be performed, potential contamination from past use is identified, and a project would then need to do further analysis and uh implement any requirements of state and federal regulations to achieve um safe levels of mitigation of the the hazard.

[01:04:51] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So that's required to be implemented and verified at the certificate of occupancy stage rather than frontloading that analysis um which is sort of the prior process uh through CEQA.

[01:05:00] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Thank you. Okay the other one I wanted to check on with you is um on page 31 under other criteria um there's uh an exemption for not um it doesn't apply in a special flood hazard area subject to inundation by a 1% annual um chance flood, 100 year flood.

[01:05:20] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Uh but I didn't see anything about riparian setbacks and um we do have uh two streams in our uh in our city that are sinuous, you know are getting more sinuous as we um that means wiggling as um as we have more intense storms uh erosion gets uh happens and and they and they uh they meander a little bit.

[01:05:46] Councilmember Pat Showalter: That happens significantly on Stevens Creek I think it was four years ago and a big section fell in on the Stevens Creek trail. I know Eric will remember that I don't think he will but anyway um uh that is likely to go on and we have signed quite a while ago with um if memory serves me a guidance document with Valley Water that requires us to have a 25 foot setback from top of bank for uh riparian zones. Is that in here?

[01:06:22] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: It's not in AB 130. There's no special provision uh if those areas are not within a a flood hazard area that's described. Um there's nothing in the law that would get someone out of complying with um other regulatory agency requirements.

[01:06:38] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So if there was some sort of um permit needed from the Department of Fish and Wildlife or the US Army Corps of Engineers for work very close to uh a stream bank, that could be required still but that's independent of and not addressed in in AB 130.

[01:06:51] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay that's uh thank you.

[01:06:55] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. Do we have any other questions from my colleagues? Oh one more question from Councilmember Hicks.

[01:07:04] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I guess I'll just follow up on what some of the community members asked. They were kind of asking if I got them right uh if they only transferred 3% of the density in the downtown area would that be much less work than some of the other things we may be imagining. I guess we'll find out what everybody's imagining in a few minutes, but um you know to do a minimal alternative TOD TOD alternative plan and then later when we're doing the housing element do more, is can you see it very finely scoped?

[01:07:42] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So what I understood from the public comments was um their calculation that the area in the downtown that they would like to be protected in a TOD alternative plan was only 3% of the area of that TOD zone.

[01:07:56] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um I didn't understand it to mean we only want to or they would only want to shift 3% of the density, which might be a more limited sort of scope of technical analysis.

[01:08:07] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um the area they're talking about is comprised probably of dozens of properties with buildings of different types and so we would likely have a pretty extensive technical process in order to figure out existing density and residential floor area compared to um SP 79's requirements and then where to shift that. So I think it wouldn't necessarily limit the extent of work needed.

[01:08:28] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay thank you.

[01:08:30] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Hicks. Any other questions? Oh I see a question from Councilmember... or oh great we have now we will now move to comments by the council which should include feedback on the questions staff pose in the staff report.

[01:08:47] Councilmember Emily Ramos: If staff could put slide 27 up with the council questions relating to SP 79 we'll start with that first. And because I also know my colleagues very well there might be items where we may need to uh do a straw poll on.

[01:09:01] Councilmember Emily Ramos: So staff will be capturing any items that we will be doing a straw a straw poll on and so after you are done speaking they will put on the screen um possible items that you we may need to do a straw poll on after each council member has spoken. Alright so we will start with Councilmember Hicks.

[01:09:26] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay I'm gonna I'm gonna give my initial ideas and I'm curious to see other people can build on them. Um so I am uh I responding to some of the things that um uh well no I'll start with saying I am for a TOD alternative plan that focuses on the downtown, so I guess that is C. I'm not extremely concerned about getting it done right away, maybe I'll regret saying that later.

[01:09:56] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um but it seems to me that the economic conditions we have now give us a little reassurance that we can work on something something that will be happy with. You know it won't be probably the last one we ever do we can we we'll learn from it and reconsider it later so I'm not saying I want um something uh something um you know that we spend that we're not making our greatest novel we can ever write or whatever.

[01:10:26] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um I'm also very interested in a historic exclusion ordinance as quickly as we can do one if we can do that before the TOD alternative plan. Um for me the model for us is more or less is in some ways we're all different but is more or less Sunnyvale that has Murphy um uh has Murphy uh protected and I think they'll put that into a TOD alternative plan and then they um you know build up around it.

[01:10:56] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um I I want to say um kind of the values you know this is a really good technical report um the the staff report that we're working off of um but there were not of course values exp expressed in it because that's our job so I think I should say some of my values now.

[01:11:16] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um the first thing the first thing I think following the things that I've said we do we are encouraging housing that's one of the the goals of this project um we're now not getting much in those areas so this does encourage housing.

[01:11:33] Councilmember Alison Hicks: At the same time um I agree with Mr Watson it's not going to all go at once we're not going to tear it all down it it will be things will be torn down and developed gradually and I think we sh decide where those things happen. We don't want 10% of it to develop and we say you know we wish all that development was consolidated it's scattered site we want to make those decisions.

[01:11:58] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And we want to make those decisions in a way that um that uh continues the projects that we're in the middle of um the main project that I'm worried about right now is call it what you will the pedestrian mall or our the that downtown component of our economic vitality which we've been putting time and money into and we expect to invest in more

[01:12:19] Councilmember Alison Hicks: and I think if we get if we don't plan carefully to me it's not so much the historic buildings themselves you know Thomas Jefferson never lived there we're not that's not the kind of thing that we're looking for. It's a sense of place that we get from kind of the overall like Murphy not every building is historic but a block a couple blocks with sense of place.

[01:12:42] Councilmember Alison Hicks: There's I mean I can pretty much guarantee in the next 10 or 20 years the entire downtown is not going to become six to 10 stories. So we have to pick where we want it to be. And by transferring some of that density we are not stopping housing development we're saying where we want it to be.

[01:13:02] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And you can see that from the upzoning that was done in the 60s in in old Mountain View where many other places I believe. A few a few apartments popped up but the whole blocks you know in old Mountain View were not torn down. So over the decade or something that they allowed that.

[01:13:22] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I you know I think they've given us a way to have uh control over uh the projects that we're in the middle of like the pedestrian mall and that we should take that control.

[01:13:33] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um I also want to say that upzoning alone doesn't make economic vitality. Um there are a lot of places with um tall apartments such as the San Antonio center, taller than downtown Mountain View, not as vital in terms of walking and community.

[01:13:50] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And tall buildings, I love tall buildings I would like to move back to San Francisco personally, but tall buildings alone don't make community and don't make walkable streets and economic vitality, there are other ingredients. And I think we as planners and council members have to add those other ingredients.

[01:14:09] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So that is um oh and I would love to declare a Villa lands historic district. Villa lands was the first subdivision in uh all of Mountain View. It includes the first three blocks of Castro plus Villa.

[01:14:25] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um doesn't mean you can't develop if you have a dis a historic district you can still build tall buildings there. But it gives you a little more discretion and recognizes that. So if I were making this decision all alone that's what I would do. So that's my opening statement thank you very much.

[01:14:46] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Hicks. Now testing out the system that we have put in place, do we have um can we see what we have so far as possible um council straw a straw polling items.

[01:15:05] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Well I'm just making sure that Councilmember Hicks sees that nothing was missed. So really this is just for Councilmember Hicks's sake to start out with. So we have two items already. Yeah that looks good. Perfect yay. Alright so next we will have Councilmember Ramirez. We can put up a slide 27 back up.

[01:15:35] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Uh thank you Mayor. Uh first I I want to uh I think echo or emphasize uh some of the remarks from the city manager. I know there is uh frustration perhaps with some of the timelines that um are described in the staff report, but that's not the staff's fault.

[01:15:52] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I think it's the practical reality that um it would have been nice to have a statutory CEQA exemption for a TOD alternative plan, but that's not in the law.

[01:15:52] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And it takes a lot of time to find consultants and uh the public expects a process when we embark upon these types of of uh initiatives.

[01:16:05] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And um the reason that approach B takes less time is that um it is simply applying um uh to our exclusion ordinance items that we've already studied and and analyzed. So it takes an enormous amount of technical analysis frankly that goes way over my head to complete that work that staff are currently doing. So the amount of time that it would take to uh to put to uh complete that work I I I totally understand.

[01:16:40] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I also wanted to point out that any TOD alternative plan requires HCD approval in order to become valid. So we could spend essentially two years um and an untold amount of staff hours to craft a TOD alternative plan and there is no guarantee that it will pass muster and be signed off on by HCD. So that is I think a significant factor to me.

[01:17:08] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um and the third comment I want to make is that um while we might shift density from the downtown or from our historic and cultural assets along Castro to somewhere else, any shift of density requires us to increase the development pressure to somewhere else, likely to some other established neighborhood in our community. In this case mostly San Antonio down the Caltrain corridor to Wisman.

[01:17:35] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I am extremely sensitive to members of the community in the Crossman neighborhood as an example who felt that they were sort of surprised by recent SB 79 projects that were proposed. We wouldn't want um a kind of situation to play out along um area sort of immediately south of the Caltrain station or in the the San Antonio neighborhood where members of that neighborhood or the HOA feel like uh density is somehow unexpectedly dropped upon them to protect some other neighborhood that was louder or sort of more organized um sort of at an earlier part of the process.

[01:18:12] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So for all of those reasons um while I am very sympathetic to the goal of preserving downtown I think preserving and managing our our historic and cultural resources is very important I think approach B strikes sort of a prudent and pragmatic balance of protecting the resources that are um that have essentially been identified as our sort of premier or key assets.

[01:18:38] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: It does the most with limiting the expenditure of um resources or sort sort of additional resources that are going to be required anyway or sort of limiting taking up of additional resources beyond what's already sort of statutorily required.

[01:18:52] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um and so for me uh that is approach B. So that's the response to the the um general framing. And then for the the questions um on slide 27, question one, does the council want to pursue a TOD alternative plan? My my answer to that would be no, to answer approach sort to support approach B.

[01:19:16] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Uh to the second question well if if council wants to support D I'm not really supportive of it but if we are then perhaps there's an alternative to pursue that later as part of a general sort of comprehensive precise plan update perhaps when we've seen how some of the other SB 79 projects might perform.

[01:19:36] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And then to the third point um or third question does council authorize the deferral of work on uh these other significant items which are going to be critically necessary for us um in in order to implement elements of the the general plan or elements of our housing element. No I would not support um deferring that work um in support of approach D.

[01:20:01] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So all of my comments uh to to support the staff recommendation. Uh thank you.

[01:20:06] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Ramirez. Uh moving on to our straw polling it looks like we probably just have two distinct groups. Um we can add a...

[01:20:18] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: It might make sense for everybody to provide their comments before going to a straw poll?

[01:20:22] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay well oh true we'll we'll get up we'll write down the answers as they speak. Never mind, we're not doing the straw poll right now. I don't know why I keep doing these prematurely.

[01:20:33] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay so we have Councilmember Clark.

[01:20:36] Councilmember Chris Clark: Thank you mayor, and I'll keep an eye on um the the tally to see if any of it changes or not based on my responses. Uh but a lot of what I will uh express echoes what Councilmember Ramirez just said as my questions and logic got into exactly this reality.

[01:20:56] Councilmember Chris Clark: So the question in my head has been the entire time, is a multi-year significant financial and staff resource intensive precise plan update or creation effort really what we want to be prioritizing right now. Given that um you know we have so many other priorities on housing and our existing uh our our pending housing element.

[01:21:26] Councilmember Chris Clark: Given the reality we've seen recently with projects proposing under SB 79 um I absolutely understand our businesses' concern I absolutely understand the community's concern and the the sort of potential shock of changing what is sort of an iconic and recognizable feature of downtown.

[01:21:49] Councilmember Chris Clark: And at the same time um going through this process the goal of which specifically is to try and stop to build the tallest buildings allowed or block essentially block the state law from coming to an area, the mechanism by which is a TOD plan, um seems it seems it frankly seems unlikely that the state is not only going to look at that and say yep that looks totally uh you know appropriate we have no concerns there. Um the same is the other the the same logic that goes into not knowing sort of the risk of SB 79 applying right to whatever site.

[01:22:30] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um it feels like a really big risk to do approach C at right now given how much we don't know, given um essentially creating an entire precise plan effort where our sole purpose essentially or primary objective would essentially be trying to circumvent what the state law is doing. Or to essentially stop SB 79 from coming.

[01:22:57] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um I'd much rather look to uh more nuanced targeted approaches which um perhaps are a version an extended version of A or B frankly I would be entirely supportive of a local ordinance right away that essentially exempts those historically significant resources. I think it's a huge opportunity our community wants that our businesses want that.

[01:23:23] Councilmember Chris Clark: I frankly thought we were in further along the process to get that so that actually disappointed me slightly. But I still um would definitely agree with essentially making an expansion to essentially all properties listed currently to do a um an exclusion ordinance immediately. Um whether that you know what bucket that fits into.

[01:23:47] Councilmember Chris Clark: But spending spending all that time trying to shift the density from essentially the area between well what the quarter quarter mile up out out into Wisman, up out into San Antonio. Um it's shifting not just SB 79 requirements obviously we've established, we're essentially taking existing local standards up on top of it. So those are pretty significant consequences not fully understood that I don't feel entirely ready to uh commit to frankly right now.

[01:24:16] Councilmember Chris Clark: So um I really like the objective design standard update. You can accomplish plenty of these values essentially through requiring all projects whether or not it's an SB 79 project. All projects have to adhere to all of the rules we just discussed: flood control right all the other objective sort of safety things. To basically accomplish that essentially to require uh whatever we've come up with. That the existing law doesn't explicitly rule out.

[01:24:48] Councilmember Chris Clark: I absolutely think we should be doing our our R3 zone objective design standards we could we could incorporate plenty of sort of character design rules into a city-wide objective standard that is more nuanced, targeted and explicitly uh you know able to be accomplished relatively quickly. Compared to uh completely revamping all of our downtown areas to essentially accomplish sort of shifting some of this density that to be fair we don't actually know if it has to be shifted exactly to.

[01:25:23] Councilmember Chris Clark: So uh to answer the specific questions for question one right a TOD alternative plan to me is a is um what we're terming it here a multi you know a huge process for our staff a significant financial undertaking an EIR consultant requirement and HCD approval. Um the answer is basically approach B I know that's essentially not I think exactly the question.

[01:25:53] Councilmember Chris Clark: Right so no for TOD right now, yes essentially approach B, expanding expanding local exclusion ordinance basically or an expanded exclusion ordinance to all those historic resources. So I don't know what you know maybe that's approach B plus whatever you want to call it.

[01:26:12] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um so essentially all currently listed items properties.

[01:26:17] Councilmember Chris Clark: And then to question two um obviously the logic leads if I don't essentially if not to start to right now right would the deferral work right I would I don't right to begin essentially don't do it now don't begin immediately. That was it no to deferring um the work essentially for a later point as some people mentioned right we we have it basically on schedule on deck relatively right in 28 whatever that was.

[01:26:47] Councilmember Chris Clark: There there will be a time essentially um for a precise plan update where this would more properly fit into our general cycle rather than throwing off off kilter what is a an incredible body of work for other priority items frankly.

[01:27:02] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um obviously our general you know the R3 the downtown objective design standards um are pretty highly important to our general body. So that's the long way of saying yes let's get the um local basically approach B whatever you want to call it. Basically get our exclusion ordinance updated for those historic resources quickly. But I do not support throwing everything off the rails to do basically essentially essentially trying to to block state law that we have no idea frankly whether uh how realistic that goal really is or what unintended consequences that'll bring.

[01:27:39] Councilmember Chris Clark: So that was a little rambling because we got into it pretty quickly but hopefully I touched those points.

[01:27:44] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Alright next we have uh Vice Mayor Abe-Koga.

[01:27:49] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: So thanks I have some prepared comments because this was such a complex and long report.

[01:27:55] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: So first of all I I want to thank staff for working on the very comprehensive report explaining a convoluted state legislation. There's been a lot of concern regarding how SB 79 will impact our downtown so I'm glad we are prioritizing its implementation.

[01:28:11] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: A strong healthy downtown that honors our local history while meeting current and future business needs and community desires serves the larger public. As I've said I recognize the balance for housing. But downtown Castro in particular represents only basically two blocks long and and some one two some some of those two streets down which is a very very extremely tiny percentage of land within our city boundaries.

[01:28:40] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: On a side note while I will likely support the approach B per your analysis, I'm glad uh Vice Mayor um our Councilmember Hicks mentioned Sunnyvale. Sunnyvale has their Murphy Avenue exempt from from pretty much everything, to preserve you know it they even passed an ordinance to prevent banks on the ground floor um which apparently the state has supported to make sure we their retail and restaurants survive there.

[01:29:08] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: So um so so you know uh sorry our city and our state has done everything possible to support their housing their development their jobs but we can do that right the issue is what's practically possible per per state laws.

[01:29:25] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: And while my heart prefers approach C the head goes towards practically option B because um to to what staff basically articulated the HCD approval timeline risk as well as other you know constraints to this TOD process.

[01:29:45] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: So if I was forced right now approach B yes um but I honestly I I'd like to see if if our exclusion ordinance could be as strong as possible basically to prevent those types of giant sort of generic buildings coming onto Castro.

[01:30:00] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: so we have to do CEQA. That is the law. Um it would be nice if HCD were expeditious in their review and approval but we can't guarantee that. Um and the one thing that is within our uh our purview is the thoughtfulness of the plans that we create

[01:30:11] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: and for better or for worse Mountain View tends to be very thoughtful. And I don't think that's a bad thing. I don't think we want to rush something out there that uh doesn't include thoughtful development standards or that uh may end up placing the residential capacity in an area where there are different unintended consequences including uh uh making a community that is the recipient of that upset because they weren't a part of that community conversation.

[01:30:45] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So we wouldn't want to rush something together rush to put something together. I think we would want to uh include members of the community you know who are interested in downtown preservation but also the folks who are going to be on the the receiving end of that residential capacity or who have other interests in the the development of a TOD plan.

[01:31:01] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So I I um I appreciate your your remarks and I think it is important you know to recognize that this is not a problem of the staff's making. Um I also appreciate following uh Councilmember Hicks. I think there are uh probably a lot of themes that are going to be similar in my own comments. Um I think I'll I'll start with though uh

[01:31:22] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: as I've sort of reflected on a lot of the material this feels more than anything like a a a workload management exercise more than it is like a land use policy making exercise.

[01:31:32] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um I think what the the staff's ultimate contention appears to be is eventually we should put together a TOD alternative plan. We should have objective standards right we should try and shape and and guide the physical evolution of the community as best as we're able to recognizing that there are many constraints under SB 79 and and state law. Um so I think my my my direct response to question one would be yes we should pursue a a pursue a TOD alternative plan.

[01:31:59] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um I personally I don't know if I would necessarily want to just limit it to the the first three blocks of of Castro. I think that is important and we have a lot of community input right now but I think as many members of the community also alluded to over time other members of our community who are uh in Monta Loma or elsewhere elsewhere will probably want us to start thinking about their parts of of the city as well their neighborhoods.

[01:32:25] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So I I I would say yes pursue a TOD alternative plan. I don't I agree with Councilmember Hicks I don't think we should start it today. I think there's a lot of work that has to go into the existing work plan items. I would like to see those completed and also how we decide talking about what the TOD alternative plan should achieve is important too.

[01:32:47] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Uh there are some areas where we may want to limit the the density and height and there are other areas where uh we're maybe more comfortable with with shifting that height but that you know beyond being a a a technical and challenging mathematical exercise I think it's also that's where you know what what type of a community do we want in 20 30 40 years is is a a critical component of the conversation that we're really not able to meaningfully have right now.

[01:33:15] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So question one yes. Um but I think that should follow the existing work plan items. And in particular I think um the citywide objective design standards are really important.

[01:33:30] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: That's citywide right. We have many instances where not having objective standards has resulted in suboptimal development elsewhere in the city. And I think that's why that work plan item is critical.

[01:33:43] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um and also uh the precise plans the downtown precise plan update and the Moffett Boulevard precise plan update can inform the TOD alternative plan. Um and I would welcome staff's uh perspective on uh perhaps maybe there's a different way we can approach those precise plans.

[01:34:02] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: One one thing to consider is uh if if the downtown historic core had a a base density of 60 units per acre we could have a a simple exemption by ordinance today.

[01:34:18] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Right if it were just 10 units per acre more dense we would actually have an easy way to exempt that portion of downtown but it's not sufficiently dense. So we don't have that simple pathway that SB 79 does allow. Um so you know maybe a a more narrowly scoped downtown precise plan where we talk about making that area 60 units per acre could allow perhaps more quickly a simple exemption where you don't have to go through a much more elaborate TOD alternative plan um and it can provide perhaps some relief more expeditiously.

[01:34:53] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: But that's where I think we would need a lot of input from staff about how to how to re-scope or how to uh to to appropriately plan for the the existing items to you know see them through and and maybe break out the things that are more urgent and defer the things that are that are less urgent. Um so uh for opt question two um I I agree with Councilmember Hicks.

[01:35:19] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I think we should pursue the exemption for historic resources. That's something that we can do through ordinance without CEQA.

[01:35:27] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um I don't support the other exempted parcels. I was going through that map and most of those sort the first there aren't that many. Many of them are already built out um or you know it's like City Hall or the you know the the Kaiser building you know I I don't know if that's the the priority.

[01:35:49] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um uh some of these other areas I don't want to trigger you know conflicts of interest but um I live in a very dense part of the city and I don't know if we necessarily need to exempt you know the San Antonio precise plan uh from SB 79.

[01:36:04] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And honestly that staff time and capacity would be better spent on many other things. So maybe it's like a modified staff recommendation where pursue the the statutory uh statutorily CEQA exempt you know historic resource exemption. Do not proceed with the precise plan sort of random assortment of parcels exemption.

[01:36:30] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um pursue the uh objective standards by ordinance um option which right now I think would use R3 as sort of the baseline. Um which I think is a good place to start I agree. And then after we've completed the work plan items and informed by staff's recommendations about how we should think about the precise plans in particular then we should start the the TOD uh alternative plan.

[01:37:03] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um so happy to sort of go through that if that's helpful again. Uh I I I also want to answer question four because that's that's the easier one. Like we really don't have a lot of options there. If we don't meet the deadlines the projects are deemed approved which is actually pretty crazy. So um it's in our best interest to have a process that allows us to meet those extremely aggressive deadlines in state law. And I think the staff recommendation is is a prudent one so I I support the staff recommendation for question four. Thank you.

[01:37:40] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Did staff get that?

[01:37:44] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: I think so. Yes so far so good.

[01:37:47] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. Uh did you want to double check to see if they did catch it Councilmember Ramirez? Cause that that you are the one I am most worried about with this process.

[01:38:03] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I guess so um maybe this is a process question for later. Some of these I'm not certain need a straw poll like include members of community and development of TOD alternative plan. I don't think there's a scenario where we would exclude the community.

[01:38:19] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um so I mean it's if if staff if that's helpful guidance for staff then certainly um but I I feel like we're do you have an opinion?

[01:38:30] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Mayor and councilmembers if I may. So I would suggest that what we're trying to capture here are um your uh options frankly for number two. Question question two because if you're going to think about different approaches that's where the straw polls are going to come in.

[01:38:48] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: So I would suggest just for efficiency's sake that let staff capture this and then let's display it at the end. And then to staff why don't we just make sure that this document is capturing the items for the straw polls because I am also taking track of where we're at with questions and then let's pull it up after we're done and then we can move forward from there if that works.

[01:39:13] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: That that does work. Can I ask one one thing I completely forgot? Um we only have like two staff who do advanced planning. Maybe we should have more. Maybe you should have some friends Eric. Cause I know we're we're expecting a lot of you and uh maybe adding I don't know I'd love to see maybe in in the mid-year like consideration of like this is we're getting to a point where our staff are going to break if we keep adding all of these state mandates on top of the council priorities I think it's something we should seriously consider. Thank you.

[01:39:45] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right thank you. Um we will if we could go back to slide 27 and now we will have Councilmember Showalter.

[01:39:54] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Thank you. I I like this listening with the chart. Very good idea. I used to make one on just on a piece of paper but it's really nice to have it pretty and neat up there.

[01:40:07] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um uh I want to just go to sort of a little bit of a higher level. Um when I look at all of the um state legislation that's been passed to promote housing recently there are a couple things that seem to be um commonalities. One of the commonalities is that if you have objective development standards you can enforce them.

[01:40:33] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And so I think that that what that says to us is that the lack of objective development standards is really a problem. And I know that R3 is designed to um develop them for a a a a a portion of our residential development. That's great I mean it seems to me like it's a wonderful start in that direction but I just think that we really need to remember that commonality um objective development standards. And we need to have them because otherwise um the state has control and we don't really want to cede the control for our local development to the state.

[01:41:15] Councilmember Pat Showalter: We we have worked really really hard to be a pro-housing community and um support housing and and and think about planning in a very comprehensive manner where we put together parks and schools and commercial and you know industry all together. We we we look at the whole package so um I think that's that's an excellent model and we you know we need to kind of protect it.

[01:41:42] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And the way to protect it it seems to me under the current situation is to get those um objective development standards done as soon as is reasonable.

[01:41:54] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um then the other thing we've I've heard loud and clear and I I agree with is we all love downtown. We all want to um protect downtown. So what we need to do to protect downtown I'm not sure exactly what it is but um uh I'm I think that's where you know that's where we've heard from our community and I think that's what we want to we want to really concentrate on.

[01:42:18] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And then I would um I would echo what um my colleague uh Councilmember Ramirez said. It seems like along with the objective um development standards there's a lot more work for advanced planning than there used to be. And um so I think we need to you know we need to think about that as um as we move forward and and and make sure that there is adequate staff or consulting power or whatever is the best way to do it. That's not our decision but just to recognize that advanced planning is super important and um and we we really recognize that.

[01:42:53] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay so um oh then the other thing is we are not powerless in terms of how these um uh how these bills are written or amended.

[01:43:08] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So and we have a good reputation and we have very good relationships with our legislators. So I think as we go through this process and we identify things that perhaps aren't written as well as they could be um we should bring that up to our legislators.

[01:43:27] Councilmember Pat Showalter: For instance it seems to me in 130 um there's a you know there's a timeframe that that generally you use and it's and it's kind of a one size fits all until you get to the huge size. And and then it just adds a little bit more time if I understood correctly most of the time it's 30 days and then if it's a slightly bigger one it's 60 days. That's not really time for much process.

[01:43:51] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So I think that um putting together a um an understanding of what would be the cutoff for when we really feel like it's not just a single project on a uh it's it's part of like a plan and and it needs more it needs more community time. I think that would be a legitimate thing to bring up to our legislators. So I wanted to bring that up.

[01:44:14] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay to the questions. Sorry for all that um soap boxing. Um uh yes I I think we do need to do a TOD plan but I think we need to do it thoughtfully um we are in a sense protected by the economic downturn and the lack of um residential development that's that's going on right now.

[01:44:35] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um I uh I do feel like getting R3 done and getting the objective standards done are they seem to be the me to be the most important things to do before the TOD but but again we're not going to do this tomorrow so if staff after after thinking about it um has you know a better way to handle it I certainly would be interested in hearing it.

[01:45:00] Councilmember Pat Showalter: But then I think we we don't want to put off um the precise plans too much but as we can do them if we can do them in parallel to the TO TOD I think that would that would be great.

[01:45:15] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um and um about the deferral I guess we you know we just have to um I I would like to say instead of the deferral my priority is R3 and the objective standards. It's not like I want to defer any of these any more than is necessary but we all need to make sure that we do things at a um at a staff that they can a um a time frame that they can be done well.

[01:45:45] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And so I you know I understand that that that could mean deferring some things. Thank you.

[01:45:52] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Showalter. As requested by the city manager we will we will do the the visual aids after everyone is done talking. Um anyone else wants to go next? Councilmember Clark.

[01:46:09] Councilmember Chris Clark: I think um open to hearing from my remaining colleagues. I think I mostly agree with um Councilmember Showalter and and Ramirez so far but a little bit of um minor difference.

[01:46:28] Councilmember Chris Clark: I think I I think we should pursue a a TOD alternative plan. Um I think the the path forward which is um sorry sitting away from the mic. Um the the path forward that Councilmember Ramirez described I think makes the most sense to me uh mostly because we're we're taking a

[01:46:52] Councilmember Chris Clark: you know if we were in a different economic environment like we were in 2019 per se I would be um much more worried than I am now uh because I think if you look at uh and staff identified this in the report but if you if you look at um you know I don't think we're going to have a flood of applications on July 1st. And if there are if there were going to be significant uh applications later this year it's probably going to be from the most well-resourced um um developers with whom we have relationships who probably don't want to torch those relationships.

[01:47:35] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um I would guess if they want to continue doing business in the city. Now I may I might eat my words um as Councilmember Hicks pointed out earlier but I I think I that is one of the macro um factors that I think is playing into how I think about this and and also the and also sort of doing this right versus really really quickly.

[01:47:59] Councilmember Chris Clark: I I think the one area I don't know if it's an area of disagreement but the I I do think the citywide objective design standards is important um because as has been pointed out you know those are things that we can enforce citywide and uh I think especially in the current legislative environment they're going to become more and more important.

[01:48:22] Councilmember Chris Clark: So um so in terms of deferring things you know the the world um as much as I'm sure we all love dark skies the world is not going to end if that gets pushed out six nine months.

[01:48:35] Councilmember Chris Clark: These other things sort of dovetail with one another. The Moffett Boulevard precise plan the downtown precise plan the the TOD alternative plan are probably going to inform one another. And I I don't think I'm in a position where I feel comfortable dictating which of those should go first or in parallel. I I kind of trust staff after we after they get our feedback tonight to to sequence these things what should go in parallel what can be fast follows.

[01:49:03] Councilmember Chris Clark: But of the things that were listed you know I want to get the dark sky ordinance done um uh or at least in a in a state where we can talk about it again but I also don't feel that getting that done this year is um is really going to have a a dramatic impact in terms of the the priorities that we're talking about here especially with the state legislature um gearing up probably to pass even even more legislation.

[01:49:32] Councilmember Chris Clark: Uh so um and I and I will point out so that that's a long way of saying I guess I think I answered yes to one. Uh the answer to two is probably something along the lines of the staff recommendation but more along the lines of but uh I think more closely with what Councilmember Ramirez recommended except in number three um I I I don't want to dictate which of these should be deferred and when.

[01:49:59] Councilmember Chris Clark: Uh I've said that I'm most comfortable with dark skies being deferred and maybe a few other things. But um but I do think that there are um there are tie-ins between the other items on this list. So I'll I'll trust staff to kind of identify which of those should go when.

[01:50:15] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um for question four um I I do think we should create a ministerial process approval process that that makes sense. Uh and then just the last note is Councilmember Showalter pointed out um I hope that and I plan to have these conversations if I'm able to with some of our state legislative representatives and I hope others will too and maybe the city can can do this uh you know formally on the council's behalf uh or maybe the mayor can but I I really hope going forward that we're I I think there's there's a lot of lost potential with the you know the the um the the designation of being a you know a pro-housing city.

[01:51:00] Councilmember Chris Clark: You know the the the thing that everyone talks about is the the the availability of funding or at least the potential to compete for that that comes along with that. But I think what would really move the needle is is additional carrots for those who pursue a you know a pro-housing designation.

[01:51:20] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um I think the state could say you know what you've worked hard to do this um this isn't an easy designation to get and if you get that designation we know that you're acting in good faith. And so we're going to give you the grace of instead of forcing you to try and put a TOD alternative plan to in place in six months you know you have a year or two.

[01:51:42] Councilmember Chris Clark: Or and not just this but I I think there are additional carrots to where you know the pro-housing cities aren't necessarily exempted from new requirements but they have the ability because they're presumably working in good faith to build additional housing to have a little bit more latitude in where that housing goes and how it's uh how those plans are developed and and not necessarily preempted um at the state level.

[01:52:09] Councilmember Chris Clark: So I just I really wish that and this is a conversation that we we can maybe have at some point but I I just wanted to point that out.

[01:52:38] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Clark. Councilmember Kamei.

[01:52:42] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great thank you. All right I think I'm gonna do my best to follow directions which is I think I just one two three. Okay alright alright. Thank you. Um so I just want to thank uh staff um for um all their hard work on bringing this forward to us the community for all your comments.

[01:53:01] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um I just really appreciate all the feedback that you've provided to us. So um for question one yes. For question two um I'm comfortable with the staff recommendation but I tend to be I perhaps as a former staff at another jurisdiction I'm always comfortable with staff recommendation.

[01:53:20] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um I I think it's balancing um the environment that we're in. I'm I'm comfortable with work beginning immediately. I think mostly because there's the for SB 79 there's uh the July 1st um kind of deadline and I think that's probably why the legislature put that in there in terms of trying to have a have a target goal and hopefully we can achieve

[01:53:50] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And maybe that's tempering expectations on you know we're gonna try to put forward as much as we can with with our alternative plan um and not let the kind of um perfect be the enemy of the good.

[01:54:04] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um for question three um I'm comfortable with the deferral knowing that again knowing that there's kind of the timeline looming of the July 1st deadline and really trust staff in terms of being able to let us know um kind of the the different timelines.

[01:54:22] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I think I I hear what colleagues are saying in particular uh particularly to the citywide objective design standards. Um but considering it's January and and July is just a few months away I I just feel comfortable knowing that we're gonna get right back to it and I think hopefully some of this work is already happening and can build off of each other happening in in parallel.

[01:54:49] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So those are my answers thanks.

[01:54:52] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Kamei. Councilmember McAlister.

[01:54:55] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes. I I have a follow couple questions. Currently what does the city have uh as it relates to citywide objective design standards? Do we have anything in place right now or would this be just a tweaking of or review of?

[01:55:14] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: So we have um some objective design standards in precise plans. Uh but the um the R3 project is developing objective design standards and then there is a work plan project Council work plan project where we would build off of that uh to apply to other mixed use areas in the city.

[01:55:36] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. Uh and the last on the one on the uh downtown precise plan I attended a a public meeting and they the consultant said that the downtown precise plan update would probably take until 2027 and 2028.

[01:55:51] Councilmember John McAlister: So um I guess we're not pushing that that's okay. So that being said I will answer the questions. Yes C Yes Yes.

[01:56:06] Councilmember John McAlister: I mean Councilmember Ramirez says well we have the work plan then what council adds on and when I came on board and I campaigned for it it says we got to start taking things off to get things done and we just keep adding them on.

[01:56:20] Councilmember John McAlister: And then I also hear well we got to trust staff and I'm trusting staff because they spend a lot of time to come up with this information and then we say well why don't we tweak this we'll we'll trust staff to do some well if you trust staff you would trust what they recommended and go from there so um it's sort of you can't have it both ways so um I'm trusting staff to get it done because they did put the time and energy to think about what would be best for the city so those are my thoughts.

[01:56:51] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember McAlister. Is that still Councilmember Oh Councilmember Clark are you Oh okay. Uh Councilmember Hicks.

[01:57:01] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay so I spoke first so I only answered question one maybe a little bit of question two. Um so I'm left not quite knowing where we're at so I'll ask um with many people choosing option B but many people in the audience and virtually asking for a focus on downtown I think I'm unclear on wheth and I guess uh Councilmember Showalter said she'd like a focus on the downtown.

[01:57:32] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I didn't think I'm going to ask two questions actually. I didn't think option B had much focus on downtown. So I want to clarify whether everybody is on board with that or whether some of the things that people said in the audience resonated with them because I think that the downtown is probably the thing that's most in danger that's question number one.

[01:57:56] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Then question number two is related. Um Councilmember Ramirez said he did not support the exemption of some of those other buildings I know other buildings is poorly defined but um he in some table the number of which I don't remember but he mentioned um the San Antonio center he said it's a tall place if we get another couple stories it's probably not going to kill us.

[01:58:23] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I thought option B did have those exclusions. So the reason I didn't pick and I may be wrong but the reason I didn't pick option B is one it had no focus no really very good focus on the downtown and two it focused on some areas that I I think already have a lot of density and it will make little difference to do a lot of work on.

[01:58:52] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I I believe we can do a shortened I understand people want something more efficient but I think we may be doing something that nobody really wants.

[01:59:03] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And that's a question.

[01:59:06] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So approach B uh recommended by staff does not have a a focused planning process for the downtown. What approach B includes is adoption of um a limited ordinance that has exclusions allowed under SB 79 for historic resources on the local register as of January 1st 2025 that's sort of the main point uh for us.

[01:59:28] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yeah and I support that but honestly that's super minimal and that's not what people in the audience were asking for at all. They're asking for the sense of place the pedestrian mall working making sure we have commercial there a whole set of things that are not I want council members who may be voting for it to be clear that if you vote for option B it doesn't have any of the things people have come to ask for. Except for the historic buildings. So.

[02:00:03] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I guess the the question that I have back is what what other tradeoffs may need to happen to include that focus on the downtown? And I and I don't know what that is and I think that from what my understanding was from the city manager's comments that could also include having to do further CEQA analysis I you know potentially um which I think yes definitely would be a benefit but I don't know what else that would mean what other tradeoffs that might mean in terms of putting forward some sort of alternative plan.

[02:00:35] Councilmember Emily Ramos: And I'm not sure if staff is able to answer that question but I think that was a bit nebulous to me so I thought at least if we're moving forward with the with B which staff says that they can accomplish which is and it includes the historic register that would maybe encapsulate some I know that some colleagues were also talking about prioritizing and not deferring some of the other items like if we did something like a a B approach but still tried to move forward the citywide objective standards could that maybe um umbrella under some parcels within the downtown? That's kind of what I was thinking of but I don't know if I don't know looking to staff cause some of so so

[02:01:26] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: I'd like to take this one. Um so here's what I'm hearing I'll summarize and we haven't heard from our mayor yet which I think um as the seventh person we'll need to see where her um thinking is as well. Um so right now what I'm hearing is that at least three council members are wanting somewhat of a hybrid approach between A and B.

[02:01:49] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: And so then I'm hearing some support for C and some support for B.

[02:01:54] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: So right now um if there were to be a straw poll um it would give staff the direction that we would focus on finishing R3 we would finish the historic preservation ordinance uh we would exempt um those historic properties that were on the roll um which are some buildings downtown we would um not necessarily put anything off except we would not start the TOD alternative plan until those existing work plan items were finished.

[02:02:37] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: And then there's interest in other things like the legislation um and some other things that folks brought up. So I don't think we have a clear A B or C at least from everyone so I'm hearing somewhat of a hybrid approach um and then we would just need obviously the the mayor's thoughts to see where you all land and then we can take straw polls.

[02:03:04] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you City Manager McCarthy. No pressure at all. Um okay. So I I guess that that um my thoughts. I when when I thought looked at um SB 79 I I believe that we were already working on our downtown precise plan we were already working on Moffett precise plan and it was my hope that those plans would essentially take into account the density requirements of SB 79 as as we move forward.

[02:03:40] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um one of the questions I asked ahead of time um which was about facade standards which I guess was my way of asking about the objective design standards particularly for the downtown because I I do feel like what a lot of people I mean there is a lot of concern of us losing our downtown.

[02:04:00] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um and it it it's a really interesting thing to to think through because the question is is like what does it mean to lose our downtown? Like is it just going to be like I I'm pretty sure no one anticipates like the downtown is just going to be bulldozed and razed as soon as July 1st comes down. That's probably not going to happen.

[02:04:19] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um but but I think a lot of people are scared of that that drip drip drip of the change happening so much and at at some point we'll look around and and it's not the downtown that we had envisioned it to be.

[02:04:33] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um so as we look into our and I I'm sorry I'm not really good about fitting into those those boxes of A B C. Um I I am uh I am okay I would love to purs pursue a TOD alternative plan. Um I I think the reason why I I like B is because I don't want to put more on staff than we really have to but then I'm also going to be like what about B plus?

[02:05:05] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um and the thing is is it we're already asking to defer work of um Dark Skies ordinance citywide objective design standards downtown precise plan Moffett Boulevard precise plan but it was my hope that the downtown precise plan and the citywide objective standards would help feed into SB 79 work.

[02:05:28] Councilmember Emily Ramos: And so if we were going to look at B plus um we would look at the objective design standards that we maintain that look and feel of our downtown and it it's not a guarantee that our downtown will remain the same way if we if we do those objective design standards but it's kind of our best shot. It's it's how we implement our vision for our downtown.

[02:05:57] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um so that's over all what I was looking at. Um also due to the the historic exclusion ordinance I would love us to get started on that just so that we can ensure that the historic uh buildings that we do have already on our local registry are are protected cause I I don't see a um appetite for people to demolish those that we have already deemed as historic.

[02:06:26] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um I think those are my answers to the questions um should we start with the visual aids or oh I see Councilmember Clark.

[02:06:40] Councilmember Chris Clark: It was just a clarify after the city manager's summary um I I'm not opposed to um I'm not opposed to deferring the items in question three um if uh you know I think we should defer things to the extent we need to to what I don't want to do is just wait and do the TOD alternative after all these things you know years from now um cause I think if we're going to pursue a TOD alternative then we should we should do so with some urgency and I'm willing to defer the things in number three.

[02:07:16] Councilmember Chris Clark: I think what I was trying to point out earlier is I think some of them inform one another and I realize that we can't it's impossible to do all these things at once um it was just pointing out that I think um you know I think I I'm willing to defer what we needed for to to move the TOD alternative along I just I also understand that you know even if we were to go with C it's probably not going to be done for 18ish months right so um unless something changes.

[02:07:47] Councilmember Chris Clark: But um but the only other kind of quasi question I had was uh one of the things that you proposed deferring was citywide objective design standards and I thought a little bit more about it um and maybe you can be a thought partner with me. The um so we have objective standards I think in most of our precise plans. Some of those precise plans are old like downtown but they're there and so that covers a big chunk of the city that's El Camino you know we you know all the precise plans.

[02:08:18] Councilmember Chris Clark: So really citywide objective design standards might have saved us in some of these instances where we were outside some of those precise plan boundaries but those were kind of few and far between. Not to say they weren't important but um that that changes my my willingness to defer that a little bit more knowing that um a big chunk of the city is already covered by those plus we're doing R3 and those objective standards can inform um some of the other things. So I just wanted to update my thinking there and just correct me if I'm wrong but I I feel like while all the objective standards might not be the same there are there are written objective standards in most of the uh well a big chunk of the city because we're talking about precise plan areas is that right?

[02:09:03] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: I think that's correct I think it's important in answering your question to understand the context in which you're asking the question. So yes generally that is true what you described. There are objective development standards more or less depending on the area and the age of the plan for example.

[02:09:18] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The challenge is if it's in the SB 79 context that you're asking the question those objective uh standards probably would prevent achieving the heights densities and residential floor area ratio that we're obligated to allow and so they wouldn't be enforceable.

[02:09:34] Councilmember Chris Clark: I see.

[02:09:34] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: So that's where the need to do you know focused planning work building off of R3 as a starting point to tailor those standards in a way that shapes those projects to the extent that we can still shape them and allows them to achieve their density floor area ratio etc to which they're entitled.

[02:09:51] Councilmember Chris Clark: Okay that's helpful. So I think um well I guess we'll get into where we all land and we'll figure out a path forward in whatever shape or form but

[02:10:04] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Just a a clarification from what Councilmember Clark was asking. So like if we if we're looking at objective standards our objective design standards say in our downtown precise plan um the current ones that are there would not fly under SB 79. Is that what you're saying?

[02:10:27] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So uh a few years ago council adopted uh design standards that were crafted to be objective design standards for areas A G and H. Um there was some direction at the time that council wanted to you know modify some of those and we're working on some of those modifications with the the project right now.

[02:10:48] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Uh but the um there are other parts of the precise plan that don't have the benefit of those standards. Uh further I would say that the focus of those objective design standards were on um uh kind of historic design and character which may be applicable to taller buildings uh but as Director Murdock said uh the the challenge here is a broad range of other development standards that may constrain uh those taller or denser buildings that would be uh that we would have to allow under SB 79.

[02:11:35] Councilmember Emily Ramos: So if we do want to address um those design standards while still maintaining our the feel of downtown but still have it done by SB 79 what bucket is that? Is that A B or C?

[02:11:56] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um that would be well well A doesn't include any updates to standards so that's just the the exclusion of sites. Um that would be bucket uh B.

[02:12:10] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay.

[02:12:12] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Uh bucket C involves changes to density.

[02:12:15] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Oh okay. All right that that makes sense now. All right. Are you still up Councilmember Clark or are you good? All right Councilmember Hicks.

[02:12:28] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I did like the mayor's description of uh B plus but I I was thinking maybe it was with what people have said B plus minus which you would think would make B but I mean adding something and subtracting something else. So it doesn't um

[02:12:47] Councilmember Alison Hicks: and kind of answering uh Councilmember Kamei's question of what can we do to speed things up so I'd say the first thing is I don't feel like we have to finish by the July 1st deadline and I don't think we will. Um and I think as people have said because of economic conditions I don't want to go too far out there but I'm not too nervous of going past that line.

[02:13:09] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um so the plus the minus is what Councilmember Ramirez mentioned about exempt isn't doesn't B have exempting these other buildings?

[02:13:26] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Yes B includes uh exemptions uh under the provision of SB 79 where the zoning allows more than fifty percent of what is prescribed in SB 79.

[02:13:40] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I thought if I heard right that Councilmember Ramirez said that was probably not worth our time and if everybody agreed it wasn't worth our time and people are looking for things to cut we should probably cut the thing that's not worth our time.

[02:13:55] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um so that's so that's so I would agree with B plus minus what Councilmember Ramirez said is not worth our time. But I'm still most people have said they want to do a TOD alternative plan.

[02:14:11] Councilmember Alison Hicks: But I think that's at some time in the future people have said. Tell me if I'm hearing wrong. Um when it can be informed by objective standards and I would say probably informed by the downtown precise plan and Moffett precise plan the amount of work that's been done in them so far.

[02:14:31] Councilmember Alison Hicks: But that's the thing I'm not people say they want to do a TOD alternative plan and some people have said they want to focus on the downtown but I'm not sure that I've understood you know and do it later I'm not I'm just not sure if they're gonna do this we all are gonna do this TOD alternative plan later but does it focus on downtown? Is it just are we just all talking about C but doing it later?

[02:14:58] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And that's a question.

[02:15:00] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I'm not sure.

[02:15:03] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Mayor, can I can I offer a way to think about um doing the TOD alternative plan later. Um I think the reality is we can't at the staff level do all of these things all at once. I think the Council understands that. So what we're talking about is trying to pause some of the existing work plan items other than R3 uh as an example, historic preservation ordinance is an example, pausing the others only to the extent needed to complete this first tranche of work. The ordinance to exclude historic resources that are already on the register, and then completing R3 so we can use that as a launch pad to build objective development standards that meet the purpose of SB 79.

[02:15:43] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Um really the timeline to do that pushes us into you know early to mid 2027 already when the Council will be developing its work plan for fiscal years 27 through 29. It seems sensible to me that that might be a juncture at which we'll know more about SB 79, we'll know if any clean up legislations come out, we'll know what other priorities may have emerged at that point, what work plan items we've completed. And Council can prioritize then whether to do a TOD alternative plan which seems supported at this time and also the the scope of that. Is it remaining focused on area H which is a very narrow task or does Council want to prioritize a bigger planning activity by the staff at that time in order to broaden that beyond area H.

[02:16:24] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: So I think the timelines converge in a way that allows Council to revisit this point with more focus um at some point you know give or take a year in the future. So I want to offer that we may not have to have the Council solve all of that now. What you are I think approaching is knowing that you're not going to do that now because of the drawbacks of deprioritizing other work that would be necessary to do a TOD alternative plan starting today.

[02:16:53] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay. Councilmember Ramirez.

[02:16:56] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Mayor. I I actually appreciate what um uh Director Murdock just shared. I think that we're not going to prescribe a date to start the work. Um and it's very difficult to know exactly when work plan items will either be completed or will they where they could land in a place where we might suspend that work to begin other higher priority work.

[02:17:23] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um for I mean all of us I'm sure have had jobs where um you you invest a lot of time and effort in a project and then your boss says you know what I don't care about that anymore, you know on a dime, flip and focus on something else. And that's very disruptive. That's very challenging. And the reason I'm uncomfortable with uh with being very prescriptive in how to treat the work is only the staff know exactly where they are in each project.

[02:17:48] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I I agree with Councilmember uh uh Showalter and and others who have shared I think the dark sky ordinance is is nice but I think we're acknowledging that there are higher priority you know urgent items that we need to attend to. And that's one where you know if if we had to ask the community to pick, you know do you want to do some of this important land use work or do you want the dark sky ordinance, I think most would say the land use work is is really essential.

[02:18:14] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So that's one where we're making a tough call. We're saying sorry staff I know you've invested a lot of time on that item but it's it's because we really have to make that trade-off to achieve these higher priority items.

[02:18:26] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Uh and and I think Councilmember Clark spoke to the the challenge that I have as well with with the downtown precise plan update and the Moffett Boulevard precise plan update. I don't know exactly where you are in that work. Moffett Boulevard is I think anticipated to be completed by the end of this year right? So it is disruptive to say stop working on that and pick something else up especially when it it has a lot of overlap with the TOD area that I think we care most about.

[02:18:55] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So I'm I don't want to say suspend work, I think it's more have staff think about now that SB 79 exists how should we rethink or rescope the Moffett Boulevard precise plan, spend a little bit of time thinking about where should that land. And then I think you would be better able to articulate to us where that should fall and where we should suspend work or where where we should complete work because it so heavily informs our thinking about the TOD plan uh or the TOD uh alternative plan especially for the downtown area.

[02:19:28] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I think Councilmember Hicks you asked the question that that I I I wasn't fully grasping until until just now. Um and that's when we begin a TOD alternative plan uh where where should we focus? And I think what you're what you're suggesting is we should be very clear to staff today that when we begin it it should focus on downtown. Um and I'm I'm comfortable with that.

[02:19:50] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: The only uh concern I have or the only advice I would give for those of you who will continue serving after I have passed away politically is there are there are going to be communities that will come out you know to their council, to the new council and say oh you know we we just found out about this. We're very concerned about the impact to our neighborhood outside of the downtown historic core.

[02:20:13] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And if we go too far along the TOD alternative plan and have already directed staff to invest heavily in just the historic core, then the risk is that you know that council or that that staff would be less able to respond to other I think equally valid community concerns about well what about the infrastructure in Monta Loma, what about the infrastructure you know West of Whisman. Right? Those are also de facto change areas now. Whether we want them to be or not.

[02:20:41] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So I I I wasn't explicit in saying where or what the TOD alternative plan should focus on. Um I am comfortable with saying based on the community testimony tonight and before this meeting downtown is a fine place to start. However I will not be here, but I I I think it's important for the council to consider what happens when other neighbors find out and they come to you know you all at that podium and say wait a second what about my neighborhood.

[02:21:16] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Ramirez.

[02:21:18] Councilmember Emily Ramos: So for the first three questions, is there um things that we need to do a straw poll on that staff needs us to clarify? And do you have the the Google doc or whatever word doc ready for us to start going down those straw poll votes? If you don't have it ready we can go on to question four because I think that's actually really quick. If you if you need time to get that ready. But if you're ready now we can we can do that now.

[02:21:45] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Why don't we uh try another moment to attempt to formulate the questions uh based on the last uh bit of dialogue uh from the council.

[02:21:53] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. So I am letting everyone... Oh yeah, go ahead Councilmember Kamei.

[02:21:59] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Sorry. Um as the only one who said I'd be happy to work on it immediately or a later date, I don't so I feel a little bit nebulous on so what does a later date mean? So we say yes, we we had discussion, so staff will do an off agenda memo or just let us know when it's happening? I when an alternative so I just don't that's the part that I I got confused on because people said we'll just start. If staff could...

[02:22:29] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Oh, so is it just January of 27 or Q1 as you were mentioning? So if we for for question two it sounds like the majority says later date. So later date would be sometime next year?

[02:22:47] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: So I think um where I've heard the council uh majority seeming to form is consider um pursuing a TOD alternative um that may focus on the downtown area H or maybe broader uh perhaps as part of the council's work plan prioritization for fiscal years 2027 through 2029. That would be happening you know in the first and second quarter of 2027 most likely.

[02:23:13] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: And so um at that time right with better understanding and insights into the functioning of SB 79 and other priorities, there can be a proper discussion of exactly when to start and the extent of that work uh in light of other uh staff demands at that time.

[02:23:38] Councilmember Emily Ramos: So effectively our conversation may inform if the future council will prioritize this as a work plan item. But effectively after today then nothing would begin until it's potentially added as a future work plan item next year. Is that what I understood? Did I understand that correctly?

[02:24:05] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: That was what I uh put out as my interpretation. Yes.

[02:24:08] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay. Thank you.

[02:24:10] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: And Mayor, Council members, if I may.

[02:24:15] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: So I think uh the the biggest thing about the timing is and this is good news, R3 is coming forward to you next month. It's coming forward the first meeting in February. That will help inform um the TOD plan. We're also working on the historical preservation ordinance that is also expected to be wrapped up this spring, which will also help the plan moving forward.

[02:24:43] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: By not postponing the downtown precise plan or Moffett precise plans by as far in the future, it means staff can work on those also, which may also help inform the TOD plan. And then I think where we will need clarity from council is if you want to focus on all the priority areas or only downtown? Is downtown shifting to Monta Loma, is it shifting to San Antonio, is it shifting to the other transit areas or do you want us to look at all of them holistically? Which I think is where the timing is going to come in for the TOD. But all the work that you will have done on all those other policy items will help inform the TOD piece.

[02:25:35] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: So I think where you all have the decision to make is are you comfortable with this kind of B plus option um and are you comfortable with the timing of when these items would come to you. Now you all can say this is a priority, we want you to start the TOD at the beginning of 27. You don't have to necessarily wait for this to be put on the next work plan, it would go on the next work plan because the work would continue at that time.

[02:26:11] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you City Manager McCarthy. Councilmember Ramirez.

[02:26:15] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Mayor. I think just just I uh as uncomfortable as I am to to stipulate a particular area especially if the future council is going to work on this and not me, um I I am okay with having a fairly you know uh narrowly scoped downtown focused TOD uh alternative plan if if that's helpful direction for staff today.

[02:26:37] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Then when you begin it uh as as Councilmember Hicks had described I think focusing on on the downtown area and especially the historic core to the greatest extent possible informed by the work that you will do or have done on the downtown precise plan update as long as we found a place to land those precise plans where that's comfortable for staff. Right? Don't don't do anything that is disruptive. I know it's that's a hard thing to do.

[02:27:04] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So I I I don't it's it's hard to say start at this day. It's more I'm trusting staff to figure out how to wind down some of these other items. I'm okay with deferring dark sky ordinance, I'm okay with saying downtown focused TOD alternative plan. Um and then I I you know reiterating the the only immediate actions would be the ordinance to exempt historic resources as of January 2025 and uh the ordinance to implement uh uh objective design standards for SB 79 and as staff is recommending using the R pro- proposed R3 standards as a baseline. So those would be the things that we would do soon.

[02:27:51] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Ramirez. Councilmember Showalter.

[02:27:55] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes, I just wanted to confirm that the uh development of the objective standards is on the list of things we're we're getting um going on right away. Is that correct?

[02:28:07] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Uh so the discussion I'm tracking right now um does include um the objective standards work that builds off of the R3 zoning update completion beginning in 2027.

[02:28:16] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Excellent. I just think that's really important. Thank you.

[02:28:19] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Showalter. Councilmember McAlister.

[02:28:25] Councilmember John McAlister: Um so everything you heard tonight, is anything going to get done by the uh initial implementation of SB 79?

[02:28:35] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Uh the honest answer is probably uh nothing will be in place by July 1st given the work that's required and the potential uh need for HCD review and approval. Um and so we will work as expediently as we can uh but it's not likely to be in place by July 1st.

[02:28:51] Councilmember John McAlister: Thank you.

[02:28:55] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Councilmember Hicks.

[02:28:57] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So if it's downtown focused I will be voting on it. I ha- or for it, not exactly the way I would have done it myself, but um I I um had thought that the we would defer the downtown and Moffett because we would work the work we've already done into a downtown focused TOD alternative plan. Uh and you look puzzled.

[02:29:28] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Uh well I think the look on my face reflects that we're still at a relatively early stage of the downtown precise plan update. So um we've largely completed the visioning framework phase. Um we have not done the extensive uh refinement and development of uh standards.

[02:29:44] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So there's not much in to inform it. Correct. Okay, now I understand that facial expression. Um yeah, so that's why I thought maybe we could defer those and start the TOD alternative plan earlier. But um yeah, if it's focused on the downtown then it's not ideal but I will be voting for it.

[02:30:06] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay. Is staff is staff ready for our straw poll or should we move on to question four and then you'll be ready for uh some clarity and any of the straw votes?

[02:30:17] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: So I think we have what I think is a workable starting point for this discussion and so if we need to tweak these to get the exact council majority then we can do that.

[02:30:26] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay, so we will move on to question four and then we'll go back to those straw polls because I think question four is actually relatively simple comparatively to the three other questions. So I believe Councilmember Ramirez already said his answer to question four which I already forgot, but I'm sure the staff remembered it.

[02:30:47] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: So uh the answer to question four that I noted for Councilmember Ramirez was to support the staff recommendation of option number one, prepare a ministerial approval process for projects eligible under AB 130.

[02:31:01] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you staff. Does anyone have an answer to question number four? Councilmember... oh yes, go ahead Councilmember Showalter.

[02:31:09] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Mayor, you may just want to do a straw poll and say you know who supports um staff's recommendation.

[02:31:15] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. So let's let's let's go with that. Um everyone who supports staff's recommendation for question number four, please raise your hands.

[02:31:27] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right, we have uh six... oh any opposed? All right. Any abstentions? Oh yes, go ahead Councilmember Showalter.

[02:31:37] Councilmember Pat Showalter: The reason I'm opposed is is um because I really am sad to think that there won't be a um public hearing where people who object to a project or have good suggestions for it can share them. And that's one of the things that the ZA hearing I think is really valuable for.

[02:31:59] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Granted, um with this new AB 130 the city won't be able to say okay you have to make that change. But a lot of times our developers um hear an idea that is um suggested by our residents and say oh that is a good idea I could do that. And um so that's why I'm objecting because I I feel like even though we can't require them anymore, uh we we need a vehicle or I would like there to be a vehicle where they can share those um those opinions.

[02:32:41] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Showalter. I'm trying to see if there was like a question relating to that about... Oh there wasn't, oh. Um about the ability for... for um community input even when things are ministerial. Like there's usually like a big sign saying there's a development coming here and send an email to um whoever, is that correct?

[02:33:09] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Um so I think what you're describing is the public notification component of the discretionary permit process where those on-site signs are provided. Um we have contemplated um evaluating in this ministerial approach some sort of uh courtesy notice and possibly a written comment opportunity. We need to think more about how that would work uh but that would at least offer um you know the opportunity to point out unique issues or concerns about a particular site or neighborhood that may not be evident to staff that could have bearing on our analysis.

[02:33:43] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: And so that's one of the alternative sort of options that might come along with this ministerial process if we can find a way functionally to make it work.

[02:33:52] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay. Does that sound good to you Councilmember Showalter?

[02:33:56] Councilmember Pat Showalter: That does sound good, thank you.

[02:33:58] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. Thank you. Uh Councilmember Hicks you're up.

[02:34:02] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So Councilmember Showalter I appreciate your no vote. I I was going to add that as a comment, not as a no vote. So I I agree that it's important to notify, it was mentioned in the staff report but probably not everybody here has read the full staff report. That there would be could be courtesy noticing as a part of this. And I agree with Councilmember Showalter that that's important to some way of taking in people's comments because they can be really, in my time as a planner, they can be really helpful in things you actually want to uh that are beneficial to you to act on maybe even save you money.

[02:34:42] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um and then uh I also think we should check on the purpose and role of the EPC because this is changing a lot of what the EPC does. Um so I think we're going to need to check in on that.

[02:35:00] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And um like we said before for the SB 79 portion of this agenda item we should lobby for modifications we may want to this legislation such as longer time frames for planners to complete work on larger projects. Like really big projects. So those oh and we should publish something in The View about this. We should educate the public. I mean not that every- everywhere will have comprehensive knowledge on it but it's a good first step. Thank you.

[02:35:39] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Do we need to take a straw poll on all that or are we is that kind of feedback cause I feel like we're generally okay with that.

[02:35:50] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: Um so what I would imagine uh clear majority support for the ministerial approval approach. We need to work on an ordinance and precise plan amendments to effectuate that. I think what we can take from the council discussion is um serious interest in courtesy notice and potentially a written uh comment opportunity and we can evaluate that as uh alternatives or components of that ministerial process when this comes back to council.

[02:36:14] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Great. And you don't need us to do a straw poll on that or we're...

[02:36:19] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: I don't think so. Um at this point.

[02:36:24] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Mayor I think it's pretty clear we will um certainly do what we can to educate the public about the AB 130 and the process and the steps that we'll take to provide that courtesy notice and the written comment period. So we'll make sure to do that in various ways.

[02:36:42] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you City Manager McCarthy. Uh Mr. Anderson do we have our straw poll grid that we need to go through to get any lingering um questions and clarity in the way?

[02:36:58] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Yeah, it's coming up.

[02:37:04] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: So here we've tried to um lay out the questions uh from the study session as well as sort of the components of those based on the flow of the council discussion. Um if we didn't capture anything quite right please let us know. So question one pursue a TOD alternative plan, um it sounded like there was council interest in um pursuing that um in the form that we described it in the staff report which is uh some sort of local approach to respond to SB 79.

[02:37:36] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The TOD alternative plan as strictly defined in SB 79 is a subset of that discussion which is broken out here uh in the third row uh related to approach C. So maybe a straw poll just to confirm the answer to question one is yes and then we can proceed to question two.

[02:37:53] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. All in favor for question one yes.

[02:37:59] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right, it looks like that's unanimous. So yay.

[02:38:03] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um question two um approach B staff recommendation focus only on historic resource exclusions and developing SB 79 objective standards based on R3 update. uh in favor, raise your hand.

[02:38:18] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Wait, I said I'd vote for it if it had a downtown focus.

[02:38:21] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Oh, this is one... wait what?

[02:38:23] Councilmember Alison Hicks: One has a downtown focus?

[02:38:28] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The downtown focus is for the TOD alternative plan right.

[02:38:33] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay, so it had that when I voted for it. Okay.

[02:38:40] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right.

[02:38:42] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay, so um are we clear on the question? All right. So we're gonna oh we are not clear on the question. Um can can staff um explain the difference between question two well question two in the question two approach B staff recommendation so forth and then question two approach C TOD alternative considering in fiscal year 27 to 29 work plan.

[02:39:13] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: So the first question two is really to confirm council majority support for the staff recommendation as sort of the base amount of work. So uh put in place the historic resource exclusions that SB 79 allows and then do the work on the objective development standards building off of R3. So essentially the staff recommendation.

[02:39:34] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: The second question two in row three is this B plus B plus minus the various ways it was described. It wasn't clear to me where the majority support was if it was focused only on area H or if there was a desire to consider at some point other areas, Monta Loma has come up as an example that may need to be discussed later or if council's sure now. And so we've set it up to just talk about considering it in the work plan for 27 29 because there's maybe different interests in the geography that would be planned for.

[02:40:08] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Through through the mayor, I think the challenge is they look like because they're both question two they are mutually exclusive but they are not right?

[02:40:16] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: They are not meant to be mutually exclusive, we can do both of those things.

[02:40:19] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Correct. Thank you.

[02:40:21] Councilmember Emily Ramos: But none none of them are focused on the downtown, that one is not there. That's C.

[02:40:29] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: So maybe I can clarify approach C if you give me a moment to just add uh at minimum area H of the downtown and other areas to be considered by council in the future. That is for the third question that is question two.

[02:40:49] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I mean I I understand the the emphasis on the the downtown but I wonder since it sounds like this will be coming back to the new council they'll get an update at that time, do we need to call out the downtown at this time or do we just need to coalesce around an approach?

[02:41:10] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I wonder how prescriptive we need to be when there's going to be a new council. I don't I don't know, I mean I just while I appreciate the conversation I think I'm grounding myself in understanding that this work will go forward but I don't know if it's helpful because it will actually help scope between now and next year or and if that scope is actually you know necessary or will that come back at a later date um for the next council, so.

[02:41:50] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: I think it's helpful to get your feedback tonight because then staff knows what they're starting to work on. Perhaps uh clarification for that third row so approach C which would be in tandem with approach B um pursuing the TOD alternative plan for area H and staff can evaluate the other areas which it sounds like there was interest for that as well.

[02:42:17] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: And then that would be looped into the future council consideration. So if that's where this council's at, so you want to look at um kind of holistically all the areas, so yes downtown and also um other areas that staff may identify then that could be looped in with that second question too. So really they're together, it's not really two separate things.

[02:42:48] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. Um let's let's do the second question in the row which is the approach B staff recommendation. Then this is not exclusive to the next question that we're going to do after it. Um but let's let's start getting answers for staff and consensus.

[02:43:07] Councilmember Emily Ramos: So um question two approach B staff recommendation focus only on historic resources exclusions and developing SB 79 objective standards based on R3 update. All in favor?

[02:43:24] Councilmember Emily Ramos: One, two, three, four, five, six...

[02:43:33] City Clerk Heather Glaser: That is correct.

[02:43:36] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay, I I know the numbers are... yes. All right, unanimous. Let's go.

[02:43:42] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right, now question two, approach C in tandem with approach B, area H, future council consideration of other areas in fiscal year 2027 to 29 work plan. All in favor?

[02:44:01] Councilmember Emily Ramos: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven. Unanimous. Yay.

[02:44:08] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um now we're going to... two more questions left you guys and then we're almost through with this item. So question three, deferral of some items, finish R3, historic preservation, objective design standards. Don't start TOD alternative plan until these existing work plan items are finished. All in favor?

[02:44:26] Councilmember Emily Ramos: One, two, three, four, five... All right, five. All opposed? All abstentions? I'm gonna assume that's an abstention. So we have five votes.

[02:44:43] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um, we're just breezing through this now. Uh, question three, resume downtown precise plan and Moffett Boulevard precise plan as soon as sensible and practical. All in favor?

[02:44:53] Councilmember Emily Ramos: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven. All right, it's unanimous. And I think we have... I'm hoping that made sense to everyone. Um, does staff have what they need? Wait, is there a question four? We did that. Okay.

[02:45:21] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right, we uh finished. Do the staff have what they need?

[02:45:27] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: I I just I guess I wasn't clear on the final point related to the resumption of the precise plans. We were trying to respond to Councilmember Ramirez's statement of not being overly prescriptive. And um you know knowing that they will need to be pushed off for some period of time, but starting the work again as soon as makes sense once we think through um the best way to account for SB 79 in those processes.

[02:45:50] Community Development Director Christian Murdock: So it's a little bit wishy-washy but because I think it's just meant to allow conditions to dictate rather than council prescribing uh when that works to resume. All right. Perhaps just confirming my verbalization of that with the straw poll might help. Does that sound right?

[02:46:05] Councilmember Emily Ramos: That sounds... that sounds...

[02:46:10] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. Thank you so much everyone for your patience. Um we are going to take a 10-minute break and reconvene at um at at 2000, which is 8 o'clock. Thank you.

1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

[02:46:58] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay everyone. Um we're gonna call this meeting back to order. Um welcome to the joint meeting of the Mountain View City Council and Shoreline Regional Park Community of January 27 2026. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

[02:47:24] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

2. ROLL CALL

[02:47:42] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. The City Clerk will take attendance by roll call.

[02:47:46] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Hicks.

[02:47:47] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Here.

[02:47:48] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Kamei.

[02:47:49] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Here.

[02:47:50] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember McAlister.

[02:47:51] Councilmember John McAlister: Here.

[02:47:52] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Ramirez.

[02:47:53] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Here.

[02:47:54] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Councilmember Showalter.

[02:47:55] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Here.

[02:47:56] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Vice Mayor Clark.

[02:47:57] Councilmember Chris Clark: Here.

[02:47:58] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Mayor Ramos.

[02:47:58] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Here.

[02:47:59] City Clerk Heather Glaser: We have a quorum.

3. PRESENTATION

[02:48:00] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Yay. All right, thank you. All right, we will now move on to item three. Please note this is a presentation only. City council will not take any action. Public comment will occur after the presentation item. If you would like to speak on this item in person, please submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk now.

3.1 National Poverty in America Awareness Month Proclamation

[02:48:21] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right, so we are happy to be joined this evening by Leslie Carmichael, board member of Hope's Corner, to accept this proclamation. Leslie, will you join me at the lectern?

[02:48:55] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All righty. Um, the proclamation reads: Whereas, January has been recognized as National Poverty in America Awareness Month, an opportunity to shine light on the struggles faced by millions of Americans daily and to explore solutions that ensure opportunity and dignity for all; whereas poverty is a complex, multidimensional issue shaped by policy decisions, lack of affordable housing, low education levels, limited employment opportunities, and systemic challenges that affect individuals and families across all demographics...

[02:49:35] Councilmember Emily Ramos: And whereas the intent of National Poverty in America Awareness Month is to heighten awareness, encourage greater support for effective programs, challenge preconceived notions, and inspire empathy and action within our communities; and whereas organizations, educators, volunteers, and businesses across the nation dedicate time and resources to address the root causes of poverty and provide essential services such as food, shelter, counseling, and support to those in need.

[02:50:08] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Now, therefore I, Emily Ann Ramos, Mayor of the City of Mountain View, along with my colleagues on the City Council, do hereby proclaim the month of January as National Poverty in America Awareness Month in the City of Mountain View, and encourage all residents to recognize the challenges faced by those experiencing poverty, to learn more about the systems that contribute to economic hardship, and engage in activities such as volunteering, advocating, and donating to help combat poverty and support those in need within our community.

[02:50:45] Councilmember Emily Ramos: So here's the proclamation. Leslie, would you like to say a few words?

[02:50:50] Leslie Carmichael: Just a few. Um thank you very much on behalf of Hope's Corner. I'm in essence representing a multitude of agencies that are part of the community safety net. And we appreciate the city's efforts to address poverty and also the support the city provides to those um comprising the safety net. Thank you very much.

[02:51:12] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. If you join me up here, we could take a picture with the rest of the council.

[02:51:54] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay, would any member of the council like to say a few words?

[02:52:03] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Oh, I was just gonna say it's really exciting to recognize Hope's Corner. They just announced their executive director and so I know they've been working on that a long time so it's wonderful to have them join us.

[02:52:15] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Kamei. And this would be a good time for what I uh promised uh in uh at our last meeting to have a call to action, call to service, call to community. Our proclamation recipient Hope's Corner is a Mountain View based nonprofit that provides daily meals and supportive services to individuals experiencing homelessness, um with a focus on dignity, respect, and community connection.

[02:52:41] Councilmember Emily Ramos: In addition to meals, Hope's Corner helps connect guests to housing, health, and employment resources. So Hope's Corner, you can volunteer with them to help with meal service, food preparation, welcoming guests, and day-to-day support. Whether you can give a few hours once a month or volunteer more regularly, your time makes a real difference in our community. You can sign up on their website at hopes-corner.org/volunteer.

[02:53:05] Councilmember Emily Ramos: And now we will move on to take public comment for the presentation items. Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on the presentation items listed on the agenda? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk now. We will take in-person speakers first and each speaker will have three minutes. And I see none. All right, we will move on to the next item.

4. CONSENT CALENDAR

[02:53:39] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um it's our consent calendar. These items will be approved by one motion unless any member of the council wishes to pull an item for individual consideration. If an item is pulled from the consent calendar it will be considered separately following the approval of the balance of the consent calendar. If you would like to speak on these items or the next item, oral communications on non-agenda items, in person, please submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk now.

[02:54:10] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Would any member of the council like to pull an item? I see Councilmember McAlister.

[02:54:16] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes, I like to pull 4.2. Comment on 4.3 and pull 4.5.

[02:54:27] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay, so 4.2 and 4.5 is pulled, while 4.3 is just comment. Is that correct Councilmember McAlister?

[02:54:39] Councilmember John McAlister: Correct.

[02:54:41] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. Thank you. All right. Next uh Councilmember Showalter.

[02:54:46] Councilmember Pat Showalter: I don't really want to pull anything but I do have some comments. Should I go ahead with my comments?

[02:54:50] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Yes please.

[02:54:51] Councilmember Pat Showalter: All right. Um first one I wanted to comment on was um item 4.3, the heat pump program. Um it's exciting that so many people have um changed their water heaters to heat pumps that the program has run out of money. That is really a great accomplishment. Congratulations to staff for running such a successful program, also to SVCE for administering it for us. It's important to continue because heat pumps uh reduce uh the use of methane and uh help reduce our collective greenhouse gas emissions.

[02:55:32] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Uh so they it's it's really good for us to continue do this. The public has suggested that more incentives be added for large families. And from my point of view that sounds like a fine idea if it if it works out from staff's point of view. I would be welcome for them to make that decision. Anyway I wanted to thank everybody for uh the heat pump program.

[02:55:55] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um 4.4, the Mountain View Affordable Housing Initiative Fund. Um this is a way for ordinary people to contribute to the development of affordable housing. And um I'm really pleased to see this creative um mechanism set up so that you or I or anybody you know could could donate $10 or $10,000 or a million dollars to this fund and um help with what's really one of the major crises of our time, which is affordable housing.

[02:56:30] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um 4.5, the Miramonte Avenue complete streets. Um this is a long time coming. I know my automatic pilot for the last three years has been to avoid Miramonte when I go places because it's so bumpy. So I'm really looking forward to it getting resurfaced and all the amenities that will be with it. Um and staff has really worked hard to make it as comprehensible as is reasonable and to let other projects that would be required to dig the street to be accomplished first so it'll only have to be surfaced once.

[02:57:06] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um at our December meeting the subject of the left turn at Sladky came up and I'm glad to see that the staff will be analyzing the situation and making suggestions to the neighborhood. That's really um good government service. So thank you staff for rising to that occasion.

[02:57:24] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um 4.9, the downtown utility improvement and citywide trash capture devices. Um this is a this is about important replacements to our water mains to make sure our water delivery system remains in good working order. We have over 176 miles of water pipelines in Mountain View that need to be maintained. So we need to work on that every year. And we do. And it's something that we should all be proud of and um and uh support.

[02:57:57] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Then um as part of our uh stormwater monitoring permit we have to install trash capture devices in our storm drains. And um this is these permit requirements are given to us by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. And um we uh we work collectively with many other um communities in the region under this permit to help keep our streams and um and the bay clean.

[02:58:30] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And then the final one I wanted to comment on is 4.10, the Shoreline Park Water Control Structures Improvements. This is about the restoration, sorry, there's a restaurant next to the Shoreline Lake. The restoration of the island in Shoreline Lake. That has um provided really wonderful bird habitat over the years. Unfortunately, this island has eroded. So it's much smaller than it used to be. And this restoration project is designed to return it to its um original size so that it can be um the bird habitat that we uh we we like to have. So thank you.

[02:59:10] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Showalter. Councilmember Hicks.

[02:59:14] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Well lucky for me Councilmember Showalter said many of the things I was gonna say. So um making it easy. As for uh 4.3 I am also on the Council Sustainability Committee and know a little bit about the this heat pump uh promotion and I just want to say that uh some of our volunteers in particular Bruce Karney from the uh from Carbon Free Mountain View says that heat pumps are the main thing you can invest in uh besides electric vehicles you could buy one of those as well um to cut your carbon footprint.

[02:59:50] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So take advantage of this of this particular promotion if you can. Uh if we vote for it. Um, I think that's it.

[02:59:53] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. Thank you. Uh, Councilmember Kamei, you're up.

[02:59:56] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Thank you, Mayor. I didn't want to pull any items either, but I did just want to make a quick comment on...

[03:00:00] Councilmember Alison Hicks: and uh yeah, as Councilmember Showalter said he he also uh suggested a restructuring for large families which staff could take advantage of or not. Um, as for 4.4, this is a uh a loan to

[03:00:15] Councilmember Alison Hicks: it's a work with, staff can correct me if I'm wrong, but it's working with the Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation to put together a fund to loan to affordable housing. And can that be for

[03:00:30] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Community Land Trust housing as well? Or what kind of affordable housing would that fund go to?

[03:00:43] Housing Director Wayne Chen: Uh good evening Mayor and Council. Wayne Chen, Housing Director. Uh yes, the initiatives fund is intended to be flexible to um fund a variety of efforts such as our new uh construction pipeline projects or acquisition preservation

[03:00:55] Housing Director Wayne Chen: projects that could include a a CLT Community Land Trust project.

[03:01:01] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay. So, now everyone knows. If we vote for that one, um you can contribute to it. Um, and I think, and yes, Councilmember Showalter

[03:01:11] Councilmember Alison Hicks: explained the left turn into and out of Slidell key which community members had been concerned about, but is there'll be an opportunity to engage. So, those are my comments.

[03:01:26] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Hicks. So as it stands we have two items that are pulled. Um Councilmember McAlister, would you like to make your comment on 4.3 before we go into public comment or would you like to wait till after public comment?

[03:01:38] Councilmember John McAlister: Uh I can do my comments and we're doing that. So on 4.3, you know, um, I was always concerned about the cost and the uh how it could affect older people down the road.

[03:01:52] Councilmember John McAlister: And I sent in a question because I'm thinking we're look we've been doing a lot of focus on this greenhouse gas here, but we're not doing as much uh attention to transportation which

[03:02:04] Councilmember John McAlister: is 58% of our emissions is much greater than we're doing with this water um heat pump. Uh this water heat pump, we had 126 people were benefited from it and so if we put more money in maybe

[03:02:19] Councilmember John McAlister: 252 people, whereas transportation, if we increased our funding for our shuttle, we could probably reduce the amount of emissions greater, we could reduce congestion, and we could probably reduce the uh

[03:02:33] Councilmember John McAlister: improve the quality of life. So I was just trying to counterbalance, yeah we're doing this, but if we got serious about transportation and getting our cellular service working in this town and getting alternatives to going forward, we can do a much better job at it. And that's going to be a greater effect in the long run. So that was my comment on 4.3.

[03:02:57] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember McAlister. We will now move on to public comment. Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on these items? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk. We will take in-person speakers first. Each speaker will have three minutes. Uh, so we will begin with uh John Cowen. Cowen.

[03:03:33] Public Speaker: Thank you Mayor and members of the Council. I am here tonight in my capacity as a current board member of the Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation, uh former chair of the foundation and also a Mountain View resident. I just wanted to make some brief comments on 4.4.

[03:03:50] Public Speaker: Uh thank you for the uh the partnership. We believe that uh generous people with bold ideas are how change happens and uh I think this is a good example of that coming to fruition.

[03:04:01] Public Speaker: And I just want to share it started with a listening conversation that uh we had with the city manager Kimbra McCarthy where we spent about an hour together uh really just understanding how the Community Foundation could best meet the needs

[03:04:16] Public Speaker: of Mountain View and affordable housing came up as really the top focus. And then our wonderful CEO uh Krista Kraims pounced on that and and we already just opened a fund. And then uh there were a number of conversations which over about a year

[03:04:34] Public Speaker: uh wanted to thank Wayne Chen in particular for a lot of the nuances that had to be worked through that as well as the City Attorney in creating this unique partnership.

[03:04:45] Public Speaker: Um but really excited uh that we can get out there hopefully after tonight and start working to raise some funds for affordable housing in this wonderful community so more people can live here. So thank you again.

[03:05:00] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you so much. Next up we have Sebastian Brisbois. Um I don't recall if I pronounced that right, I'm sorry if I did. Um and then after him we have Alexander Brooks.

[03:05:09] Sebastian Brisbois: Hey. Yeah um my name is Sebastian Brisbois, but don't worry about it, I have to go to another country for people to pronounce it correctly. So anyway, I'm here to talk about uh item 4.7.

[03:05:22] Sebastian Brisbois: And yeah, so I'm not a big fan of this funding for the public safety building. Uh when I think of, you know, public safety in the city and imagine what that might look like,

[03:05:36] Sebastian Brisbois: I don't think of a big expensive facility. And it's not very helpful for a lot of residents. And what I think about is like the safety of our roads for pedestrians, bikers, even people driving cars.

[03:05:52] Sebastian Brisbois: It's pretty crazy out here. Um yeah, and also housing. It's not very affordable. And yes, I know the city is doing work on both of those, but why not um do more

[03:06:06] Sebastian Brisbois: instead of waste it on a big expensive building. So that's how I feel about that. And I just think that we can do better as a city and maybe act more

[03:06:19] Sebastian Brisbois: on that poverty awareness month and do more towards that and directly deal with the problems we face instead of throwing money away. So

[03:06:33] Sebastian Brisbois: I think this is also a time we really need to step up as a city. We have a federal government trying to make life hell for many people, and we have a state that's not doing enough.

[03:06:47] Sebastian Brisbois: So I think we need better, more affordable housing, safer transportation, and in general better social services that I think we could deliver if we spend this money that way. Thank you.

[03:07:04] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. Alexander Brooks. And then we will go to our virtual speakers. Speaker.

[03:07:15] Public Speaker: Hi. I'm here also to speak on item 4.7. And much like the previous speaker, I oppose continued spending on the police facility. Uh police spending is something that has been tried over and over and over again in order to reduce crime

[03:07:31] Public Speaker: and there's no correlation between increased cop spending and safer communities. We have an enormous enormous amount proposed in this item, something like eight million dollars proposed to be put into uh this cop complex as just the first of

[03:07:45] Public Speaker: what an uh expected to be something like 189 million dollars, which is just an unthinkably high amount to spend on something that we know is not making our community safer. In a time when as the previous uh speaker mentioned,

[03:08:01] Public Speaker: communities are really feeling boots on our necks in terms of what's going on with ICE. And we've been feeling this way for generations, especially in black and brown communities, where policing has continuously been criminalizing and villainizing people instead of providing the types of support

[03:08:17] Public Speaker: and the types of education, housing, transportation, healthcare and employment that communities really need. And so again as I asked at the last uh City Council meeting where this item was brought up, I'm really encouraging the City Council to think more creatively about

[03:08:32] Public Speaker: what generations from now we want our community to look like. We know that this existing structure where police uh have this enormous amount of funding is not uh leading us into a a better future. Instead we are exacerbating racial disparities, exacerbating class disparities,

[03:08:48] Public Speaker: exacerbating increasingly gender disparities. And we have this rise of government and state power that's coming down on our communities and people are really feeling the pressure and not feeling the support from our cities that we'd really like to have.

[03:09:03] Public Speaker: We've seen what's happened uh in Atlanta, we've seen what's happened elsewhere in the Bay Area where these there are these huge uh police spendings that are not uh in line with what communities want, and are instead kind of slipped in on them. I'm I'm kind of surprised that there's been almost no discussion of this item.

[03:09:20] Public Speaker: Eight million dollars is an enormous amount of money that's part of what was proposed to be 16 million dollars already proposed to this. And then 190 million dollars or so over generations to come, which is an enormous amount to burden communities with when that's just not what communities need right now. There's been a lot of discussion I appreciate about affordable housing,

[03:09:38] Public Speaker: a few million dollars put here and there for that in the short term, and that's blown out of the water by what's being devoted to towards this police facility. I understand that there are some concerns around seismic retrofitting.

[03:09:50] Public Speaker: If that's what you are trying to do then I can understand there being specific budget items about how to seismically retrofit a building, but that that's not what this proposal is, which is to double the size of the amount of space given to policing

[03:10:03] Public Speaker: with this huge giveaway of public funding for generations to come, instead of what communities really need, which is support, which is understanding, and which is power for our communities instead of continued power for policing. Thank you.

[03:10:17] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. Uh we will now move on to our virtual speakers. Um first one, Tim McKenzie.

[03:10:27] Public Speaker: Greetings Council. Hope you're all doing well. Um I also would like to uh join in to with the previous commenters who spoke on item 4.7 about all of the money going to the police building.

[03:10:40] Public Speaker: Um I do think that they articulated things better than I would be able to. Um just that I don't think having a huge building for police with a shooting range to be added on is what creates safety for our community.

[03:10:54] Public Speaker: Uh I'd like to echo the idea of, you know, traffic safety, making it so that we can bike to school or work without being hit by a car. Uh that is public safety. Ensuring that we have housing, having food for meeting basic needs, that is public safety.

[03:11:09] Public Speaker: Um but uh I'd also like to uh remind everyone that there has been a material change in conditions since this uh this huge amount of money has been spent or has been decided to be spent to build this massive building.

[03:11:24] Public Speaker: Uh when this was being discussed, there was a public safety advisory board where citizens could have some oversight and see uh have some impact on policing policy. That board has been disbanded.

[03:11:38] Public Speaker: So we're spending a huge amount of money, there is no longer the same uh public oversight that we once had. Uh that is a material change in conditions from when this was initially made. And I think that's important to consider. Thank you.

[03:11:53] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. Uh next we have Renald Nubi. Um I'm really ho I I'm sorry if I got that wrong. Oh yay.

[03:12:15] Public Speaker: Oh no you actually did it. Um you did a pretty good job. Okay um as the previous three presenters, uh three speakers, I would also like to speak against this specific item.

[03:12:27] Public Speaker: Um not just because I, like everyone else who spoke prior to me, I think the city could well better spend this money into better investing into its people, better investing into other items that could help better the citizens of Mountain View.

[03:12:42] Public Speaker: Like example, third spaces, more investing into the arts and schooling, instead of again giving giving all this money to the police while we know that's not what makes our community safe.

[03:12:55] Public Speaker: Um and just also going through the city's forecasted for the next forecasted for the next 30 years, the city expects to go under a budget deficit. And I feel spending this amount of money is not the right way to spend for the city to use its funds,

[03:13:11] Public Speaker: where it should be used to help people, knowing that the city is going to be in strenuous financial situations coming forth in the future. So once again I would implore the City Council, like all everyone here has mentioned before, please think of more creative ways of using this huge amount of money

[03:13:27] Public Speaker: instead of investing it into a building that will do effectively nothing to help the citizens of Mountain View, and think of better ways in which it could be invested into the population of Mountain View. Thank you.

[03:13:42] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. And that is it for our virtual public comment. I will now bring this back for Council action and note that a motion to approve the balance of the consent calendar 4.2 and 4.5 have already been pulled, should also include the reading and the title of the ordinance and resolutions attached to consent calendar items 4.1, 4.3 and 4.4.

[03:14:07] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I see a motion from Pat Showalter and seconded by Councilmember Ramirez. Go ahead Councilmember Showalter. Oh wait uh is this uh Councilmember McAlister, is that after?

[03:14:26] Councilmember John McAlister: Did I mention 4.7? I wanted to make a comment on.

[03:14:32] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Oh no I didn't have that down. Uh feel free to make your comment on 4.7.

[03:14:34] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. Um, in the light of the seriousness of what these prior gentlemen had uh commented on, mine is a little more towards the community. But I just would like to remind the community that this

[03:14:48] Councilmember John McAlister: it's a public safety building that we are building. That includes the fire department's going to be there, our emergency operations center is there, our dispatch center is there. So as you see what's happening in the east with all these tremendous snowstorms that we've had recently, and all the rain,

[03:15:05] Councilmember John McAlister: uh we have earthquakes come along. We need to have a building that is going to be able to stand, and it does more than just policing. So it's a it's something that's going to benefit the whole city in the long run and make our city safer,

[03:15:19] Councilmember John McAlister: and more responsive to our needs, and more respectful as we go forward. So just to give a heads up on what our that actual public safety building's going to do. And to make that public safety building even better,

[03:15:33] Councilmember John McAlister: and I know the segue stinks, but um we authorized a million dollars for public art. And I've been pushing public works our public art for the last uh well I guess 10 years since I've been on Council. And when I saw that we had a reduction of uh

[03:15:51] Councilmember John McAlister: to save save spend save money on this particular item, I thought oh that was interesting that you know we're going to save $600,000. But this is a general comment for the whole city is that I think if we start doing public art throughout the city it's going to be more engaging, it's going to make the city more exciting, it's going to be a destination.

[03:16:07] Councilmember John McAlister: And even though this is one building, it's potential that it could be a showcase for many other parts of public art that we can do throughout what the city has in city facilities, and again for the rest of the

[03:16:20] Councilmember John McAlister: the downtown or parts of the city wherever, if we have statues and whatever. So I'm always looking for public art to go somewhere, and you know if we're going to start putting it down one place, let's make sure that we reinvest it into the city because it is an attractive, it improves your life, it could be calming,

[03:16:36] Councilmember John McAlister: it could be so where you can uh reflect on things. And so public art is very important for us. So those were my comments on 4.7.

[03:16:52] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. Were there any other comments that you had? I know that you pulled 4.2 and 4.5.

[03:17:04] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah.

[03:17:10] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Okay. Um, so we have Councilmember, yes, uh Councilmember Hicks, uh your comments on 4.7 would now be appropriate.

[03:17:23] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So, thank you uh Councilmember McAlister for your uh support of public art. I also support public art. I wanted to say this particular item I did request to reduce it, and that's because um my I kind of have sympathies with uh some of what uh the members of

[03:17:40] Councilmember Alison Hicks: the public have said. I think that we as Councilmembers always have to watch carefully what we spend on public buildings. Um when I was going to school as a planner, uh I worked for the city of Oakland that spent a lot of money on some of its public buildings, and

[03:17:55] Councilmember Alison Hicks: my planning teachers told me that we it's a foolish city that spends a lot of money on public buildings, and I would include police buildings. And shor- other things like parks and housing and economic vitality. In this case the art that was uh allocated there was like

[03:18:09] Councilmember Alison Hicks: higher than anywhere else including downtown, anywhere else in town. And I probably would have made the it's on a the building is on a very large parcel of land which I think we could have used more economically. Um but I can't get all those things done. The one

[03:18:24] Councilmember Alison Hicks: the one thing I did was make sure that the art that was allocated to it is the same as in other places, not way above other places. And that was my reasoning.

[03:18:38] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. Um so we have a motion on the floor which is to approve the balance of the consent calendar um not including 4.2 and 4.5. I believe we are ready for a vote on that. Oh wait, Councilmember Showalter, take it away.

[03:18:59] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay. So um I'll um bring back the um the balance of the consent calendar which is 4.1, 4.3, and 4.4.

[03:19:18] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Well the balance, and I need to read resolutions and ordinances related to 4.1, 4.3, and 4.4. Um item 4.1, adopt an ordinance of the city of Mountain View repealing Chapter 36,

[03:19:35] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Article 13 Tenant Relocation Assistance of the Mountain View City Code, amending Chapter 46 of the Mountain View City Code to change the title and add a new article governing tenant relocation assistance, and finding that these code amendments are not subject

[03:19:49] Councilmember Pat Showalter: to the California Environmental Quality Act. To be read in title only, further reading waived. Um item 4.3, adopt a resolution of the City Council of the city of Mountain View authorizing the city manager or their designee to amend an agreement with Silicon Valley Clean Energy

[03:20:10] Councilmember Pat Showalter: to increase funding for the heat pump water heater program by $250,001 resulting in a total not to exceed amount of $500,000. To be read in title only, further reading waived. And item 4.4, adopt a resolution

[03:20:25] Councilmember Pat Showalter: of the City Council of the city of Mountain View, one appropriating one million dollars in the city's below market rate housing fund to fund the Mountain View affordable housing initiative fund with the Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation, and two, authorizing the city manager or designee

[03:20:46] Councilmember Pat Showalter: to negotiate and execute the funding agreement with the Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation, and to negotiate and execute all necessary documents to effectuate its purposes. To be read in title only, further reading waived.

[03:21:04] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Showalter. Now we are ready for a vote.

[03:21:58] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Motion passes unanimously. We will now move on to item 4.2. Councilmember McAlister.

4.2 Housing Element Program 1.1(g)-Zoning/Precise Plan and General Plan Amendments (Second Reading)

[03:22:04] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, I'm still getting used to this format so it's probably going to be more of a comment. But uh I also wanted to say I'm going to vote no on 4.2. And the reason being, we went over this before about the rezoning throughout the city,

[03:22:21] Councilmember John McAlister: and it's it's concerns me that we are doing all this rezoning, but we also say that we are a city that supports small businesses. And this is sort of a counter

[03:22:36] Councilmember John McAlister: contradiction of actually what we're trying to do, is because we're taking these small lots where small strip malls are and we're going to say well developer you can come along and you can uh tear it down, uh yeah you can put some mixed use into it,

[03:22:50] Councilmember John McAlister: but you're allowed to do these other things. And once we start tearing down those small little strip malls, like the one on Calderon, the developer's not going to put room in there or that space, because we're seeing small businesses going out of business throughout the city, throughout the county, everywhere,

[03:23:05] Councilmember John McAlister: because the cost of doing business is a relocation. And so when we say hey we're gonna allow businesses to uh come back in, that's not gonna, that's not realistic. So I'm voting no on it because we need to do a better job protecting small businessmen. As a small business person myself I'm very aware

[03:23:22] Councilmember John McAlister: of the continual increases in costs, and so I think we need to look seriously, are we serious about wanting to protect small businesses or are we just trying to build? So that's what my, that's my comment on 4.2. And I can make a motion to, if you want to pass it or tie it into 4 point, my other one, but

[03:23:36] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I see we actually already have a motion on the floor. And I think Councilmember Ramirez is next.

[03:23:44] Councilmember John McAlister: Oh, okay. 4.2? Okay.

[03:23:45] Councilmember Emily Ramos: For 4.2. Then we'll go into 4.5 right after. Okay. All right, Councilmember Ramirez.

[03:23:48] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Mayor. Um, and I appreciate the uh remarks from Councilmember McAlister. I know it's a an issue that we all take seriously. Um, in this case this is um a portion of the direction that we've already provided and specifically uh adoption of the development standards and the zoning ordinance which include um uh standards related to uh

[03:24:08] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: commercial elements. So it is an important part of the direction. Uh so I appreciate your principled vote, but I think this is actually necessary to effectuate the um at least having development standards to to retain businesses in in these uh these areas. Oh and with that I'll go ahead and move to approve the staff recommendation

[03:24:26] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: uh including adopt an ordinance of the city of Mountain View amending Chapter 36, Zoning of the city code to implement subtask G of housing element program 1.1, including updates to Article 5, commercial zones, to allow general plan mixed-use village center land uses in the commercial office zoning district,

[03:24:43] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: and to make other clarifying and conforming changes such as modifying and reorganizing standards in Division 23, general plan mixed-use village center developments of Article 9, standards for specific land uses, to be consistent with the commercial office zoning district and the Evandale Precise Plan,

[03:25:01] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: and requiring avigation easements pursuant to the Moffett Federal Airfield comprehensive land use plan as recommended by the Environmental Planning Commission to be read in title only, further reading waived.

[03:25:13] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Ramirez. Seconded by Councilmember Showalter. Let's take it to the vote.

[03:25:35] Councilmember Emily Ramos: And that motion passes 6 to 1 with Councilmember McAlister uh dissenting. We will now take it uh back to Councilmember McAlister for item 4.5.

4.5 Miramonte Avenue Complete Streets Study, Project 23-31-Final Report; Street Reconstruction (Miramonte Avenue), Project 25-28-Professional Services Agreement

[03:25:46] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, thank you. Um, this is another one um, I had questions about, concerns about, I'm always looking for infrastructure and how we can improve it, how we can make it more efficient, how we can uh save money on doing things that are right.

[03:26:01] Councilmember John McAlister: And I pulled 4.5 because I had some following questions on the uh parking on this street. Anytime we take parking away from a particular area, this is particularly towards McKelvey Ballpark where

[03:26:15] Councilmember John McAlister: you know we got baseball fields coming on, I mean we got baseball tournaments going on, a lot of people come to it. And uh there was concerns about where people were going to park. Are they going to go into the neighborhoods? And so I wanted to make sure that we did that. Also

[03:26:29] Councilmember John McAlister: we have a lot of people that are some people uh are saying we need to improve our bike routes and so forth, and I said that's great, but we need to collect data to see actually where people are riding their bikes.

[03:26:44] Councilmember John McAlister: And so that when we make these decisions on how we develop 'em, that we're using uh good good data to appropriate the amount of uh usage to the the design of the the the road. And so that it gets the best sense out of it, the best

[03:26:59] Councilmember John McAlister: best dollars, because we are limited in our funds. And sometimes we have a tendency to want to do the best we can, but we have to live in reality and see what we get through. So this part of the, I know we're doing uh segment two, there's three segments to

[03:27:14] Councilmember John McAlister: uh Miramonte going from uh Covington, well I'll say Covington it goes to Cuesta, then Cuesta to Castro, and Castro to El Camino. And this part that we're doing on Miramonte is long overdue. And I know there was a lot of construction on it and

[03:27:28] Councilmember John McAlister: uh that is one heck of a bumpy road. And uh there's a lot of good stuff that I seeing on it. We're going to put some crosswalks, or we did repaint our crosswalk going Hans, that's very important. But we're also going to be taking some uh

[03:27:43] Councilmember John McAlister: some street parking away from it, what I understand, but I don't know exactly what. So that's part on me. But the point I was trying point I'm going to do on this part is do we really know how many people are using the bike route on it?

[03:27:57] Councilmember John McAlister: I ha- I went through the report that was the Miramonte complete street study way ba- when it was first initiated, came through, and I was looking how many people were riding on segment B. Now segment B is very important because it includes people going from Bubb School and Graham. And I think that's very important that we maintain our safe

[03:28:13] Councilmember John McAlister: our safe routes to school. Uh that is a very important section intersection over there. And we already have protected bike lanes from Hans to Castro for the Bubb School, that's going to be going through. And so that's I support all that, and increasing the sidewalks.

[03:28:28] Councilmember John McAlister: But on the other sides of the streets where we're not necessarily that close to the schools, I's always conc- I always like to make sure that we have the data before we do a project to see if it warrants it, and then data afterwards to see if there is an uh what the effect is of doing this. Because we plan to do a lot of stuff involved with our active transportation program,

[03:28:44] Councilmember John McAlister: and a lot of people want it and I think it's a great idea, but we gotta make sure we we do it wisely. So I can't say much you know segment B is really taken care of. I appreciate Councilmember Showalter and Councilmember Hicks talking about Slidell key. People are concerned about that.

[03:28:59] Councilmember John McAlister: I see that and I can see that could be a potential issue for all those people because all of a sudden we're saying we can't allow a few cars to pass, turn on that intersection, and then they're going to be meandering going through the neighborhoods which doesn't help anybody.

[03:29:13] Councilmember John McAlister: So um I'm glad we're doing that and being proactive and being smart about that particular deal. On segment A I do have a few questions for staff. Um I was looking at the pictures on segment A and I wanted to get clarity

[03:29:28] Councilmember John McAlister: on there was items that was going to be done, these were brought up in our our Council questions and that was mine, and someone else brought some long ones out of what exactly was going to be done in there. It was good to see some clarity on this particular one.

[03:29:43] Councilmember John McAlister: And so um one of my initial questions for whoever wants to take it, it says consider installing an additional new mid-block crossing at Miramonte and West Park Drive, and there already one exists.

[03:29:56] Councilmember John McAlister: So I was wondering where were you guys going to be putting this new thing in?

[03:30:08] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Do we have someone from staff to answer that?

[03:30:26] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: Good evening, Jennifer Ing, Public Works Director. So the um additional crossing as my understanding is going to be requested at East Park. There is currently an existing painted crosswalk at West Park, which is the southerly

[03:30:38] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: park interface with Miramonte. Um and at that location, at the southerly one, we are looking at adding an RRFB.

[03:30:52] Councilmember John McAlister: So it's different than this one here? This is the one that I would think that goes from Park over to McKelvey.

[03:31:02] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: There is also another Park at Miramonte that is north of that. So one is East Park and one is West Park.

[03:31:13] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. I'm still confused. Is that the one that goes over by AAA building?

[03:31:21] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: Um the one to the north is the West Park. That does not currently have a painted crosswalk across Miramonte. And then the one to the south is East Park. That one does have a painted crosswalk, and is looking at getting an RRFB.

[03:31:35] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, I'll follow up on that one, thank you. Um also I was concerned about since we have a community ballpark there,

[03:31:43] Councilmember John McAlister: that you're going to be taking some parking away from that particular but it says that there will not, I was confused about were you taking some parking away and then in the questions it said we will have parking there and there will be no need to park in the community. And I couldn't see how we did both.

[03:31:58] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: So some parking will be retained along Miramonte Avenue in the vicinity of McKelvey Park. Um some will be removed and some will be retained. And so uh based off of the parking counts that we, parking utilization counts that staff had conducted,

[03:32:15] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: um the amount of parking that is due to be left on the street um will be sufficient for the park needs.

[03:32:27] Councilmember John McAlister: And so that's if there's two games going or a tournament going, there'll be enough signifi- plenty of parking and they'll won- uh Miramonte then?

[03:32:38] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: Based off of the observations that were performed earlier, including weekend and weekday counts, yes.

[03:32:47] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. 'Cause there was a notation in here, okay, I'll go with that. Um where there baseline, back in '24 when this was taken,

[03:32:58] Councilmember John McAlister: it seems that there was a baseline taken of, so segment A from Miramonte to El Camino, 19 people riding a bike on that particular segment. Are is it your plan to do some more counts or going forward

[03:33:14] Councilmember John McAlister: to getting more data to say actually how many people are riding on these routes?

[03:33:24] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: Yeah, I think 19 at the time that data was collected was information that was used into feeding the design and the recommendation for today. Um typically we wouldn't go back and do additional counts unless there was some sort of directive uh for staff to do so, or if we were looking at changing roadway geometry which we wouldn't be doing

[03:33:43] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: anytime soon after this project is constructed.

[03:33:49] Councilmember John McAlister: Well will any of this information that you collected for segment B be reviewed after to see how the effective of putting in the bike lanes and so forth are?

[03:34:04] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: I mean certainly staff is, especially traffic staff in Public Works is always out on the streets and observing how new construction is utilized in the city. They're always looking for opportunities to make um improvements and they're always driving around the streets to to see how you know, and to enjoy how the residents are are using the new infrastructure.

[03:34:25] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: So there will be observations that are informally um happening after construction is completed.

[03:34:34] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. Um well since we're doing a lot of road improvements and bringing things down, are is the traffic department getting a a good sense of here's what we're trying something that works and we're streamlining our our uh planning process, or is it getting more

[03:34:52] Councilmember John McAlister: uh expedited that you're able to do, you know, you're done a bunch of these buffered lanes and going forward that will be get done quicker or better understanding of what needs to be put in?

[03:35:09] Public Works Director Jennifer Ing: Yeah, we're always learning as we're going, right? Um the first time we do anything it's always a little bit rough, um but the second time we do it, it goes a little better. The third time we do it, even faster. So uh at a certain point um once something becomes standardi- standardized, certainly that is when you know my team hits their groove and they're able to be the most efficient.

[03:35:28] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. I thank you answer. Yeah, I would thank you for meeting with me earlier today to answer some of my questions, I appreciate that. Thank you for being there.

[03:35:41] Councilmember John McAlister: And I like to make a motion for 4.5, and if needed to accept it. Or I need to read it?

[03:35:50] Councilmember Emily Ramos: There's no uh need to read it, but you might want to make the motion what you want to do.

[03:35:56] Councilmember John McAlister: I did. Oh, okay, it came back. Okay.

[03:36:00] Councilmember Emily Ramos: All right. So we have a motion to approve 4.5 by Councilmember McAlister, seconded by Councilmember Showalter. Let's take it to the vote.

[03:36:26] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Motion passes unanimously. Yay. All right. Um next item, we will now have oral communications for public comment.

5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC ON NONAGENDIZED ITEMS

[03:36:34] Councilmember Emily Ramos: 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 jurisdictions up to three minutes during this section. State law prohibits the Council from acting on non-agenda items.

[03:36:51] Councilmember Emily Ramos: If you would like to speak on this item or the next item in person, please submit a blue speaker card to the City Clerk now. Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or submit a blue speaker card to the City Clerk.

[03:37:04] Councilmember Emily Ramos: We will take in-person speakers first. Uh each speaker will have let's see how many people we have. Okay so we we only have a four people on public comment so uh each speaker will have three minutes. We will first have uh Dylan Rich

[03:37:21] Councilmember Emily Ramos: that will be followed shortly after by Albert Jeans.

[03:37:40] Dylan Rich: Good evening Council. Uh my name is Dylan Rich. I am a a director at Palo Alto Prep School in Mountain View over on Wyandotte Street. Um I have a we've been

[03:37:55] Dylan Rich: coming to these meetings since about September 9th. Um uh the last time I spoke we've had a few more um incidents, close calls with uh either teachers coming out of parking parking lots

[03:38:09] Dylan Rich: or even on Wyandotte to uh independence um uh where there's near accidents that are occurring including students who are walking. Um this is uh

[03:38:23] Dylan Rich: something we really need you to take a look at. Um this is a um it's a serious issue with line of sight. The large uh large vehicles are hard to see through. Um

[03:38:39] Dylan Rich: uh this is something where um it's someone is gonna get hurt or killed um and we really need some relief. Um please uh

[03:38:52] Dylan Rich: please take some action. Okay? Uh thank you.

[03:39:03] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. Albert Jeans, followed by Eva Tang.

[03:39:23] Public Speaker: Yeah, we can just move to the second slide please. Um I'm here for the parks thing but I thought I'd give you an update on our RV situation following this gentleman's comments.

[03:39:35] Public Speaker: In the last couple weeks Palo Alto has really restricted parking in their areas um I guess I'd say east of the 101 freeway which is their commercial zone. They've instituted you know mandatory movement of RVs on Thursdays so they can do street cleaning.

[03:39:50] Public Speaker: And that has essentially halved the number of RVs that can park in those areas because they don't want to keep having to kind of crowd around and try to jockey for position every Thursday. And in addition on Elway, I think Elwell Court and commercial, they're doing some gas line

[03:40:06] Public Speaker: maintenance and so they've pretty much banned parking there for the next six months. And that's reduced the number of RVs in that whole area by maybe about 30 vehicles. The next slide please.

[03:40:21] Public Speaker: Now whether that's correlated to what's happening in Mountain View I don't know, but at the last count two weeks ago, there were 329 RVs on Mountain View streets. That's up 20 from the last time I told you in December.

[03:40:37] Public Speaker: And you can see it's just going up and up. Um it's happening in different areas, these things move around. It's very difficult without getting detailed tracking information you know where the RVs are going, whether it's the same people coming in and going.

[03:40:51] Public Speaker: Um in this particular case there was actually a reduction of RVs on the, what is it, National Avenue, which is actually another big area in the East Whisman area. So I'm not sure what's going on there, there's definitely an increase in the area around Wyandotte and Costco.

[03:41:07] Public Speaker: And so that's probably a result of this, but I you can't be sure. But I'm sure you know we still have capacity for more. Um again those RVs on National can come back, and that will

[03:41:20] Public Speaker: probably bump the figures up another 10 vehicles maybe the next time I take a survey um next month. And that's all, thank you.

[03:41:34] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. Eva Tang.

[03:41:52] Eva Tang: Hi, good evening Council. It's Eva Tang. You may remember me from such defunct advisory committees as public safety advisory committee or board. Thank you.

[03:42:07] Eva Tang: Um, before I get into what I really came here to talk about tonight, I love what's been done to California Street, um especially the curb cut in on the crosswalks and how they don't impede the bike lanes because have you ever driven through the city of Burlingame?

[03:42:20] Eva Tang: They do that, and then it interrupts the bike lanes, and I don't know how anyone bikes there. Sorry, not to talk smack about any city. But uh, let's get to the main point here.

[03:42:33] Eva Tang: I'm here to talk about Flock. Flock was brought to the Public Safety Advisory Board in April of 2024. It was brought to us as a purely informational item and we didn't vote on it.

[03:42:47] Eva Tang: Um it never sat right with me how we expressed our concerns about Flock, and yet we rubber stamped it anyway. In July, you may remember that I sent an email to each of you with concerns regarding Flock because the SF and Oakland Police Departments have funneled their Flock data to ICE.

[03:43:03] Eva Tang: I was met with anecdotes from our chief, typical, about how Flock has helped uh various people, like a couple people, reassured me that Mountain View PD has complied with California law and that their data is safe and secure.

[03:43:18] Eva Tang: I decided to audit the uh data for myself and I did a records request pull in November 2025 including all requests from outside agencies. I got an update in December that said quote, lastly we will not be providing records

[03:43:32] Eva Tang: related to queries made by outside agencies using our data. For information regarding inquiries conducted by other agencies, we respectfully direct you to submit a request to these agencies directly. I sent in an appeal on the 13th of this month um because MVPD policy says,

[03:43:47] Eva Tang: this is Section 460.9, um outside agencies make a request uh for Mountain View's data uh in written form, it's reviewed by the Special Ops Division Captain, and the request is retained on file.

[03:44:03] Eva Tang: I think this is a Freedom of Information Act violation. I'm going to say that outright. Um, why are we not, why have I not been handed this data unless MVPD has something to hide?

[03:44:17] Eva Tang: And if you're wondering why I care about this so much, you try consoling an 11-year-old whose family has been deported. Thank you.

[03:44:31] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Eva. We have Judy Levy next, followed by Zoe Zarowski.

[03:44:54] Judy Levy: Hi Judy Levy. Uh and now for something much lighter, but I've been meaning to come to you and ask you to um

[03:45:00] Public Speaker: standing is that you are starting the clock on the pilot program when the last device is installed. So that if that's true, that means all the installed devices are running without a clock on them for the pilot program duration. That just doesn't seem right to me.

[03:45:18] Public Speaker: The point that I want to bring up is about objective standards going through, um, public works and, um, that help to establish the guidelines for how, uh, um, development projects are dealt with.

[03:45:31] Public Speaker: So this last came up at the EPC meeting where they were talking about 490, um, East Middlefield, the housing project there. You're going to be reviewing this in March, I believe. And I'll bring it up then as well.

[03:45:43] Public Speaker: But one of the problems with that, it seems to be a very good project, but there's a quandary about how to provide adequate spaces for delivery vehicles to go into that site or on the street, to be able to drop off items without blocking the bike lanes.

[03:45:58] Public Speaker: And that the blockages in the bike lanes has been an ongoing problem, um, throughout the city, but in particular right now on California Street, on El Camino, where the bike lane is a bit limited with the bollards and everything.

[03:46:52] Public Speaker: And delivery vehicles and others are parking regularly in the bike lanes. So there needs to be amped up, uh, enforcement there, it seems. But also the objective standards aren't updated enough to, um, make sure that we can require that in new developments that spaces are provided for those delivery drop-offs.

[03:47:11] Public Speaker: Um, uh, those really need to be developed and quickly, because as you know, new, uh, project developments are coming through all the time. Thank you.

[03:47:20] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. And our final speaker is, uh, Tim McKenzie.

[03:47:25] Tim McKenzie: Greetings all, Tim McKenzie, he/him, once again. Um, I would also like to echo some of the comments about concerns with flock safety.

[03:47:36] Tim McKenzie: Um, this is something that we were, if you recall, uh, before the disbanding of the public safety advisory board, which was how we citizens were able to have oversight to policing in Mountain View.

[03:48:32] Tim McKenzie: Uh, there was a lot of consternation expressed by board members. In fact, one board member resigned after the flock debacle because they felt that they didn't, did not, their concerns were not being seriously taken.

[03:48:48] Tim McKenzie: Um, but one thing that we were assured, we were guaranteed, along the way was, 'this will be open, this will be transparent, there will be oversight. You'll be able to get reports back at Public Safety Advisory Board meetings at least once a year, um, maybe it was even quarterly.'

[03:49:06] Tim McKenzie: I forget, it doesn't really matter, because PSAB doesn't exist anymore. Our promised oversight does not exist.

[03:49:13] Tim McKenzie: Uh, additionally, I submitted a Freedom of Information Act request back around when Flock was adopted, um, asking for communications between the city and Flock Safety.

6.1 Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan - Draft Review

[03:49:56] Councilmember Alison Hicks: The purpose of this study is to review and provide feedback on the draft Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan.

[03:50:07] Tim McKenzie: Um, that that, if you search for that public records request on the, I think it's on the city website, it's actually hidden away and only allowed for me to see it, which is, instead of being open to the public, which seems pretty antithetical to transparency, again, that we were promised.

[03:50:09] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby and Community Services Director John Marchant will present the item. If you would like to speak on this item in person, please submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk now. And... staff take it away.

[03:50:27] Tim McKenzie: Uh, and also, the files that I did end up getting were redacted to an extent that would make the people who worked on the Epstein files blush.

[03:50:36] Tim McKenzie: Uh, the fact that our so-called one-year pilot program has been going for more than a year and the timer hasn't even started is a bit ridiculous.

[03:50:37] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: All right. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council members. My name is Christine Crosby, Assistant Community Services Director, and as mentioned, here with me tonight is Community Services Director John Marchant,

[03:50:47] Tim McKenzie: Um, and we know there are, from the, uh, public records requests that, uh, that EFA received of who has had some things shared with, uh, or who has access to Mountain View flock data, there are one or two departments in there that have explicitly shared their data with ICE.

[03:50:49] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: as well as Parks and Open Space Manager Tim Youngburg, and Recreation Manager Colin James. Also joining us virtually tonight are members of the consulting team, Neely Bot from Next Practice Partners, and Deeksha Robot and John Gibbs from Wallace Roberts & Todd.

[03:51:07] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: I am pleased to present the updated draft Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan. This draft reflects more than two years of community engagement, technical analysis, and staff collaboration across multiple departments.

[03:51:20] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Tonight is an opportunity to walk through the key components of the draft and gather your input to help us refine and strengthen the final version.

[03:51:31] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Our last major guiding documents, the 2014 Parks and Open Space Plan and the 2008 Recreation Plan, are outdated and no longer reflect our community's growth or current needs.

[03:51:43] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Since then, Mountain View has experienced population growth, changes in school field access, and major shifts from the pandemic in how people use parks and public spaces.

[03:51:50] Tim McKenzie: Which means that if they can see our data and they shared it with ICE, our data is going to ICE.

[03:51:53] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Additionally, developing this plan is a City Council priority project and aligns closely with related citywide efforts such as the Housing Element and the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan.

[03:51:57] Tim McKenzie: I don't want surveillance state helping fascist thugs keep us down, put boots on our necks. We should not have these cameras that are tracking everyone's motion for up to 30 days.

[03:52:05] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: The strategic plan is grounded in several key factors. It starts with extensive community input paired with the on-the-ground expertise of staff who understand program demand and facility use.

[03:52:14] Tim McKenzie: And perhaps I'll submit a public records request for the, uh, location of the council members' cars, which Flock and MVPD do have.

[03:52:18] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: That input was supported by in-depth technical analysis and data-driven tools to understand current conditions and needs. We also evaluated realistic cost ranges and potential funding strategies,

[03:52:28] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. Um, we will now close public comment, um, and now move on to item 6.1 Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan - Draft Review.

[03:52:31] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: and we refined how park acreage is calculated to focus on what's accessible to the public. These factors shape a practical and actionable plan.

[03:52:44] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Following the release of the initial draft in November, we received feedback from the Parks and Recreation Commission and the public. A summary of key themes are included in Attachment 2 of the staff report.

[03:52:55] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Based on that input, we made targeted updates to better connect community priorities to the analysis and resulting action items.

[03:53:04] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: We elevated trees, biodiversity, and safe access as core themes, expanded planning area-based analysis to better reflect growth and equity, and improved organization and clarity around implementation, funding, and staffing.

[03:53:19] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: The updated draft reflects that feedback and functions as a clearer, more actionable roadmap.

[03:53:27] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: During the plan input phase, several themes emerged consistently and are noted on the slide. To name a few, residents strongly expressed the need to expand parkland, particularly in certain planning areas.

[03:53:39] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: There was broad support for improving aging infrastructure and park amenities, and a clear desire for more biodiverse landscaping, tree planting, and environmentally sustainable features.

[03:53:50] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: And across all engagement, the community emphasized its appreciation for the city's well-maintained parks and the wide range of programs available.

[03:53:59] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Several strengths stand out in Mountain View's parks and recreation system. Over the past decade, the city has made major investments, opening eight new parks, expanding the trail system,

[03:54:11] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: and delivering a significant number of facilities, like Shoreline Athletic Fields, the Community Center renovation, Magical Bridge Playground, and the Rengstorff Park Aquatic Center, to name a few.

[03:54:22] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Our parks are also well-maintained at a consistently high standard, reflecting the dedication and expertise of Parks and Open Space staff.

[03:54:31] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: On the recreation side, programs have grown and adapted, particularly since COVID, with participation up 28% and community events up 31% over the last three years.

[03:54:42] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: These strengths provide a strong foundation for the next decade.

[03:54:47] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Looking at key opportunities, the most significant is adding new parks in planning areas with the greatest gaps in acreage and access.

[03:54:55] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: We also need to modernize several older parks so they meet today's expectations for accessibility, functionality, and design.

[03:55:03] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: We heard strong interest in expanding programming for adults and older adults, and internally, strengthening staff capacity and succession planning will be critical as the system continues to grow.

[03:55:14] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Overall, while recreation is a strength, the core opportunity and focus of this plan is expanding and enhancing the park system where it's needed most.

[03:55:24] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: This slide shows park acreage by planning area using a revised methodology that better reflects public access.

[03:55:31] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Historically, the city reported park acreage both with and without the North Bayshore planning area, resulting in a citywide figure of 13.43 acres per 1,000 residents with North Bayshore and 2.66 without it.

[03:55:46] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Based on community feedback, we refined how acreage is calculated to better reflect what's open to the public, reducing school field acreage to reflect limited public availability, and counting only publicly accessible portions of Shoreline.

[03:56:01] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Using this revised approach, the citywide figure is 4.74 acres per 1,000 residents, or 1.94 acres when North Bayshore is excluded.

[03:56:13] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Most importantly, this analysis shows five planning areas below 1.5 acres per 1,000 residents, noted in the red box on the slide, clearly identifying where new parks and expansions are most needed over the next ten years.

[03:56:29] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: To guide future investments, the plan introduces a framework for prioritizing park planning and improvements.

[03:56:36] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: This framework organizes projects based on their cost, complexity, and scale, helping clarify the level of investment required.

[03:56:45] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Develop new parks represents the most significant investments, focusing on new neighborhood parks and park expansions that typically involve land acquisition and major partnerships.

[03:56:55] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Enhance existing parks includes strategic improvements such as redesigns that improve layout, accessibility, and overall usability.

[03:57:03] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Maintain and update parks focuses on repairs and updates, primarily like-for-like lifecycle replacements.

[03:57:11] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Let's take a look at the draft vision and values that form the foundation of the strategic plan. They were shaped by what we heard through community engagement, technical analysis, and staff input.

[03:57:23] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: As part of this work, the Community Services Department also developed a new mission statement: Building community, enriching lives.

[03:57:30] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: The vision reflects a future that's inclusive, sustainable, and centered on access and connection, while the values guide how we make decisions and deliver services.

[03:57:39] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: These set the foundations for the goals and actions that follow in the plan.

[03:57:44] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: The plan is built around four goals: Expanding equitable access to parks and trails, strengthening inclusive recreation programs, supporting staff and maintenance capacity, and advancing long-term funding and community engagement.

[03:58:00] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Together, these goals guide the strategies and action plan.

[03:58:04] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: The strategies on the screen tonight highlight the key ways we advance goals one and two, through strengthening connections to parks and trails through land acquisition, new park development, and transportation planning;

[03:58:17] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: diversifying amenities to reflect community needs; supporting biodiversity and environmental resilience; and expanding inclusive programs across the system.

[03:58:28] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: On the screen are goals three and four strategies. These support strengthening staff and maintenance capacity, expanding revenue sources, and improving storytelling and community engagement.

[03:58:41] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: The draft plan includes 50 action items organized by goal and strategy. Because community priorities center on parks, trails, and open space, most actions focus on expanding and maintaining those assets.

[03:58:54] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Recreation programs are already strong, so fewer actions are needed there, while ten action items focus on funding and marketing to support implementation.

[03:59:04] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: To be transparent and accountable, the action plan is paired with a clear performance and tracking framework.

[03:59:10] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: The plan includes ten performance metrics that translate goals into measurable outcomes, tracking progress on park access, participation, sustainability, workforce capacity, partnerships, and financial stewardship, to name a few.

[03:59:24] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Progress will be reported annually through a public-facing dashboard, and updates to the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council, providing transparency and ongoing oversight.

[03:59:34] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: These metrics are designed to be adaptive, allowing the city to adjust priorities over time as conditions and needs change.

[03:59:41] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Finally, the plan recommends a comprehensive update beginning in 2036 to evaluate what's been achieved, reassess needs and levels of service, and set priorities for the next decade.

[03:59:54] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: This slide illustrates the scale of costs associated with park improvements and new park development.

[04:00:00] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: As discussed earlier, updates to existing parks are generally lower cost, enhancements require moderate investment, and developing new parks represent the highest level of investment.

[04:00:12] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Each category is shown here relative to the cost of developing a five-acre neighborhood park, and many of the plan's actions, particularly new parks and major renovations, will require significant funding,

[04:00:26] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: which aligns with the City Council's direction in the fiscal year 2025-27 work plan to explore a potential revenue measure.

[04:00:36] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: The plan outlines several funding strategies to support implementation. These include the 2026 revenue measure, completing a nexus study to update development fees, expanding sponsorships and grant funding, and building strategic partnerships.

[04:00:53] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: In addition to larger strategies, the plan also identifies smaller incremental opportunities to strengthen long-term funding, such as updating fee structures or exploring capital reserve fees for facility reservations.

[04:01:07] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Following tonight's meeting, we will update the draft plan to incorporate the feedback we receive from the Council and the public.

[04:01:14] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: The next draft will then go to the Parks and Recreation Commission in March, and we will return to City Council in May for plan adoption.

[04:01:23] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: Within the staff report and on the screen tonight, we have provided three questions for the Council to provide feedback. In closing, this draft strategic plan provides a clear, data-informed roadmap for expanding access to parks and recreation, strengthening programs, and guiding investment over the next ten years.

[04:01:42] Assistant Community Services Director Christine Crosby: We appreciate Council's time and direction, and we're happy to answer any questions.

[04:01:50] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. Since this is a study session, we will actually take public comment first.

[04:01:57] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um, would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or submit a blue speaker card to the city clerk. We will take in-person speakers first.

[04:02:15] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um, each speaker will have two minutes. Um, we will start actually with Jim Zorosky, uh, because he is speaking on behalf of a bit more than five people. Um, so he will get 10 minutes.

[04:02:28] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Uh, as soon as we confirm all the five people.

[04:02:33] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Sounds good.

[04:03:06] Councilmember Alison Hicks: All right. When you're ready. Okay, Mr. Zorosky, when you're ready.

[04:03:13] Jim Zorosky: Um, I have a presentation that's about 10 minutes. Basically, what I was going to show, and next slide please.

[04:03:21] Jim Zorosky: Um, first of all, Mountain View is a great place to live. You can skip three slides.

[04:03:25] Jim Zorosky: And it has its advantages, but it also has its thorns. It's pace of life, it's congestion, and um, stress that goes on here, a lot of things cause us, and most importantly the high costs.

[04:03:41] Jim Zorosky: When we look back at how this plan was created, I was at most of the meetings, and we started with a template where the choices were offered: more playgrounds, more shade structures, obstacle courses, splash pads. But not offered as choices in their surveys that went to 455 people for, was more parkland, more trees, more undifferentiated play spaces, and more plantings and biodiversity.

[04:04:06] Jim Zorosky: The fact that these scored in the top 25% of the responses, even though they weren't listed, shows that there's a great demand for things like biodiversity, undifferentiated play spaces, especially in those four communities that were correctly identified by Christine and John as lacking park spaces, uh, almost entirely in some instances like in the Rengstorff area.

[04:04:30] Jim Zorosky: So what we're going to say is that we don't think, next slide please.

[04:04:37] Jim Zorosky: That the original proposal as crafted by the consultant really got its arms wrapped around Mountain View. They didn't include school fields or an evaluation of school fields as part of the study and the cumulative analysis of how satisfied people are with their parks.

[04:04:57] Jim Zorosky: We're not satisfied with our school fields. People in my neighborhood aren't, people in the Crittenden area aren't satisfied with their school fields. They want a park. And we keep saying, we want a park. And everybody nods their head, but there's no funding for parks, there's no nothing.

[04:05:11] Jim Zorosky: So we don't think that the study as it exists today as of user satisfaction is accurate. And if you want an answer to that question, if you think it's accurate, come down to Monta Loma and I'll introduce you to about 100 people. Next slide, please.

[04:05:26] Jim Zorosky: We don't think that the consultant had a good analysis of what it's like to live in Mountain View. Mountain View has about nine different planning areas. Each of them have different park challenges. And some of these planning areas are fairly distinct and fairly difficult to get from one to the other.

[04:05:44] Jim Zorosky: They're separated by things like 101, Central Expressway, 237, 85, and it makes it difficult for especially for residents north of Monta Loma, north of, I'm sorry, Central, in North Mountain View to do anything. Next slide, please.

[04:06:01] Jim Zorosky: So because of this, we get these ridiculous conclusions like 92% of people live within a 10-minute walk of a park or school field. Next slide, please.

[04:06:11] Jim Zorosky: Now, I would add an asterisk to this. The 92% accessibility figure is accurate if you have an asterisk that says, 'if the field is open at the time and date you wish to visit', which in the case of school fields it's not, 'or you possess wings, and you possess wings.' Next slide, please.

[04:06:29] Jim Zorosky: So for instance, and I can show you this on the board, if you look at this slide, this is the consultant's drawing of accessibility of parklands. You notice that these people over here can climb over the fence and cross the railroad tracks, and then they're within the 92% level. That's for Central and the railroad track.

[04:06:51] Jim Zorosky: Over here, they can cross 101 and they're in the 92% level. Now if you want your kid to go cross 101 and be in the 92% level, you obviously don't live here.

[04:07:00] Jim Zorosky: The same thing goes with the diagram, and this is a, the orange spots are schools. They're not available to the public three months out of the year, and in that case they do not clearly reflect the availability of parkland in most of North Mountain View. So to the extent that they're saying we're happy and we have parks, they're wrong. Next slide, please.

[04:07:20] Jim Zorosky: So since staff took over ownership, early this summer staff took over ownership, and things have gotten a lot better. And I've got to say positive things about Christine and about John, and about Audrey, and the work they've done to define the problems. Next slide, please.

[04:07:35] Jim Zorosky: Some of the things that they recognized that the consultant did not recognize was that, and Christine had this on her slide, was that some of our areas, not many, but some, such as North Bayshore and Miramonte, have more park space than the state relies.

[04:07:52] Jim Zorosky: Others have less than half, and some have less than a third. In these cases, these areas are park deficient, next slide please, and they're getting more park deficient.

[04:08:06] Jim Zorosky: Staff also did a very good job in a very short period of time of cleaning up some of the real sloppiness in the original consultant draft. They got rid of some of the slides that showed that we had to cross the railroad tracks or 101 or 85 or 237 to get to our 10-minute walk.

[04:08:23] Jim Zorosky: I don't know how they got in there in the first place, but the fact that they were there made them know that these people are not from Mountain View. Next slide, please.

[04:08:31] Jim Zorosky: Another thing that staff recently did that was very positive is they were able to figure out how much we are short and how much we have borrowed from our community in shortages from, from park space.

[04:08:46] Jim Zorosky: They calculated in their brief that we're 83 acres, at $13 million an acre is what they calculate the cost of building a new park, and it's slightly different than the nexus study you're doing, but it's in the same ballpark, which is about, we're $1.1 billion short of park space. That is a lot of money, and that's nothing we're ever going to make up in a short period of time. Next slide, please.

[04:09:08] Jim Zorosky: So they made also very good generalizations about prioritizing the parks equity things, which Christine just showed you. Next slide, please.

[04:09:19] Jim Zorosky: The thing is, we need to give them time to finish their job. We need a plan that tells Council how much this is going to cost. We don't know, and there's some real challenges ahead of us.

[04:09:32] Jim Zorosky: We need to set our priorities. They talk about 'let's go with the priorities that are the most important', but we don't list them. Without listing them, we're never going to be able to do them. So we need to have staff, these are our priorities: we need to take care of our young people, we need to take care of old people. We're not going to be able to take care of everybody at a billion dollars.

[04:09:50] Jim Zorosky: So we need to do that in the next drafts so that we have a plan that we can work on. The other thing is, we need model staffing to execute. We need to model our staffing. We don't have enough staff right now to do what we need to do under the sixth element, the sixth housing plan. We don't have enough.

[04:10:11] Jim Zorosky: And so we then from there create meaningful and measurable action items. Next slide, please.

[04:10:16] Jim Zorosky: So we know park space by planning area and we know we need more. Next slide.

[04:10:23] Jim Zorosky: And we know that's going, now the thing we can learn from 2014, next slide please, oh wait, stop, come back to that one real quick, I'm sorry.

[04:10:31] Jim Zorosky: We had priority one: acquire open space community park north of Central and south of 101. This is 12 years ago. No, not done.

[04:10:39] Jim Zorosky: Acquire open space throughout the city for neighborhood parks and mini parks, especially for those neighborhoods deemed most deficient in space. Hardly anything. Next.

[04:10:46] Jim Zorosky: So we didn't get it done. So since 2014, we have fallen further behind in our park deficit.

[04:10:54] Jim Zorosky: Yeah, we built the Magical Bridge. Yeah, we opened about 8 acres of park space. But we should have opened 30 because our population grew by 10,000. 10,000 times 3 acres per person is 30.

[04:11:05] Jim Zorosky: So we fell an additional 22 acres short over the last 12 years. What did we do wrong? Next slide, please.

[04:11:12] Jim Zorosky: We have a very long pipeline. It takes an average of eight years to go from property acquisition to park dedication. We don't have an acquisition strategy. We're not equipped to compete with private developers in buying land.

[04:11:26] Jim Zorosky: If a piece of land comes due, it usually gets bought by a private developer very quickly. We don't get a shot at it. Next slide.

[04:11:34] Jim Zorosky: In addition to having our, the amount of space that we have available be less because it was diluted by 22 acres, we lost access to a lot of 88 acres of school fields during the kerfuffle with the Dr. Rudolph administration over the last thing.

[04:11:54] Jim Zorosky: So now all of our schools except Monta Loma are fenced, and all of them have restricted access. So most of our areas that have less park space have less access than they had 12 years ago. Next slide, please.

[04:12:04] Jim Zorosky: So if you look at it, the park deficit in 2014 was 61 acres, land cost 3 million an acre, so it was a total deficit of 270 million, adjusted to today's dollars that's 370.

[04:12:19] Jim Zorosky: Today the deficit is 1.1 billion, meaning that we have seen a 200% increase in our park deficit over the last 12 years.

[04:12:28] Jim Zorosky: That's huge, since the CPI only went up 37%. The problem we have, next slide please, is we don't know how much the park deficit is going to go up more. Next slide, please.

[04:12:40] Jim Zorosky: We have 11,000 more residents coming in. With the exception of North Bayshore, most of them are going in areas that are already park deprived.

[04:12:49] Jim Zorosky: We need to figure out how much that's going to cost and where we're going to get the money from. Otherwise we'll be back here in 12 years talking to our residents about why once again we have tripled our park deficit, and the kids, the new residents, the old residents have no place to play.

[04:13:04] Jim Zorosky: I really thank the council for looking at how we're going to keep Mountain View a great place to live. Thank you very much.

[04:13:11] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. Um, our next speaker is Albert James.

[04:13:23] Albert James: Wow, that was a great talk. Uh, I'm only going to compliment that a little bit. Uh, you can go directly to the second slide, please.

[04:13:38] Albert James: There we go. Yeah, the main point I want to drive across, which is what this gentleman also mentioned, a school field is not a park.

[04:13:45] Albert James: Um, yes, an open grassy field for playing in is part of a well-designed park. But I don't think anyone thinks that a field is an adequate substitute for a park.

[04:13:56] Albert James: And yet, when calculating levels of service, the plan treats school fields as equivalent to parks. Next slide, please.

[04:14:05] Albert James: This is a summary of a table in the report, I've added a few columns that shows what percentage of the parkland or open space, as they call it, is actually schools.

[04:14:17] Albert James: And you can see the three boxes in orange, two-thirds to three-quarters of that allocation is schools. So those areas are actually very deficient in parkland every weekday until 4 o'clock, because, you know, as he said, there's, and even on some holidays I've been there and gates have been locked and I haven't been able to get in.

[04:14:38] Albert James: So if you look at the last column, which is the acres per thousand without the schools included, we have three areas that fall below one-half. You know, this is compared to an ideal of three. Next slide, please.

[04:14:53] Albert James: So, and those areas happen to be clustered right there in the upper left-hand corner: Thompson, Rengstorff, and Stierlin.

[04:15:02] Albert James: And as he said, the report says those are high priorities, but I want to stress these are very high priorities. You know, you talk about making upgrades to existing parks, we don't even have parks to do upgrades to.

[04:15:17] Albert James: In fact, in the Stierlin area, the only, the biggest park there is San Veron, and it only has about 1.4 acres of usable space, even though it's about a 2-acre park because a lot of it's covered in ivy.

[04:15:32] Albert James: Next slide, please. Finally, I'd like to point out that the population is not standing still. Since 2020, you know, almost 1,500, in the next few years, 1,500 units will be added to the Stierlin area, which is about a population of about 3,000.

[04:15:51] Albert James: You know, we should be getting about nine acres of parks, and that's not coming anytime soon. Thank you very much.

[04:16:03] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. Next we have Zoe Zorosky.

[04:16:12] Zoe Zorosky: And I, as a young kid, I would go to Monta Loma Park. Right now it's Monta Loma Elementary School park, it's no longer Monta Loma Park.

[04:16:24] Zoe Zorosky: Um, and I used to play soccer and use the, uh, the baseball backstop, and the park would be open.

[04:16:32] Zoe Zorosky: Um, but things have evolved over time, and uh, the school has taken more control over the park. And the park is no longer available until after 4 P.M.

[04:16:43] Zoe Zorosky: Um, I've also noticed at Monta Loma Elementary School park that um, there are more uh, club soccer teams, Little Leagues going on. Um, so it doesn't really feel like a community park anymore.

[04:16:57] Zoe Zorosky: Um, there's about three different groups there simultaneously, and um, and it's not even a full-size soccer field. So it is a very crowded space.

[04:17:09] Zoe Zorosky: Um, in addition, okay, so throughout the years I've continued to play sports, and I also um, have played at Crittenden Middle School.

[04:17:20] Zoe Zorosky: And um, Crittenden Middle School is also very crowded today. Um, there's people running around the track. There's uh, different sports groups there.

[04:17:31] Zoe Zorosky: Um, and then there's also the community that wants to have access but they can't because the uh, people who pay to have access on these fields have priority.

[04:17:44] Zoe Zorosky: So I also see this as an equity issue, and um, park space will continue to be an issue as the population grows, and it's something that should be addressed now. Thank you.

[04:18:00] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. Uh, next we have Henry Song or Soong.

[04:18:08] Henry Song: Uh, good evening Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council members. Um, I want to clarify the level of service in the report specifically with regards to, in the context of tennis and pickleball programming.

[04:18:23] Henry Song: Because the current report materially misstates both tennis and pickleball access by relying on raw court counts rather than function, uh, functional availability.

[04:18:33] Henry Song: The report states that Mountain View has 35 tennis courts, yielding a tennis level of service of one court per roughly 2,500 residents using the city's implied population. That sounds generous on paper.

[04:18:47] Henry Song: But that paper number collapses once you account for how courts are actually used. Of those 35 courts, 24 are subjected to or managed uh, by mixed usage, including 12 courts at Cuesta Park operated under a private contract contractor, overflow use at Rengstorff and Cooper Parks, or and also shared shared courts with other uh, property owners, and monthly club-sanctioned events with standing agreements with the city.

[04:19:15] Henry Song: Um, these courts are frequently reserved for programming and not available for true drop-in first-come first-serve uh, usage.

[04:19:23] Henry Song: So that means it leaves 11 courts citywide that function, functions as truly open first-come first-serve use.

[04:19:32] Henry Song: And when you redo the level of service math based on functional availability, uh, and based on the roughly, you know, 87 to 89,000 residents and only 11 courts, that yields one court per 7,900 residents.

[04:19:48] Henry Song: Um, and so when pickleball goes from severely underprovided into meeting the level of service based on the current numbers, and essentially counting the tennis courts as if the the availability is more available than they appear, there is a metric issue that needs to be reconciled,

[04:20:07] Henry Song: and also that both activities must be analytically decoupled for a more accurate reading and understanding.

[04:20:12] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. We will now move on to our virtual speakers, starting with Bruce England.

[04:20:15] Henry Song: And before endorsing any framework within the strategic uh, report, um, I believe that council would be best to advise staff to to clarify those numbers so that the metrics will be more accurate on paper. Thank you.

[04:20:23] Bruce England: Hi, uh, Bruce England, uh, Whisman Station Drive.

[04:20:28] Bruce England: Um, yeah, I just have a few comments. I am interested in what has been said so far, and I do agree with the points made about counting school space as park space. They aren't the same thing. I clearly have heard that from other people here, so I echo, um, please keep that in mind.

[04:20:50] Bruce England: Other points briefly are, uh, the importance of amenities, because people are not just going to the parks and using the parks in and of themselves, but they're moving around the town.

[04:21:02] Bruce England: People who are, um, exercising active transportation, they're biking, they're walking, and so on, and trying to make their, sometimes commuting and making their way through the city along the roadways and into the parks.

[04:21:15] Bruce England: And so envisioning our city as being just park space, a continuous park space, is an important conceptual thing to keep in mind, rather than just saying we're going to put trees in this park and we're going to call that a park and everything else is different.

[04:21:32] Bruce England: Um, so the amenities need to include water fountains, restrooms, and things like that so that people have those rest stops when they're making their stops going through town.

[04:21:43] Bruce England: And that includes after hours. The idea of having restrooms and other amenities closed down at sunset just ignores the fact that people are using the parks and going through the parks at at all hours.

[04:21:57] Bruce England: So even keeping them open until 10 is much more realistic than saying when the sun goes down we're locking everything up. Especially since they're being locked and unlocked remotely now.

[04:22:09] Bruce England: Um, the operating hours are controlled by section 38-13, and that was last updated in 2014. So that really ought to be reviewed.

[04:22:18] Bruce England: The dark skies issue, which was talked about earlier, I've heard, um, that that's going to be delayed. That's really important because lighting is key in park space and how that's handled, as well as other places in the city.

[04:22:29] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. All right, we have uh, Marika Sycora.

[04:22:33] Bruce England: So having that delayed can really be, uh, problematic.

[04:22:35] Marika Sycora: Hi. Thank you for allowing me the time to speak here. Um, I live in the, uh, central, uh, area, I guess, Old Mountain View is what we call it here. And um, uh, we have no um, dog park that is um, in a walkable distance.

[04:22:37] Bruce England: And then lastly, I just want to praise Pyramid Park. I often say that that's the one closest to where I am in addition to a couple of other neighborhood parks. City really did a great job. Thank you.

[04:22:53] Marika Sycora: We have Eagle Park, which is not technically a dog park as you know, um, and you can only take your dog there off-leash between 6 A.M. and 10 A.M., Monday through Friday. Um, so you cannot take them off-leash on the weekend.

[04:23:09] Marika Sycora: Um, and so, you know, there's a large community of, um, dog owners that are driving around Mountain View to take their dogs to off-leash dog parks.

[04:23:19] Marika Sycora: Um, we have a, I believe it's called a mini park, named uh, Fairmont Park, um, and it's um, it's a very nice park, um, it's hardly ever used by anybody.

[04:23:32] Marika Sycora: And I know that because I go there about six or seven times a week. Um, and I think it's very rarely used because Mercy Bush Park is much nicer and it's only two blocks away.

[04:23:45] Marika Sycora: Um, I I raise Fairmont Park because it is already fenced in. Um, it would only need a gate, um, at the very small opening of the current fence, and you could very easily turn that into a dog park, um, quite quickly.

[04:24:01] Marika Sycora: Um, so I appreciate all of the effort that went into the strategic plan. Um, I am concerned that there's a target of only one to two updates per year, and that those updates cost 1 to 1.5 million dollars.

[04:24:16] Marika Sycora: Um, I think there we need to focus on small things that we can do quickly, um, and so that we can make um, small improvements to more parks um, during the year rather than just one to two major updates, um, so that um, more people are feeling a benefit all the time, um, rather than just small pockets um, getting major updates. Thank you.

[04:24:41] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Sorry, your time has expired. Um, we'll move on to Dashiell Leeds.

[04:24:51] Dashiell Leeds: Hello, my name is Dashiell Leeds, I'm the conservation coordinator for the Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter.

[04:24:58] Dashiell Leeds: Uh, we're glad to see that staff has integrated biodiversity into the park design subsection and the addition of action items related to the implementation of the draft Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan.

[04:25:11] Dashiell Leeds: These inclusions are good, uh, but biodiversity has not yet been identified as a standalone core goal of the park system.

[04:25:19] Dashiell Leeds: With this in mind, our chapter supports the suggestion put forward by the Santa Clara Valley Bird Alliance in their letter that they sent to Council this morning.

[04:25:29] Dashiell Leeds: In that letter, they recommend the addition of a fifth goal to the draft Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan, a goal that is focused on biodiversity.

[04:25:39] Dashiell Leeds: I'll read the draft language here. Uh, quote: 'Protect and restore biodiversity. Identify opportunities for habitat preservation and restoration, and ensure that park operations and facilities are designed and implemented so that locally native species survive and thrive in alignment with the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan.' End quote.

[04:25:59] Dashiell Leeds: Biodiversity is important in its own right, and it's important for the health and well-being of Mountain View residents.

[04:26:07] Dashiell Leeds: Establishing biodiversity as a core goal of the plan would strengthen the plan's vision, reflect community priorities, and help ensure that future park investments will continue to support people and nature.

[04:26:19] Dashiell Leeds: Uh, and speaking of how we handle nature in the future, we'd also like to lament the delay on the Dark Sky Ordinance, and we encourage this Council to find opportunities to resume work on that ordinance as soon as possible.

[04:26:34] Dashiell Leeds: Um, you don't need to reinvent the wheel here. There's plenty of established local precedent for these ordinances that you can base your draft ordinance off of, such as Cupertino, Brisbane, Los Altos, and the recently adopted ordinance in Palo Alto.

[04:26:37] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. Rashmi?

[04:26:42] Rashmi: Can you hear me?

[04:26:43] Councilmember Alison Hicks: We can hear you. It's a little light though.

[04:26:46] Rashmi: Okay. Is this better?

[04:26:47] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Much better.

[04:26:49] Dashiell Leeds: Uh, so we encourage you to resume work on that and provide direction to resume work on that as soon as you can. Thanks for your time and consideration.

[04:26:49] Rashmi: Great. My comments focus on the importance of natural spaces in our park system and a push to better align the plan with community feedback.

[04:27:00] Rashmi: Natural green amenities have been highlighted as a priority by residents at every step of the feedback process of this plan. Natural green spaces have also been highlighted as a priority by the city leadership through the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan.

[04:27:15] Rashmi: The Parks and Rec plan has made progress since its last iteration by incorporating portions of the Biodiversity and Urban Forest plan into the Parks and Rec plan, which is great.

[04:27:27] Rashmi: However, the plan still reads as if natural spaces are separate from the core set of amenities that parks are meant to provide.

[04:27:35] Rashmi: To fully, to be fully integrated with the plan, these spaces such as tree groves, pollinator habitats, and nature trails should be directly called out as amenities in the park design process, section 6.1 and 6.2 of the plan.

[04:27:51] Rashmi: For example, the plan's design guidelines for community parks states that these parks should have at least one recreational anchor, one community anchor, and one active recreation amenity.

[04:28:02] Rashmi: This required list should also include one biodiversity anchor.

[04:28:06] Rashmi: It is only by directly incorporating these natural spaces into the design guidelines as amenities in their own right that Mountain View residents can be confident that green spaces will not be deprioritized in favor of built environment amenities when the rubber hits the road.

[04:28:23] Rashmi: I would also say the same thing about trees and shade structures. The plan still lists shade structures as an amenity investment priority in section 7.4, areas of focus for park improvement and expansion, and leaves out trees completely in this section.

[04:28:40] Rashmi: I'm also still not sure why skateboarding parks and adult fitness areas continue to be listed as priorities in the plan. These two amenities scored as very low importance, skateboard parks as the lowest in fact, in both the statistically significant and community surveys, yet the plan still calls out these amenities as priorities in section 7.4, while nature-based amenities and items residents have identified as top priorities are left out.

[04:28:52] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you, your time has finished. Um, next we have Cliff Chambers.

[04:29:07] Cliff Chambers: Hi, this is, uh, Cliff Chambers, uh, 20-year resident of, uh, Mountain View.

[04:29:10] Rashmi: One last important topic I would like to see included in the plan is addressing the use of poured-in-place rubber surfaces, which are used at almost every playground in Mountain View. These surfaces are harmful...

[04:29:14] Cliff Chambers: I'd first like to thank, uh, Christine Crosby and her team, because I think they did a exemplary job of responding to the very diverse comments that we received at the Parks and Recreation, uh, Commission and in a very engaged public.

[04:29:30] Cliff Chambers: I want to make comments with two hats. First, the hat is president of the Mountain View Pickleball Club.

[04:29:38] Cliff Chambers: We're really pleased to see that pickleball is highlighted as a prioritized amenity.

[04:29:43] Cliff Chambers: Uh, we're very happy that uh, an action was added for the, uh, design and construction of pickleball courts. Uh, and we're really looking forward to an update, hopefully in the coming days, on the private property public, uh, pickleball court option...

[04:30:00] Public Speaker: for hopefully uh a minimum of 12 new courts. The second hat I wear is as is a voter. And I have to agree with Jim Zoworski that some work really needs to still be done in kind of itemizing the costs of things.

[04:30:16] Public Speaker: We have a revenue measure hopefully uh it's probably going to be a bond measure coming up. And I don't get a good sense of what the priorities are that would be included in such a plan in a very short period of time.

[04:30:30] Public Speaker: So I think a lot has there's been a lot of really good stuff added to the plan in terms of the kind of cost, but there's no sense of priorities of what would come first in the next few years. That really needs to be added to the plan. Thank you very much.

[04:30:47] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. Next we have Jessica Chohan.

[04:30:55] Jessica Chohan: Hi there. First, I want to acknowledge the immense effort staff put into this comprehensive plan. We know this was a huge effort. Now it's finally time for council to weigh in. You know, you've heard from the community for years now about lack of park space, and we even see new folks joining the conversation every meeting. This is your opportunity to get it right and to do the hard things to make progress.

[04:31:22] Jessica Chohan: We all understand the reality is that Mountain View is a built-out city, that land is expensive, and closing the projected parkland gap is a massive financial challenge. While the plan clearly identifies the severe gaps, the proposed solution needs to be elevated in urgency to address the deficit.

[04:31:40] Jessica Chohan: Earlier agenda items highlighted that this issue will only grow, and this plan relies heavily on an opportunistic acquisition strategy with a goal of acquiring only up to 10 acres over the next 10 to 15 years, despite an 87-acre shortfall.

[04:31:56] Jessica Chohan: To achieve meaningful results, I urge council to strengthen the action plan, especially in four specific areas. Move from an opportunistic to a prepositioned plan. We can't just study or wait and see about a a bond, or wait about properties becoming available.

[04:32:13] Jessica Chohan: We need to be clear that we will pursue a bond measure, that we will identify specific properties that we will acquire through all means available, potentially including things like eminent domain. Uh, we need to strengthen regulatory requirements for developers.

[04:32:28] Jessica Chohan: Um, as we, um, go through the Nexus study, we should look to maximize impact fees rather than reducing them. This is crucial for residents, uh, across the city. Um, you know, residential projects over a certain size should be required to dedicate actual land rather just rather than just accepting in-lieu fees.

[04:32:50] Jessica Chohan: Um, you know, as, as we grow and densify, this only serves the public more, public health, environmental stewardship, and it it's just

[04:32:58] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. Uh, next, uh, our final commenter is Mary Datio.

[04:33:06] Mary Datio: Um, good evening. Um, I want to echo all the points that Rashmi made about, um, recognizing natural spaces and biodiversity, um, as an amenity. So, um, that this would, um, sort of strengthen, um, the actually reflect in the plan how important so many of the, uh, people who, who've weighed in on this plan, um, how important we feel, feel that that those things are, the natural spaces and, and biodiversity.

[04:33:39] Mary Datio: Um, I'm, um, I just think we need, land is such an issue. And as I'm hearing other people talking about it, I'm especially concerned too, because, um, not just because of all the new residents that we expect that are going to be Mountain View residents with all the building, but at the same time, um, quite a bit of building is going on right on our borders,

[04:34:08] Mary Datio: uh, along El Camino in Los Altos, and along San Antonio in, um, Palo Alto. And so it's just so important that, um, that we do find a way to acquire more land.

[04:34:23] Mary Datio: And then the third thing I wanted to mention is, um, I feel that the, I sent a note about this, I hope you saw it, but basically 50 acres, the 50 acres, 52 acres of Stevens Creek Trail and Permanente Creek Trail, um, all that park space is allocated to the North Bayshore, even though only about a third maybe of those trails is actually in the North Bayshore.

[04:34:50] Mary Datio: So it grossly distorts the, um, park space per area. And this especially bothers me or concerns me because one of the top amenities in many of the surveys that were conducted, like the top thing people said they wanted were biking, hiking, and, and walking trails.

[04:35:09] Mary Datio: And so here we have these two trails. Thank you.

[04:35:14] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Alright, it's time to bring it back to council. Council will now have the opportunity to, uh, ask questions and then discuss and provide feedback on the following questions. Does any member of the council have questions?

[04:35:36] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I'm assuming. Okay, there we go. Councilmember McAlister, kick us off.

[04:35:41] Councilmember John McAlister: I need to start off saying I've been doing the City Council for 10 years and this is the best report I've ever seen. The detail, somebody actually followed the strategic plan blueprint on how to do it. And when you do something like that and it includes a lot of stuff, it makes you think about what you're doing.

[04:36:19] Councilmember John McAlister: You start a lot of discussion. People are going 'what about this', da da da da da, and that's why this is a draft program. But you have so many areas that you can bring in so many people, say hey this is important to me, this is important to them. So that being said, I just think it's really good.

[04:36:33] Councilmember John McAlister: And, you know, the questions I have are are pretty minuscule to the overall design. Um, disappointing that it's going to be 10 years from here, I'll be gone, you'll be here, to work on it and get it done. But that is a long process and we don't have many pre precise um programs like we were talking about, precise plans for wherever and we're talking 10 years down the road and things change dramatically.

[04:36:39] Councilmember John McAlister: You know, so there are some flaws here and there, but overall it's very comprehensive from my stan standpoint, from seeing other, I was here in 2014, so I get to reflect on that. Uh, but it really does accomplish a lot. And what it also does is allow people to really discuss it.

[04:36:58] Councilmember John McAlister: So, uh, I'm glad that you're looking that far forward. And how to prioritize certain items. And yes, your statistics may be, some people view it one way, other people see it another. But at least again, you're getting people to look down there and see what's coming on and so it it's really nice.

[04:37:20] Councilmember John McAlister: So I have a couple of questions. Well I have more, but I'll probably think of more as we go along. Um, let me just follow up on some of the questions that uh people asked about. Now I live over by, okay City Attorney, do I have to recuse myself since I live near a park?

[04:37:38] Councilmember John McAlister: You said to, I just making sure. Um, I live near the gate um, gateway to the southern part of um Stevens Creek Trail, I would say. That's on our s on the west side of Stevens Creek. There's a whole area that's going to be developed, it's like 32 acres or so forth.

[04:37:56] Councilmember John McAlister: And when someone mentioned that that's all going to be part of North Bayshore, well the people in North Bayshore aren't really using this, I mean I use the the the um Stevens Creek Trail daily, and so does my dog. And so it's it doesn't make sense that you don't include it in other parts of the city where it actually is the local the 10-minute rule that you walk into.

[04:38:21] Councilmember John McAlister: So is that something that you may revise to say, getting that out of the 233 acres that you say up there, you can clear by the 172 later, um, to get it down where it actually is used and utilized?

[04:38:36] Community Services Director John Marchant: Thank you for the question once again. John Marchant, Community Services Director. So this is an item that we as staff struggled with a little bit and even the Parks and Recreation Commission had a a brief conversation about as well. Um, and I'll I'll go back historically, the the trail systems started in the north, started being connected to the shoreline and then moving south.

[04:38:58] Community Services Director John Marchant: So historically those acres have been associated with the North Bayshore. Um, and therefore when you look at the calculations, um, citywide and you re and then you take away the North Bayshore, you're actually reducing all of those acres from the total.

[04:39:15] Community Services Director John Marchant: Um, and in the discussion through the Parks and Recreation Commission, they decided not to allocate or recommend allocating those acres into those planning areas. Um, as well as, uh, staff was looking at the, um, where the Stevens Creek Trail is bisected by several planning areas.

[04:39:38] Community Services Director John Marchant: And so we we have not gone through a a specific process to see how we can allocate those to individual planning areas. If that's, uh, a recommendation of council tonight, we can certainly look at that.

[04:39:52] Community Services Director John Marchant: Um, for an example, um, in one area, the Central and then Whisman is bisected by the Stevens Creek Trail. How do we how would we separate those acres out? We would have to go through an exercise to figure that out. But once again if that is, uh, something that the the council is interested in, that is, uh, some work we can do.

[04:40:14] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, um I would like to see that also. And I also see your calculations for the overall city is at 4.4 acres. But, you know, we have this 3-acre um goal. And I think you you do put an asterisk in there, that's because that includes parts of North Bayshore, Shoreline Regional Park.

[04:40:36] Councilmember John McAlister: And I think that, uh, and I thought I saw an asterisk in there that would take it down, but when you take a regional park, that's again, up let's use your 10-minute rule, I'd like to see that uh maybe reviewed because it doesn't really reflect the the uh deficit that we have throughout the city.

[04:40:55] Councilmember John McAlister: When you had you put up the slide, we only had one or two areas that were in it. But if you take it out, the whole city's in a big deficit. And it was in a deficit back in 2015 when I was mayor of the city and we were trying to get acquisitions. But it's very hard to compete with billionaires and multinational, you know, uh, companies that have a lot of money, so it's very tough to do that.

[04:41:20] Councilmember John McAlister: And you've I think you're doing a pretty good job getting there, so. Uh, the other question I comment I had is that you have these uh actions, and I always think uh you you need to have some actions and actually how you can fund these things.

[04:41:38] Councilmember John McAlister: We're we're talking about, you know, we're going to have a shortage and I think there's opportunities and somebody brought it up of how the park uh commission can ad park department can actually figure out how to increase their funds. And I saw under immediate actions, and you actually put first two years, which is I mean you're saying we're going to do this, we're going to do it in a timeline.

[04:42:01] Councilmember John McAlister: And so what happens is what's great is that we hold you accountable, because in two years I'll come along and I'm here and I'll ask you these questions. But what you're looking at is how we can increase our funding. To a lot of people are concerned about funding.

[04:42:16] Councilmember John McAlister: So how are you, how did you come up with saying these immediate actions, we're going to look at the fees, we're going to look at how to all of these different the user fees, the naming fees and so forth. So how did you say 'hey these are important' and and your thoughts behind that?

[04:42:32] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Thank you for the question. Um, so in order to do a lot of the, um, short-term, mid-term, and long-term, um, action items, there are foundational action steps that we need to take first to be able to set us up to complete the future ones.

[04:42:48] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: So as I stated earlier, um, significant funding would be needed to develop new parks or to update our parks. And in order to do that, we need the funding. So let's look at identifying that first.

[04:43:01] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Um, additionally, we've got, um, in the immediate actions, a focus on updating, um, council policies, things that, uh, can impact our facility reservations and our our field reservations, um, sooner than later.

[04:43:17] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Um, also looking at, um, our staffing. In order to accomplish some of those larger action items, we need the appropriate staff in the right positions to be able to advance them. And so we were strategic in, um, how we placed items so that we could sequence things.

[04:43:36] Councilmember John McAlister: There was also a comment about we have limited funds. And so is it the question is do we save it up for big things, or do we try to get accommodate more people with doing small things of enhancing the parks or maintaining the parks and so forth.

[04:43:54] Councilmember John McAlister: So could you explain a little bit that stray is that going to be implemented, is that a something that you can do right away or is that something that you're thinking about doing?

[04:44:04] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Thank you. Um, so as we are advancing, um, several of the action items, there are capital, um, improvement projects that have been identified that we have currently, um, scheduled and have funding to do. Um, those are ones that we hope to accomplish sooner than later. Um, because we have the funding and we've got the projects identified.

[04:44:28] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Um, we've also, um, will be looking at some of the, um, what we did with this draft is we incorporated a whole section of milestones and deliverables that we anticipate for each action item that was not in the last draft.

[04:44:43] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: And that allows us to say what things we anticipate being able to complete, um, and that the, um, the timelines that are associated with those action plans are when we expect them to be completed. So for example, a long-term item may have several milestones underneath it where some of those may be completed sooner than later, um, because again, we've got those projects identified.

[04:45:08] Councilmember John McAlister: Are there any strategies in these guides to make your uh financing sustainable? And it with could I mean like fees that haven't been revised, we know about in a long time, but is there a way to incorporate the fee structure that I even though we're supposed to be cost recovery, but we can redefine cost recovery for um pre-maintenance and maintaining things wear out like we do with the fire fire part, we got big trucks and we save money and get it done.

[04:45:39] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Yes, thank you for the question. There is an action item, and I'm trying to find it, um, that is specific to looking at the recreation cost recovery policy. Um, we previously did the citywide master fee study, but we knew that the cost recovery policy should be looked at. And so we held off on updating a large number of our fees so that we can go through a true cost recovery review and determine if our um programs are allocated to the correct, uh, categories and the right subsidies.

[04:46:10] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Um, so we would like to go through that exercise first, that will allow us to see if any of our programs move, and then um, be able to adjust the fees accordingly.

[04:46:20] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Additionally, within um, one of the action items um, related to funding, there is an action to study um, adding um, capital reserve fees to our facility reservations. These are fees that are a nominal fee that would be added to the reservation that would then be put into a reserve that could be used to improve that specific facility.

[04:46:42] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: So for example, a nominal fee for a barbecue reservation would then be earmarked for any future improvements needed for that specific barbecue. Um, so we don't have that currently, um, it is a new concept for us, and um, it is an action item for us to explore.

[04:46:58] Councilmember John McAlister: The other question I see that, well, a couple other questions. People are asking you to do quite a bit of trees and native planting. Don't we have another study that you're working with that sort of interacts with that one, that feeds into it. Could you give us some background of the biodiversity and, what do you call that?

[04:47:18] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: The Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan.

[04:47:20] Councilmember John McAlister: Urban Forest, yeah. Cause there are two separate plans, and how they work together.

[04:47:26] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Absolutely, and thank you for that question. Um, you are correct, the city is working on a draft Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan. It just recently went to the Parks and Recreation Commission last week, um, which they, um, approved forwarding the draft to the City Council, which I believe is coming to you next month. Um, and will be your first opportunity to weigh in.

[04:47:50] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Um, that, and the Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan, have a little bit of an overlap. Um, and what we've done in this current draft is that we've elevated biodiversity, it's in section 6.3, before it was a little buried. Um, but we've elevated and added more information to connect it to the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan.

[04:48:10] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Um, specifically with a cross reference of action items that focus on biodiversity in parks, we've incorporated that within here. We also doubled up on those action items. So if it was an action item in the draft Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan, we've also included it in, um, the strategy that's focused on biodiversity here. Um, which I think helps strengthen it and helps align it.

[04:48:33] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Um, additionally, one of the, um, feedback things that we heard from the Parks and Recreation Commission at the last, um, meeting in November, was they would like to have the city look at having dedicated staff to focus on biodiversity to ensure that the, um, outcomes or the actions of the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan are carried through.

[04:48:53] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: That is not only in the um Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan draft, but is also included as a staff position that we are recommending through this process as well.

[04:49:04] Councilmember John McAlister: Why do we have two plans? What what, are they such big tasks that you had to focused on certain items to get it down to okay?

[04:49:11] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Yeah, and um, I I would say that the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan, and John can fill in, um, Director Marchant can fill in anything that I've missed, um, really focuses on, um, the scientific side of nature and incorporating landscape, um, to provide, um, access for our habitats and wildlife and supporting them.

[04:49:31] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Um, whereas this plan is focusing on a larger system-wide analysis. Um, and so we see that we could utilize the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan to support, um, the way that we look at park design, um, the way that we maintain our parks. Um, but they are separate documents. The Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan also doesn't just govern parks, but it also focuses on private development, as well as um public infrastructure.

[04:50:00] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. And there's some comments about transportation. And I know we have our, you have your department, we have a transportation department. So I mean why are they sort of looking at you to get these things done when we have an excellent transportation department? Are you working with conjunction with the public works and their transportation program?

[04:50:21] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Yes we are. Um, public works is working on the Active Transportation Plan. Um, and we have identified an action within this plan to support, um, the Active Transportation Plan with identifying opportunities to increase safe access to parks.

[04:50:38] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Um, that was something that we heard loud and clear through the public engagement, and that um, folks would like to have, um, like to feel safe and comfortable walking from um, their house to a park or park to park. Um, and so we've incorporated and connected with our our colleagues in public works on that aspect. So as they are advancing their plan, we'll be at the table to assist and provide information related to park access.

[04:51:05] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, those are my questions. Thank you.

[04:51:08] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. Councilmember Showalter.

[04:51:14] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, um, well, you asked a lot of great questions, um, Councilmember McAlister. I have a couple, and then lots of comments. I mean I guess we're all sort of integrating the comments as we go. First of all, I I I echo what um, John has said and what uh Jim Zoworski said about how you know this plan has really progressed.

[04:51:40] Councilmember Pat Showalter: I read the Nov November version over the break, and then I found out the new version had changed a lot, so I had to read that too, and um I was a little taken aback by that. But at the same time, it really um, uh, showed me how much the the plan had changed. And um, that's, you know, all to the good.

[04:52:01] Councilmember Pat Showalter: I think that when we started out it was a little too theoretical and not true not not Mountain View enough. Anyway, um I do have some questions. One is, um, uh, I don't understand what you do with the update, you know the update numbers were like a million dollars per acre for a park. What do you do for that?

[04:52:23] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Thank you for the question. Um, so an update, well actually let me clarify your question. Is your update of what could be done with $1 million?

[04:52:35] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Well, yeah, I mean what what could be done, what would you expect to do?

[04:52:40] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Sure. I am going to look to our Parks and Open Space Manager, who is currently working on a few update items to share what could possibly be done for an update for around a million dollars.

[04:52:58] Parks and Open Space Manager Tim Youngberg: Tim Youngberg, Parks and Open Space Manager. So currently we're working on a project at Sylvan Park, and for $500,000, we have various amenities that would be improved. Benches, uh, the trash cans within the park, the playground that's there, both the the two to five playground and the five to twelve playground, so both playgrounds would get updated.

[04:53:18] Parks and Open Space Manager Tim Youngberg: The post and platforms would stay the same, but the amenities around the uh playground would be updated. There's a few irrigation upgrades that would happen within the park. And then, um, trying to think of any other ones, uh, there's a few picnic tables that are in the park that need to be upgraded and benches as well. I think there was 17 benches, uh, 20 trash cans, so various things came up in just in that park was about $500,000.

[04:53:45] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay, so that that park is a number of acres. So, if you divided, you know, um,

[04:53:53] Parks and Open Space Manager Tim Youngberg: It depends on the like you said, it depends on the number of amenities within the park. So obviously a bigger park has got more amenities, you can you can make that buck last a lot longer, um, in smaller parks.

[04:54:04] Councilmember Pat Showalter: But the per acre cost. You can do a lot with a a million dollars per acre. I guess that's what I'm getting to.

[04:54:11] Parks and Open Space Manager Tim Youngberg: Yes.

[04:54:11] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um, cause alright. Cause I I would really like to see, I mean I see that the actions are sort of bifurcated into things that you need to do to get organized to move on to the um to all the actions and and and to um really incorporate all that's been learned in um in the uh this plan development and to, you know, to carry those things out.

[04:54:37] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And then there are the action items that are more things that people will see in the parks. And I I'd um, I was wondering if if there would be a way for us to kind of evaluate those separately. So that there would be um some physical visible responses to our residents um, uh, that we tracked more than just getting organized.

[04:55:04] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Which is very, very important, you can't do the other, you know, one one without the other, but I I do feel like people um, people are really uh immersed in their parks. Like John says he goes to the Stevens Creek Trail every day, I go to Cooper Park a couple times a day, I'm sure if you asked all of us, we go to a park really regularly. So we know it really well and we notice what what changes.

[04:55:32] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So so if there was a new tree or new benches or whatever, I mean people would care and notice. So how how are you um planning to uh kind of separate that out?

[04:55:47] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Thank you for the question. Um, so one thing as we naturally do that, um, our Parks and Open Space division has annual CIPs that we have access to be able to maintain these these items.

[04:56:01] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Um, and so we do look for those opportunities as things are aging out, we try to replace them, or um, if we have access to planting more trees, we try to do so. Um, I think you were going to tag

[04:56:14] Parks and Open Space Manager Tim Youngberg: You can

[04:56:20] Community Services Director John Marchant: Yeah, to go along with what um, Parks and Open Space Manager Youngberg was talking about is we do look at our parks, we look for opportunities to improve, we do have capital funding to help with that.

[04:56:39] Community Services Director John Marchant: Um, and as we go through the Biodiversity plan, we actually have some initial ideas of where we can add trees, biodiversity, how do we re-visit our existing parks to see how we can either plant more trees or increase the biodiversity.

[04:56:55] Community Services Director John Marchant: Um, and and then be able to um either look for the existing funding or request the additional funding to do that. Um, in the case of Sylvan Park we think we have some funding to um make that happen once we have a an approved Biodiversity and Urban Forest plan to follow the planting guidelines that will be coming out and and other items.

[04:57:18] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Good, okay. So I guess what I'm asking then is the answer I I seem to be, I think you're giving me which is good, is that we do have a way to track that there are improvements kind of spread throughout the city in all the parks regularly.

[04:57:38] Community Services Director John Marchant: Yes, as a matter of fact one of the great things that um, Mr. Youngberg has done since he came and joined us as a as a team member, he really has created an annual review of where we can be making improvements.

[04:57:53] Community Services Director John Marchant: So he has a five-year plan for pour-in-place, he has a certain number of years for um, the playground improvements, and so we can follow his plan and be make sure that we're keeping up on those systematically.

[04:58:06] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay, thank you. And then um, another question I had was um, I wondered why the vision shows up so late in the report.

[04:58:18] Councilmember Pat Showalter: That's a bit of a um unusual uh organization. Usually the vision is in the, you know, introduction. It doesn't come up until, well it's in the executive summary, of course, but it doesn't come up until 114. Uh page 114.

[04:58:38] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So I wondered about um uh, do we want, do you feel like you, I mean you've thought about how to reorganize this. Do you do you want to further reorganize it so the vision's a little earlier? Or um, how how did you feel about that?

[04:58:54] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Thank you for the question. Um, so we did hear a similar comment when we brought this to the Parks and Recreation Commission. However at that time we didn't have an executive summary formalized.

[04:59:05] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Um, and so when we developed the executive summary and incorporated it, um we felt oh it's at the front. However we can further look into that following tonight and see if there's a way that we can further reorganize, that's something we can look into.

[04:59:19] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, I I think that's great. And also um uh kudos on the executive summary, that um adds a lot. And then um, this is something that I think we're going to be studying in the fee evaluation, but um, do we, do we have an estimate of what percentage of the costs of um like a summer camp is covered by fee versus not fee, I mean fee versus general fund or other sources?

[04:59:50] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Thank you for the question. So the operating costs associated with um the recreation programs is general fund um funding. Um, I don't have the information in front of me to say what the cost recovery is for our summer camps.

[05:00:06] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: I will say that we are um very affordable and low cost, and we're also very proud that we have our financial assistance program to assist those that may need um financial assistance to cover it.

[05:00:17] Councilmember Pat Showalter: But I think we're all very proud of that. And um I think that it's um, you know it's really a policy discussion about how much we want to spend, and it's and it really aligns well with our community for all. Okay, thank you. Those are all for now.

[05:00:30] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you. I'm going to reiterate, so we we are only doing questions right now, I I'm not ready to to to straw poll quite yet until we're done with our questions. So next we'll have Councilmember Hicks.

[05:00:42] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I have a question for you Mayor.

[05:00:45] Councilmember Emily Ramos: And Yes?

[05:00:45] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And it's how we're gonna go through the questions, so that I never know do we do are we gonna take them one by one, go through all of them, I want to be organized ahead of time and everyone else so we don't get lost.

[05:01:00] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I I was anticipating doing all three questions, and then if there were things that were straw pollable, um staff will uh pull it out, we will have the visual aids that we did in the last item. Um so we will probably be going a little bit more carefully to make sure that we capture everything.

[05:01:20] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Great. So one by one we'll be going through all questions at once, I can do that. Thank you.

[05:01:26] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Alright. Um, do we have any more questions from the council? Any more questions? Okay.

[05:01:37] Councilmember John McAlister: There's a garbage can near my spot, and it's a bear trap one where you have to go under. So why do we have all these garbage cans have to be bear safe?

[05:01:51] Parks and Open Space Manager Tim Youngberg: Yes, thank you for the question. Uh Tim Youngberg, Parks and Open Space Manager. Uh this was before my time and I think there's some still some YouTube videos of the squirrels that uh took over Cuesta Park. So in in doing that and for future we've we've latched on to these bear saver cans, we've actually gone to ones that have the foot pedal and the hand so uh they makes it a lot easier.

[05:02:17] Parks and Open Space Manager Tim Youngberg: Another reason is for back safety, um some of them back safety for the staff so that you're you're opening from the bottom rather than having to pull the bag out over the top. So there is some ergonomic safety due to them as well.

[05:02:30] Councilmember John McAlister: Uh and one we forgot to ask and I'm surprised Councilmember Showalter didn't ask about it, uh do we have any updates on pickleball?

[05:02:41] Community Services Director John Marchant: I actually have an update. And so this is uh hot off the press if you will. Um, dur as you know during the development of the city's pickleball feasibility study, city staff stated that there was an opportunity to collaborate with private property owners to develop publicly accessible courts.

[05:03:00] Community Services Director John Marchant: Over the last few months uh and since we our last public meeting uh staff has been discussing various potential sites with property owners. We have identified a viable site for an interim pickleball facility that could be used for uh at least five years, uh while we continue to work on securing a more long-term permanent location and potentially at the same site.

[05:03:25] Community Services Director John Marchant: The site is located about a half mile away from the nearest residential neighborhood in the eastern part of the city and provides appropriate space for outdoor pickleball facilities as well as parking. We are in the initial stages of negotiation with the property owner to come to an agreement for the interim use of the site, uh after which city could begin the process to design and construct the pickleball courts.

[05:03:50] Community Services Director John Marchant: Additional public updates will be provided in approximately two to three months, subject to reaching formal agreement with the property owner for the interim use of the site. So we have been able to say that we have identified a a specific location, we are uh now in active negotiations with that property owner.

[05:04:12] Councilmember John McAlister: We still need to see what we can do with exactly how much we can provide in including parking and other amenities. So I don't have a a specific number yet.

[05:04:25] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Alright, thank you for that. Are we done with questions? Because now we can get feedback. Let's go. Any moment now. Councilmember Clark.

[05:04:39] Councilmember Chris Clark: I will probably be the briefest um. Questions one, two, and three. Does the council agree that draft plan provides an accurate picture of um. So, uh anyway, yes to number one. Um, yes to number two, I agree that the draft vision and goals and strategy reflect what the city should focus on.

[05:04:59] Councilmember Chris Clark: And number three, um, the action plan, I I I don't see, I think you've captured, I don't have any specific actions or to add or remove. So I I'm fine with one, two, and three.

[05:05:09] Councilmember Chris Clark: The only thing that I'll add is um, I do um, there was one public speaker and I think it I think you mentioned it came up the PRC meeting, I am sympathetic to the idea of um, I I I if we're allocating, I realize that trails are recreation, not necessarily parks, but they um they're a really, really important component of of our overall um amenities and and plans, and I think it is a given the amount of time and money that we've spent on those trails, I think it's kind of a waste to have those allocated to North Bayshore um, or or have them unallocated.

[05:05:52] Councilmember Chris Clark: So um, and I realize they they cross some planning area boundaries, which by the way my only other comment is I don't know how we arrived at these planning boundaries decades ago, um at some point in the future we should probably find a different methodology, but we have what we have and it's fine.

[05:06:12] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um the way that I would do it would just allocate the uh this assumes there are other people who agree with me. But the way that I would do it would be to allocate for example Stevens Creek Trail or Permanente Creek Trail, if there's access you know if it if it bifurcates a planning area and there's access from both planning areas, very easy access, you know Sylvan has a very expensive bridge that we built uh to access the Stevens Creek Trail, then I would allocate the section of the trail that runs through or bifurcates those two planning areas to both planning areas.

[05:06:47] Councilmember Chris Clark: So um, and instead of just having it all allocated to either either unallocated or North Bayshore. And I was just looking at the map and I think it wouldn't be, it's not something you can do in five minutes but it's um, and I'm also sure it won't be without controversy, but um, but I I do think I do think that is a great amenity for the for the planning areas that have easy access to it, uh both the Permanente and the Stevens Creek Trail, plus all the money and time and energy that we put into getting licenses for the Hetch Hetchy right-of-way in certain areas over in San Antonio and then in in the Whisman area.

[05:07:24] Councilmember Chris Clark: So I think that I think there should be some out some credit given to those things um because uh otherwise it it just feels it feels strange to me not to have not to allocate those to the areas that have easy access to those amenities. But those are my those are my only comments, otherwise I think this is this is an excellent um step forward.

[05:07:47] Councilmember Chris Clark: Folks have talked about implementation, a big part of this will be the CIPs and prioritizing um the various projects within this which will will end up doing as a council, um but I think overall this is an excellent plan.

[05:08:00] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Clark. Councilmember Showalter.

[05:08:07] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay, yes, um question one. Uh I do think that this is an accurate picture of the the parks, and I would concur with what um uh Councilmember Clark said about allocating the um the space along the trails.

[05:08:22] Councilmember Pat Showalter: I think everybody doesn't, you know you don't go on the trail and go the whole length. You might just take a short walk on it. And um so I think you're you know the people who live adjacent to it are more likely to use that section of the trail.

[05:08:37] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And I guess another question, another thing associated with that is we in the future we'll be able to allocate that nine acres to um uh to the um southern portion of of the this the um town.

[05:08:54] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay, um, does the council agree with the draft vision, goals, and strategies reflect what the city should focus on? I would really like to change the um the the vision a little bit. And really that's in response to um how parks are um I think I think for for parks we should put nature first.

[05:09:23] Councilmember Pat Showalter: That's I mean we go to parks to walk around to play on the equipment but but mostly we go to parks to have an outdoor experience with nature. And we have beautiful parks. We should be very, very proud of that.

[05:09:37] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Parks in fact one of the things I wrote was that um a lot of the community feedback has been positive. Residents love our parks, they love all the events, they love the classes, but we don't want to do this process just so we can pat ourselves on the back. Although patting ourselves on the back is not a bad idea, you've done a really great job.

[05:10:02] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um we did it because we understand how important parks are, we know they are a significant amount of infrastructure that has to be maintained, refreshed and evolved with changing community interests like pickleball. We know that during the pandemic um people came to treasure our parks even more, and we know that increasing population there's always increasing needs.

[05:10:23] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um so I you know I really want to put that message of putting nature first out there. Um and and we've heard that from uh many people. I um I took a a stab at at well in the conversation with the um one of the um PRC members, we took a stab at changing the vision.

[05:10:48] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And um the vision we have the original was is a vibrant inclusive and sustainable community where accessible parks open spaces and recreation opportunities inspire connection well-being and stewardship for generations to come.

[05:11:02] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And we thought it might be a little better if first of all we put our name in it. Mountain View is an inclusive resilient community with where a rich network of parks natural open spaces and recreation opportunities builds community enhances physical and emotional well-being and inspires care for our natural environment.

[05:11:21] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So I would be willing to, I mean maybe we could share this with staff and you could think of it going forward or know what my fellow council members think, but the idea that we should put nature first, and um we should add Mountain View in there. Um so that that's two things I would like to see changed.

[05:11:43] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And then um when we talk about I guess it's strategies or maybe it's actions, in the actions uh on question three, um I really thought this was a great list of actions, but I did come up with a couple more that people might um might want to think about.

[05:12:06] Councilmember Pat Showalter: One is um continue to emphasize learn to swim activities. The city has had a robust swimming program for decades. And that's just as it should be because swimming is very important from a safety point of view, and also it's just wonderful for physical fitness.

[05:12:26] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So I think we should explicitly have that as part of our you know goals and actions, that we want to do that. Um for the there's a lot of pools you know because we have 65% of um Mountain View population is renters in apartments. There's a lot of pools that are um basically not watched very carefully. So it's really important that our children learn to swim. So that's why I I would I would like to have that added. um continue to emphasize learn to swim activities.

[05:13:00] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And then another one um kind of relates to our active transportation. And that's I'd like to teach bike safety and how to ride a bike to um as part of our programs. So those are two actions I'd like to add. And um that's the end of my comments right now. Thank you.

[05:13:18] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Showalter. Councilmember Hicks.

[05:13:23] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. Well I also agree that it's a very good report, I would say more on that but it's 10:30 so I'll go to I won't belabor that and I'll go to my comments.

[05:13:37] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I have so question number one do we agree that the draft plan provides an act accurate picture of Mountain View's parks etc. Um or is anything not clearly shown. I'd say yes it's generally good my big addition is uh what council member Showalter also highlighted and many of our residents have over the via email and in person. Um that we could call out natural parks and park space I think more than I think we could enhance that part of the plan.

[05:14:14] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um and I actually think this is a paradigm shift we need to make. I think that when we were actually I have a neighbor who um lived was a child here in the 1920s and 30s, um he's since passed on, but he told me that uh back then when this was a more rural place and even even decades later, you didn't need green space in parks. You could just go there were orchards all around. But we're not like that anymore and we're not going to be, we're gonna get less and less like that as you could probably tell if you were here for the first item on our agenda, we're becoming a more and more dense place so we really do like...

[05:15:00] Councilmember Alison Hicks: most dense cities that I know of whether it's Golden Gate Park or Central Park, you need a green respite. Not that we'll make one as big as Central Park, but, um, big enough for us I hope. So I think that that has to be infused throughout the plan and we have to think like a more urban place that people need that sort of green retreat.

[05:15:23] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um, I let's see and and so I'm going to put that into some of the action items. I agree with what people have said about allocating the trail, basically the way they said it at the access points and so forth. Um, and you know the other big item is what people have called out, park equity,

[05:15:40] Councilmember Alison Hicks: um, and unfortunately the fees we can charge are being greatly reduced. So that's something that we we have to park equity and how to get it is of course something we have to keep our eyes on. Um, so, uh, so question two, the draft vision, goals and strategies.

[05:16:05] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I heartily agree with what Councilmember Showalter suggested as a change to the vision. Um, one of the things that I saw is that the vision and goals and so forth don't call out, um, our parks as physical spaces. And I think that that that vision does that, so I'm and I also like that Councilmember Showalter used the word word beautiful when she talked about the parks.

[05:16:35] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I mean, I think we have to see them as actual places that are, you know, green with trees with you know more than things like playground structure and trash cans. You know. Um, so okay so that's the vision I would change. Um, I don't know whether that that changes the goals or strategies, um, let's see.

[05:16:58] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Uh, and the rest of my comments are for question number three, which is the action plan. So there are a number of places, a lot of this is putting the um nature-based, some nature-based changes. Um, one so I do think that the resident that said Fairmont Park might make a good dog dog park, it might make a good, maybe you have reasons it shouldn't be, but it might make a good dog park.

[05:17:40] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um, then uh one point I'm going to call them out by number mostly when I found the number, 1.3.1 is expand tree canopy in parks. I think this really needs to be emphasized. I would add more funding to that category if possible and I would work very closely with Canopy. They do a great job, um, and you know the more we work with them the better.

[05:18:08] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Uh, so 1.3.2 says establish enhanced native and pollinator gardening etc. I would say that either needs to be emphasized and expanded or add another category because um survey responses include a lot about serving people of all ages and particularly how adult needs are often given short shrift.

[05:18:24] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And but the surveys also show that adults most often requested more areas for walking, running, and green respite in one's own neighborhood. Um, and not adjacent to as we heard from the the um pickleball in Cuesta Park, not adjacent to chain link fences, noises, etc.

[05:18:42] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I think that that section could be embellished or add a section on that. Um, 3.1.3 said establish dedicated biodiversity expertise. I would expand that to include design for natural parks, not just expertise on biodiversity but also on like I said design for natural parks.

[05:19:24] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um, then 4.1.7 says evaluate and enhance potential establishment of a foundation. I I would say that will take some time, and I'm repeating myself but in the short term we already have a nonprofit and that's Canopy. We used to have a nonprofit called Mountain View Trees, but it was not easy to run one and it was easier to combine with Canopy.

[05:19:54] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So that may still be true. Um, although I understand the foundation and Canopy would have different roles. Um, then uh 7.1.2 and 7.1.3 which are about enhancing parks and updating parks, these sections as they're written they talk a lot about adding unnatural things to parks,

[05:20:12] Councilmember Alison Hicks: signage, I think we talk about signage a little more than we should but anyway, signage, shade structures, recreational infrastructure. I think we need and one of our commenters said this, we need to conceptualize and name natural elements and those should be also 7.4.3 says amenity investment areas.

[05:20:37] Councilmember Alison Hicks: For all those sections I think we need to conceptualize and name natural elements that we would add. Um, trees, vegetation, buffers, natural play structures, tree-lined walking paths, groves of trees, um green meditative spaces, these are all amenities as well and I think these are the things that we're leaving out.

[05:21:06] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um, and I think we need more models of more natural parks. Um, commenter mentioned the Charleston retention basin which is probably my favorite park in the city, and it has no lawn, but all the models that we picture have lawns.

[05:21:26] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I would like to be able to, when people in neighborhoods are designing parks, that they have some different models. Um, and Stevens Creek Trail, Pat you said add a parcourse, I agree add a parcourse there, but um a natural parcourse not a like metal and plastic one. Um, so uh I think those are most of my comments.

[05:21:58] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Oh, and find opportunities for linear parks. Uh, we had a resident that mentioned possibly along Shoreline Boulevard. That's it, thank you very much.

[05:22:13] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Hicks. So Councilmember Ramirez.

[05:22:20] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Mayor. I'm going to belabor the point that Councilmember Hicks did not want to belabor, and that's uh how well staff uh has done in as I shared in the briefing snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. I feel like a few years ago uh the plan was in a very precarious state.

[05:22:45] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, I heard, I think all of us heard some uh constructive criticism from members of our community, um, but I think in part because of um excellent uh guidance uh from uh from the PRC and from the community, um, and staff's uh as a member of the public had shared um willingness and interest to to dive in and and take charge of this,

[05:23:08] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: it's landed in a very good place. And I agree with Councilmember McAlister, which is something I don't often do, um, that uh this is one of the best plans that that I've ever uh read through. And I think it serves as a very, as a standard for for future work of the city and a very high bar, so I hope other departments are listening.

[05:23:25] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, but it's uh, I'm going to be a little bit more uh high-level. I think there's um a lot of uh very important and and useful feedback from both the community and from members of the council. Um, I want to be careful uh not to get lost in the sterile quantification of parks.

[05:23:45] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I think for my perspective whether the number attached to my planning area is one or seven, it really doesn't make a difference in practice. Do I have access to the park in my neighborhood? Is there a park in my neighborhood? I think um there is certainly value in uh, and I think the, as you had explained to me, uh the exercise that you've done in um in the quantification is is not uh it's not a waste of time.

[05:24:16] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: There's a lot of like the work that you've done to, you know, append whatever the GIS information is to every asset in every park means that it's easier to conduct maintenance right and to keep track of of what's there and what needs to be updated. So that's that's useful stuff.

[05:24:41] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, but I I you know I work for a city that pretends to be data-driven, right? And then makes decisions that are completely uh unrelated to what's what the data actually would inform the city to do. So I'm I'm, that's important and I don't want to diminish it,

[05:25:04] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: but I also feel like um there's uh a lot of value in in just listening to what the community has shared with us. And and I think many of the comments from my colleagues uh speak to that. Um, so I did have one question.

[05:25:23] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um there, I think we got several uh uh several members of the community had shared about uh further elevating the biodiversity elements that tie into the biodiversity strategy which I think, sorry, biodiversity plan, which is already very strong in the plan.

[05:25:48] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, but is there, is there value in having almost a like a like a new goal that is explicitly related to the implementation of the biodiversity strategy and also um elevating or enhancing some of the the natural, unpaved, unprogrammed elements of parks and open space that uh Councilmember Hicks and other members of the Council have shared. Is that a trivial task? Is that non-trivial? I'd love to get your sense of whether that's a good idea.

[05:25:48] City Staff: Thank you for the question. Um, so I do want to point out that strategy 1.3 we did update in this version to incorporate stronger language to biodiversity. This is also um an area that we expanded the number of actions, so there are five actions associated with biodiversity just in that strategy alone.

[05:26:09] City Staff: Um, if the council wishes to elevate this to a fifth goal, I would propose elevating all of strategy 1.3 to being a goal and then we'll have to um I guess then update a strategy with it. Um, or just update a goal. So I think it can be done, um, and that could be something we can look at in the revision.

[05:26:32] City Staff: And I echo uh what Christine has said. Um, however I think there I'm trying not to put the cart before the horse if you will. Um, I think um once the community sees and also council sees the the biodiversity urban forest plan, maybe you will see more of that that connection um naturally compared to trying to

[05:26:58] City Staff: because this one's coming first is there a push to try to put more of that language into this because of the timing sequence. If we were going with the biodiversity plan first, would there be more of a request to put more of some of these elements in, I don't know. Um, just trying to put things into perspective.

[05:27:17] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: That's helpful, I think that's um that's uh important for us to consider too. I I don't have uh I'm not going to suggest that we take a straw poll, I just wanted to get staff's take on um the value of of a recommendation like that.

[05:27:43] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, for the questions, um, question one is hard because I I feel like I'm not in a position to independently corroborate the work that you've done. I I trust you, I I know that you've done a lot of great work to incorporate community feedback, um, and I I don't know if I have any any value add in in responding to question one.

[05:28:09] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Uh, question two I I'm supportive of the staff recommendations. Um, for question three, the only thing uh I'd love to uh suggest that we um explicitly include and this um also is something we talked about in the briefing so if staff has had a chance to think about it and has some recommendations I'm very interested in in how you'd want to um include this.

[05:28:36] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: But we have uh in I think you had suggested action 4.1.2 which is utilize the park impact fee nexus study process to evaluate and update chapter 41 uh of the city code including new or revised parkland dedication requirements uh and fee structures.

[05:28:58] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: One of the things I've been interested in is ensuring that um development standards for for new, well with the nexus study both commercial and residential development, um, facilitates the dedication of parkland and facilitates uh to the extent you know they are desirable uh POPOS.

[05:29:15] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Uh, so I I would be interested in learning more about how CSD and CDD collaborate uh during private development review uh, and whether there is an opportunity for CSD to um provide some input in updated development standards uh to make sure that you know we we have standards that actually help achieve the goals that are in the parks and recreation strategic plan.

[05:29:32] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, so I'm not suggesting that we um be prescriptive in what those development standards are, but we're looking at R3 uh next month, um we provided a lot of guidance today on a TOD um alternative plan, uh development center and and we also have the objective design standards.

[05:29:58] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: There's a lot of work that's going to be done in this and it also feels like a a good opportunity for uh for community services uh department staff to to work with CDD and say you know if you're thinking about you know this particular development standard, here's something you should know.

[05:30:10] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Something that we've heard about in working with uh with developers. Uh, so I you know love your your take or your feedback on that. And similarly I think it's also more implicit than explicit but uh uh including standards for for POPOS and thinking about um ways to to streamline that process.

[05:30:30] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: There's certainly value in in in-lieu fees, but in-lieu fees are are tough um because they uh um will uh lose purchasing power fairly rapidly. Uh so I think where we can get dedicated land ideally, right that would be I think that's that's the hardest thing to get,

[05:30:50] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: um anything that we can do to facilitate that including through um uh updates to development standards. And then um having greater clarity or or guidance for for POPOS uh when we would want a POPO instead of a you know a city-owned public park,

[05:31:05] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: um those are the kinds of things that I feel like could go into 4.1.2 but uh you know would would defer to staff on whether there's a different way to to include some of those considerations. Thank you.

[05:31:21] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Ramirez. Now Councilmember Kamei.

[05:31:26] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Um, well I'm grateful to go after Councilmember Ramirez because I had written some notes that will be similar. But first and foremost I just want to thank staff. Um, I know that this was just a journey, and we're here, um, and it's just I I just want to say thank you and thank you to our community who stuck with us um through this uh process.

[05:31:51] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: But I think what we're reviewing tonight is such a better plan and product and 10-year roadmap of what we'll be able to do. Um, and I you know like like anything there's room for improvement and we heard from some of the members of our of the public tonight on what we can do, but we know that this is kind of like iterative work. Um, and so I'm just really grateful.

[05:32:15] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And then something that I just want to reflect on um with colleagues is, you know in the city of Mountain View our parks and rec fall under community services. And I think that's so fitting um because a lot of cities like the one that our our colleague works for it's a it is just kind of parks and rec, um, but it's so much more than that.

[05:32:41] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And what we're seeing too is a plan that reflects community services and just how this department is so interwoven throughout um uh every element of our city. And that's one of the things that I had noted was just this plan really highlights cross-departmental work. And I think there there um I don't know if it's like should be added, but I just want you know just a comment which is

[05:33:03] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I think that cross-departmental work allows Council to think about maybe as the CIPs come forward or as we're talking about work plan, how we can help support and trying to maybe pull the thread of okay which department might be lead and then which department helps um support uh especially when we're talking about things like land use decisions so.

[05:33:29] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um, but for question one on the um the plan um I think staff has done everything that they um were able to do to try to make sure that it was as comprehensive as possible and I just want to you know say thanks again for that. Um, and if anything is missing or not clearly shown, I know a resident will email us after this meeting and let us know. So I feel like we are headed in the right direction um might be how to answer question number one.

[05:33:59] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And then for two on the vision, goals, and strategies, just appreciate the comments from my colleagues especially the additions from um Councilmember Showalter on um on how we might be able to do that. And then um for the any actions um move down, moved up on the timeline, I think there's just some things that I wanted to to highlight.

[05:34:27] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um, I think that what I appreciate about the uh plan is it is honest about where and about the assessment of where we are are at in our community. And um I think that it's great in terms of transparency to say we're going to share those performance metrics. I would I know staff is currently working on what that might look like, is it a website or does it live on the community services um page,

[05:34:56] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I would just say when we just when it's decided on how we're going to be sharing these performance metrics, if we can make sure that we inform our community. Um, so that could be highlighting it in The View or you know, gonna get in trouble for saying this, a citywide notification or something just so for the community to know. I think that this has shown to be of the level of interest that putting it out there would be greatly appreciated.

[05:35:28] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And then as we're doing so, working closely with our um multi um cultural engagement program to make sure we're doing that in other languages and also maybe trying to double tap it in our Spanish Civic Leadership Academy, our Mandarin um Civic Leadership Academy for people to to know, um, and they can be able to track work.

[05:35:51] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I think um when we were talking about some of the things that the city can work on, um programming came up. And so further exploration on how we might partner with the nonprofits in our area as like I would say existing resources. So for example at the senior center we have our Avenidas Rose Kleiner Center,

[05:36:10] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I'm not sure how much collaboration we're doing in terms of programming um together, but maybe that could be a way for us to mutually share resources without it being a resource drain, if that if that makes sense. Um, and so that's just kind of one idea, but I know um continuing to expand like our programming for youth and teens is something um that that we can work on and I feel excited that we have YAC and they've come up with so many great ideas

[05:36:40] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: and maybe being able to tap into YAC on what other programming we can we can do. Um, we know that they've been leading our um Youth Mental um Health Summit for the last four years now, five years? Five years. Um, and that came out of our youth, so if they want to do anything else we can ask them.

[05:37:02] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um, as we're talking about doing improvements on our parks, I think one of the and an apology if I in the very uh dense document missed it, but just making sure we're highlighting accessibility. I think one of the wonderful things that was highlighted for a Magical Bridge is just all abilities, all ages, and so we're thinking when we're thinking about accessibility, having that lens for all of the improvements that we have going forward.

[05:37:30] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um, and I think la one of the other things is how we might balance uh this ambitious plan to gather funds that are very scarce resources is something the the city and the council are going to need to be um increasingly creative about. And so um I just wrote like POPA in my notes, and I think uh Councilmember Ramirez highlighted it.

[05:38:05] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I you know I think with our inability to gather fees as much as we have in the past and having a POPA option, finding ways, and I know that it was called out in the plan on making, if it's a POPA not necessarily making it feel, I think right now a lot of our POPAs feel like POPAs, but finding ways to make them feel as much as possible as a I don't know, lack of better word, like a regular city park.

[05:38:35] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And I know that there was language in the document that talked about that. um, and really if there's any carrots we can use I think would be um gr great, um, as we're talking about um more accessibility. Um, and appreciate Councilmember McAlister's comments on the use of our of our paths and you know um being able to to find a way to calculate that. But that's a challenge for for staff that they will continue to try to mount.

[05:39:08] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um, and I think um I'm trying to I have a note here that I'm trying to recall. Um, I think one of the things too in the plan is I think highlighting what the city is able to do, but also maybe how we can use our community members, our nonprofit partners, our our private sector partners on how they're part of the solution as well, um, is something that I think we can think about more um with with the plan.

[05:39:46] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I think uh everything we're not going to achieve these ambitious goals ourselves and so um I think making sure that it's not just all on the city, um, but a a creative and collaborative partnership. So thanks Mayor.

[05:40:03] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember Kamei. Now we have Councilmember McAlister.

[05:40:09] Councilmember John McAlister: Uh Councilmember Ramirez, we do agree on some other stuff, so I'll just we'll get there. But I first have to do a shout-out to our Assistant City Manager Audrey, to John Marchant, to Christine, to Tim, to Colin. I mean that is collaborative work. I mean that is uh, I understand we had some consultants but that you guys took the bull by the horns and really uh really went on it and so that is a great example of what can be done if we let you alone.

[05:40:42] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. Um, uh, but I that I we just have to shout it's really nice. And and I wanted to say now it's they put all this work to and Lucas and former Mayor Ellen both mentioned financing. And this is where Council has to step up and decide what they want to do about financing or getting these things. And you guys meant POPA, you know private property public access.

[05:41:52] Councilmember John McAlister: Now, if uh Chris and Pat, you may remember when Sobrato was putting their property up in North Bayshore we were having a discussion and they came in and they wanted as much private property to be used as their park dedication fee. And then we went through a process of trying to figure out yada yada yada and so we came to a point, well maybe we might want to review that and say no we really don't want your you're not going to get credit for doing this landscaping,

[05:42:22] Councilmember John McAlister: we need the city, we need that money to be put towards the whole city and start looking at that as a revenue source to get us to where we need to get. And that's important. Also when we're looking at our land, uh fees and so forth, I know a lot of you wanted to reduce fees to get more housing, but this is a need that we if we're serious about it we need to start looking at that and say okay we want to build housing but we really need the parks to accommodate all this growth.

[05:43:32] Councilmember John McAlister: And so we need to look at that when something comes along and it says I know the state says well you you have to reduce our fees. How the council can figure out how to find other avenues to get those fees to help accomplish this goal which is something somebody people really love in Mountain View.

[05:43:50] Councilmember John McAlister: Um, to Pat's thing about the vision, you get to play with AI a little bit, this is the second time I've done it, and you throw in the uh adverbs and adjectives and all of a sudden it comes out you know, and go. But I mean there's, to your point is, yeah there's a lot that we could do to you know, no offense to you guys, to spice it up. And so it was really nice.

[05:44:12] Councilmember John McAlister: But um, you know I can't uh everything that everybody says this is a we've had a tough early start but this is a great way to finish the day on a great report. I know we're not done yet, and Councilmember Ramirez and I are upset that we couldn't vote for the 10 o'clock closing, uh but we went right past it. Uh, but this is a this is a really great document and you know it's a great start and I praise you for all whatever it's worth and it's good.

[05:45:22] Councilmember John McAlister: I see our Public Works Director here, and they're going to work great together because she has a vision, she's energetic, she likes to pour into this, and I know great things are going to come out of that collaboration. And where the third wheel is that you might say is to make sure that it gets funded and all that.

[05:45:39] Councilmember John McAlister: And when Lucas, uh former Councilmember Ramirez and former Kamei and former Hicks, they go I was part of this. My name's on it and you'll be proud of this project. So I'll leave with that note but thank you guys for everything.

[05:45:55] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you Councilmember McAlister. I would like to point out that you don't have to vote past 10 because you only do that when there's a new item. Hahaha. Alright, we're going to go back to Councilmember Showalter.

[05:46:50] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes, all these wonderful things that people brought up jogged another thing that I wrote down several places in the um in the uh draft plan and that was the concept of putting together um friends of various parks groups that could help with maybe planting flowers or helping to plan or whatever.

[05:47:13] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And and I think we could we could help do this maybe through the neighborhoods um program. So just just the idea of putting together or allowing um friends of various parks to...

[05:47:32] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Alright, um bringing it back to me. Um, I'm writing this down. Um okay. Uh for the first question, I generally agree that the the the draft plan provides an accurate picture of Mountain View's parks trails and open spaces. I agree with um finding ways to allocate trails so we get credit for that.

[05:48:39] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um, I kind of view trails as linear parks. Um, I re I remember like um it was a development proposal before my time here on council, but I was watching council and they're like we're doing our parks by having a linear park and I kind of had an eyebrow raise, but I will take credit for I will I will I will get those credits uh so that we can get closer and inch closer to that that uh three acre per thousand as we can.

[05:49:10] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um, for question number two, um the draft vision goals strategies I agree with some of my colleagues before me of elevating nature, um even though I am, that nature is not something that I um am generally associated with. (laughs)

[05:50:10] Councilmember Emily Ramos: So um, uh however I I actually do support the idea of ev elevating essentially um, you gave the idea of 1.3 of elevating it to an actual goal. Um, I kind of thought that like looking at the the the strategies and the different uh categories of them, I would have actually just taken number three out of the parks trails and open space and just move that up.

[05:50:38] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Because I an and I know that we do have a separate biodiversity but I feel like actually elevating it would make a better connector point. Um, and I really don't want another tree rebellion. Um so uh uh there's that.

[05:50:54] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I agree with uh Councilmember Kamei's uh the make use of partnerships, we like, the YAC is is wonderful and um things like our our Civic Leadership Academies and how they have these wonderful events including Lunar New Year coming up, um, and the the work that they do we really want to leverage our community.

[05:51:58] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I really do like the idea of Councilmember Showalter's the friends of insert neighborhood park um idea and and having that actually look through with CNC.

[05:52:10] Councilmember Emily Ramos: It does actually remind me of how in the CNC we were looking at how we define neighborhoods and I was looking at how we define these planning areas and it does not make that much sense to me to begin with, so I don't know if if it's just if it's a major lift, but just something to kind of think through and how we divide our city is is really kind of odd.

[05:52:30] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I used to live in uh Shoreline West. And I actually viewed Rengstorff as my neighborhood park kind of thing. Like there's Mariposa and then you could walk past that new pocket park that's going to be in the Tillery and then you have Castro, I mean I'd rather walk to Rengstorff than to Castro Park. Um, so uh like it's really weird how we define that. And then you have like Thompson which is real pretty much Monta Loma. And like why are they their own area? I don't understand why.

[05:53:42] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um, so like something to kind of think about, uh as we view our city strategically and how we we divide up, not not that I want to divide our city, but you you know what I mean, how we divide, especially if we're looking at things like equitable park space. When it's divided up really oddly, how does how does that really actually define um that part.

[05:54:08] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um, I I'm trying to write all the oh, and then um, yes I also agree with um looking into how we can take take advantages of POPAs um more. Um, I know we had this conversation when I had my briefing with you if I could get away with getting more land by having like multi um multi-level um recreational facilities, I totally would but I was told that that doesn't fly.

[05:55:20] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I mean I would love to get our park planned by having freakin' pickleball towers, but I see that that's not gonna that's not gonna fly. Um, so I guess so yes one, yes two, but I I would love to elevate um the biodiversity language to its own goal. And um other than question three generally there I agree with most of my col actually I I don't see anything I would oppose any of the um things that my colleagues have put in.

[05:55:57] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I don't know if you, I I'm hoping that you you kept track of what we need to straw poll on so we get clearer things. And I think we are ready for said straw polling um if necessary. So if you can get started with that.

[05:56:59] Community Services Director John Marchant: Alright, we're gonna tag team here we haven't debriefed amongst ourselves so we're going to help each other out.

[05:57:07] Community Services Director John Marchant: Um, I think there re some, there was some clear consensus, one looking at the trail uh trail acres by planning area. We heard that from the majority of you.

[05:57:18] Community Services Director John Marchant: Um, and then going to Councilmember Showalter's looking at the vision if you'll send us what you put together, sounded like there was uh enough consensus to look at that. Um which incorporated the u utilization of the city name with within such.

[05:57:36] Community Services Director John Marchant: I think where I would like uh consensus or clarity on from the council is the elevation of a biodiversity goal. I believe I heard uh two um council members reference that, um and want to know if that is something um others are interested in.

[05:58:36] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I would be interested in that especially if we could combine it with what so many residents said about elevating natural parks, um which I think is overlapping but slightly different than biodiversity, um that's how I and then I would agree with it.

[05:58:58] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Alright, shall we do a straw poll and let's clarify elevating, okay, let's um, elevating uh biodiversity and natural parks as a separated goal. Um, Councilmember McAlister, do you have any comments on this possible straw poll?

[05:59:18] Councilmember John McAlister: I just want to make a comment on it. Uh, I'm going to vote no on it because we don't have a plan. So it's a little hard to say incorporate it, so once we get a plan yeah I'm all for it, but to do something early is uh I'll just say no on that, that's why.

[06:00:00] Councilmember Emily Ramos: iteration.

[06:00:01] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Okay. Sounds great.

[06:00:03] Councilmember Emily Ramos: With that, I think I think we're good. Whoo. All right. Um, uh, there there's nothing else that we have. So, okay, mayor to provide or ask staff for a summary of majority council. Okay, we're good. We're good.

[06:00:20] Councilmember Emily Ramos: So that closes out our item for our Parks and Rec Strategic Plan Draft Review. Thank you so much, staff. Um, we are now on to our next item, Council, Staff and Committee Reports.

7. COUNCIL, STAFF/COMMITTEE REPORTS

[06:00:35] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Any council, staff and committee reports? Uh, Councilmember Showalter.

[06:00:42] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yes, there was um a BAWSCA meeting last week. And um, for the first time in 25 years, you might have seen this in the newspaper, the um the drought map for California doesn't show any areas of drought. This is um really quite something.

[06:01:00] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um, it's uh, it follows really three wet years. And previous to that we had 12 dry years. So there's a lot of variation. Um, we had a long discussion on the Water Demand Study.

[06:01:14] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And this uh, this is formally designed to provide all the member contractors with the information that they need for um for our water management demand, I mean our ur- urban water management plans, which we're required to um submit to DWR.

[06:01:34] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And um the nature of the urban water management plans is basically for each city to say, if we build out to the maximum that's allowed in our zoning, will we have enough water for it. And so that's, you know, that's a very different view than um is that a realistic amount of our water demand.

[06:01:58] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So there was a lot of discussion about kind of both of those viewpoints and um where BAWSCA should be planning. Because if you plan for the most possible you could ever use, you obviously have to have more water, you have to have more um uh sources and of supplies, all of those things.

[06:02:26] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So it's um it's a philosophical argument that we will continue to wrestle with. If anybody wants to talk to me about it, I would be glad to talk about it. Um, also, we had a Silicon Valley Clean Energy meeting. It was um, our January meeting was really our organizational meeting.

[06:02:44] Councilmember Pat Showalter: So we voted Larry Klein to be our chair and Sally Meadows to be our vice chair. We also appointed the executive committee, and um we met on Friday and I was elected the chair of the executive committee. So um that should be fun.

[06:02:59] Councilmember John McAlister: Does that come with a pay raise?

[06:03:01] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, it comes with a pay raise. Right. Another another sandwich.

[06:03:05] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um, and um, we um, I I wanted to announce to everybody that on February 20th we're having an event, you probably got a a notice from the the clerk, about the opening of the um Pond A2W project.

[06:03:25] Councilmember Pat Showalter: And the thing that I think we're we're all going to have um the most fun with is that it includes a 1.2 mile extension of the Stevens Creek Trail into the bay. So that means that my go-to exercise, which has been riding down to the end of the Stevens Creek Trail and back, is about to get 2.4 miles longer.

[06:03:51] Councilmember Pat Showalter: But that's pretty cool. So anyway, so I hope as many of you as possible can make it. Yeah, that's uh, um, it'll be at 10:00 a.m. Thank you.

[06:04:02] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you, Councilmember Showalter. Councilmember McAlister.

[06:04:06] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, as uh a newly appointed member of the California League of Cities Transportation Committee, we had a committee meeting up in Sacramento. I attended that. That was uh, we were getting updates on various bills, how as it relates to transportation and funding. And so that was a a great, you know, get to see some people.

[06:04:26] Councilmember John McAlister: I actually came across the mayor, we were sitting in the thing, so we would go 'hi'. Unfortunately, we didn't get to see the city manager. And our former mayor, Ellen Kamei, hear their great speech on how to work together. But it was nice to meet with other city uh city officials to say what their transportation needs are.

[06:04:44] Councilmember John McAlister: And the big thing that really came out of it was e-bikes. Everybody was talking about how do we control e-bikes? How do we get a handle on it? They are talking about people get, you know, the accidents that are all occurring, and what's a legal bike, what's not, helmets and so forth.

[06:05:00] Councilmember John McAlister: So, I know uh the CTC has been talked about it, and uh they actually the City Leagues has a uh webinar, they had a a webinar on it. And so they brought in a lot of people, so, uh, we'll keep you tuned on that, because it's going to come here. I mean, just yesterday I thought I was going to get run over by a uh e-bike on Stevens Creek Trail.

[06:05:19] Councilmember John McAlister: So, but uh, so that was nice to hear other people and they're working to get uh collaborations of best practices and so somewhere along the line when if we get to the point where we're going to talk about it, there's a lot of cities that have already gone through the practice and will help us uh help fine tune our our policy. Thank you.

[06:05:38] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Thank you, Councilmember McAlister. Councilmember Kamei.

[06:05:42] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Um, so as uh Councilmember McAlister mentioned, City Manager McCarthy and I got to participate in the annual uh League of California Cities Mayors and, I think it's new council members, academy last week.

[06:05:59] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Uh, where we spoke about developing an effective city council and city manager team, the key to good governance and city success. Um, and I also wanted to put forward an item 7. Typically an item 8, but now tonight is an item 7.

[06:06:17] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So I don't know if I should wait until people are done with their reports and then I can circle back to myself, Mayor. If you want to do that, I don't know if you have a report, just a report.

[06:06:24] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I'm I'm actually okay, would you just...

[06:06:26] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay, great. Okay. All right. Well, I'll put forward an item 7. Um, so I just um wanted to seek uh urge my colleagues' support. Um, you know, in in light of recent events and I think what's coming in in two weeks, which is a Super Bowl,

[06:06:47] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: members of our community have, I think, asked probably all of us um what we're doing in terms of um safety protocols. And I think it's a opportunity for us to once again reaffirm being a community for all. And so I would ask for um two items.

[06:07:06] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um, one, add information on our website, we have um our our Fan Fest page, but it would be a really great opportunity for us to put on safety protocols and how we're we're protecting our community um and and different resources.

[06:07:24] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I think it'd also be an opportunity, the second item, for an off-agenda memo for our to council on what's being done to support our community. I know that our police chief is very much in touch with many of our um community partners, our nonprofit groups, but um not everyone is connected to those organizations or those groups.

[06:07:47] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And so I think it would be um really great for us to have that information so that we might be able to pass it on and make sure that we're also have that information to pass on in other languages. I know that that there might be a you know quite a bit of focus on those um who may be um undocumented or immigrants,

[06:08:05] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: but we also have those who are green card holders um here on H1B visas, and so it'd be I think everyone would probably be interested in those resources. So ask if uh colleagues would be supportive of that as an item 7 tonight. Thank you.

[06:08:23] Councilmember Emily Ramos: So there's two asks.

[06:08:26] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Oh, go... okay. Um, so one ask is to update the Fan Fest page um to include information and resources as um this is a a big event that's coming to our general area.

[06:08:44] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um, and there has been seen as an increase in um activity uh that many people have found concerning uh in our immigrant communities. And so to have to provide some information on our our Fan Fest page.

[06:08:58] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And then also to another another vote, we're going to do two, um on an off-agenda memo um to see what our city is doing in response to some federal actions relating to immigration and their agencies relating to that.

[06:09:14] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So we'll go with the first uh vote, um which is um updating of the Fan Fest page. All in favor?

[06:09:23] Councilmember Emily Ramos: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven. Seven, whoo. Um, that is unanimous. All right. And then we have the second one, which is the off-agenda memo. Um, all in favor, please raise your hand.

[06:09:37] Councilmember Emily Ramos: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven. Great. Congratulations, Councilmember Kamei. Unanimous on both counts. Um, next we have Councilmember Hicks.

[06:09:50] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So, as you all may remember, we reconstituted our Senior Advisory Committee. And I'm also the liaison to Avenidas that serves our senior community. Um, I have a Nirvana Nwokedu who is on the Senior Advisory Committee and I have taken up visiting the various locations of Avenidas.

[06:10:18] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um, and so we recently visited the Chinese Community Center, really worth a visit in my opinion, I don't know how many people may have ever gone, I had never gone before. It's an extremely active community center, it's at the the Cubberley in Palo Alto.

[06:10:36] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um, but it gets participants as far, coming from as far as Fresno and San Francisco once a week. Fresno is farther than San Francisco. And also virtually from places like um London and so forth. Um, because it it offers a lot of very rare senior programs in uh Cantonese and Mandarin.

[06:11:00] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And um very active, with an art show and um and uh singing and language, and um yeah, they would they would welcome any visitors.

[06:11:15] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Wonderful. Um, I have some updates. I also went to Sacramento for, I am on a Cal Cities policy committee, I am on the Governance, Transparency and Labor Relations Committee.

[06:11:30] Councilmember Emily Ramos: We got some reports on the AI coalition, um and uh a lot of discussion about civility and safety issues for elected officials. Um, I'm very happy we're in Mountain View because we don't have a lot of those issues.

[06:11:43] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um, they also went over some of the changes with the Brown Act, and and more advocacy relating to that to make things um manageable for cities as the state uh does a lot of changes to the Brown Act, um and some cities are are struggling adjusting to those changes.

[06:12:02] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um, I also went to the ABAG meeting, um, on the 15th. I was, I am the alternate in ABAG. Um, and they went over, um, mostly the the only action item that they had that day was um selecting the members for the advisory board. Um, and so that was that was nice.

[06:12:28] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um, I did the Cities Association meeting, the um selection committee, which is usually sat on by mayors. Um, so the new, we have two new ABAG uh representatives, uh Rob Moore from um Los Gatos, and um Dan Furtado from uh Campbell.

[06:12:51] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um, and congratulations to me and Councilmember Clark, we are both alternates now to the ABAG. Um, and uh Councilmember Clark also became an alternate for, I don't I don't even remember.

[06:13:03] Councilmember Chris Clark: SVRIA.

[06:13:04] Councilmember Emily Ramos: SVRIA. Um, and also they also voted on um the Air Quality District uh rep for the Cities Association and that went to Councilmember Linda Sell from uh Sunnyvale.

[06:13:21] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I I can't recall the exact name of it, I just remember the initials pretty much spell out 'BAD'. Um, it's like B A A Q M D. I I...

[06:13:30] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

[06:13:33] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Yeah, Bay Area Air District. They drop the Q.

8. ADJOURNMENT

[06:13:41] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Um, and so uh with that, we move on to adjournment. Tonight we are adjourning the meeting in honor of city employee Leon Rosario, who passed away in December 2025. Leon worked for the city for nearly 17 years, starting in Community Services as an hourly laborer,

[06:14:00] Councilmember Emily Ramos: eventually rising to the position of a Post-Closure Environmental Systems Specialist in the Public Works Department. Leon cared deeply about the Mountain View community. Over the last few years, he spearheaded efforts with students at Alta Vista High School in Mountain View to introduce them to careers in public works

[06:14:20] Councilmember Emily Ramos: through presentations, career fairs, and conducting mock interviews. He shared his background and job responsibilities with students and offered advice on how they can succeed in a similar career path. Leon also worked tirelessly for days and weeks in a row to make repairs at the closed landfill during emergency situations.

[06:14:41] Councilmember Emily Ramos: He even holds the wastewater section's record for the most sewer pipe repairs made in one day. He was a wonderful coworker, motivated in everything he did, always willing to barbecue at city events, and share his pride and knowledge about the landfill.

[06:14:59] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Leon will be remembered for his infectious smile, sense of humor, generosity, strong work ethic, and dedication to his family, job, and the city organization. Our thoughts are with his family and loved ones.

[06:15:12] Councilmember Emily Ramos: I'll also note that uh we um uh some of us went to his uh many of our city staff went to his uh memorial service this past weekend, including uh Councilmember Kamei and uh the city manager. Um, so he will be dearly missed.

[06:15:30] Councilmember Emily Ramos: Our next council meeting will be held on February 10th, 2026. This meeting is adjourned at 2333, and that means uh 11:33. And we are adjourned.

• ← Previous
• Next →