Posted on the City web site here:
Council wrestles with 100 Moffett Blvd. redevelopment proposal's implications for traffic and mobility
Council was asked to decide, on June 18, whether the southern terminus of
Stierlin Road should continue to feed into an onramp to Central
Expressway, or whether the onramp should be closed. Closure would enable
a really nice cycletrack and pedestrian path between Central and Stierlin
to be built, heading through the new apartment development that Prometheus hopes to have approved in the fall. Council decided to close the onramp, citing the need to take advantage of this unparalleled opportunity to
build the first segment of a safe, convenient "active transportation" link
from downtown to points north, including North Bayshore.
Many residents in the blocks northwest of Central and Moffett opposed the
onramp closure, citing its convenience given the current backup on
southbound Moffett during peak times. Others objected to drivers'
speeding down narrow neighborhood streets to get to the onramp, sometimes making it impossible for residents to get out of their driveways.
To expedite access to westbound Central if the onramp were closed, a proposal had landed on the table, and gained Staff's approval, to add a dedicated right-turn lane to southbound Moffett as it approaches Central Expressway, lessening the number of cars backed up there. However, most members of the public (and then Council) supported this option even if the onramp were left open. There was no study of the possibility of not widening Moffett but simply turning the current westmost lane into a dedicated right-turn lane, an alternative that members of MVCSP thought would also accomplish traffic-taming goals.
Concerns about long-standing issues of pedestrian and bicycle safety at
that intersection, magnified by the planned addition of a dedicated
right-turn lane, convinced a majority of Councilmembers that the details
of intersection design should be examined by B/PAC as soon as possible.
At the April 2nd City Council Study Session, they will be discussing the Item 4.2 - 100 Moffett Boulevard Residential Development Project (Item 4.2, see http://laserfiche.mountainview.gov/WebLink/Browse.aspx?startid=35382&&dbid=0 and Calendar for more details. Individual CSP members (not speaking for CSP as a whole, however), might refer to our letter to the City on this project, which you can see below for details we believe Council should consider during their deliberations.
SHORELINE REGIONAL PARK COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION STUDY
MARCH 26, 2013 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
The Mountain View City Council will finalize the recommended transportation strategies and follow up actions identified in the Shoreline Regional Park Community Transportation Study that should be pursued through the North Bayshore Precise Plan process and Fiscal Year 2013-14 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) on:
Tuesday, March 26, 2013—4:30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers—500 Castro Street, Second Floor
Members of the public will have an opportunity to address the City Council regarding the Shoreline Regional Park Community Transportation Study at this meeting.
The report will be available on Friday, March 22, 2013 after 4:30 p.m. on the <http://laserfiche.mountainview.gov/Weblink/Browse.aspx?startid=35382&dbid=0>City's website, in the Public Works Department at 500 Castro Street, and at the Mountain View Public Library at 585 Franklin Street.
Contact the Public Works Department at (650) 903-6311 for additional information.
The City Council had a second study session, on 2/26/13, on proposed office towers (and parking structures) at 700 E. Middlefield. There will probably be a third. Council comments included the following:
"Are we doing piecemeal projects?" (Staff: "Until we have a Precise Plan for the area.")
"What is the implication for our RHNA numbers?"
"What about using the Light Rail, instead of shuttles, to get employees to the downtown station?"
"Shouldn't we be more proactive about improving transportation for people in the North Whisman area, rather than waiting for a crisis? There are a lot of people working there now!"
"This proposal is an old-style office park with much bigger buildings. LEED Platinum has nothing to do with neighborhood structure. Where are there enticements to take the train, with these overwhelming views of the freeway? There should be viewable local services, a larger trip reduction requirement tied to a greater absolute increase in trips, and reduced parking."
"These buildings are not accessible by foot; they're fronted by an onramp."
"Even people living nearby will have to drive there. This is not transit-oriented, just tall buildings visible from a freeway."
"There should be a net benefit for the community. Need a big trip reduction, ways not to need parking. Community benefits need not be proportional to the size of the project: in the current environment, it's going to take a lot more from the developer. The buildings need to be reoriented--the open space planned is visible only to people in the buildings."
"The open space should be visible and available to the public."
"Unfortunately developer financing is tied to the amount of parking."
"Why not reduce the square footage? Do we really need to have 1.0 FAR?"
"An EIR requiring 'overriding considerations' should lead to mitigation fees due."
"There could be ZIP cars there for employees to use during the day."
"TDM should be designed to produce a 25-30% trip reduction."
"We need to discuss all this, not just have each Councilmember provide comments to Staff."