On December 11, a 4-3 majority (Kasperzak, Siegel, Bryant, and Macias voting no) of the Mountain View City Council rejected the staff wording of potential housing impact fee resolutions, which was based on a majority consensus during previous Council deliberations.

A second motion passed 4-3 (Means, Inks, Abe-Koga, Macias voting yes).

As approved by Council, starting February 9, 2013, commercial "Office/High Tech" developers will be assessed $10/square foot, and there will be no increase for "Retail/Entertainment" and "Hotel" types of non-residential development (it was proposed to be a 2.5x increase in fees for everyone, meaning $15/square foot for offices).

There had been previous widespread agreement that non-residential development is the main driver of the need for affordable housing for lower-wage workers, which has now reached crisis proportions in Mountain View. Further development allowed under the new General Plan will exacerbate this.

Also starting February 9, 2013, rental-housing developers (who would be required to provide 10% BMR units under our 1999 BMR ordinance) will also be assessed $10/square foot, equivalent to less than 5% BMR units, and not an incentive for them to provide "units, not fees".

The next Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG) Housing Action Coalition (HAC) meeting features a developer discussing how he finances mixed-use developments. Could be very interesting for CSP members, as financing relates to parking, affordable homes, etc.

For more details, see "SVLG/HAC: Coping with Rejection in Development Finance" in the Calendar under December 11th at 11am.

3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION CANDIDATE
INTERVIEWS
Interview five candidates for the Environmental Planning Commission.

Details on City web site:
http://laserfiche.mountainview.gov/WebLink/Browse.aspx?startid=35382&&dbid=0

At the November 13th Council meeting, it was decided to continue the rental-housing impact fee discussion to December 11th, so both commerical and rental-housing development sources could be considered at the same time.

Suggested talking points: CSP members could let councilmembers know that the rental housing fee should be at least equalivalent to 4.6%, as this is the cost to the developer to build 10% of the units of the project on site as Below Market Rate (BMR) housing affordable to those at 65% Area Median Income (AMI).

An ordinance we’ve had for many years specifies 10% BMR units in rental housing developments. If a fee equivalent to less than 4.6% is passed, it will not encourage developers to "build on-site affordable units" in their developments rather than paying the fee, aside from being equivalent to less than 10% BMR units.

If the commercial linkage fee passes (which is anticipated), these fees could be used to bring the rents of the BMR's down to a 50% level, for example, which is where the greatest need is.

Note: This is one of several agenda items.  This item will be covered sometime between 6:30 and 8:30pm.

Details on City web site:
http://laserfiche.mountainview.gov/WebLink/Browse.aspx?startid=35382&&dbid=0

December 4, 2012: Council approved Staff recommendations regarding single-use bags tonight 7-2, with Inks and Means voting No.

6.1 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW ADDING ARTICLE IV TO CHAPTER 16 OF THE MOUNTAIN VIEW CITY CODE RELATED TO REUSABLE BAGS

1. Resolution No. _____—Adopt A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED BY THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO FOR THE REUSABLE BAG ORDINANCE BE FOUND ADEQUATE FOR THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW'S ACTION; AND ADOPTING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS OF FACT FOR ADDITION OF ARTICLE IV TO CHAPTER 16 OF THE MOUNTAIN VIEW CITY CODE REGARDING REUSABLE BAGS, to be read in title only, further reading waived.

2. Introduce AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW ADDING ARTICLE IV TO CHAPTER 16 OF THE MOUNTAIN VIEW CITY CODE RELATED TO REUSABLE BAGS, to be read in title only, further reading waived, and set a second reading for December 11, 2012.