ATT 1 - Public Comment — Mountain View City Council, February 11, 2025

From:

To: Penollar, Krisha
Subject: Re: 1702-1704 Miramonte Mountain View
Date: Monday, January 13, 2025 6:46:13 AM
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.

Dear Krisha,
Thank you very much for providing me this information.

My reading of the General Plan and Housing Element shows the Mixed Use Village Center at Blossom Valley Shopping Center, on the south side of Cuesta, while 1702-1704 Miramonte is described as a 'developable underutilized opportunity site'.

A 45 ft tall mixed use residential and commercial center on that small corner is too massive. It is to the east and south of modest single story residential, which is the direction our sunlight comes from. It's not a large parcel and has a triangular shape, and I don't see how buildings could transition to 45ft in height, as I see on other sites in Mountain View.

A long-standing neighborhood problem is inadequate parking at the medical complex. Employees and clients park on Sladky and Tulane all day on weekdays, this creates conflicts, and the city has never successfully addressed this issue.

I agree that putting moderate income housing at 1702-1704 is a good idea. Please consider a change in zoning from commercial to residential. There is plenty of commercial space at Blossom Valley Shopping Center, with the potential to build more there.

Sincerely, Ingrid Graeve
On Friday, January 10, 2025 at 07:54:34 AM PST, Penollar, Krisha <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Ingrid,
Apologies on the delay. Miramonte is currently proposed to permit General Plan Mixed Use Village Center land use, which allows up to 45’ maximum building height and reduced wall plate heights when adjacent to residentially-zoned properties. At the EPC meeting, we will discuss Staff’s approach to implementing the Housing Element programs, which states to rezone Miramonte to allow 30 DU/acre as residential is currently not permitted in the existing zoning. You can find relevant information on the project webpage . The staff report
should be posted later today.

The parking standards must follow the City’s minimum parking requirements, but allows shared parking as indicated in the GP Mixed Use Village Center land use development standards linked above.

Let me know if you have any follow-up questions.

Attachment 1
Thank you,

From: Ingrid Graeve
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2025 6:05 AM
To: Penollar, Krisha <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 1702-1704 Miramonte Mountain View

CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.

Hi Krisha,
Which zoning designation is being proposed for 1702-1704 Miramonte? I found a presentation online from 2022 that indicates R3A and R3B, with no height increase allowed, would be planned adjacent to R1 in this area. Is this correct?
Sincerely, Ingrid Graeve

On Tuesday, January 7, 2025 at 09:56:49 AM PST, Penollar, Krisha <[email protected]
> wrote:

Hi Ingrid,

Thank you for your question. I’m available for a phone call at 3 if you would like to touch base about the upcoming meetings.

Thank you,

From: Ingrid Graeve
Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2025 8:20 AM
To: Penollar, Krisha <[email protected]> Subject: 1702-1704 Miramonte Mountain View

CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or

attachments.

Hi Krisha,
I received your postcard about 2 upcoming city meetings to change the zoning at various properties from commercial to residential. I live at the corner of Sladky and Miramonte, opposite 1702-1704 Miramonte, and have questions about that development. I read in the Housing Element that there is an opportunity for 15 middle income residential units on that 0.75 acre site. What does that look like? What types of buildings might this mean (number of stories, layout, parking, etc)? Sincerely, Ingrid Graeve

Using 55 Fairchild Drive as a representative example of the parcels in Evandale Precise Plan Area A, redeveloping our ~45000 square foot lot as apartments or condos would allow for, roughly:
 Approximately 65,000 square feet of building,
 Spanning 4 stories,
 Split amongst 1000 square foot dwelling units, achieving almost 60 units of housing along with 5000 square feet of public and back of house spaces.

Using the same parcel for commercial use, redeveloping our ~45,000 square foot lot as a new hotel would allow for, roughly:
 Approximately 15,750 square feet of building,
 Spanning 2 stories,
 Split amongst 300 square foot average hotel rooms, achieving at most 35 hotel rooms with 5000 square feet of necessary public and back of house spaces.

As you can see from this rudimentary example, the commercial zoning in the Evandale Precise Plan Area A is so highly restrictive that it will never be feasible for the property owners in this area to redevelop for commercial purposes. The standard prototype for a new hotel is approximately 110 rooms, which is the optimal number of rooms to operate a hotel proﬁtably.

The City should do its utmost to encourage development, both of residential and commercial properties. The zoning found in Evandale Precise Plan Area A, however, is so restrictive that there has been no development in this area in over 20 years. We encourage you to take this opportunity to revisit the Evandale Precise Plan’s Commercial Neighborhood zoning and improve the density and height restrictions to match the much-improved General Plan Mixed Use Village Center, or at a minimum, consider utilizing the Commercial/Residential-Arterial (CRA) Zoning District Standards.

Thank you for your time.

Ramesh Mistry
President, Everest Hospitality

Attachment A: Letter to Councilmembers, dated April 18, 2022 Attachment B: Letter to Councilmembers, dated December 1, 2023 55 Fairchild Drive
Mountain View CA 94043

April 18, 2022
Councilmember Pat Showalter
City of Mountain View
500 Castro Street
Mountain View CA 94041

Dear Councilmember Showalter,
We recently were contacted by the City of Mountain View Community Development Department to discuss residential development of our property, as part of the 2023-2031 Housing Element update for the State of California. While we are interested in the additional option to build housing on our property, we would like to take this opportunity to request a review of the Evandale Precise Plan, which includes our property at 55 Fairchild Drive.

The Evandale Precise Plan was adopted by the Mountain View City Council on December 9, 1997 via Resolution 16191, and has not been updated since then. As described in the plan document, the precise plan encompasses a narrow strip of land adjacent to US 101 between Moffett Boulevard and North Whisman Road. It consists of three areas (Areas A, B and C). Our hotel, the Ramada by Wyndham Mountain View, is included in Area A.

Since the Precise Plan was adopted in 1997, the area surrounding and including the Evandale Precise Plan has changed dramatically. The majority of Area B within the Plan has since been redeveloped to include high density housing, while Area C now includes a commercial office building.

Across Highway 101, major redevelopments at Moffett Field have taken place, adding several high-rise office buildings for Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and others. To the east of N Whisman, there are various high rise commercial office buildings, soon to be joined by Google’s Middlefield Park mixed-use project.

To the west, across Moffett Boulevard, the Ameswell Hotel and Google office complex have recently opened, adding 255 guestrooms and office space to the area.

Within Area A of the Precise Plan, however, there have been no significant developments since the Plan was adopted. While the former Denny’s restaurant site on Leong Drive has now been demolished, it is our understanding that the project slated for that site has been delayed or cancelled. The County Inn motel is currently for sale, being offered as a potential redevelopment site.

We believe that our current zoning of Neighborhood Commercial is impeding redevelopment and renewal of our area, with height and density restrictions that don’t allow a financially feasible redevelopment project to take place. Neighborhood Commercial zoning restricts development to a floor area ratio of 0.35 maximum and a height limit of 35 feet (2 stories maximum), with setbacks of 15 feet in

December 1, 2023
Councilmembers and Mayor,
City of Mountain View
500 Castro Street
Mountain View, CA 94041

Dear Councilmember,
I wanted to start by wishing you a wonderful holiday season.

In April of last year, I wrote to you requesƟng City Council to review the Evandale Precise Plan and update our zoning to beƩer suit the current needs of our neighborhood and our city. I am wriƟng to you today to kindly request, again, that the Evandale Precise Plan is reviewed and updated.

In the last month, another major hotel project has been approved less than one mile from our hotel, namely the 500 Ellis Street hotel. This project, which sits on 2.16 acres, will be six stories tall, with 201 hotel rooms, a 2-story oﬃce building and a 4-story parking garage with reduced parking for 192 spaces.

In comparison, the current zoning at 55 Fairchild Drive, 0.9 miles away, of Neighborhood Commercial only allows for a Floor Area RaƟo of 0.35, with height limits of 35 feet and 2 stories. With such restricƟons, the exisƟng hotels and businesses in Area A of the Evandale Precise Plan, including my business at 55 Fairchild Drive, have no possibility to renovate or redevelop, as no new project can be economically viable with these restricƟons.

Considering that we have been in business for over 40 years, serving thousands of guests and providing hundreds of thousands of dollars in transit tax to the City, I believe it is only fair that our business is treated on equal fooƟng to new projects in our neighborhood. If a new hotel development in our neighborhood is allowed to be six stories tall, why are we restricted to only two stories? As I noted in my last leƩer, I request that the City Council update Area A of the Evandale Precise Plan at a minimum, to Commercial/ResidenƟal Arterial (CRA) Zoning. This updated zoning, while sƟll not as generous as the 500 Ellis Street project, will allow my hotel, along with the other businesses in Area A, a fair chance to redevelop with a ﬁnancially feasible project.

Kind regards,
Ramesh Mistry
Ramada by Wyndham, Mountain View
55 Fairchild Drive Mountain View CA 9434

From: Pancholi, Diana
To: Penollar, Krisha
Cc: Anderson, Eric B.; Murdock, Christian; Blizinski, Amber Subject: FW: Train Noise Comments
Date: Thursday, January 16, 2025 9:11:43 AM
Good Morning Commissioners,
Below is the Comment from last night's meeting on Item 5.1.- Housing Element Item 1.1g.

Sincerely,
Diana
Diana Pancholi
Principal Planner
Community Development Department | Planning Division
650-903-6306 | MountainView.gov
Twitter
| Facebook | Instagram | YouTube | AskMV
-----Original Message-----
From: Max Bosel
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2025 9:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Train Noise Comments
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.

Commissioner Cranston,
Thank you for considering my comments regarding the impacts of train noise and potential issues with their impact on the Evelyn Avenue Corridor Precise Plan based on the General Plan’s Outdoor Noise Environment Guidelines.

Your perspective that you shared having lived across from the San Antonio train station, however, is a night and day comparison to the Mountain View train station. There are no at-grade crossings at the San Antonio station. There are three at the Mountain View train station. Trains do not routinely sound their horns at the San Antonio station. They do with several blasts at each of the three crossings at the Mountain View train station.

Needless to say, it was disappointing to hear you draw conclusions from experiences at a location two miles from the project site. It felt dismissive to me, having direct exposure to the impacts I spoke about. I encourage you to sit outside the Savvy Cellars, or at a downtown outdoor seating establishment in the 100 blk of Castro Street and attempt to have an uninterrupted conversation during lunchtime. My home is roughly half a mile from the train station, and my family doesn’t open the windows at night because of the noise from the train horns. These are the issues that I intended to convey with potential residential development at the Evelyn site, along with suggesting the City begin considering a viable solution that mitigates these impacts and enhances the quality of life in the area.

Thank you for again for your service and consideration, and I hope that sharing my points of view brings broader awareness to the responsibilities when making decisions for an entire community with diverse experiences in different locations, even when they are in the same city.

Respectfully,
Max Bosel

Mountain View City CouncilFebruary 11, 2025

Mountain View City Council
February 11, 2025