1 Memorandum
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
September 27, 2022
Lindsay Hagan, City of Mountain View
Carolyn Neer, Project Manger
Kristy Weis, Principal Project Manager
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Middlefield Park Master Plan Project – Responses to Late Comment Received
One late comment letter was received on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Draft SEIR) for the Middlefield Park Master Plan project, subsequent to the conclusion of the 45-day public comment period on June 10, 2022 and after the publication of the Final Supplemental Impact Report (FSEIR) on August 19, 2022 . The comment l etter was from the Center for Public Environmental Oversight and dated August 30, 2022. A copy of this late comment letter is included in Attachment A.
This memo includes a summary of the written comments pertaining to the adequacy of the Final SEIR with responses. Comments regarding the merits of the project are not included in the summary below and do not warrant responses under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The comments received do not raise any significant new information or substantial evidence in light of the whole record to warrant recirculation of the SEIR per CEQA Guidelines 15088.5. The comments do not raise any new significant information related to new or substantially more severe significant environmental impacts than were previously disclosed in the Final SEIR.
Attachment 19
2 Summary of Comments from the Center for Public Environmental Oversight (dated August 30, 2022):
The specific issues and suggestions raised in the letter have been grouped into three related comments, with responses to each one provided below.
Comment 1:
• The draft SEIR states, “Based on recent monitoring data, the MEW plume has encroached into the western edge of the project site.” The Final SEIR should describe and map the encroachment of the MEW plume into the project site.
Comment 2:
• For any new construction, developers must not interfere with existing monitoring wells for the MEW site.
• In addition, developers should construct two or three additional shallow groundwater monitoring wells at the midpoint of the western most parcel. • The City of Mountain View should require that the developer reduce the potential for lateral migration of volatile organic compounds along utility corridors, similar to the requirements in NASA’s Environmental Issues Management Plan (EIMP).
Comment 3:
• The City of Mountain View should require that the developer undertakes soil vapor screening, using EPA protocols for redevelopment at the MEW site, for areas adjacent to the MEW Vapor Intrusion Study Area , particularly at parcels O1, R1 , and R2 .
Should levels exceed EPA’s interim action levels, cleanup should be required prior to construction.
Responses to Comments:
Response 1: MEW Plume – Page 131 of the Draft SEIR describes how the MEW plume has encroached into the western edge of the project site. This is detailed in Appendix G of the Draft EIR. EPA regularly monitors and maps the extent of the MEW plume. Because the location of the plume is not static, the most recent map showing the location of the plume is included as Figure 16 i n the 2021 Annual Progress Report MEW Fairchild & Regional Groundwater Remediation Progress Report. This Progress Report is available to the public at: https://semspub.epa.gov/work/09/100027775.pdf. Additionally, this map has been reproduced and an outline of the proposed project site has been drawn on it to provide further clarity regarding the location of the plume in relation to the proposed project site. A copy of this map is included at the end of this response.
Response 2 : Monitoring Wells and Lateral Migration along Utility Corridors – As discussed in Section 5.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the Master Plan project is required to prepare a site- specific Phase I ESA and and a Site Management Plan (SMP) for all specific development projects with Recognized Environmental Conditions within the Master Plan area (see Precise Plan EIR MM HAZ-3.1 on page 139 of the Draft SEIR). The purpose of the SMP is to establish management practices for handling contaminated soil, soil vapor, groundwater, or other materials during construction. The
3 applicant submitted a Project-Specific Agency Submittal (PSAS) with a Site Management Plan (SMP) dated November 9, 2021, to both potential regulatory oversight agencies for this site, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The RWQCB declined review of the SMP, and the EPA responded providing their review and acceptance of the initial SMP.
Future SMPs required for specific developments within the Master Plan will include design-level measures to prevent lateral migration of groundwater and soil vapor along utility corridors. The SMP(s) will also address protection, relocation, and decommissioning of existing monitoring wells and the need for additional wells, if appropriate. The SMPs are required to be submitted to both the EPA and the RWQCB. for review and approval prior to commencing construction activities, for which agencies can require inclusion of appropriate measures such as those identified in the NASA Environmental Issues Management Plan.
Response 3: MEW Plume Related Soil Vapor Screening – As discussed in Section 5.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials of the Draft SEIR, future development within the MEW Superfund Study Area is required to comply with the EPA -required Record of Decision (ROD) Amendment for the Vapor Intrusion Pathway, MEW Superfund Study Area to minimize the potential impacts associated with vapor intrusion. The Draft SEIR acknowledges that the MEW plume has encroached into the western edge of the project site (page 131 of the Draft SEIR), which includes portions of O1, R2, and R1 as noted in the comment. The EPA-required ROD measures are outlined on pages 137 -139 of the Draft SEIR. The ROD measures are applicable to sites where there is evidence of soil vapor concentrations due to the MEW plume above screening levels derived from EPA’s indoor cleanup levels . Per the ROD, vapor intrusion remedies are required to be submitted to the EPA for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits (including subsurface work and new construction).
This comment does not raise any issues with the adequacy of the Draft SEIR; therefore, no further response is required.
4 Figure 16 from EPA 2021 Annual Progress Report – Middlefield Ellis – Whisman Fairchild and Regional Groundwater Remediation Programs with the MPMP site boundary:
Source: Geosyntec Consultants. 2021 Annual Progress Report MEW Fairchild & Regional Groundwater Remediation Progress Report. April 15, 2022.
Attachment A: Late Comment Received
CENTER FOR PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL OVERSIGHT
A project of the Pacific Studies Center
P.O. Box 998, Mountain View, CA 94042
Voice/Fax: 650-961-8918 <[email protected]> http://www.cpeo.org TO: Lindsay Hagan, City of Mountain View
FROM: Lenny Siegel, Center for Public Environmental Oversight (CPEO) SUBJECT: Middlefield Park Master Plan Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR)
DATE: August 30, 2022
CC: Alana Lee, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) CPEO supports the Middlefield Park Master Plan, but we have some concerns related to its proximity to the Middlefield-Ellis-Whisman [MEW] Superfund Study Area. I have personally have been following contamination in this part of Mountain View since the early 1980s, and through the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition and now CPEO we have engaged a technical consultant through EPA’s Superfund Technical Assistance Grant program since the 1990s.
Mountain View, in cooperation with environmental regulatory agencies, has shown that it is possible to develop both housing and commercial projects on and near sites with substantial subsurface contamination. We look forward to continuing this tradition at Middlefield Park.
Our consultant, Peter Strauss, has made a series of recommendations that we believe will allow this development to proceed safely. We were only able to finalize these recommendations today, one day beyond the official comment period, but we hope you will take these recommendations under consideration, in anticipation of U.S. EPA’s review of the project.
While the eastern portion of Middlefield Park is beyond EPA’s jurisdiction, and thus beyond the scope of Strauss’s recommendations, I suggest that similar considerations be applied there in anticipation of oversight by the Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control Board.
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PETER STRAUSS
The controls for vapor intrusion are referenced in the final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. While this is reassuring, I recommend the following be added to the SEIR:
2 1. The draft SEIR states, “Based on recent monitoring data, the MEW plume has encroached into the western edge of the project site.” The Final SEIR should describe and map that encroachment. 2. For any new construction, developers must not interfere with existing monitoring wells for the MEW site. 3. In addition, developers should construct 2 or 3 additional shallow groundwater monitoring wells at the midpoint of the western-most parcel. 4. The City of Mountain View should require that the developer undertake soil vapor screening, using EPA protocols for redevelopment at the MEW site, for areas adjacent to the MEW Vapor Intrusion Study Area, particularly at parcels O1, R1, and R2. Should levels exceed EPA’s interim action levels, cleanup should be required prior to construction. Elsewhere in the area, EPA has required that remedial action be taken where trichloroethylene (TCE) soil vapor concentrations were found to exceed 20,000 μg/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter) because it believes that TCE soil vapor concentrations above that level indicate that building vapor mitigation (both passive and active) may be insufficient to ensure long-term protectiveness. Based upon such soil vapor exceedances, EPA required additional cleanup prior to development at both 277 Fairchild Drive and 870 Leong Drive. 5. The City of Mountain View should require that the developer reduce the potential for lateral migration of volatile organic compounds along utility corridors, similar to the requirements in NASA’s Environmental Issues Management Plan (EIMP).
Public Comments Received Prior to EPC
Public Hearing
To: Environmental Planning Commission
City of Mountain View
500 Castro Street
Mountain View, CA 94041
Sent via email to: [email protected]
October 12, 2022
Re: Google Middlefield Park Master Plan
Dear Chair Cranston, Vice Chair Yin, and EPC Commissioners, The undersigned environmental organizations are pleased to support Google’s Middlefield Park Master Plan (Plan). The Plan realizes the vision of the East Whisman Precise Plan for innovation and sustainability, for increased canopy and native vegetation, and for ecological connectivity and resiliency. We appreciate the effort to transform an area that today consists of parking lots and older office buildings into a mixed-use neighborhood with parks, trees and habitat.
Our organizations have been following the Middlefield Park project since the Plan was submitted to the City of Mountain View in fall 2020. In our September 2021 letter to Council, we supported the project and asked clarifying questions focusing on ecological, mobility and su stainability elements of the plan. Google has since provided answers to our questions, and we expect to engage with Google further in the design phase.
We believe Middlefield Park will align with Mountain View’s Biodiversity Strategy and sustainability goals and contribute to the broader ecological and human health of the city and its residents. We appreciate the Plan has incorporated the following features:
● A focus on site ecology through aggregation of open space areas, creating habitat corridors and using native plant species with high value to birds and pollinators ● Green spaces include a significant expansion of the existing tree canopy with thought given to planting water-wise and native tree species, expanding on a regional “re- oaking” strategy
● Plants and green spaces incorporated in public as well as private spaces such as courtyards
● Consideration of bird-safe design to reduce bird collisions ● Consideration of light pollution reduction strategies to support human and ecological health
● Locating housing and shopping near public transit and prioritizing improvements for pedestrians and bikes to reduce car dependency
We recommend that the district utility system be included to ensure efficiency and resilience in Phase One, which is entirely residential.
We respectfully ask members of the Environmental Planning Commission to support Google’s Middlefield Park Project. We plan to follow the project as it is implemented, delivering a mixed- use project that truly weaves nature into the urban landscape.
Sincerely yours,
Gita Dev, Co-Chair, Sustainable Land Use Committee
Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter
Rani Fischer, Environmental Advocacy Assistant
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
Linda Ruthruff, Conservation Chair
California Native Plant Society, Santa Clara Valley Chapter
Alice Kaufman, Policy and Advocacy Director
Green Foothills
1 Hagan, Lindsay
From: BRUCE KARNEY
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2022 1:57 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Brooke Ray Smith; Nikki Lowy; Hagan, Lindsay; , Planning Division Subject: Carbon Free Mtn. View Endorses Google Middlefield Park Project CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL ‐ Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Dear EPC Members,
Carbon Free Mountain View has received two briefings by Google and LendLease on the Middlefield Park Proposal, the most recent coming at a General Meeting on Aug. 18, 2022 that was held via Google Meet.
The CFMV members who attended the meeting voted to formally endorse the Middlefield Park Proposal. (Council member Showalter attended the meeting but recused herself from the decision by logging off prior to the voting.)
CFMV urges your approval of the project. We believe that this project will create an attractive new "urban village" of the kind that the City has endorsed for the last 10+ years. We are impressed by the high percentage of affordable residential units as well as other features of the proposal.
Speaking for myself alone, I think there is good reason to believe that once it is complete the innovative design of the new neighborhood will make it the least carbon-intensive neighborhood in Mountain View. As such, I expect it will inspire other large-scale redevelopments to match or exceed what Google and LendLease intend to accomplish.
Cheers,
Bruce Karney
Chair, Carbon Free Mountain View
October 19, 2022
Re: Item 4.1 – Middlefield Park Master Plan
Dear Chair Cranston and Members of the Environmental Planning Commission:
The LWV supports government action to provide affordable housing for all Californians. Assuch, we have been enthusiastic about the Middlefield Park Master Plan throughout the process,with its large amount of housing around transit with planned amenities.
We accept the results of the independent analysis of the BMR Alternative Mitigation, and wewould like to reiterate its finding that the affordable housing is predicated on “significantexternal funding sources.” As Council was made aware in their August review of the AffordableHousing Strategic Plan, there is a major shortfall in the City’s internal funding availability. Otherfunding sources also remain very competitive.
As such, we would like to see Google, Lendlease, and the City continue to work on providingconcrete steps to ensure that this housing does get built. This is especially important becauseMountain View’s draft Housing Element depends on this and North Bayshore for a large portionof its site inventory, as mentioned in the “Progress in Meeting the RHNA” and “Specific/MasterPlan Areas” sections of theHCD review letter. (Please send any questions about this email to Kevin Ma at [email protected]) Thank you for considering our input.
Karin Bricker, President of the LWV of Los Altos-Mountain View cc: Lindsay Hagan Aarti Shrivastava
(408) 501-7864
2001 Gateway Place, Suite 101E
San José, California 95110
svlg.org
▼
Environmental Planning Commission
City of Mountain View
500 Castro St.
Mountain View, CA 94041
RE: Middlefield Park Master Plan
Dear Environmental Planning Commissioners,
On behalf of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, I am writing in support of the Middlefield Park Master Plan that will implement the city’s vision to transform outdated and underutilized office buildings and parking lots into a walkable neighborhood with new homes, parks, amenities, and jobs.
The Silicon Valley Leaders hip Group is driven by more than 350 member companies to proactively tackle issues to improve our communities and strengthen our economy, with a focus on education, energy, the environment, health care, housing, tax policy, tech & innovation policy, and tr ansportation.
Among the top concerns of our members is a need for housing affordable for all incomes here in the Bay Area.
Middlefield Park will catalyze the broader East Whisman area ’s transformation into a sustainable, transit -oriented neighborhood with jobs and housin g using the smart growth principles in the City’s East Whisman Precise Plan. This plan proposes up to 1,900 homes, including 20% affordable homes, which will be delivered by dedicating land to the City of Mountain View.
As seen in other jurisdictions, dedicating land for standalone affordable housing enables the opportunity for more units at deeper levels of affordability, using tax credits, matching state and federal funding, and other affordable housing tools.
This plan is also a critical part of the city’s effort in meeting the regional housing needs assessment (RHNA) goals.
The redevelopment of Middlefield Park will spur the creation of thousands of well-paying jobs and provide economic opportunity to small businesses while adding significant additional annual tax revenue to the City, County and school districts. Middlefield Park is like catching lightning in a bottle that will spark opportunities for jobs, housing, and open space amenities, benefiting residents for years to come.
Thank you for consideration of our comments.
Sincerely,
Vince Rocha
Vice President, Housing and Community Development
Silicon Valley Leadership Group
Ahmad Thomas, CEO
Silicon Valley Leadership Group
Jed York, Chair
San Francisco 49ers
Eric S. Yuan, Vice Chair
Zoom Video Communications
James Gutierrez, Vice Chair
Luva
Victoria Huff Eckert, Treasurer
PwC US
Greg Becker
Silicon Valley Bank
Aart de Geus
Synopsys
Vintage Foster
AMF Media Group
Raquel Gonzalez
Bank of America
Paul A. King
Stanford Children’s Health
Ibi Krukrubo
EY
Alan Lowe
Lumentum
Judy C. Miner
Foothill-De Anza Community
College District
Rao Mulpuri
View
Kim Polese
CrowdSmart
Sharon Ryan
Bay Area News Group
Siva Sivaram
Western Digital
Tom Werner
Mainspring Energy
October 19, 2022
DATE
▼
1 From: James Kuszmaul
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2022 7:10 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Public Comment on Item 4.1 Middlefield Park Master Plan CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL ‐ Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
To the Environmental Planning Commission:
Mountain View YIMBY is thrilled to see the Middlefield Park Master Plan being finalized and look forward to the transformation of the area into a walkable, bikeable, mixed-use neighborhood with new housing which will help to alleviate Mountain View’s housing shortage. We hope that the remaining permitting and approval processes for the individual buildings in this plan will be streamlined to the greatest extent feasible, so that the new housing—market rate and deed-restricted affordable housing—will be available as soon as possible.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment,
James Kuszmaul
On behalf of the members of MV YIMBY
Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planningc/o Aaron Grossman817 Montgomery StreetMountain View, CA 94041 October 19, 2022
City of Mountain View Environmental Planning CommissionCity Hall, 500 Castro StreetPO Box 7540Mountain View, CA 94039-7540 Re: 5.1 Middlefield Park Master Plan
Dear Chairperson Cranston and Environmental Planning Commissioners:
The Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning (MVCSP) appreciates the opportunity to provide commentson the Google/Lendlease (Applicant) Middlefield Park Master Plan (Master Plan).
MVCSP has provided extensive public comment during the development of the East Whisman Precise Plan and theEPC and City Council Study Sessions on the Master Plan. We have expressed and now continue to expressstrongsupport for the overall mixed use development framework provided in the Master Plan.Our full support forapproval was contingent on the many follow-up studies and deliberations that address the issues identified duringpublic comment, EPC review, and City Council review.
We would like to congratulate City Staff and the Applicant for addressing a wide range of issues that are reflectedin the update of the Master Plan and the many Exhibits to the staff report. We are particularly pleased with thedetails and outcomes of the following:
The Phasing Plan identified in Exhibit 10 provides many community benefits in the first phase of the project.TheApplicant is providing 850 market rate housing units and proposing the dedication of 2.4 acres for potentially 380affordable housing units in Phase I. If fully delivered, this provides a very proactive start to the Job-HousingLinkage Program. In addition, Gateway Park, the Bridge Open Space, and the Ellis POPA are proposed to bedelivered in Phase I. Finally, the Applicant will initiate the almost $19 million Small Business Diversification andNonprofit Inclusion Program (Small Business Program) also in Phase I.
The Small Business Program details along with the Community Benefits analysis in Exhibits 11 and 12 are veryresponsive to both the EPC and City Council commentsduring their February and March 2021 study sessions. Thissmall business program for local businesses owned by women and individuals from underserved backgrounds willbe a very valuable asset to the community.
The Development Review Committee (DRC) has provided very important input to the design aspects of theMaster Plan.The updated Master Plan now reflectsmany excellent urban design details, including a very goodconceptual design of the Ellis Park POPA. The park network in the Master Plan is a blueprint for a parkland gem inthe East Whisman area.
MVCSP has significant concern with the actual delivery of affordable housing units as part of the Master Plan. Thefollowing are our concerns and recommended actions for the EPC to consider:
The analysis of the dedicated land for affordable housing in Exhibit 13 highlights the many significant challengesfor a sizable delivery of 380 units of affordable housing units.In the early 2021 meetings of EPC andthe CityCouncil, MVCSP along with many on the EPC had a desire for inclusionary affordable housing development butlooked forward to the economic analysis in order to make a final determination if the land dedication alternativewas financially feasible. We do concur with the Seifel/Strategic Economics conclusion that there arePOTENTIALLYmore benefits with the dedicated land for affordable housing option, but would require between $63.7 to $80.6million without a City Contribution and $22.5 to $39.4 million with a City Contribution. It is our understandingfrom email correspondence with City staff that the decision on a City Contribution would be at a later date if theMaster Plan is approved and the developer proceeds. Also, according to City staff, there has not been furtheranalysis on whether or not the substantial financing resources are actually feasible for project delivery with orwithout a City Contribution. This is understandable since the purpose of the Seifel/Strategic Economic analysiswas, as explained by City staff, “a best attempt to identify what the funding gapcould bebased on whatfactors weknow.” MVCSP supports the land dedication alternative ONLYIF City Council commits to a City Contribution and Cityhousing staff is reasonably sure (from what we know today) that a financing package can be secured when theland is transferred to the City.We recommend thatthe EPC ask the City Council about their current intent for aCity Contribution. We also recommend that the EPC ask the City Community Development staff, based on currentcircumstances, what the probability is of securing the necessary funding to actually build the affordable housingunits.
Additionally, if the land dedication alternative is granted, MVCSP wants the 20% or 380 units to be delivered.While the Applicant has proposed to front load the affordable housing units in Phase I, their proposal is for 20%below market rate (BMR) units or 380 units whereas the Seifel/Strategic Economics analysis concludes that only338 units can be delivered on the two parcels totalling 2.4 acres. According to email correspondence with theApplicant, they worked with an architecture firm to conduct a test fit analysis for the 2.4 acres and that workvalidated their 380 unit total yield. They have cited examples where actually more than the 380 affordable housingunits could possibly be delivered on the same site based on different design variables.
MVCSP recommends that the EPC request an amendment to the Development Agreement that incorporates anypotential deficit of affordable housing as inclusionary affordable housing in Phase 3 of the Master Plan. This isessentially a contingency plan if the design process after the land has been transferred reveals that there will beless than 380 units accommodated on the two parcels.
Thank you again for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,Cliff Chambersfor the Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning Cc:Lindsay Hagan, Assistant Community Development DirectorMicaela Hellman-Tincher, Housing & Neighborhood Services ManagerAarti Shrivastava, Assistant City Manager / Community Development DirectorKimbra McCarthy, City ManagerHeather Glaser, City Clerk About Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable PlanningThe Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning is a local volunteer-based organization dedicated to making Mountain View asbeautiful, economically healthy, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian accessible, and affordable as possible. MVCSP member interest andexpertise covers areas such as housing, transportation, the environment, the economy, and beyond!For more information, seehttp://www.mvcsp.org.To contact us, send email [email protected].
350 W. Julian Street, Building 5, San José, CA 95110
www.svathome.org • [email protected]
TRANSMITTED VIA EMAIL
October 19, 2022
Environment and Planning Commission
City of Mountain View
Re: Middlefield Park Master Plan
Dear Chair Cranston, Vice Chair Joyce, and Members of the City of Mountain View Environmental Planning Commission,
On behalf of SV@Home and our members, we write today to provide comments in support of Google’s Middlefield Park Master Plan in the East Whisman Precise Plan area.
We appreciate Google’s vision for East Whisman. Their proposed Master Plan reflects and fulfills Mountain View’s goals for the area: it reimagines the current sprawl-centric office park as a mixed-use, walkable, bikeable hub with new residential development, commercial space, and parks. Middlefield Park is designed in the Master Plan to grow around existing transit and connect to the rest of Mountain View and to Sunnyvale, and will serve as both an anchor and catalyst for other development in the East Whisman area.
The Middlefield Park Master Plan rests on the strengths of the East Whisman Precise Plan.
The Jobs-Housing Linkage Strategy remains a ground-breaking policy tool to directly link new office growth with new residential development. This is a Master Plan that reaffirms the value of truly mixed use places – complete communities – where people of all incomes can live, work and play, with open spaces and active uses 18 hours a day. We would like to thank the City Council and staff for all of their work to adopt an East Whisman Precise Plan that enables such innovative development proposals and smart growth.
We are most pleased that the plan enables 20% of new units to be 100% deed-restricted affordable homes. We are supportive of the plan worked out by staff and the Google/Lend Lease team, which we will discuss further below.
Land dedication is an important and effective tool for integrating affordable housing into larger developments or master plans. This approach allows for the inclusion of a greater number of affordable homes and can support deeper levels of affordability – details that are all clearly outlined in the staff memorandum. There are a number of challenges however, most of which are also outlined in the memo:
• The first is the required additional public subsidy. It will always take additional resources to achieve deeper levels of affordability. This is particularly true in the context of a plan that will include 20% of the units as affordable and incorporates significant additional public benefits. In this case the land dedication will enable the full 20% and will come to the City with valuable site improvements;
• The second is ensuring there are clear policies and timelines to facilitate the development of affordable housing sooner rather than allowing the land to sit vacant. In Board of Directors
Kevin Zwick, Chair
United Way Bar Area
Gina Dalma, Vice Chair
Silicon Valley Community
Foundation
Candice Gonzalez, Secretary
Sand Hill Property Company
Andrea Osgood, Treasurer
Eden Housing
Shiloh Ballard
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition
Bob Brownstein
Working Partnerships USA
Amie Fishman
Non-Profit Housing
Association of Northern CA
Ron Gonzales
Hispanic Foundation
of Silicon Valley
Javier Gonzalez
Google
Poncho Guevara
Sacred Heart Community
Service
Janice Jensen
Habitat for Humanity
East Bay/Silicon Valley
Janikke Klem
Jan LIndenthal
MidPen Housing
Jennifer Loving
Destination: Home
Mary Murtagh
EAH Housing
Chris Neale
The Core Companies
Kelly Snider
Kelly Snider Consulting
Staff
Regina Celestin Williams
Executive Director
October 19, 2022
Re: Middlefield Park Master Plan
350 W. Julian Street, Building 5, San José, CA 95110
408.780.8411 • www.svathome.org • [email protected] this case, the improved land dedications are in Phase 1 and there is additional support to increase the level of confidence in their development. None of these steps are guarantees, but the additional steps taken by the City Council to prioritize funding to develop on city-owned land will be important; and • The third is that affordable housing needs to be integrated with the market rate and commercial development in the plan area. Ideally, this includes a mixture of inclusionary units and stand alone 100% affordable projects, but in this case the land dedications will support both the spatial and economic integration of the new community.
Middlefield Park will play a significant role in the growth of Mountain View in the next decade. The commitments to bring the affordable homes forward in Phase I in the Middlefield Master Plan will be essential to meeting the 6th Cycle RHNA obligations outlined in the Housing Element Update. We are confident that city staff and the Google/Lend Lease team have alignment on both vision and implementation strategies. This will take continued commitment from both, including support from the City Council, to be fully realized. This has been a long and complicated planning process, which will continue for years to come, but we are excited to see progress being made as the East Whisman Precise Plan continues to gain momentum.
Sincerely,
Regina Celestin Williams
Executive Director