From: Marie
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2026 10:59 AM
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Cc: Jimmy
Subject: Public Comment Opposing Proposed 8-Story Development at 843–903 Castro Street CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Dear Members of the City Council,
I am writing to
formally express my strong opposition to the proposed eight-story mixed-use development at 843–903 Castro Street, 700 West El Camino Real, and 750 Fairmont Avenue, as described in the Notice of Public Hearing.
The escalation of this project’s height—from an originally understood five stories, to seven, and now to eight—raises serious concerns regarding consistency, transparency, and community expectations. A five-story development is far more aligned with the existing neighborhood character and represents a reasonable and predictable scale. The continued increase in height appears excessive and incompatible with the surrounding residential environment.
There are several substantive concerns that I respectfully ask the Council to consider:
1. Sunlight and Shadow Impacts
An eight-story structure will significantly alter sunlight access for existing residents.
Reduced natural light can negatively affect quality of life, property enjoyment, and even health outcomes. The scale of shadowing from an eight-story building is materially different from that of a five-story structure and warrants careful reconsideration.
2. Neighborhood Character and Compatibility
The surrounding area is not designed to accommodate a building of this height and density. The proposed structure would create a stark visual and architectural contrast, undermining the established character of the neighborhood.
3. Traffic and Parking Constraints
Increased residential density and commercial activity will inevitably lead to more traffic congestion. Local streets in this area are already narrow and heavily utilized.
Additional demand for parking will likely result in spillover into surrounding residential streets, increasing safety risks and reducing accessibility for current residents.
Attachment 6
From:
To: Maravilla, Edgar
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Objections to applicant PL-6753
Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2025 3:30:49 PM
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Hello Edgar,
I am a longtime resident of Mountain View and new first-time homeowner on Fairmont Ave in Old Mountain View. I had hoped to be able to attend this evening's meeting regarding the proposal at 843-903 Castro, 700 W El Camino, and 750 Fairmont Ave (PL-6753) but unfortunately am out of town for work at the moment. I am writing to you to express my strong objections to the current proposal.
I chose to live in Old Mountain View because of the unique character of this segment of the city. It is somehow both a bustling little downtown and a quiet neighborly area with a quaint neighborhood association. Adding the proposed 140 residential units in addition to underground parking and additional storefronts, with the dramatic increase in traffic, will really significantly affect this area in ways that must be considered.
As someone who was paying rent until less than 6 months ago, I know how badly we need more affordable housing. However an 8-story mixed-use complex of (presumably) luxury condos is not the way to do this. Not only will these skyscrapers block out the sun for the modest 1-2 story homes across the street but if downtown Los Altos is any clue, they will sit vacant and unsold for months or years. Because the people who can afford $1-2M properties don't want condos, they want townhomes or freestanding houses. And downtown Mountain View doesn't exactly need more storefronts at the moment, considering the number of properties that have been sitting vacant for years, just a few blocks away.
The addition of these hundred of vehicles to the corner of Castro and El Camino will also have major impacts on traffic. Although it would be great if some of the residents went vehicle-less, the public transit system in the greater bay area is just not what it needs to be to do that. Trust me. I've tried to take a combination of trains and buses to work and it just isn't practical or feasible, and I work less than 7 miles away. So conservatively, for 140 units, you're adding about 200 vehicles, as many will have 2 adults, each with their own vehicle. How many parking spots will be available to residents in the proposed underground garage? Where will the remaining vehicles park? My street, Fairmont, seems a logical choice. But it is a fairly narrow street and the garbage truck can only barely pass through when there are vehicles legally parked on both sides. Additionally, young kids frequently bike home from school, taking Fairmont as a safer alternative to El Camino. And tons of extra cars plus narrow road plus young children biking should be a serious safety concern to anyone involved.
Again, I understand the need for more housing. But we need affordable housing that fits in the character of this particular part of the city of Mountain View. I think with modifications, additional consideration of traffic and safety, and a limit of 4-stories, which is more in fitting with other buildings on Castro and El Camino, this project could potentially be a positive
addition to our city.
I have also cc'd my state assembly member, Marc Bergman, and state congressperson, Josh Becker, in the hopes that they can read my concerns and understand why some of these laws favoring "development at any cost" (ie builder's remedy, SB 79) make it more challenging for cities to address reasonable concerns about safety and overly rapid development, particularly as this is one of three separate developments being proposed at this specific intersection, each 7+ stories and adding a total of over 350 housing units without thought to infrastructure, safety to our children and community, or the city itself.
Thank you for your consideration,
Holly Cooper
From:
To: Maravilla, Edgar
Subject: Project on Castro and El Camino
Date: Friday, November 1, 2024 12:45:08 PM
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Dear Sir,
I am a long time resident of Mountain View and I object to this 8 story project.
Castro St
can’t support the the businesses they have and didn’t support the ones that are gone.
The parking facility would need to have at least over two hundred parking spaces and an outside lot , if businesses did occupy the lower levels.
That corner is very dangerous, children and adults cross at that corner all the time.
El Camino is so busy already and more traffic is unthinkable at that corner.
Sincerely,
Carolyn Blatt
From:
To: Maravilla, Edgar
Subject: Public Comment on 881 Castro (Castro Commons)
Date: Sunday, July 14, 2024 7:52:41 PM
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL - Ensure you trust this email before clicking on any links or attachments.
Hi Edgar,
The project at 881 Castro is coming before the Development Review Committee this Wednesday. I would like to urge the DRC to have the applicant come up with a more original
design for the exterior appearance of the buildings. As it stands, the project bears a striking resemblance to the apartments under construction at 1001 N. Shoreline Blvd. Here's a rendition of Castro Commons taken from the Plan Set:
And here is a photo of the building at 1001 N. Shoreline Blvd.:
This same style is present in too many recently constructed buildings. Here is 100 Moffett:
It's also prevalent in office buildings, like the Bank Of America building in Palo Alto or the Google building on Pear Ave:
All these buildings use rectangular blocks with exaggerated framing elements around walls of windows. The project at 881 Castro will occupy a prominent location in Mountain View.
Surely the architects can come up with a more original design that will not look dated in another twenty years.
Sincerely,
Albert Jeans
Oct 22, 2025
City of Mountain View
500 Castro St.
Mountain View, CA 94041
Re: Proposed Housing Development Project at 881 Castro Street To: [email protected]; [email protected]; Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
Dear Mountain View Zoning Administrator,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits this letter to remind the City of its obligation to abide by all relevant state laws when evaluating the proposed 140-unit housing development project at 881 Castro Street, which includes 11 moderate income units and 11 very low income units. These laws include the Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”), the Density Bonus Law (“DBL”), AB 130, and California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) guidelines.
The HAA provides the project legal protections. It requires approval of zoning and general plan compliant housing development projects unless findings can be made regarding specific, objective, written health and safety hazards. (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subds. (d), (j).) The HAA also bars cities from imposing conditions on the approval of such projects that would render the project infeasible (id. at subd. (d)) or reduce the project’s density (id. at subd. (j)) unless, again, such written findings are made. As a development with at least two-thirds of its area devoted to residential uses, the project falls within the HAA’s ambit, and it complies with local zoning code and the City’s general plan. Increased density, concessions, and waivers that a project is entitled to under the DBL (Gov. Code, § 65915) do not render the project noncompliant with the zoning code or general plan, for purposes of the HAA (Gov.
Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j)(3)). The HAA’s protections therefore apply, and the City may not reject the project except based on health and safety standards, as outlined above.
Furthermore, if the City rejects the project or impairs its feasibility, it must conduct “a 2201 Broadway, PH1, Oakland, CA 94612
www.calhdf.org
thorough analysis of the economic, social, and environmental effects of the action.” ( Id. at subd.
(b).)
CalHDF also writes to emphasize that the DBL offers the proposed development certain protections.
The
City
must
respect
these
protections.
In
addition
to
granting
the
increase
in
residential
units
allowed
by
the
DBL,
the
City
must
not
deny
the
project
the
proposed
waivers
and
concessions
with
respect
to
building
height,
rear
yard
setback,
and
Privately
Owned/Publicly
Accessible
(“POPA”)
open
space
credit.
If
the
City
wishes
to
deny
requested
waivers,
Government
Code
section
65915,
subdivision
(e)(1)
requires
findings
that
the
waivers
would
have
a
specific,
adverse
impact
upon
health
or
safety,
and
for
which
there
is
no
feasible
method
to
satisfactorily
mitigate
or
avoid
the
specific
adverse
impact.
If
the
City
wishes
to
deny
requested
concessions,
Government
Code
section
65915,
subdivision
(d)(1)
requires
findings
that
the
concessions
would
not
result
in
identifiable
and
actual
cost
reductions,
that
the
concessions
would
have
a
specific,
adverse
impact
on
public
health
or
safety,
or
that
the
concessions
are
contrary
to
state
or
federal
law.
The
City,
if
it
makes
any
such
findings,
bears
the
burden
of
proof.
(Gov.
Code,
§
65915,
subd.
(d)(4).)
Of
note,
the
DBL
specifically
allows
for
a
reduction
in
required
accessory
parking
in
addition
to
the
allowable
waivers
and
concessions.
(
Id
.
at
subd.
(p).)
Additionally,
the
California
Court
of
Appeal
has
ruled
that
when
an
applicant
has
requested
one
or
more
waivers
and/or
concessions
pursuant
to
the
DBL,
the
City
“may
not
apply
any
development
standard
that
would
physically
preclude
construction
of
that
project
as
designed,
even
if
the
building
includes
‘amenities’
beyond
the
bare
minimum
of
building
components.”
(
Bankers
Hill
150
v.
City
of
San
Diego
(2022)
74 Cal.App.5th
755,
775.)
Furthermore, the project is exempt from state environmental review under the Class 32 CEQA
categorical
exemption
(In-Fill
Development
Projects)
pursuant
to
section
15332
of
the
CEQA
Guidelines,
as
the
project
is
consistent
with
the
applicable
general
plan
designation
and
all
applicable
general
plan
policies
as
well
as
the
applicable
zoning
designation
and
regulations;
the
proposed
development
occurs
within
city
limits
on
a
project
site
of
no
more
than
five
acres
substantially
surrounded
by
urban
uses;
the
project
site
has
no
value
as
habitat
for
endangered,
rare,
or
threatened
species;
approval
of
the
project
would
not
result
in
any
significant
effects
relating
to
traffic,
noise,
air
quality,
or
water
quality;
and
the
site
can
be
adequately
served
by
all
required
utilities
and
public
services.
The
project
is
likely
also
eligible
for
a
statutory
exemption
from
CEQA
pursuant
to
AB
130
(Pub.
Res.
Code,
§
21080.66),
which
was
signed
into
law
on
June
30,
2025
and
effective
immediately
(Assembly
Bill No. 130, 2025-2026 Regular Session, Sec. 74, available here) Caselaw from the California Court of Appeal affirms that local governments err, and may be sued, when they improperly refuse
to
grant
a
project
a
CEQA
exemption
or
streamlined
CEQA
review
to
which
it
is
entitled.
(
Hilltop
Group,
Inc.
v.
County
of
San
Dieg
o
(2024)
99 Cal.App.5th
890,
911.)
2 of 3
As you are well aware, California remains in the throes of a statewide crisis-level housing shortage.
New
housing
such
as
this
is
a
public
benefit:
by
providing
affordable
housing,
it
will
mitigate
the
state’s
homelessness
crisis;
it
will
increase
the
city’s
tax
base;
it
will
bring
new
customers
to
local
businesses;
and
it
will
reduce
displacement
of
existing
residents
by
reducing
competition
for
existing
housing.
It
will
also
help
cut
down
on
transportation-related
greenhouse
gas
emissions
by
providing
housing
in
denser,
more
urban
areas,
as
opposed
to
farther-flung
regions
in
the
state
(and
out
of
state).
While
no
one
project
will
solve
the
statewide
housing
crisis,
the
proposed
development
is
a
step
in
the
right
direction.
CalHDF
urges
the
City
to
approve
it,
consistent
with
its
obligations
under
state
law.
CalHDF is a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation whose mission includes advocating for increased
access
to
housing
for
Californians
at
all
income
levels,
including
low-income
households. You may learn more about CalHDF at www.calhdf.org. Sincerely, Dylan Casey CalHDF Executive Director James M. Lloyd CalHDF Director of Planning and Investigations 3 of 3
www.CatalyzeSiliconValley.org
September18,2023GlenYonekura&PhilRollaGPRVentures843CastroStreet,MountainViewCA,94041 RE:GPRVenture’sProposalforCastroCommonsinMountainView
DearGlen&Phil,
ThankyouforpresentingyourCastroCommonsproposalfor843CastroStreetinMountainViewtoCatalyzeSVmembersatourProjectAdvocacyCommitteeonAugust23,2023.Asweunderstandit,themixed-useprojectlocatedonthecornerofCastroStreetandElCaminoRealproposestheconstructionof128newcondominiums,includingunitsdesignatedforaffordablehousing.Someoftheproject’s amenitiesincludeanactivecitypark,openspaces,paseos,ground-floorretailandrestaurantspaces,andcommunity-dedicatedmeetingroomstogather.Withtheproject’s communityengagement wellunderway, ourmembershavethefollowingfeedbackontheproject.
StandoutElements:
CommunityOurmembers commendthedeveloperfor goingabove andbeyondin theircommunityengagement efforts,whichhasnotablyenhancedtheproject.Theirproactive approachto engagingwithresidents andstakeholders is commendable.Weappreciatethedeveloper'sresponsivenesstofeedback,especiallyregardingthepark,giventheproject'sprimelocationat thesouthernentranceto Castro Street, a focal point in thecommunity.Nevertheless,thereisasharedconsensusamongourmembersthatthedevelopershouldconsiderbroadeningtheiroutreacheffortstoencompassunderrepresentedgroups,witha particularfocusonpotentialtenantsoftheBelowMarket Rate(BMR)units.Overall,thedeveloper'scommitment to fosteringa collaborative environment andtheirproactiveengagementwithstakeholdersisgreatlyappreciated.
VibrancyOurmembershighlyvaluethevibrantandcommunity-orienteddesignoftheproject.Amongthebest-receivedfeatures:thePaseoconcept,widersidewalks,andoutdoorspaces,allofwhicheffectivelyintegratetheprojectintotheneighborhood.Wealsoappreciatetheinclusionofcommunityspaces,outdoordecks,andtheproject'sfocusonretailservingthebroaderneighborhoodandthethoughtfulpreservationoflightandspaceinthePaseo.Thebuilding'sdesign,characterizedbyitshumanscaleandpotentialtobecomeananchorattheEl1
www.CatalyzeSiliconValley.org
CaminoendofCastro Street, waswell-receivedbyCSVmembers.Oneofthemsuggestedenhancingtheproject'svibrancybyconsideringartinstallationsormurals.However,thereisasharedconcernamongourmembers aboutensuringthat thePaseoremainsaccessibletoeveryone, not just residents. Overall, our members praisedthe projectfor itscommunity-focuseddesignandpotentialtoenliventhearea.
Intensity/ZoningTheproject'sproposaltoconstructa7-storybuildingwith128homesusingtheStateDensityBonusLawgarneredpositivefeedbackfromourmembers.Wearepleasedtoseethisintenselyzoneddevelopment situatedcloseto transitaccess.Theprospectofaseven-storystructurestandsoutasanopportunitytosetaprecedentforincreaseddensityandverticaldevelopment onCastroStreet that canencouragefurthergrowthandrevitalizationalongit.Underliningthesignificanceofaddressinglocalhousingrequirementsandtheneedformore homes,ourmembers voicedtheirpreferenceformaintainingtheexistingheight anddensitywithoutmakinganyreductions.
ElementstoImprove:
TransportationOurmembersarepleasedwiththeproposedproject'sproximitytothebusstop,lightrail stationandmountainview transitcenter. Thecurrent designincludes216residentialparkingspacesand149bikeparkingspaces,includingelectricalvehicle(EV)chargingstations.Whilewe largelysupporta lowerparkingratio, there'sa strongpreferenceforunbundlingcarparking.Theinclusionofthesebikeparkingspacesandparkingundergroundtoprovidemorehomeswaswellreceivedbyourmembers.Oneofourmembersrecommendedoutreachtobicyclepedestrianadvisorycommitteesandbikeadvocacygroupstoimprovebikestorage facilities.Additionally, we appreciatetheinclusionofEVcharginginfrastructureforvarioustypesofelectricvehicles,suchascars,e-bikes,ande-scooters.However,wesuggestadditionalchargingcapacitytomeettheanticipatedshifttowardall-electricvehiclesinthenextdecade.Overall,ourmembers prioritizeunbundledparking, transitpasses,androbustbikestoragetoencouragesustainabletransportationchoices.
SustainabilityOurmembersemphasizebuildingsthatgoaboveandbeyondonsustainability.Asweunderstand,thisprojectincludessolarrooftopandLEEDSilvercertification.Althoughwe understandthird-partycertificationssuchasLEEDorGreenpoint Rated(GPR)canbechallenging,thereare2higherstandardsforLEED–GoldandPlatinum–thatwerecommenddevelopers pursue.Intheabsenceofthose,ourmembers emphasize indoorairquality,sustainablematerialsforenergyefficiencyandnoisereduction.There'sencouragement to 2 www.CatalyzeSiliconValley.org
explore a zero-carbon construction process through third party service providers likeMoxion Power.
Affordability
Our members are staunch supporters of including on-site affordable housing in residential projects. We appreciate the project's proposal to designate 15% of the units on-site as affordable housing. The bedroom mix was well received by our members. That being said, we have a collective desire for the developer to exceed this 15% threshold, with a particular emphasis on targeting lower income ranges, such as 30-50% Area Median Income (AMI). We also have concerns regarding the displacement of businesses and residents currently on the site, with a desire to explore options for their return. Overall, our members value the inclusion of affordable housing but encourage an increase in both quantity and extent lower AMI levels.
We are very thankful to you for bringing your project to our Project Advocacy Committee (PAC).
Our members are eager to see more affordable homes as part of a vibrant, mixed-use development coming to such a prime area of Mountain View that desperately needs housing.
Our members look forward to seeing new homes and retail along with community spaces within proximity of transit. With a retail store front, paseo and a variety of amenities, the project promotes an active and connected community. As a 7-story building, this project gets us closer to the kind of housing solutions our region needs.
Sincerely,
Catalyze SV’s staff and Project Advocacy Committee members CC:
Aarti Shrivastava ([email protected])
Amber Blizinski ([email protected])
Aaron Hollister ([email protected])
Wayne Chen ([email protected])
Edgar Maravilla ([email protected])
Alison Hicks ([email protected])
Pat Showalter ([email protected])
Margaret Abe-Koga ([email protected])
Ellen Kamei ([email protected])
Lisa Matichak ([email protected])
Lucas Ramirez ([email protected])
Emily Ramos ([email protected])
Old Mountain View Neighborhood Association
Mountain View YIMBY
Peninsula for Everyone
KRP architects
GPR ventures
3 www.CatalyzeSiliconValley.org
Bruce England
Catalyze SV
About Catalyze SV
Catalyze SV’s Project Advocacy Committee is comprised of community members who identify, evaluate, & lead advocacy efforts around speci fic development projects.
4 ProjectReviewScorecard
ProjectUnderReview:CastroCommonsProjectApplicant:GPRVenturesReviewDate:August23,2023 Page3ofthisscorecardexplainsthecriteriabelow, asdoes:catalyzesiliconvalley.org/project-list Community Score:4/5Ourmemberscommendthedeveloperforgoingaboveandbeyondintheircommunityengagementefforts,whichhasnotablyenhancedtheproject.Theirproactiveapproachtoengagingwithresidentsandstakeholders iscommendable.We appreciate thedeveloper'sresponsivenesstofeedback,especiallyregardingthepark,giventheproject'sprimelocationatthesouthernentrancetoCastroStreet,afocalpointinthecommunity. Nevertheless,thereisasharedconsensusamongourmembersthatthedevelopershouldconsiderbroadeningtheiroutreacheffortstoencompassunderrepresentedgroups,withaparticularfocusonpotentialtenantsoftheBelowMarketRate(BMR)units.Overall,thedeveloper'scommitmenttofosteringacollaborativeenvironmentandtheirproactiveengagementwithstakeholdersisgreatlyappreciated.
Vibrancy Score:5/5Ourmembers highlyvaluethevibrantandcommunity-orienteddesignoftheproject.Amongthebest-receivedfeatures:thePaseoconcept, widersidewalks, andoutdoorspaces,allofwhicheffectivelyintegratetheprojectintotheneighborhood.Wealsoappreciatetheinclusionofcommunityspaces,outdoordecks, andtheproject'sfocusonretailservingthebroaderneighborhoodandthethoughtfulpreservationoflight andspaceinthePaseo.Thebuilding'sdesign,characterizedbyitshumanscaleandpotentialtobecomeananchorattheElCaminoendofCastroStreet,waswell-receivedbyCSVmembers.Oneofthemsuggestedenhancingtheproject'svibrancybyconsideringartinstallationsormurals.However,thereisasharedconcernamongourmembersaboutensuringthatthePaseoremainsaccessibletoeveryone,notjust residents.Overall,ourmemberspraisedtheprojectforitscommunity-focuseddesignandpotentialtoenliventhearea.
Transportation Score:3/5Ourmembersarepleasedwiththeproposedproject'sproximitytothebusstop,lightrailstationandmountainviewtransitcenter.Thecurrentdesignincludes216residentialparkingspacesand149bikeparkingspaces,includingelectricalvehicle(EV)chargingstations.Whilewelargelysupportalowerparkingratio,there'sastrongpreferenceforunbundlingcarparking.Theinclusionofthesebikeparkingspacesandparkingundergroundto providemore homeswaswellreceivedby ourmembers.Oneofourmembersrecommendedoutreachtobicyclepedestrianadvisorycommitteesandbikeadvocacygroupstoimprovebikestoragefacilities.Additionally,weappreciatetheinclusionofEVcharginginfrastructureforvarioustypesofelectricvehicles,suchascars,e-bikes,ande-scooters.However,wesuggestadditionalchargingcapacityto
meet theanticipatedshifttowardall-electricvehiclesinthenextdecade.Overall,ourmembersprioritizeunbundledparking,transitpasses,androbustbikestoragetoencouragesustainabletransportationchoices.
Sustainability Score:3/5Ourmembersemphasizebuildingsthatgoaboveandbeyondonsustainability.Asweunderstand,thisprojectincludessolarrooftopandLEEDSilvercertification.Althoughweunderstandthird-partycertificationssuchasLEEDorGreenpointRated(GPR)canbechallenging,thereare2higherstandardsforLEED–GoldandPlatinum–thatwerecommenddeveloperspursue.Intheabsenceofthose,ourmembersemphasize indoorairquality, sustainablematerialsfor energy efficiencyandnoisereduction.There'sencouragement to explore a zero-carbonconstructionprocessthroughthird partyserviceproviders likeMoxionPower.
Intensity/Zoning Score:5/5Theproject'sproposaltoconstructa7-storybuildingwith128homesusingtheStateDensityBonusLawgarneredpositivefeedbackfromourmembers.Wearepleasedtoseethisintenselyzoneddevelopment situatedcloseto transitaccess.Theprospectofa seven-story structure standsoutasanopportunityto set aprecedent forincreaseddensityandverticaldevelopment onCastroStreet that canencouragefurthergrowthandrevitalizationalongit.Underliningthesignificanceofaddressinglocalhousingrequirementsandtheneedformorehomes,ourmembersvoicedtheirpreferenceformaintainingtheexistingheightanddensitywithoutmakinganyreductions.
Affordability Score:4/5Ourmembersarestaunchsupportersofincludingon-siteaffordablehousinginresidentialprojects.Weappreciatetheproject'sproposaltodesignate15%oftheunitson-siteasaffordablehousing.Thebedroommixwaswellreceivedbyourmembers.Thatbeingsaid,wehaveacollectivedesireforthedevelopertoexceedthis15%threshold,withaparticularemphasisontargetinglowerincomeranges,suchas30-50%AreaMedianIncome(AMI).Wealsohaveconcernsregardingthedisplacementofbusinessesandresidentscurrentlyonthesite,withadesiretoexploreoptionsfortheirreturn.Overall,ourmembersvaluetheinclusionofaffordablehousingbutencourageanincreaseinbothquantityandextentlowerAMIlevels.
Legacy Score:N/AMembersofCatalyzeSVdidn’tthinkthiscategorywasapplicabletothissite.However,theproject'seffortstopreserveoaktrees,aGatewaysign,maintainthepark,andincludemuralsareappreciated.Theideaofa"Gateway"signwasparticularlywell-receivedasapotentialplacemarkerforCastroStreet'sentrance. CumulativeScore:4outof5
OVERVIEW
Thisproject reviewscorecardprovidesguidelinesfor consistentlyevaluatinghowaproposeddevelopmentalignswithCatalyzeSV’svalues. CatalyzeSV’svaluesare:● Inclusive, DiverseCommunities● Healthy, SustainableDevelopment● Convenient TransportationChoices ● HousingSolutionsfor All● Vibrant Placesfor People● EquitableCommunityEngagement GradingCriteria- MeritsCommunity: Theapplicant ismakingsignificant effortstoreachout tothecommunity,includingunderrepresented** voices, andhasaddressedrecommendationscollectedthroughcommunityengagement.Vibrancy: Theproposal seizeslocational opportunitiesandincludesfeaturestoenhancethehumanexperienceof thesiteandneighborhood. Publicandprivatespaceisdesignedtopromotephysical, mental, and/or social well-beingwhileconnectingwithparks, freshfood,and/or other communityamenities.Transportation: Theproject recognizesthegrowingimportanceof avarietyof mobilitysolutions, incentivizesreducedautomobileusage, andmeasuresmobilityafter theproject isbuilt andoccupied. TransportationDemandManagement plansareencouraged.Sustainability: Theproject incorporatesmeasurablegreenbuildingfeatures. CalGreenTier1/2measuresand/or third-partycertifications(LEED, WELL, LivingBuildingChallenge, etc) areencouraged. Somefeaturescanbefoundhere:https://www.catalyzesiliconvalley.org/sustainable-features.Intensity/Zoning: Theproject utilizesnearlythefull densityallowedunder itszoningandgeneral plandesignations.Affordability: Theproposal considersprotectionsor relocationbenefitsfor existingresidential and/or commercial tenantsthat maybedisplaced. It goesbeyondcurrentgovernment requirementsfor onsite, below-market-ratehomes, stabilizedcommercial leases,or appropriatesubstitutes.Legacy(whenapplicable): Theproject undertakeseffortstoincorporate, protect, orpreserveanyobjectsof significant cultural or historicmerit identifiedbythecommunityonornear thesite.** =Researchhasshownthat renters, newresidents, peopleof color, younger people, andfemalestendtobeunderrepresentedvoicesonlocal development issues. (1, 2, 3) GradingScale- MeritsAnaveragescoreof 3.5isrequiredfor CatalyzeSVtoconsider advocatingfull support for aproject.1 =Failstomeet project reviewcriteria2=Meetssomeproject reviewcriteria3=Meetsbasicproject reviewcriteria4=Exceedsproject reviewcriteria5=Goesfar beyondproject reviewcriteria N/A=Categorydoesnot apply