Attachment 5
From: Shuo Shen
To: Brennan, Phillip; Hicks, Alison
Subject: Public Park Space on the Prometheus Project (675/685 E. Middlefield) Date: Thursday, February 16, 2023 8:48:47 AM
Attachments: image.png
Hi Phillip, Alison,
This is Shuo. I'm a resident on Pyramid Way. Our unit is right next to the Pyramid Park. I received the invitation to the hearing of the prometheus project plan on 675/685 E.
Middlefield. And I would like
to share my thoughts in writing as I can't attend the meeting today.
The plan mentions a 0.36-acre park for 850 (716 + 144) residential units plus office buildings.
The size of the park looks very small for the number of units. As a comparison, when Pulte Radius was planned, it had the
2.76-acre Pyramid park for 200 units. The Pulte plan had 30 times more park space than the new Prometheus plan on a sqft per unit basis.
I would really appreciate it if you could forward our concern to the meeting and discuss whether there's more room for public park space for each unit. Otherwise, I'm afraid the project would put huge pressure on the neighboring Pyramid Park. As it stands, the Pyramid Park is already overly crowded during daily peak hours, imposing safety concerns to the playing children and noise issues to the neighboring
units.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Cheers,
Shuo
From: Mandy Lau
To: Brennan, Phillip
Subject: 675 and 685 E Middlefield Project Feedback
Date: Friday, February 17, 2023 9:56:00 PM
Hi Phillip - I am a property owner of the Whisman neighborhood and was made aware of the above development couple weeks ago. I have significant concerns of the proposed development plan:
1. Density and resident to park ratio - in the precise plan (p.21), it calls for 3 acre of park per 1000 residents. This development aims to have 1500-2000 residents and yet only offers 0.36 acre? I understand the developer argues the 3 acre refers to wider park MV offers such as in Shoreline. But this is contrary to our understanding when the precise plan was approved. What this development is doing is creating high density housing in a residential area where park is already limited. This is very concerning. This concern is shared among many home owners in my neighborhoods.
I highly urge the development reduce the unit by more than 50% or only focus on office development.
2. Traffic - With potential additional 1500 residents, you are creating significant traffic along Middlefield and Ferguson.
This does not even consider the Google Master plan
development on the other side of Middlefield. What we will experience is HUGE congestion in Middlefield and 237 corners. It is environmentally unfriendly and unsafe.
I witnessed several accidents on the Middlefield and 237 HWY junction given the confusing traffic light.
I also object the backroad going out to Ferguson.
That exit should not be allowed to
minimize traffic onto Ferguson.
3. Safety - In our small neighborhoods - we already experienced increased crime rate, especially of stealing packages and those thieves just ran off.
Mountain View is one
of the most expensive and supposedly safe suburbs. As you invite more residents, we will see crime rates increase, making this once attractive neighborhood unsafe.
4. Building Height - the developer said they already lowered the building height below what's allowed. But that should not be the benchmark. The developer should consider the look and feel of the surrounding buildings. The Revela appointment is only 4 story high. The development should at least reduce the height by half to match the nearby buildings and maintain that character.
5. Retail - In the Precise plan, there was a request any new development must have a good retail and residential ratio. What I see is more residential units and NO retail, not even a grocery store. This is a huge concern
I highly ask the committee to re-evaluate this plan with the existing residents nearby in mind. Imagine you are the ones living in this neighborhood and will soon be seeing an influx of residents coming in, causing traffic, safety issue.
The economy is still fragile, the Google master plan is still in planning. We do not understand why there is such a rush to building 800+ units when we are in a recession.
I sincerely hope the developer will reconsider and focus more on office building and retail as opposed to high-density housing.
Sincerely,
Mandy
https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx? BlobID=32005&fbclid=IwAR2MbFY2625EV-
cOoIKFKMiupVcF7E4TEr6wdk2Fb1PaxpziN8KXXylehFU
Hi Mr. Brennan,
If one is oppose to a dev proposal project, specifically in MV, how can one vote and/or state points against it?
Thanks,
John
From: Shapiro, Rebecca
To:
Cc: Brennan, Phillip
Subject: RE: To Attn: Rebecca Shapiro/Development committee Date: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 2:21:45 PM
Attachments: image001.png
Hello Ms. Friedman –
Thank you for reaching out with your question re: unit mix in the Prometheus project, and to expand on some of the comments you shared at the DRC meeting.
I have CC’ed Phillip Brennan on this email. Phillips is City project planner for this development, and is the best source of information on specific project components such as the unit mix.
Cheers,
Rebecca Shapiro
Deputy Zoning Administrator
Community Development Department | Planning Division
650-903-6306 | MountainView.gov
Twitter | Facebook | Instagram | YouTube | AskMV
From: Leslie Friedman
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 1:00 PM
To: , Planning Division <[email protected]> Subject: To Attn: Rebecca Shapiro/Development committee TO: Rebecca Shapiro, Deputy Zoning Administrator
Hello, I attended the January meeting in City Hall with your committee and the individuals representing Prometheus. At the meeting, I did not hear what kind of apartments were going to be built either in the market value apartment building or in the building reserved for moderate or low income renters.
Are these apartments one bedrooms, studios, two bedrooms? I apologize if this was announced at another meeting.
These options will have a great impact on all aspects of the buildings. The future of the half- acre-plus-a-bit park, for example, can be predicted depending on how many thousand
individuals - adult, juvenile, or canine - might be using it.
A half acre might help by creating a small open space, but people of all ages will need a bigger space actually to be able to play or dodge the doggie-ness or sit and enjoy the surroundings.
I recognize that Prometheus enlarged the area of the proposed open space. However, half an acre
for thousands of residents is not a big space.
Areas around trees which are not killed will be precious space but 3000 residents or more will need to use other parks or school yards. Knowing the kind of apartments would make a difference.
Is this for studio apartments or apartments in which a family could live?
I understand that Prometheus wants an office building as well. Good morning, it is the 21st century.
At some point, soon I hope, Mountain View needs to recognize that the world has changed in a
very big way. Destroying trees which are life saving elements of our world, planning for offices
which will welcome a third of the employees maybe twice a week, what is this? Prometheus and
other builders need to think about what reason they have to continue doing what they accomplished
well in the 1980s.
Thank you for your kind attention,
Leslie Friedman
P.S. I have heard the strange claim that "redwood trees use too much water." Compared to hundreds of apartments with plumbing, the trees are quite economic in their use of water over their lifetimes of hundreds of years.
1 Brennan, Phillip
From: NA <
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2024 11:02 PM
To: Brennan, Phillip
Subject: 675-685 E Middlefield
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Hi Mr. Brennan,
I believe our heritage trees are vital assets. Not only do they increase oxygen and remove pollutants, but they also slow the buildup of greenhouse gases and provide shelter, shade, and beauty to our City. I’m writing to request that you prevent the destruction of the heritage trees at 675 E Middlefield. These beautiful assets to our City cannot be replaced. -Nancy Achter, MV Resident
From: Shannon Wilkowski
To: Brennan, Phillip
Subject: PL-2023-259 & PL-2022-260
Date: Friday, September 20, 2024 1:50:39 PM
Dear Mr. Brennan,
I would like to advocate AGAINST the removal of heritage trees associated with the potential
project on Ferguson Dr related to application numbers PL-2023-259 & PL-2022-260.
I believe Prometheus could work harder to save large trees.
Thank you,
Shannon Wilkowski
(Eldora Dr)
1 Brennan, Phillip
From: Terri Goldberg
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2024 11:13 AM
To: Brennan, Phillip
Subject: Save the trees
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Dear Mr. Brennan,
My plea is one of many asking you as a decision-maker to spare as many trees as possible on Ferguson St. in Mountain View. Our urban forest is critically important in so many “unseen ways.” Namely: habitat for birds who keep insect population down, converting CO2 to oxygen, providing shade, adding beauty and greenery to our environment.
In my view whatever development is planned can be altered to preserve those trees. Too many times trees are sacrificed for concrete. Let’s find a solution to SAVE THOSE TREES! Sincerely yours,
Terri Goldberg Mountain View resident since 1962 Sent from my iPad
From: Sanmay Ved
To: [email protected]; Brennan, Phillip
Subject: Increased Park Allocation for 685 E Middlefield Project by Prometheus Date: Thursday, November 14, 2024 9:18:31 AM
Dear City of Mountain View,
I am writing to express concerns regarding the proposed park space allocation for the 685 E Middlefield Project by Prometheus
The project includes new 8-story multi-family apartment buildings with 836 units. Based on an estimated occupancy of 2.39 residents per unit, this translates to approximately 2,000 residents.
Mountain View's General Plan aims for 3 acres of park space per 1,000 residents. Applying this standard, the development should ideally include 6 acres of park space. However, the current proposal allocates only 0.52 acres.
To put this into perspective, Radius at Whisman Station, a 198-home community, has access to Pyramid Park, which is between 2.75 and 3 acres.
Insufficient park space within new developments can lead to:
Overcrowding: Strain on existing parks in surrounding areas.
Reduced Quality of Life: Limited access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation for new residents.
Inequity in Access: Disproportionate impact on the well-being of the new residents of the new community.
I urge the city to review the park allocation for [Project Name] and ensure it aligns with Mountain View's General Plan and the needs of its growing population. A minimum of 6 acres of park space should be included within this development to ensure adequate access for its residents.
Thank you for your time and consideration of this important matter.
Sincerely,
Sanmay
Requested Revision to COAs
From: Shuo Shen
To: Showalter, Pat; [email protected]; Matichak, Lisa; Brennan, Phillip Subject: [Prometheus] Concerns with Park Space
Date: Saturday, November 23, 2024 2:44:38 PM
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Dear City of Mountain View,
I'm a resident near Pyramid Park. I am writing to express concerns about the insufficient park space allocation in the proposed 685 E Middlefield project by Prometheus.
The project plans for 836 units, housing an estimated 2,000 residents (based on 2.39 residents per unit).
However, the proposal allocates only 0.52 acres of park space, which is inadequate to support the needs of such a large community.
The existing Pyramid Park, located near the development site, is already experiencing significant overflow, leading to noise and parking issues. Adding more residents without sufficient new park space will exacerbate these problems, further reducing the quality of life for both new and existing residents.
Insufficient park space in new developments can lead to:
• Overcrowding in already overburdened parks.
• Reduced quality of life due to limited recreational green spaces. • Increased noise and traffic congestion near current parks, affecting the surrounding neighborhoods.
I urge the city to reevaluate the park allocation for this project and ensure sufficient green space is included to meet the needs of its residents and alleviate pressure on existing parks.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Shuo
From: Shuo Shen
To: [email protected]; Matichak, Lisa; Showalter, Pat; Brennan, Phillip Subject: Re: [Prometheus] Concerns with Park Space
Date: Saturday, November 23, 2024 4:43:06 PM
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
As you can see, on a typical Saturday afternoon, the park is crowded. There’s a lot of traffic and noise and it is not very pleasant to the residents next to the park.
Having a new construction with minimal park space will make this problem even worse.
Shuo
On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 2:43 PM Shuo Shen < > wrote:
Dear City of Mountain View,
I'm a resident near Pyramid Park. I am writing to express concerns about the insufficient park space allocation in the proposed 685 E Middlefield project by Prometheus.
The project plans for 836 units, housing an estimated 2,000 residents (based on 2.39 residents per unit).
However, the proposal allocates only 0.52 acres of park space, which is inadequate to support the needs
of such a large community.
The existing Pyramid Park, located near the development site, is already experiencing significant overflow, leading to noise and parking issues. Adding more residents without sufficient new park space will exacerbate these problems, further reducing the quality of life for both new and existing residents.
Insufficient park space in new developments can lead to:
• Overcrowding in already overburdened parks.
• Reduced quality of life due to limited recreational green spaces. • Increased noise and traffic congestion near current parks, affecting the surrounding neighborhoods.
I urge the city to reevaluate the park allocation for this project and ensure sufficient green space is included to meet the needs of its residents and alleviate pressure on existing parks.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Shuo
From: Mandy Lau
To: Brennan, Phillip; [email protected]
Subject: 685 East Middlefield development
Date: Sunday, November 24, 2024 8:58:33 PM
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Dear Mr. Brennan and EPC committee,
I am a resident of the Whisman Park area and like to express my concern of the new development on 685 East Middlefield especially the ratio of number of residents relative to park space.
The current proposal estimates close to 2,000 residents but the park space is a mere 0.52 acres.
This is drastically lower than the Mountain View
requirement of 3 acres per 1,000 residents. I understand your potential push back is that the 3 acres include space in shoreline park etc. But this is not reasonable because our daily living is in our "immediate neighborhood".
The current proposal is posting HUGE traffic, safety and wellbeing concern for the residents in the Whisman district area.
I share this concern with many residents in the neighborhood. I ask for your reconsideration of your proposal to "reduce" the density of your development AND add more park space in the immediate area.
Sincerely,
Mandy
From: Mandy Lau
To: Brennan, Phillip; [email protected]
Cc: , City Clerk
Subject: Re: 685 East Middlefield development
Date: Saturday, December 7, 2024 1:20:34 PM
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Hi all - I received a notice that there is another public hearing on 12/17. In the notice it looks like the above plan received a conditional approval subject to the “Alternative Mitigation Plan”. Can you share what the mitigation plan is?
As mentioned below many of owners in the Radius community are very concerned about the lack of Park Space, congestion, safety and overall wellbeing of the neighborhood once this massive project is launched.
We sincerely hope you can scale back on the density.
Mandy
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Sunday, November 24, 2024, 8:58 PM, Mandy Lau <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Raihan Saleh
To: Brennan, Phillip
Cc: Shree Dharasker
Subject: Application No. PL-6535 685 E. Middlefield Road Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2024 11:32:08 AM
Attachments: image001.png
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Hi Phillip,
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) has received mailed in notice for the 11/20/2024 City of Mountain View Environmental Planning Commission Meeting to discuss the 675- 685 E. Middlefield Road Mixed-Use Development Project (Project), received on 11/18/2024.
Valley Water staff has reviewed the documentation provided for this Project, and have no comments.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you,
RAIHAN SALEH
Pronouns: she/her
ASSISTANT ENGINEER II
Community Projects Review Unit
Tel. (408) 630-2693
Santa Clara Valley Water District is now known as:
Clean Water • Healthy Environment • Flood Protection
5750 Almaden Expressway, San Jose CA 95118
www.valleywater.org