Last night (July 3) during a study session Council took a straw vote and decided 4-3 to not plan for housing in the North Bayshore neighborhood.

Council Chambers was quite full with about 40 or so people there to support housing in North Bayshore and about 10 against. (Those are complete eyeball estimates, that could be wrong!) Most of those who were there to speak in favor of housing in North Bayshore were Mountain View residents. Most of those who were opposed to housing were not from Mountain View. The common message among supporters who spoke was please leave housing in North Bayshore on the table as an option. It is a complicated idea that needs further exploration and the Precise Plan is the place to do that. Please don't remove that option now.

After hearing over about an hour of public comments, Council had a brief discussion of this and other topics. While a formal vote cannot be taken during a study session, Council did decide to take a straw vote in the matter so that city planning staff can prepare a final version of the General Plan that reflects their wishes, which will be ready for Council to approve at their July 10th meeting.  Mayor Kasperzak asked for a show of hands on whether or not housing should be left in the General Plan as an issue to explore further. Three said yes, while four said no. This means that next week the final draft General Plan that Council will presumably approve will not include housing in North Bayshore. Wah.

Yes:
Mayor Mike Kasperzak
Vice Mayor John Inks
Councilmember Tom Means

No:
Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga
Councilmember Ronit Bryant
Councilmember Laura Macias
Councilmember Jac Siegel

Thanks to the many who came out last night and wrote Council ahead of time. Your comments were eloquent and thoughtful. While this particular decision didn't go as MVCSP had wanted, but overall we have a really wonderful General Plan that we had a hand in crafting and should be proud of. This one, very interesting issue popped up toward the very end of the process and has sucked a lot of attention away from the whole document, which is very strong. It has lots of great policies that will set MV on a good course for the future. Let's keep that in mind and celebrate it!

This study session is to discuss the 2030 General Plan and Land Use Map, Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program and the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for these reports. You can check the City web site on or after June 29th to confirm the scheduled time and location for the study session.
http://laserfiche.mountainview.gov/WebLink/0/fol/25128/Row1.aspx

Can only attend 1 meeting? Attend this one!

Come to City Hall tonight, June 27th at 7pm to make comments on the General Plan at the Environmental Planning Commission meeting. This is the last time the EPC will discuss the document before sending it off to Council. The question of whether or not there will be housing allowed in North Bayshore still hangs in the balance. Use the MVCSP General Plan Action Guide found below for tonight and for the Council meetings on July 3rd and 10th.




General Plan Issues and Action Guide

North Bayshore Housing

Background:

 
Originally, retail, housing, and office were considered for North Bayshore sopersons could live close to where they work while supporting expanded retail services.
North Bayshore was envisioned as a mixed-use boulevard with frequent transit serviceconnecting to downtown, retail on the ground floor, and apartments and office above.
Allowing housing would give people an option to live close to their jobs, supportexpanded retail services, and justify frequent, all-day transit service between Downtownand North Bayshore. However, City Council recently removed housing from the mix dueto concerns that housing would impact wildlife and exacerbate transportation problems.
The Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) recently stated that allowing housingwould have no additional impact on wildlife compared to existing development (pg82,
B6-4), and additional policies in the General Plan call for concentrating newdevelopment along Shoreline Boulevard which would restore previously built-upon landto wildlife.

Potential Action:

1. Ask Council to restore housing to the North Bayshore area in the General Plan.
2. Consider asking that additional study on housing’s impact on wildlife beconducted in the North Bayshore Precise Plan, but we should not be eliminatinga major solution to our traffic and emissions challenges this early to the process
3. Consider asking that the impacts for a range of housing units be studied in theNorth Bayshore Precise Plan, since additional units may have a positive impacton emissions and traffic.
Flexible Mixed Use

Background:

 
Council recently added a draft policy that would allow greater intensities along ElCamino Real at “key locations” coupled with “significant community benefits.” Thesecriteria would be defined through the zoning, not in the General Plan, but they areexcellent mechanisms to locate growth near transit, jobs, and services. Additionally, it’s
an opportunity for the city to leverage development interest to get new civic amenities
and create great places.

Potential Action:

1. Support the proposed policy

2. Ask that it be expanded to other change areas in addition to El Camino Real
3. Remind Councilmembers that the criteria of “significant community benefits” and“key locations” will be defined during the zoning process.
Transportation

Background:

 
Most of the transportation policies are solidified and unlikely to change prior toadoption of the General Plan. Major studies of new transit service are likely to beundertaken in later, more focused planning efforts. However, there are opportunities toadd some language to existing policies to strengthen outcomes.

Potential Action.

1. Ask that additional language be added to Draft General Plan bicycling policies todefine the city’s ambition as a “leader in bicycling.” Language supporting this
vision could include “development of innovative infrastructure conducive to a low-
stress bicycle transportation network comfortable for all ages and abilities.
2. Support the city’s continued work on the pedestrian master plan and
interventions that make the city more walkable.
Avenues of Action

1.
Attend the Council and/or EPC public hearings on the Draft General Plan andspeak to the above issues during the public comment period.
2.
Write a letter to EPC members prior to their 6/27 meeting addressing theseissues
3.
Write a letter to City Council Members prior to their 6/3 Study Session on theDraft General Plan
Public Hearing Dates

June 27: Environmental Planning Commission meeting– 7PM @ City Hall

July 3: City Council Study Session– 5PM @ City Hall Only time for onemeeting? This is the most important one to speak at.

July 10: City Council Final Meeting– 6:30PM @ City Hall

Councilmember Contact Information

Mayor Mike Kasperzak: mkasperzak@mediates.comVice Mayor John Inks: johninks@sbcglobal.netCouncilmember Margaret Abe Koga: margaret.abekoga@mountainview.govCouncilmember Ronit Bryant: ronit.bryant@mountainview.gov


Councilmember Laura Macias: la.macias@mountainview.gov
Councilmember Jac Siegel: jacsharonsiegel@comcast.netCouncilmember Tom Means: tom.means@mountainview.gov

EPC Member Contact Information

Chair Todd Fernandez: trf@mac.comVice Chair Lisa Matichak: lisa.matichak@gmail.comCommissioner Eric Anderson: eanderson@csaengineering.comCommissioner John McAlister: jrm7357@pacbell.netCommissioner Kathy Trontell: mktrontell.mtvw.gov@gmail.comCommissioner Chris Clark: clarkcr@gmail.comCommissioner Rachel Grossman: grossmanrachel01@gmail.com




At the end of a six hour meeting, the EPC decided in a 4-3 straw vote to go against Council's direction and revisit the idea of allowing housing in the North Bayshore neighborhood, through the policies in the General Plan. This was not a decision to be taken lightly; allowing housing in North Bayshore brings up a lot of unknowns and even potential drawbacks for things like wildlife. But MVCSP firmly believes that last night's decision was a sounds one for environmental, economic and community creating reasons. We look forward to navigating the complex but exciting challenges that this decision will open up.

The members of the EPC deserve a huge thank you for considering this matter long and hard. That thanks is extended to all members of the EPC regardless of where they fell on the decision. An extra special thanks to the four EPC members who decided in the end to express support for mixed use development in North Bayshore: Rachel Grossman, Chris Clark, Eric Anderson and EPC Chair Todd Fernandez. An extra special thanks goes to Rachel Grossman for leading the charge on this topic (we admire your boldness and conviction!), Todd Fernandez, for being brave enough to publically change his mind on a heated topic (that really does take humility, intelligence and confidence) and Chris Clark for making a hard decision with an election ahead of him (that's brave too!). Eric don't feel left out; thanks for being you. :)

Finally, a huge thanks to all of the advocates who turned out last night, especially the crazies that stuck around until almost 1:00am to make a public comment.  Thanks to those who wrote letters to your representatives. We've said it before but big milestones call for sappy repetition; it's people like you all who put the time in and speak up that make change happen. Thank you! You are our heroes!

- The Core Team

Overall Comments on the General Plan

• Great job EPC (and staff and Council)! Through this process, MV officials and staff have thought creatively and with an eye toward toward our economic and environmental future, all while respecting the desires of the current community. We believe this General Plan will protect the things that we love about our city but give us the flexibility to grow and change in the right ways. Our city has the best officials and staff around!
  

Talking Points on Flexibility in the Focus Areas

• MVCSP fully supports Council's suggestion that increased heights and densities be allowed when developers offer significant community benefits. Some examples of community benefits we think would warrant increased densities include:

1. Park space
   
2. Affordable housing
3. Shuttles or other kinds of transit amenities
   

• Similarly, MVCSP would like to see developers who build near transit and offer their tenants permanent, free transit passes be granted a parking requirement reduction.
• As we have noted before, we encourage the EPC and Council to fold as many pieces of the Increased Housing Alternative that was studied into the EIR, into the Preferred Draft of the General Plan. This will allow the City to enjoy reduced the "vehicle miles traveled" rates that come when greater numbers of people live in close proximity to transit.
  

1. One way to do this without triggering a new Environmental Impact Report and going beyond the level of intensity that the community is comfortable with right now, is simply by stating that allowing housing at heights and densities beyond what is in the general plan may be a way to mitigate for traffic and other impacts at a future date.
   

Talking Points on North Bayshore

• We’d like to go on the record as saying that we still believe that North Bayshore can and should be a mixed use community in the future. More and more office parks are going to be going in this direction. We should take advantage of the General Plan update and move toward creating a model, mixed use employment center. We believe this could:

1. Help reduce traffic.
2. Create a neighborhood full of innovative people where ideas can incubate and flourish.
3. Put MV at the cutting edge of a burgeoning movement toward the revamping of traditional office parks. This will help MV stay at the forefront of innovation, which is good for our local economy.
4. Help support local business who need a customer base beyond 9am-5pm.

• Please put policies in the General Plan that recognize that housing as a variable when studying mitigations to traffic and other challenges, when developing the precise and transportation plan.
• Whether N. Bayshore remains office or becomes mixed use, transfer of development rights should be used to move development away from Shoreline Park and near the intersection of Shoreline and Charleston. This will do two things:

1. Create a greater and much needed buffer for wildlife, and
2. Create more of a neighborhood, which will make the neighborhood more pleasant for people, more walkable, which will reduce the need for driving and it will increase the likelihood that transit can be successfully run to and from the neighborhood. This is very important.
   

• Please figure out how to permanently protect Shoreline Park. This may require two things:

1. Change the zoning designation of the park from “Public Use”
2. Plan for ample parks in N. Bayshore, some of which can be flagged as long term “reserves” of land, should there be a need for a school, fire station, etc.

 

 

Members of City Council:

johninks@sbcglobal.net
la.macias@mountainview.gov
ronit.bryant@mountainview.gov
tom.means@mountainview.gov
jacsharonsiegel@comcast.net
mkasperzak@mediates.com 
Margaret.abekoga@mountainview.gov

Environmental Planning Commissioners:

trf@mac.com
lisa.matichak@gmail.com
ktrontell@mac.com
eanderson@csaengineering.com
clarkcr@gmail.com
grossmanrachel01@gmail.com
jrm7357@pacbell.net

It's always a good idea to cc relevant City staff on your emails. If you don't know the specific staff person working on your project, send it to the City Manager and City Clerk. If the project is related to land use/planning include Randy Tsuda and Martin Alkire. You may also want to include Ellis Berns, the Economic Development Director. Their emails are also below:

city.clerk@mountainview.gov
city.mgr@mountainview.gov
Martin.Alkire@mountainview.gov
randal.tsuda@mountainview.gov
ellis.berns@mountainview.gov

Tomorrow night, May 10th, MVCSP will be holding its monthly meeting at Vox Design Group's office at 421 Castro Street in Mountain View. We will be discussing the following items:

• What advocacy steps to take in advance of the May 16th EPC meeting and the May 19th community meeting on the General Plan.
• How should we handle Council's decision to not allow mixed use development at North Bayshore? (Google staff may be in attendance to share their plans on the matter.)
• Preliminary plans for the San Antonio area have been released. How do they look? We may be joined by a San Antonio Shopping Center property owner who can offer his perspective and hear our thoughts.
• Update on Bus Rapid Transit.
• Report back on recent events we've hosted; workshops and Grand Boulevard Initiative.
  
• Sharing the first draft of the MV Guide to Citizens' Involvement
• Update on drivethrus

Please join us! Feel free to bring snack. :)

Friday, March 16, 2012

9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Mountain View City Hall

City Council Chambers, 2nd Floor

500 Castro Street

Topics:

·         Mountain View’s General Plan and North Bayshore Precise Plan efforts

·         Anticipated long-term growth and transportation needs in the Shoreline Regional Park Community

·         National trends in transportation and smart growth

·         Panel discussion

—     Innovative transportation options for the Shoreline Regional Park Community

—     Portland South Waterfront Transportation System

—     Los Colinas (Dallas) Area Personal Transit System

Welcoming Remarks:

R. Michael Kasperzak, Mayor, City of Mountain View

Keynote Speaker/Panel Moderator:

William Fulton, AICP

Smart Growth America—VP for Policy and Programs

Former Mayor and Councilmember—Ventura, CA

Speakers/Panelists:

·         Randal Tsuda, City of Mountain View Community Development Director

·         James Lightbody, AECOM

·         Steve Raney, ULTra PRT

·         Jerry Sanders, SkyTran

·         Brian Newman, Director of Campus Planning, Oregon Health and Science University

 

 

Contact the Mountain View Public Works Department for more information

(650) 903-6311