New Page 1 Campaign IssuesMake a contributionVolunteerMediaBiographyFunContactMuchas GraciasSearchHome


Open Space Plan

10/16/2001 Special Meeting
A Councilmember commented that if Grant Road and Marilyn Drive are even implied as places for agriculture in the open space plan, then they lose credibility for producing the housing units that the City has designated them to produce to meet the ABAG numbers. Instead, she suggested that the plan should say that they want to preserve some agricultural land for the City but that no particular parcel should be mentioned. She endorsed working with the school sites, supported having the Cuesta Park Annex in the master plan and could not support taking away all of the potential options for Rengstorff Park.

Housing Element

7/17/2001 Council Meeting
Draft housing element issues list
Councilmember Stasek supported striking a balance by increasing supply and reducing demand in terms of the impact of job growth on housing costs. She also supported a policy to increase ownership opportunities in the City, stating it is an important part of the Housing Element and a benefit to the community.
She spoke against high density, especially high-rises. She supported a long-term policy goal for use of the City's in-lieu funds and proposed that CDBG funding should be put into apartment rehabilitation, which would be more cost-effective than building new units. She also proposed looking at what other cities are doing in terms of mobile home park rent control. She then spoke against proactive rezoning of the mobile home parks.
She also expressed interest in seeing what housing opportunities can be provided for the City's public service employees and proposed coming up with strategies for providing affordable ownership opportunities.
She clarified that the concept of smart growth is laudable but that the reality is how to meet housing goals in the context of the indivisual parcles that come before the Council. She added that she does not support reducing the park in-liew fee, which would decrease the Council's ability to produce open space.

Efficiency Studio Project

2/13/2001 Council Meeting
Identification of a preferred site
Another Councilmember said she values consistency, and she has been consistent in saying she would support either of these sites because the project needs to get built. She said she would like the opportunity to vote for the San Antonio Loop site first because she is intrigued with what could be done with the downtown site next. She said she thinks if Council does the efficiency studio project on the downtown site, it would never be able to do any other type of housing on the San Antonio Loop site, whereas, if the efficiency studio project is placed on the San Antonio Loop site, Council will have the opportunity to do a mixed-use project setting aside a higher percentage for BMR or to do perhaps a joint public/private development where Council could allocate for public safety, teachers and City workers.

6/20/2000 Study Session
One Councilmember said that in terms of the difference between the sale and the lease, one of the things that was mentioned in connection with perhaps using the Rengstorff Park site is that the money used to purchase the site could then be used to purchase land somewhere else in the City. She said it seems when you do a prepayment, you are presuming you are going to make up this difference between the $2.2 million and the $3.8 million by the earnings of having that money as investment earning over the next 55 years, which would seem to preclude using those funds for park acquisition. Another Councilmember said she wants this project built and can live with any of the sites. She said the City needs to get as many units as possible and as cheap as the City can. She said with the new information about the lease, she thinks more can be done. Or, she said, with the lease payments, if it now comes to where the City can build it this year or with more CDBG funding build a better one next year, she said she thinks the City should broaden its horizons a little bit, particularly as to the number of units that could be built. In terms of parking, she said the City needs to be realistic about how much parking can be provided. She said she is not interested in the downtown site because she feels it has a very high opportunity cost and because there is so much more the City could be doing with that site in the whole redevelopment. She questioned the height of The Crossings buildings on the other side of the overpass, which should be compared with the height of adjacent buildings. 

2/15/2000 - Study Session
One Councilmember asked if it is possible to buy a piece of land just so that they have bought something and then turn around and sell it when a piece of land becomes available that they actually want to develop on. A Councilmember stated that the downtown site has a very high opportunity cost, there are too many other potential uses and they would lose potential parking. She noted that she is comfortable with the San Antonio site because there is a lot of on-site presence that brings a measure of control to this project that a hotel or apartment would not have. She added that she is not comfortable with rezoning given their time constraint and that their highest priority is to lock up the land and make a commitment that every dime of CDBG, HOME and set-aside funds between last year and goal date should be allocated to this project.

7/27/1999 Council Meeting
A Councilmember expressed concern that Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition provides 94 percent of the affordable housing in the City. and stated that she is interested in the integrated services development of Charities Housing. She added that she has no opposition to a public-private partnership but is opposed to anything that will delay their action on this project. Finally, she stated that is is adamant to using next year's CDBG Funds for this project and is not convinced that using the Housing-Set-Aside Funds is necessary. A Councilmember indicated that a precedent was set for using future year CDBG Funds when the City made a commitment that the upcoming year's CDBG Funds would be allocated to the Central Apartments when there was the danger that the property might be converted to market rate housing. She suggested that they would not be allocating funds that they do not have but would identify future funding sources instead of advancing a loan that may not be needed by the time the CDBG funds arrive. A Councilmember stated that she is alarmed that they could not complete an action even if it involved a funding option that was identified in the staff report.

3/30/1999 Council Meeting
1999-2000 CDBG/Home programs - A Councilmember expressed concern about the fact that the Salvation Army operates the Clara-Mateo Alliance Homeless Shelter and because the Salvation Army has recently come under scrutiny by the City of San Francisco for some discriminatory practices, she would like to see information come back on their operation at the shelter, She added that although all of the capital projects are well deserving of funding, one of the top priorities is the efficiency studio project, and since the CDBG Funds seem to be in peril, she would like to see that this project is fully funded in case that funding is lost in the future.

Avalon Bay Towers

3/28/2000 Council Meeting
A Councilmember expressed her opposition to this project because she does not think that the community as a whole has ever embraced this type of high rise much less two towers. 
Resolution No. 16467 Carried 4-2; Noe, Stasek no; Kasperzak absent (note - Vice Mayor Noe has been supportive of this project, her no vote was on a specific parking condition)

300-Block Bryant St.

11/9/1999 Council Meeting
A Council member expressed concern about the lack of trees on the site and suggested that the motion include a condition to require more trees be planted on the property. Another Councilmember concurred and also emphasized the importance that potential buyers are notified as to the commercial aspects of this development.

Habitat for Humanity

11/16/1999 Study Session
A Councilmember stated that she feels strongly that they should identify this year's upcoming CDBG funds, rather than future Revitalization Housing Set-Aside funds for this purpose. Another Councilmember stated that she does not think they are giving the citizens of Mountain View value with this project because the per unit subsidy is so high compared to other projects that would house a lot more people. 

939 West Dana St.

8/13/1999 Council Meeting
One Councilmember noted that there was a requirement in the site plan for 30% open space and that there does not appear to be 30% open space. The same Councilmember asked if pathways are consistent with open space because open space should be a place where people can relax and play. The Councilmember asked if the Downtown Committee is looking at that definition of open space in their review. One Councilmember commented that the east elevation area is attractive as it is and is concerned with putting stoops to the balconies due to safety issues and also because it would make the balconies another entrance into the unit rather than an area for relaxation or recreation.

Whisman Station

5/11/1999 Council Meeting
Another Councilmember said she thinks a solution to that is to specify a housing type and then allow the developer to work with that housing type at the density that makes sense for that parcel. She said that certain housing types are going to flow to certain densities. She said it is her desire to provide a range of housing ownership opportunities in the City of Mountain View, but if all that is built in the City is expensive single-family homes, for a huge percentage of people in the City, Council will effectively not have done anything to provide them with the opportunity to stay in the community and own something. She said that she leans to low-density townhouses with the type and style that is directly across the street from this parcel at this time. Another Councilmember said she feels that the low-density townhouses are already a compromise between single-family detached houses and the condominiums or higher-density townhouses recommended by the Environmental Planning Commission and she is not prepared to compromise further.

Affordable Housing

5/ 13/1997 Council Meeting

Motion: M/S Faravelli /Noe
Carried 6-0; Figueroa absent
Consider Item No. 8.1 out of order.

Councilmember Stasek stated that she placed this item on the agenda to hopefully begin the process of discussing issues that require in-depth discussion. She said that the upcoming proposed joint study session with the Environmental Planning Commission might be an excellent opportunity to begin a positive discussion about what opportunities there are for affordable housing in the City of Mountain View. She said the focus would be on proactive measures and the supply side and what the City is doing and what it could do.

Motion: M/S Ambra/Noe Carried 6-0; Figueroa absent
That the City Council and the Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) hold a joint study session to review alternative techniques to address affordable housing needs.

Housing Trust for Santa Clara County

6/12/01 Special Meeting
One Councilmember said she thinks if there is a way to get funding, the two-year pledge structure is probably much more realistic considering the dollars that the City has available, and she said she can appreciate that it probably makes sense to have restrictions on the first $250,000 so it is specifically targeted to the efficiency studios. However, she said, she would hate to see Mountain View go the way of Palo Alto and completely foreclose the opportunity for any first-time home buyer program, so she questioned restricting the first-year contribution and targeting it to the efficiency studios but not doing it for the second year because there may be the potential that there would be some projects that would provide some home ownership opportunities.