From: Edward Swierk
To: City Council FORWARD
Subject: Agenda item 6.1 - Housing Element
Date: Saturday, March 5, 2022 1:34:10 PM
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Dear Councilmembers,
I am appalled by the recent site inventory for new housing. El Camino Real certainly should be a focal point -- ideally 4-story apartment buildings from end to end -- but it is completely unrealistic to expect it to absorb nearly all of the city's new housing.
Every neighborhood, including Old Mountain View, can accommodate infill development at double the current zoned density, at least.
It is natural to fear the vocal minority who want to preserve the city in amber. But even many long-time
homeowners like myself support the city doing its part to stem the regional housing crisis. Please step up and prepare a realistic plan for housing growth.
Edward Swierk
W Dana St
Mountain View
From: Karin. Bricker
To: , City Clerk; City Council FORWARD; Ramirez, Lucas; Hicks, Alison; Showalter, Pat; Abe-Koga, Margaret; Kamei, Ellen; Matichak, Lisa; Lieber, Sally
Cc: McCarthy, Kimbra; Shrivastava, Aarti; Ellen Yao; Anderson, Eric - Fire; Glaser, Heather Subject: LWV LAMV Letter re: The Housing Element Update Date: Sunday, March 6, 2022 6:13:20 PM
Attachments: 0308-22-mvcc-housingelementupdate revised.pdf CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
March 6, 2022
Re: Council Meeting, March 8, Agenda #6.1 Housing Element Update Study Session Dear Mayor Ramirez and Members of the City Council:
The LWV supports the sta plan that includes RHNA and certified Housing Elements, so we commend the comprehensive Staff Update on the Housing Element and Draft Site Inventory list. There are five areas we would like to highlight to enhance this process.
1. In the interest of transparency and providing adequate information for community feedback, we strongly suggest that you provide a list of the various siteswith street addresses including the size of the parcel, existing use and zoning and the estimated number of net new units.
2. The current Housing Element does not appear to comply with the AFFH requirement. The inventory lacks sites south of El Camino Real, an area where there are schools with fewer socio-economically disadvantaged students. We recommend moving the “back-pocket” listing of the Blossom Valley Shopping Center and the Grant Park Plaza and rezoning them to Opportunity Sites.
We recommend listing the office buildings off South Drive behind the hospital and the Cuesta Park Annex. There may be faith-based institutions in that part of the city that will consider building housing on their property.
3. The ratio of low and moderate-income housing to total housing projected for the Opportunity Sites and Rezone Projects is unrealistic. Table 2 on page 7 indicates that the projects have approximately four times more low and moderate income expected production than those above moderate. These ratios are almost the opposite of what is expected in the Pipeline Projects where the estimated numbers are considered fairly accurate. The LWV is concerned Table 2 does not show a clear methodology for the expected production of very low, lower, and moderate-income units.
4. We recommend the city consider adding a permanent, low-rent mobile home parkto help RV dwellers. The first step may be to rezone a site.
5. Finally, the Site Inventory map includes sites that appear unrealistic for redevelopment. Some, such as Target, don’t seem likely to be redeveloped by 2031. The new Housing Element law requires more substantive information regarding the feasibility of production than prior Housing Elements.
Please send comments related to this letter to Donna Davies at Karin Bricker, President LWV of Los Altos Mountain View cc: Ellen Yau Aarti Schrivastava Kimbra McCarthy Eric Anderson Heather Glaser