Agenda packet — Mountain View City Council, October 13, 2026 (part 1 of 2)

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AND NOTICE
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2026 - 6:30 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND VIDEO CONFERENCE, 500
CASTRO ST., MOUNTAIN VIEW, CA 94041
Mayor Emily Ann Ramos
Vice Mayor Chris Clark
Councilmember Alison Hicks
Councilmember Ellen Kamei
Councilmember John McAlister
Councilmember Lucas Ramirez
Councilmember Pat Showalter
Kimbra McCarthy, City Manager
Jannie L. Quinn, Interim City Attorney
Heather Glaser, City Clerk
Council Chambers and Video Conference, 500 Castro
St., Mountain View, CA 94041
6:30 PM Tuesday, October 13, 2026

REGULAR MEETING
This meeting includes a virtual participation option. Members of the public wishing to address the City Council virtually may join the meeting online at https://mountainview.zoom.us/j/84351267142 or by dialing (669) 900-9128 and entering Webinar ID 843 5126 7142.

To speak during an item, click the “Raise Hand” feature in Zoom or dial *9 if participating by phone. When the Mayor calls your name, press *6 to unmute if you are joining by phone.

The City is piloting the use of an AI translation service. To access translation services during the meeting, visit https://attend.wordly.ai/join/TXDB-0388 and select your preferred language. Please note that the City of Mountain View cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated text or interpretations.

In-person interpretation services are available in Spanish and Chinese upon advance request. Requests must be submitted to the City Clerk’s Office no later than 5:00 p.m. two business days before the meeting by phone at (650) 903-6304 or by email at [email protected].

Meeting materials may also be translated upon advance request. Requests must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m. two business days before the meeting by phone at (650) 903-6608 or by email at [email protected].

Esta reunión ofrece una opción de participación virtual. Los miembros del público que deseen dirigirse al Concejo Municipal de forma virtual pueden unirse a la reunión en línea a través de https://mountainview.zoom.us/j/84351267142 o llamando al (669) 900-9128 e ingresando el ID del seminario web 843 5126 7142.

Para comentar durante un punto de la agenda, utilice la función "Raise Hand" (levantar la mano) en Zoom o marque *9 si participa por teléfono. Cuando la alcaldesa mencione su nombre, presione *6 para activar el micrófono si se ha unido por teléfono.

La Ciudad está probando un servicio de traducción basado en inteligencia artificial. Para acceder a los servicios de traducción durante la reunión, visite https://attend.wordly.ai/join/TXDB-0388 y seleccione el idioma de su preferencia. Tenga en cuenta que la Ciudad de Mountain View no puede garantizar la exactitud del texto traducido ni de las interpretaciones.

Se ofrecen servicios de interpretación presencial en español y en chino, previa solicitud. Las solicitudes deben presentarse ante la Oficina de la Secretaría Municipal a más tardar a las 5:00 p. m., dos días hábiles antes de la reunión, llamando al (650) 903-6304 o enviando un correo electrónico a [email protected].

Los materiales de la reunión también pueden traducirse si se solicitan con antelación. Las solicitudes deben presentarse a más tardar a las 5:00 p. m., dos días hábiles antes de la reunión, llamando al (650) 903-6608 o enviando un correo electrónico a [email protected].
1 本次会议提供线上参会选项。希望通过线上方式向市议会发言的公众人士，可访问
https://mountainview.zoom.us/j/84351267142 或拨打 (669) 900-9128 并输入会议 ID 843 5126 7142 加入会议。
如需在会议议程中发言，请点击 Zoom 中的“举手(Raise Hand)”功能，或者如果您通过电话参会，请拨打 *9。市长叫到您的名字时，如果您是通过电话参会，请按 *6 取消静音。
市府正在试用人工智能翻译服务。如需在会议期间使用翻译服务，请访问
https://attend.wordly.ai/join/TXDB-0388 并选择您所需的语言。请注意，山景城市府无法保证翻译文本或口译的准确性。
如有需要，可提前预约西班牙语和中文的现场口译服务。会议材料翻译申请必须在会议召开前两个工作日的下午
5:00 前提交至市书记官办公室，可通过电话 (650) 903-6304 或电子邮件 [email protected] 提交。
会议材料也可通过提前申请提供翻译。翻译申请必须在会议召开前两个工作日的下午 5:00 前提交，可通过电话
(650) 903-6608 或电子邮件 [email protected] 提交。
TELECONFERENCE NOTICE:

Councilmember Ellen Kamei will participate in the meeting by teleconference pursuant to Government Code §54953(b) from Shibuya Excel Hotel Tokyu, 1-12-2 Dogenzaka Shibuya-ku, Room 2020, Tokyo 150-0043, Japan.

The teleconference location will be accessible to the public and the agenda for the meeting will be posted at that location pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(b)(3).

Members of the public have the opportunity to address the legislative body at this location. 6:30 P.M.-REGULAR SESSION

1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/ROLL CALL

2. CLOSED SESSION REPORT

3. PRESENTATIONS
These are presentations only. The City Council will not take any action.

3.1 Filipino American History Month Proclamation

3.2 United Against Hate Week Proclamation

3.3 Compassion Week Proclamation

3.4 Caltrain Presentation

4. CONSENT CALENDAR
These items will be approved by one motion unless any member of the Council or audience wishes to remove an item for discussion. The reading of the full text of ordinances and resolutions will be waived unless a Councilmember requests otherwise.

4.1 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Zoning Map Amendment (Second Reading)

1. Adopt an Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Amending Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the Mountain View City Code to Update Standards and Procedures Related to the Designation and Preservation of Historic Resources and Finding that the Amendments Are Exempt from Review Under the California Environmental Quality Act, Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15308, as Recommended by the Environmental Planning Recommendation(s):

City of Mountain View Page 2 of 7 Printed on 10/8/2026
2 City Council AGENDA AND NOTICE TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2026 - 6:30 PM Commission, to be read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment 1 to the Council report). (First reading: 7-0)

2. Adopt an Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Amending the Zoning Map to Exclude Properties Designated on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources Prior to January 1, 2025 from Government Code Section 65912.157 (Senate Bill 79) and Finding that the Amendments Are Exempt from Review Under the California Environmental Quality Act, Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), as Recommended by the Environmental Planning Commission, to be read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment 2 to the Council report). (First reading: 7-0) Council Report
ATT 1 - Zoning Code Amendment Ordinance
ATT 2 - Zoning Map Amendment Ordinance
Attachment(s):

4.2 Ambulance Billing and User Fees
Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Mountain View Adopting the Revised Ambulance Billing and User Fees to Be Used by the Mountain View Fire Department for Advanced Life Support Emergency Ambulance Transportation Services and Authorizing the Applicable Fees to Be Reflected in the City’s Master Fee Schedule as “Actual Costs (as Established by Santa Clara County),” to be read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment 1 to the Council report).

Recommendation(s):

Council Report
ATT 1 - Resolution
Attachment(s):

4.3 Pathways to Housing Annual Progress Report
Accept the 2026 Pathways to Housing Homeless Response Strategy Implementation and Expenditure Plan's first Annual Progress Report.

Recommendation(s):

Council Report
ATT 1 - Metrics Report Year One
ATT 2 - Implementation Matrix Year One
Attachment(s):

4.4 Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan, Project 23-37-Authorize Amendment to Professional Services Agreement
Authorize the City Manager or designee to amend the existing professional services agreement with San Francisco Estuary Institute, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) (Business Entity No. 1141169), to amend the scope of services, extend the term to December 31, 2028, and increase compensation by $150,000 for an amount not to exceed $1,022,880.

Recommendation(s):

Council Report
ATT 1 - Proposed Scope of Services
Attachment(s):

City of Mountain View Page 3 of 7 Printed on 10/8/2026
3 City Council AGENDA AND NOTICE TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2026 - 6:30 PM

5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC ON NONAGENDIZED ITEMS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Council on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic within the City Council's subject matter jurisdiction for up to three minutes during this section. If there appears to be a large number of speakers, speaking time may be reduced to no less than 1.5 minutes. State law prohibits the Council from acting on nonagenda items.

6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

6.1 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network

1. Receive a report on the Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network.

2. Adopt Phase 1a of the report and direct staff to return to Council during the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget process for project funding, and direct staff to establish a Technology Upgrade Reserve for future implementation of Phase 1b and other strategic technology investments as budget permits.

Recommendation(s):

Council Report
ATT 1 - City of Mountain View Fiber Network Study Report ATT 2 - Figure 1 Phase 1a
ATT 3 - Figure 2 Phase 1b
ATT 4 - Figure 3 Phase 2
ATT 5 - Figure 4 Phase 3
Attachment(s):

7. PUBLIC HEARINGS

7.1 LinkedIn Development Agreement Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue
Introduce an Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Approving a First Amendment to the Development Agreement By and Between the City of Mountain View and LinkedIn Corporation for the LinkedIn Middlefield Campus on a 28.7-Acre Site Located at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue (APNs: 165-38-001 and 165-38-009) to Extend the Term by Five Years, to be read in title only, further reading waived, and set a second reading for October 27, 2026 (Attachment 1 to the Council report).

Recommendation(s):

Council Report
ATT 1 - Draft DA Amendment Ordinance
ATT 2 - June 24, 2026 Administrative Zoning Hearing
ATT 3 - DA Amendment Request
ATT 4 - Original DA with Extension Letter
ATT 5 - Council Report dated November 27, 2018
Attachment(s):

7.2 Interim Urgency Ordinance for Detention or Custodial Facilities City of Mountain View Page 4 of 7 Printed on 10/8/2026
4 City Council AGENDA AND NOTICE TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2026 - 6:30 PM Adopt an Urgency Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Establishing a Temporary Moratorium on the Filing, Acceptance, Processing, or Approval of Applications for, and the Establishment or Operation of, Detention or Custodial Detention Facilities and Custodial Processing Facilities Pending Study of Appropriate Zoning and Land Use Regulations.

Recommendation(s):

Council Report
ATT 1 - Interim Urgency Ordinance
Attachment(s):

7.3 Downtown Business Improvement Area No. 1 and Allocation of 2027 Business Improvement Area No. 1 Revenues

1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Mountain View Confirming the Annual Report of the Downtown Mountain View Business Improvement Area No. 1 and Levying the Annual Benefit Assessments for Calendar Year 2027, to be read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment 1 to the Council report).

2. Authorize the City Manager or designee to allocate the 2027 revenues from Business Improvement Area No. 1 to the Mountain View Chamber of Commerce to fund a disbursement agreement with the Mountain View Chamber of Commerce to accomplish the purposes of the area.

Recommendation(s):

Council Report
ATT 1 - Resolution
ATT 2 - September 8, 2026 Council Report
Attachment(s):

7.4 Downtown Business Improvement Area No. 2 and Allocation of 2027 Business Improvement Area No. 2 Revenues

1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Mountain View Confirming the Annual Report of the Downtown Mountain View Business Improvement Area No. 2 and Levying the Annual Benefit Assessments for Calendar Year 2027, to be read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment 1 to the Council report).

2. Authorize the City Manager or designee to allocate the 2027 revenues from Business Improvement Area No. 2 to the Mountain View Chamber of Commerce to fund a disbursement agreement with the Mountain View Chamber of Commerce to accomplish the purposes of the area.

Recommendation(s):

Council Report
ATT 1 - Resolution
ATT 2 - September 8, 2026 Council Report
Attachment(s):

7.5 Energy Services Contract for Solar Photovoltaic Systems and Battery Energy Storage Project-Various Actions
Recommendation(s): Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Mountain View: (1) Awarding an City of Mountain View Page 5 of 7 Printed on 10/8/2026
5 City Council AGENDA AND NOTICE TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2026 - 6:30 PM Energy Services Contract to SolarNorcal, LLC, Doing Business as Excite Energy, for the Design, Installation, and Commissioning of Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Systems at Four City Facilities: the Mountain View Public Library, City Hall, the Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts, and Rengstorff Park Aquatics Center (“Project Sites”), Including Roof Replacement Work at the Mountain View Public Library and the Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts, and a Battery Energy Storage System (Battery Storage) at the Rengstorff Park Aquatics Center, For a Total Amount Not to Exceed $3,945,750; (2) Finding That the Project Satisfies the Cost-Effectiveness Requirements of California Government Code Section 4217.12 for Energy Service Contracts; (3) Approving a Midyear Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project, City Facilities Solar PV and Battery Storage, for the Design and Installation of Solar PV Systems at the Project Sites, Including Roof Replacement Work at the Mountain View Public Library and the Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts, and Battery Storage at Rengstorff Park Aquatics Center (Collectively, “Project”); (4) Transferring and Appropriating $2,600,000 From the General Non-Operating Fund, $1,400,000 From the CIP Reserve Fund, and $1,000,000 From the Sustainability Project CIP (Project 20-99) to Fund the New CIP Project; and (5) Finding That the Project is Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to be read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment 1 to the Council report). (Five Votes Required)
Council Report
ATT 1 - Resolution
ATT 2 - Preliminary Locations for Solar PV & Battery Energy Storage Systems ATT 3 - Projected 20-Year Cumulative Net Savings
Attachment(s):

8. COUNCIL, STAFF/COMMITTEE REPORTS
No action will be taken on any questions raised by the Council at this time.

9. ADJOURNMENT
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC:

There is a 90-day limit for the filing of a challenge in Superior Court to certain City administrative decisions and orders which require a hearing by law, the receipt of evidence and the exercise of discretion. The 90-day limit begins on the date the decision is final (Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6). Further, if you challenge an action taken by the City Council in court, you may be limited, by California law, including but not limited to Government Code Section 65009, to raising only those issues you or someone else raised in the public hearing, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council prior to or at the public hearing. The City Council may be requested to reconsider a decision if the request is made prior to the next City Council meeting.

The agenda, reports, and any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda are posted at https://mountainview.legistar.com under the meeting details for the date of this meeting. The agenda may also be viewed at City Hall, 500 Castro Street, the City Clerk's Office, 500 Castro Street, Third Floor and at the Mountain View Library, 585 Franklin Street, beginning the Friday morning prior to Tuesday City Council meetings.

Printed copies of the agenda, reports, and any writings or documents already provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda may be requested at the City Clerk's Office during normal business hours.

The Council may consider and act on items listed on the agenda in any order and thus those interested in an item listed on the agenda are advised to be present throughout the meeting. The reading of the full text of ordinances and resolutions will be waived unless a Councilmember requests otherwise. Per Council Policy A-13, no new items of business will begin after 10:00 p.m. unless an exception is made by vote of the Council.

Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office at (650) 903-6399 or by email City of Mountain View Page 6 of 7 Printed on 10/8/2026
6 City Council AGENDA AND NOTICE TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2026 - 6:30 PM at [email protected] 48 hours prior to the meeting so the City can make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. (28 CFR 35.160 (b) (1)). If you have a hearing or speech disability, please use the California Relay System at 711, TDD 650-967-0158 or 800-735-2929.

The City of Mountain View does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, source of income, gender, gender expression or identity, or any other State or Federal protected class in any of its policies, procedures or practices. This nondiscrimination policy covers admission and access to, or treatment or employment in, the City of Mountain View programs and activities. For inquiries regarding the nondiscrimination policy, please contact the City's Section 504 Coordinator at [email protected] or 650-903-6397.

Computer-generated captioning of the City Council meeting is unedited and should neither be relied upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript.

ADDRESSING THE COUNCIL:

Email comments to [email protected] by 4:30 p.m. on the meeting date. Emails will be received directly by the City Council. Please identify the Agenda item number in the subject line of your email. Requests to show an audio or video presentation during a Council meeting should be directed to [email protected] by 4:30 p.m. on the meeting date.

Anyone wishing to address the Council in person must complete a blue speaker card indicating the name you would like to be called by when it is your turn to speak and the item number on which you wish to speak. Please complete one blue speaker card for each item on which you wish to speak. Virtual and in-person speakers will be called in order as determined by the Mayor.

Pursuant to Council Policy A-13, an individual speaker shall have up to 3 minutes to address the Council. For any agenda item or for Oral Communications on nonagenda items, if there appears to be a large number of speakers, the Mayor may reduce speaking time to no less than 1.5 minutes per speaker unless there is an objection from Council by majority vote.

If requested in advance of the public input portion of the agenda item to the Mayor or City Clerk, a speaker who represents five or more members of the public in attendance who complete cards but elect not to speak may have up to 10 minutes to address the Council, if the Mayor determines that such extension will reduce the total number of speakers who planned to speak.

An applicant and/or appellant for a zone change, precise plan or quasi-judicial hearing or appeal to the Council shall have up to 10 minutes to address the Council and, with the consent of the Council, two minutes of rebuttal at the conclusion of all public speakers.

The presiding officer may remove or cause the removal of any individual(s) for disrupting a meeting in accordance with California Government Code section 54957.95, as may be amended from time to time. In accordance with California Government Code section 54957.9, as may be amended from time to time, the Council may order a meeting room cleared and continue in session in the event a meeting is willfully interrupted by a group or groups of persons so as to render the orderly conduct of the meeting impossible, and order cannot be restored by the removal of individuals who are disrupting the meeting.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.3(b)(1), at least twice the allotted speaking time will be provided to a member of the public who utilizes a translator.

City of Mountain View Page 7 of 7 Printed on 10/8/2026
7 City of Mountain View
Legislation Text

CITY HALL
500 CASTRO STREET
File #: 205908, Version: 1
Filipino American History Month Proclamation
City of Mountain View Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/8/2026
powered by Legistar™ 8
City of Mountain View
Legislation Text

CITY HALL
500 CASTRO STREET
File #: 205910, Version: 1
United Against Hate Week Proclamation
City of Mountain View Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/8/2026
powered by Legistar™ 9
City of Mountain View
Legislation Text

CITY HALL
500 CASTRO STREET
File #: 206210, Version: 1
Compassion Week Proclamation
City of Mountain View Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/8/2026
powered by Legistar™ 10
City of Mountain View
Legislation Text

CITY HALL
500 CASTRO STREET
File #: 206365, Version: 2
Caltrain Presentation
City of Mountain View Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/8/2026
powered by Legistar™ 11
City of Mountain View
Legislation Text

CITY HALL
500 CASTRO STREET
File #: 205999, Version: 1
Historic Preservation Ordinance and Zoning Map Amendment (Second Reading)

2. Adopt an Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Amending the Zoning Map to Exclude Properties Designated on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources Prior to January 1, 2025 from Government Code Section 65912.157 (Senate Bill 79) and Finding that the Amendments Are Exempt from Review Under the California Environmental Quality Act, Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), as Recommended by the Environmental Planning Commission, to be read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment 2 to the Council report). (First reading: 7-0)
City of Mountain View Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/8/2026
powered by Legistar™ 12
DATE: October 13, 2026
CATEGORY: Consent
DEPT.: Community Development
TITLE: Historic Preservation Ordinance and
Zoning Map Amendment (Second
Reading)

RECOMMENDATION

SUMMARY
On September 22, 2026, the City Council introduced an ordinance to amend Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code. The Ordinance will, among other provisions, improve the City’s standards and procedures for the designation and de-listing of historic resources, identify levels of review for physical modifications to historic resources, and provide information on benefits available to owners of historic resources. This Ordinance is the culmination of outreach, analysis, and review of best practices. The Ordinance also incorporates Council direction received at the public hearing, including a revision to allow the formation of historic districts only within the geographic area bounded by California Street, Hope Street, Evelyn Avenue, and Bryant Street, and to reduce the enforcement penalty period for violations from 15 years to five years. 13 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Zoning Map Amendment (Second Reading) October 13, 2026

Page 2 of 3 ends

On September 22, 2026, the Council also introduced an ordinance amending the Zoning Map to exclude properties designated on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources (“MV Register”) prior to January 1, 2025, from Government Code Section 65912.157 (Senate Bill 79).

This is a second reading and final adoption of the ordinances. If adopted, the ordinances will be effective on November 12, 2026.

FISCAL IMPACT
Adoption of the proposed ordinances is not expected to result in a significant immediate fiscal impact. Implementation of the updated Historic Preservation Ordinance may result in additional administrative costs associated with maintaining the MV Register and administering the City’s historic preservation program.

The overall future fiscal impact cannot be reasonably estimated at this time because it will depend on the number of property owners who seek Mills Act contracts or other incentives, as well as future Council actions regarding historic preservation incentives and properties included on the MV Register.

LEVINE ACT
California Government Code Section 84308 (also known as the Levine Act) prohibits city officials from participating in any proceeding involving a “license, permit, or other entitlement for use” if the official has received a campaign contribution exceeding $500 from a party, participant, or agent of a party or participant within the last 12 months. The Levine Act is intended to prevent financial influence on decisions that affect specific, identifiable persons or participants. For more information see the Fair Political Practices Commission website: www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/pay-toplay-limits-and-prohibitions.html Please see below for information about whether the recommended action for this agenda item is subject to or exempt from the Levine Act.

EXEMPT FROM THE LEVINE ACT
☒ General policy and legislative actions
14 Historic Preservation Ordinance and Zoning Map Amendment (Second Reading) October 13, 2026

Page 3 of 3 ends

PUBLIC NOTICING
The City Council’s agenda is advertised on Channel 26, and the agenda and this Council report appear on the City’s website. The ordinance was published at least two days prior to adoption in accordance with City Charter Section 522.

Prepared by:

Elaheh Kerachian
Senior Planner
Eric Anderson
Planning Manager
Amber Blizinski
Assistant Community Development Director
Approved by:

Christian Murdock
Community Development Director
Audrey D. Seymour
Assistant City Manager
Attachments: 1. Zoning Code Amendment Ordinance

2. Zoning Map Amendment Ordinance

15 Attachment 1
ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW
AMENDING CHAPTER 36 (ZONING) OF THE MOUNTAIN VIEW CITY CODE

TO UPDATE STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES RELATED TO THE DESIGNATION AND

PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC RESOURCES AND FINDING THAT THE AMENDMENTS ARE

EXEMPT FROM REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15308,

AS RECOMMENDED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION WHEREAS, the City Council initiated an amendment of Chapter 36 of the City Code to reflect the community’s historic preservation goals, update the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources (Register) to include a complete list of historic resources to be protected, establish a process and criteria for the designation of local historic districts, create updated and streamlined processes and historic review permits, and create a more detailed and comprehensive list of incentives and benefits; and
WHEREAS, the City has complied with the procedures and requirements set forth in Government Code Section 65853, et seq., and Section 36.52.40, et seq. (Zoning amendments) of the Mountain View City Code; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on August 19, 2026, and recommended that the City Council adopt the amendments to Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on September 22, 2026 on this Ordinance and received and considered all information, documents, and comments presented at said hearing regarding amendments to Chapter 36, including the recommendation from the Environmental Planning Commission, the City Council report, and project materials; now, therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council hereby makes the findings for text amendments to Chapter 36 (Zoning) pursuant to Section 36.52.70 of the City Code:
a. The proposed amendment(s) is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed amendments are consistent with the General Plan because they promote the preservation of historic resources, which is consistent with General Plan Goal LUD 11 (Preserved and protected important historic and cultural resources), Policy LUD 11.1 (Historical preservation), and Policy 11.3 (Incentives), as the amendments will update and strengthen historic preservation standards and procedures;
16

Page 2 of 29 ends

b. The proposed amendment(s) would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. The proposed amendments would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City because historic resources improve local character and identity, communicate local history, and celebrate unique and distinguished architectural and cultural achievements. The amendments would update standards and procedures to designate and protect historic resources, including historic districts; create effective and streamlined permit review processes; and create a more detailed and comprehensive list of incentives and benefits, resulting in the preservation of historic resources;
c. The proposed amendment(s) is internally consistent with Chapter 36 of the Mountain View City Code. The proposed amendments are internally consistent with Chapter 36 of the Mountain View City Code because they improve clarity, consistency, and usability. The amendments create effective and streamlined permit review processes, clarify designation and permit procedures, update eligibility criteria, and provide additional incentives and benefits for the preservation of historic resources while maintaining consistency with the City’s historic preservation framework; and
d. The proposed amendment(s) is in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed amendment(s) is in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15308 (Class 8), which applies to actions taken by regulatory agencies to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment through a regulatory process that includes procedures for environmental protection. The proposed amendments update and strengthen the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance by clarifying the procedures and standards for identifying, designating, and preserving historic resources, thereby enhancing their protection. The proposed amendments do not relax existing standards for the protection of historic resources or authorize development or other activities that could result in environmental degradation. Approval of the Ordinance will not result in any property being removed from the Register. The Ordinance requires review of substantive changes to historic resources, which will be subject to additional CEQA review.

SECTION 2. Repeal and Replacement of Division 15 (Designation and Preservation of Historic Resources) of Article XVI (Zoning Ordinance Administration) of Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the Mountain View City Code. Division 15 (Designation and Preservation of Historic Resources) of Article XVI (Zoning Ordinance Administration) of Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the Mountain View City Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced with the following:

DIVISION 15. - DESIGNATION AND PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC RESOURCES SEC. 36.55 Designation and preservation of historic resources. 17

Page 3 of 29 ends

SEC. 36.55.01. Purpose.

The city council finds and declaresthat the recognition, preservation, protection, use, and adaptive re-use of historic resources is in the best interest of the health, prosperity, social, cultural, and economic enrichment and general welfare of the City. The Mountain View Register of Historic Resources and associated regulations established by this Chapter provide a program and procedures to support and guide the maintenance, rehabilitation, enhancement, and protection of historic resources in Mountain View.

SEC. 36.55.02. Definitions.

For the purpose of this division, the following words shall have the meanings set forth in this section:

Alteration. Any physical change to the interior or exterior of a building, structure, object, or site subject to the provisions of this Division.

Character-defining feature. The distinctive, tangible, and physical features or elements that contribute to the overall historic character of a building and were present during its period of significance.

Director. The community development director or designee, unless otherwise stated.

Exempt alteration. An alteration to a historic resource that does not have the potential to adversely affect the resource’s integrity or character-defining feature(s), and does not require a historic resource evaluation to so determine.

Historic district. An area within the City of Mountain View, with defined physical boundaries, that possesses a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development and that the city council has designated for inclusion in the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources pursuant to this Division. The area encompassed by the boundary of a historic district includes properties that are primary contributors and limited contributors to the district’s significance.

Historic district primary contributor. A parcel that contains one or more building(s), structure(s), or object(s) that contributes to the significance of a historic district and possesses sufficient integrity to convey that significance. Multiple condominium parcels within a single structure shall be considered one primary contributor. This is equivalent to “contributor” in the evaluation of historic districts for the California Register of Historical Resources or National Register of Historic Places.

Historic district limited contributor. A parcel that is within the boundaries of a historic district that does not contain a building, structure, or object that contributes to the district’s significance, either by the absence of any such building, structure, or object or by same’s lack of 18

Page 4 of 29 ends

sufficient integrity to convey thatsignificance. Multiple condominium parcelsin a single structure shall be considered one limited contributor. Although the parcel may not contribute directly to the historic district’s significance, altering it may detract from the district's overall ability to convey its significance. This is equivalent to “non-contributor” in the evaluation of historic districts for the California Register of Historical Resources or National Register of Historic Places.

Historic resource. Any building,structure, object,site, district, or other improvement that the city council has designated for inclusion in the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources as an individual resource, historic district, or primary contributor to a historic district, as well as those which have been listed on the California Register of Historical Resources or National Register of Historic Places. This definition includes but is not limited to built environment resources, cultural landscapes and landscape elements, archaeological sites and deposits, and traditional cultural properties. Historic district limited contributors are not historic resources, but their alteration may detract from the district's overall ability to convey its significance.

Historic resource evaluation. A report prepared by a qualified professional that evaluates the significance of a historic resource within its historic context, explains how the historic resource meets the eligibility criteria and integrity thresholds as established by the local, state, or federal government, and establishes a period ofsignificance and character-defining feature(s).

Integrity. The ability of a property to convey its significance, typically evidenced by the retention of attributes, or a character-defining feature(s), that existed during its period of significance and including location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The Mountain View Register of Historic Resources may apply integrity thresholds appropriate to the applicable resource type, period of significance, and historic context, which may differ from those applied by the California Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historic Places, specifically for resources constructed prior to 1939 and resources in the 100 to 300 blocks of Castro Street and side streets within one block thereof.

Any integrity threshold that differs from the threshold ordinarily applied to the California Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historic Places shall be identified and explained in the historic resource evaluation supporting designation.

Major alteration. An alteration to a historic resource that is not “exempt” and does not qualify as a minor alteration and affects or modifies its character-defining feature(s) or integrity.

Minor alteration. An alteration to a historic resource that is not “exempt,” but where the alteration would not affect or modify any character-defining feature(s) or impact the resource’s integrity, or would only affect or modify a character-defining feature(s) that is not visible from public rights-of-way or other publicly-accessible property.

Mountain View Register of Historic Resources (or Historic Register). The inventory of buildings, structures, objects, sites, districts (including primary and limited contributors), and other improvements designated by the city council as historic resources pursuant to the 19

Page 5 of 29 ends

provisions of this Division. The Historic Register shall be adopted and amended by city council resolution. In addition, properties listed on the California Register of Historical Resources and/or the National Register of Historic Places are automatically listed on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources pursuant to Section 36.55.25. The Mountain View Register of Historic Resources shall be the city's "local register of historical resources" as defined in the California Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k).

Period of Significance. The span of time which a historic resource attained the characteristics or associations for which it meets the significance criteria to be considered a historic resource or historic district.

Qualified professional. An individual meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards (36 CFR Part 61, Appendix A) in history, architectural history, historic architecture, or archaeology, as appropriate to the property type, whether a historic resource or being evaluated as such.

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (or SOIS).

The latest edition of the standards and guidelines maintained by the National Park Service for the preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction of historic properties.

SEC. 36.55.05. Preservation of historic resources.

No person shall alter, modify, remove, or destroy, or allow any other person to alter, modify, remove, or destroy, any historic resource designated and included in the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources except as provided herein.

SEC. 36.55.10. Designation findings.

A building, structure, object, site, district, or other improvement may be designated as a historic resource and placed on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources if the city council finds all of the following:
a. The resource is significant under one or more of the following significance criteria:

1. Is directly associated with eventsthat have made a significant contribution to history and cultural heritage within the City of Mountain View;

2. Is strongly identified with a person who, or an organization which, significantly contributed to the culture, history, or development of the City;

3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction significant to the City’s history or cultural heritage, 20

Page 6 of 29 ends

or represents of the work of an architect, design professional, or builder of merit, or possesses high artistic value; or

4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to the City’s pre-contact era or history.
b. The resource retains historic integrity as defined in this division, and as specified for historic resources of the same type and period of significance in any historic context statement applicable to the resource;
c. The resource is at least 50 years old, except if a potential historic resource is less than 50 years old, documentation of its significance must demonstrate that sufficient time has passed to understand its historical importance within appropriate context;
d. If the resource is a historic district, there is adequate concentration, linkage, and/or continuity of historic district primary contributors to convey the historic district’s significance, and historic district limited contributors do not disproportionately detract from the district's overall ability to convey its significance. For a proposed historic district requested by a property owner application, the proposed district comprises at least twice as many historic district primary contributors as historic district limited contributors; e. Each designation finding shall identify the substantial evidence supporting the finding as applied to the particular resource.

SEC. 36.55.15. Designation process for Historic Register - Individual Resources.

The city council may considerthe designation of a building,site,structure, object, or other improvement as a historic resource and place same on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources pursuant to one or more of the permissible methods described in subsections (a), (b), and/or (c) to initiate such consideration, and pursuant to the public hearing action in subsection (d) to designate the historic resource.
a. Initiation by owner application. The property owner may request designation of a building, site, structure, object, or other improvement as an individual historic resource. Requests for designation must be accompanied by a historic resource evaluation that demonstrates the property’s significance and integrity relative to the findings for designation as defined in Section 36.55.10. The application shall be filed with the director. The director may require a third-party peer review of a submitted application, and may require an applicant to provide a deposit for payment of expenses associated with the peer review.
21

Page 7 of 29 ends

b. Initiation by the city council. The city council may initiate the designation of a building, site, structure, object, or other improvement as an individual historic resource. Within thirty days of the initiation of the designation by the city council, the director shall notify the property owner, as such owner’s name and address appear on the last equalized assessment roll of the County Assessor, in writing by first-class and certified mail.

The notice shall describe the consequences of designation, identify the anticipated hearing date if known, and explain the property owner’s opportunity to submit written materials and qualified professional evidence.

Prior to the public hearing required by subsection (d), the directorshall ensure the preparation of documentation that supports the designation, which shall at minimum include a historic resource evaluation that demonstrates the property’s significance and integrity relative to the findings for designation as defined in Section 36.55.10.

The director shall provide the property owner with notice of availability of the completed historic resource evaluation and other materials upon which staff intends to rely no fewer than sixty (60) days before the public hearing, and shall make such information available to the property owner upon request. The property owner may submit written comments, factual materials, and a qualified professional response for inclusion in the hearing record. c. Initiation by survey. The City may initiate the designation of any building, site, structure, object, or other improvement identified as eligible for listing on the Historic Register through a City-initiated survey. The survey used for initiation pursuant to this subsection shall remain valid for five years from the date of evaluation, provided the director determines before the designation hearing that no material alteration or other changed circumstance affects the survey’s conclusions concerning significance or integrity.

At least 60 days before the public hearing in subsection (d), the director shall notify all property owners under consideration for designation in writing by firstclass and certified mail. d. Public hearing before city council. Prior to any action to designate a building, site, structure, object, or other improvement as an individual historic resource in the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources, the city council shall hold a public hearing in accordance with the noticing and procedural requirements described in Division 16 (Applications, Hearings and Appeals) of this Article. The city council shall only take action to designate a building, site, structure, object, or other improvement as an individual historic resource if such action has been initiated pursuant to one of the methods described in this section or brought forward 22

Page 8 of 29 ends

pursuant to Section 36.55.39, and upon making the required findings for designation in Section 36.55.10.
e. Designation is a discretionary action. The provisions of this division shall not create a duty for city council to designate any building, site, structure, object, or other improvement as an individual historic resource. Notwithstanding any evidence that supports designation, the city council may, in its sole discretion, determine not to designate a building, site, structure, object, or other improvement as an individual historic resource after taking into account property owner or community sentiment, differing qualified professional opinions of significance, eligibility for removal pursuant to Section 36.55.35, and other relevant factors.
f. Failure to notify. Failure of any property owner to receive notice sent by mail to the address shown on the last assessment roll for the property in question shall not invalidate proceedings if the City complied with the notice requirements of this division.

SEC. 36.55.20. Designation process for Historic Register - Historic Districts.

The city council may consider the designation of a historic district and place same on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources pursuant to one or more of the permissible methods described in subsections (b), (d), and/or (e) to initiate such consideration, and pursuant to the public hearing action in subsection (g) to designate the historic district. a. Districts generally. The designated boundary must be contiguous, and shall not contain non-district parcels wholly enclosed within the district boundary. A historic district may only be formed within the geographic area bounded by the following public streets: California Street, Hope Street, Evelyn Avenue, and Bryant Street.
b. Initiation by property owners’ application. A group comprising the owners or authorized agents of at least fifty percent of the parcels and at least fifty percent of the privately-owned land area therein may request designation of a historic district. “Parcels” shall include condominiums, but the land area of the condominium lot must be divided equally among owners based on their affirmative participation in the request. A request for a historic district designation shall be filed with the director and must include the required application materials in subsection (c). The director may require a third-party peer review of a submitted application, and may require an applicant to provide a deposit for payment of expenses associated with the peer review.

As an additional protection against unreasonable applications, historic districts initiated by property owners shall have at least twice the number of primary 23

Page 9 of 29 ends

contributors as limited contributors, which shall be established prior to the public hearing in subsection (g).
c. Required application materials. The following items are required application materials for any historic district designation requested by property owners:

1. A historic resource evaluation of the proposed historic district’s significance and integrity relative to the required findings for designation as defined in Section 36.55.10;

2. A map depicting the boundary of the proposed historic district;

3. A list and/or map and photographs of primary contributors and limited contributors to the proposed historic district, including buildings, structures, objects, landscape features, and infrastructure elements such as public rights-of-way, lighting, and signage. All parcels within the district boundary must be identified as primary contributors or limited contributors, and include the property address(es) and assessor parcel number(s);

4. A list and photographs of character-defining features of the proposed historic district as a whole, including those architectural characteristics shared by primary contributors that convey the proposed historic district’s significance.
d. Initiation by the city council. The city council may initiate the designation of a historic district by majority vote. Within thirty days of the initiation of the designation by the city council, the director shall notify the owners of all properties within the boundary of the proposed historic district, as such owners’ names and addresses appear on the last equalized assessment roll of the County Assessor, in writing by first-class and certified mail. Prior to the public hearing required by this section, the director shall ensure the preparation of documentation that supports the historic district designation, which shall at minimum include a historic resource evaluation that demonstrates the proposed district’s significance and integrity relative to the findings for designation as defined in Section 36.55.10.
e. Initiation by survey. The City may initiate the designation of any district identified as eligible for listing on the Historic Register through a City-initiated survey. The survey used for initiation pursuant to this subsection shall remain valid for five years from the date of evaluation.
f. Notice and owner response. At least 60 days before the public hearing described in subsection (g), the City shall mail a notice and an owner-response by first-class 24

Page 10 of 29 ends

and certified mail to owners of all properties in the proposed historic district, as such owners’ names and addresses appear on the last equalized assessment roll of the County Assessor, identifying the proposed boundary, the proposed classification of the owner’s property, the local regulatory consequences of designation, and the procedure and deadline for submitting written comments.

The owner-response form is advisory and does not constitute a vote or establish an owner-consent requirement. Staff shall report the number and percentage of owners supporting, opposing, and not responding.
g. Public hearing before city council. Prior to any action to designate a historic district in the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources, the city council shall hold a public hearing in accordance with the noticing and proceduralrequirements described in Division 16 (Applications, Hearings and Appeals) of this Article. The city council shall only take action to designate a historic district if such action has been initiated pursuant to one of the methods described in thissection or brought forward pursuant to Section 36.55.39, and upon making the required findings for designation in Section 36.55.10.
h. Designation is a discretionary action. The provisions of this division shall not create a duty for city council to designate any historic district. Notwithstanding any evidence that supports designation, the city council may, in its sole discretion, determine not to designate a historic district, or designate only a portion of a proposed historic district, after taking into account property owner or community sentiment, differing qualified professional opinions of significance, eligibility for removal pursuant to Section 36.55.35, and other relevant factors, and further provided the designated portion independently satisfies Section 36.55.10 and affected owners received notice of the boundary materially under consideration. i. Failure to notify. Failure of any property owner to receive notice sent by mail to the address shown on the last assessment roll for the property in question shall not invalidate any proceedings in connection with the proposed designation. j. Additions to historic districts. This section shall also be used to consider the addition of properties to existing historic districts. Initiation by property owners’ application as described in subsection (b) shall require a request by a group comprising the owners of at least fifty percent of the parcels and at least fifty percent of the privately-owned land area of the addition, as well as all other criteria based upon the proposed amended historic district as a whole.

SEC. 36.55.25. Designation of State and National Register Resources.

Any resource listed on the California Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historic Places shall also be included on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources, except for a historic district that does not meet the geographic location limitations 25

Page 11 of 29 ends

provided in Section 36.55.20.a. Such inclusion shall be by reference and shall not require a separate local designation hearing. Within thirty (30) days after receiving notice of the listing, the director shall notify the property owner of the listing, its local regulatory consequences, and the procedure for correcting an error concerning the identity or listing status of the property.

SEC. 36.55.30. Removal from Historic Register or reclassification of primary contributors – ineligible properties.
a. Applicability. Owner(s) of property designated on the Historic Register may submit an application to the director for removal from the Historic Register pursuant to this section. Requests for removal must be accompanied by a historic resource evaluation that demonstrates the property’s significance and integrity relative to the findingsfor designation as defined in Section 36.55.10. The director may require a third-party peer review of a submitted application and may require an applicant to provide a deposit for payment of expenses associated with the peer review. Owner(s) may, but are not required to, submit an application pursuant to this section concurrently with an application for any other permit required by this chapter. This section may only be used under the following circumstances:

1. Loss of integrity due to accident or disaster. The property has lost its integrity due to damage or deterioration beyond the owner’s control.

Qualifying circumstances may include, but are not limited to, a natural disaster such as a flood or earthquake. The circumstances shall have damaged the property to the extent that it no longer possesses sufficient integrity to convey its significance and justification for inclusion in the Historic Register. Loss of integrity due to neglect, failure to maintain, or alterations completed in a manner inconsistent with the City Code shall not be considered a qualifying basis for removal from the Historic Register pursuant to this section.

2. New information. Evidence not included in the documentation supporting the original designation demonstrates that a property does not meet findings (a), (b), (c), or, if applicable, (d) in Section 36.55.10. b. Historic district primary contributors. Owner(s) of a historic district primary contributor may submit an application to the director pursuant to this section to convert their property from a historic district primary contributor to a historic district limited contributor. If removal of the property would retain the contiguousness of the historic district within which the property is located, the application may include a request to amend the historic district boundary to remove the property from the district. Applications pursuant to this subsection shall include updated documentation as required in subsection (c) of Section

36.55.20. 26

Page 12 of 29 ends

c. Historic districts. A group comprising the owners of at least fifty percent of the parcels and at least fifty percent of the privately-owned land area within a historic district, as calculated in subsection (b) of Section 36.55.20, may submit an application to the director pursuant to this section for removal of the historic district from the Historic Register. Applications pursuant to this subsection shall include updated documentation as required in subsection (c) of Section 36.55.20. d. Public hearings. Upon receipt of a complete application and following departmental review and any review required under Section 21000 et seq. of the Public Resources Code (the California Environmental Quality Act), the zoning administrator shall hold a duly noticed public hearing in accordance with Division 16 (Applications, Hearings and Appeals) of this Article.

Following such hearing, the zoning administrator shall forward a written recommendation to the city council, which shall hold a duly noticed public hearing in accordance with Division 16 (Applications, Hearings and Appeals) of this Article.

The city council shall review the zoning administrator’s recommendation and the evidence in support of termination of designation, modification of historic district boundary, or conversion from historic district primary contributor to historic district limited contributor.
e. Findings. The city council shall approve a request for removal from the Historic Register or conversion from a historic district primary contributor to a historic district limited contributor, or the modification to a historic district boundary pursuant to this section if it makes the following required findings:

1. Based on substantial evidence, including a current historic resource evaluation, the property does not meet one or more of the findings(a), (b), (c), or, if applicable, (d) in Section 36.55.10; and

2. For removal or reclassification of a contributor to a historic district, the resulting district boundary and classifications continue to satisfy Section

36.55.10(d), or the city council concurrently modifies or removes the district designation as necessary; and

3. The removal from the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources or reclassification complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

SEC. 36.55.35. Removal from Historic Register or reclassification of primary contributors – exemptions.
27

Page 13 of 29 ends

a. Applicability. Owner(s) of property designated on the Historic Register may submit an application to the director for removal from the Historic Register pursuant to this section. Requests for removal must be accompanied by evidence of the circumstances applicable to this section. The director may require a thirdparty peer review of a submitted application and may require an applicant to provide a deposit for payment of expenses associated with the peer review.

Owner(s) may, but are not required to, submit an application pursuant to this section concurrently with an application for any other permit required by this chapter. This section may only be used under the following circumstances:

1. Economic hardship. The applicant has presented facts that clearly demonstrate to the satisfaction of the city council that failure to remove the historic resource from the Historic Register would result in an immediate and substantial hardship because of conditions peculiar to the particular structure or other feature involved. In determining whether substantial hardship exists, the city council shall consider evidence that demonstrates that the following factors, considered together, establish that continued designation would deny all reasonable economic use of the property or otherwise impose an unconstitutional burden under applicable law:

A. Denial of the application will diminish the value of the subject structure or property so as to leave substantially no value.

B. Sale or rental of the property is impractical, infeasible, or uneconomic, when compared to the cost of holding such property for permitted uses.

C. Improvement of the property in a manner which would preserve its character-defining features is impractical, infeasible, or uneconomic.

D. In addition, the city council shall consider reasonably probable permitted uses; market value and return with and without removal; supported rehabilitation and maintenance costs; available incentives and feasible preservation alternatives; reasonable investment-backed expectations when the property was acquired; and whether the asserted hardship was caused or materially increased by neglect, unlawful alteration, or failure to maintain the resource. A reduction in value, reduced profitability, or a more profitable alternative use shall not, standing alone, establish hardship. Any relief shall be limited to the minimum necessary to avoid the demonstrated hardship.
28

Page 14 of 29 ends

Penalties, corrections, or other enforcement measures pursuant to Section

36.55.70 shall not be considered costs in the determination of economic hardship.

2. Free Exercise of Religion. The applicant has presented facts that clearly demonstrate to the satisfaction of the city council that the inclusion in the Historic Register would impose a substantial burden on the applicant’sfree exercise of religious liberty. The city council shall consider the nature of the religious exercise, the manner and degree of the burden, and whether less restrictive relief would avoid the burden while preserving the resource. Qualification under California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 207 may be considered as evidence of religious use but does not, by itself, establish a substantial burden or entitlement to removal. Any relief shall be limited to the minimum necessary to remedy the demonstrated burden. .
b. Historic district primary contributors. Owner(s) of a historic district primary contributor may submit an application to the director pursuant to this section to convert their property from a historic district primary contributor to a historic district limited contributor. If removal of the property would retain the contiguousness of the historic district within which the property is located, the application may include a request to amend the historic district boundary to remove the property from the district. Applications pursuant to this subsection shall include updated documentation as required in subsection (c) of Section

36.55.20. c. Historic districts. A group comprising the owners of at least fifty percent of the parcels and at least fifty percent of the privately-owned land area within a historic district, as calculated in subsection (b) of Section 36.55.20, may submit an application to the director pursuant to this section for removal of the historic district from the Historic Register. Applications pursuant to this subsection shall include updated documentation as required in subsection (c) of Section 36.55.20. d. Public hearings. Upon receipt of a complete application and following departmental review and any review required under Section 21000 et seq. of the Public Resources Code (the California Environmental Quality Act), the zoning administrator shall hold a duly noticed public hearing in accordance with Division 16 (Applications, Hearings and Appeals) of this Article.

The city council shall review the evidence in support of the request for removal of the resource and the zoning administrator's recommendation. 29

Page 15 of 29 ends

e. Findings. The city council may approve a request for removal from the Historic Register or conversion from a historic district primary contributor to a historic district limited contributor, or the modification to a historic district boundary pursuant to this section only if it makes the following required findings:

1. The removal from the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources is no broader than necessary to remedy the economic hardship or legally cognizable burden on religious exercise established under thissection; and

2. The removal from the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

SEC. 36.55.39. Other modifications to the Historic Register.

Nothing in this Division shall be interpreted to prevent the director from initiating a modification to the Historic Register for city council consideration, including but not limited to a modification to add or remove one or more properties, revise a property’s status as a historic district primary contributor or historic district limited contributor, or expand or contract one or more historic districts, when the director determines that information available to the City indicates that the modification may be warranted under the standards and criteria of this Division. Initiation by the director, by itself, shall not modify the Historic Register or alter a property’s designation or classification. Before city council action, the director shall ensure preparation of the documentation necessary to evaluate the proposed modification and compliance with the notice and public hearing procedures applicable to the proposed modification. The city council may approve the modification only upon making the findings required for the applicable action.

The director may initiate correction of a clerical, mapping, address, ownership, or other nonsubstantive error in the Historic Register after written notice to affected property owners. A correction may not add or remove a resource, modify a historic district boundary, or change a contributor classification.

SEC. 36.55.40. Historic preservation permits.
a. Applicability. No person shall make any alteration to any individual historic resource, historic district primary contributor, or historic district limited contributor, except alterations that are “exempt” pursuant to subsection (h), without first obtaining a historic preservation permit (“HP permit”), which shall prohibitsubstantial adverse change to the integrity of the historic resource. An HP permit and any other coincidental permits shall remain in effect for four (4) years from the date of approval, and shall be eligible for a permit extension pursuant to Section 36.56.65.
30

Page 16 of 29 ends

b. Application requirements. In addition to the application requirements of Division 16 (Applications, Hearings and Appeals) of this Article, including but not limited to current photographs and architectural drawings, specifications or other descriptive materials necessary to illustrate the proposed alteration, the HP permit application shall include a list of character-defining features and an SOIS analysis by a qualified professional. An alteration to a historic resource must be in substantial compliance with the SOIS.

The City shall determine whether a minor HP permit or major HP permit is required upon receipt of a complete application, pursuant to the provisions in subsections (c) and (e) of this section. Notwithstanding the listed improvements in subsections (c) and (e), the zoning administrator shall have the authority to approve any application affecting character-defining features (major alterations) pursuant to subsection (f), and the director shall have the authority to approve any application not affecting character-defining features (minor alterations) pursuant to subsection (d).
c. Minor HP permit applicability. Minor HP permits are required for minor alterations to historic resources. The director may establish and maintain a list of alterations they have determined to typically require a minor HP permit.

The following are examples of alterations to individual historic resources and historic district primary contributors that would typically require a minor HP permit.

1. Construction of an addition to the principal structure that is not visible from public rights-of-way or other publicly-accessible property;

2. Alteration of, or construction of an addition to, an existing accessory structure that does not contribute to the property’s significance;

3. Relocation within the parcel of an accessory structure that does not contribute to the property’s significance;

4. Removal of non-historic additions or features on the principal structure;

5. Replacement of historic or compatible non-historic windows or doors inkind, with matching material, type, configuration, and/or operability;

6. Replacement of incompatible, non-historic windows or doors with windows or doors that match the original or historically documented examples on the building or are consistent with the architectural style and period of significance, including material, size, muntin pattern, operation, profile, and finish;
31

Page 17 of 29 ends

7. Creation of new window or door openings not visible from public rightsof-way or other publicly-accessible property;

8. Foundation and structural repair or replacement that does not remove or alter character-defining features;

9. Installation of awnings or canopies that do not remove, damage, or permanently alter character-defining features;

10. Installation of rooftop photovoltaic panels based on compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (i.e., to minimize visibility from public rights-of-way while preserving reasonable solar efficiency). The City may require an alternative location only when it would not substantially impair the system’s costeffectiveness or energy production and when it would avoid material impacts to significant historic features;

11. Installation of skylights; or

12. Installation of new commercial signs, in new locations.

The following are examples of alterations to historic district limited contributors that would require a minor HP permit. Such actions may require development review approval pursuant to other provisions of this Article (which may include a public hearing).

13. New or additional principal building on the site;

14. Demolition of a principal building on the site; or

15. Vertical addition to an existing principal building. d. Minor HP permit process. Upon receipt of a complete application, the director may approve or disapprove a minor HP permit administratively, with no public hearing or public notice required.
e. Major HP permit applicability. Major HP permits are required for major alterations to historic resources. The following are examples of alterations that would typically require a major HP permit.

1. New or additional principal building on the site;
32

Page 18 of 29 ends

2. Construction of a new accessory structure, such as a garage, trash enclosure, or pergola, visible from public rights-of-way or other publiclyaccessible property;

3. Construction of an addition to the principal structure that is visible from public rights-of-way or other publicly-accessible property;

4. Relocation of a principal structure or structure that contributes to the property’s significance within its parcel;

5. Relocation of a historic district primary contributor to a different parcel within the historic district;

6. Alteration or addition to a principal structure or accessory structure that contributes to the property’s significance, that would remove, alter, or permanently obscure a character-defining feature;

7. Full or partial change in exterior cladding material (e.g., wood siding to stucco), where the change is more extensive than what would be associated with minor alterations;

8. Replacement of windows or doors with new windows or doors of differing material, type, configuration, and/or operability;

9. Replacement of incompatible windows or doors with matching, incompatible windows or doors;

10. Painting or coating previously unpainted or uncoated character-defining features or materials (e.g., brick, stone, concrete, shingles);

11. Full or partial replacement of roofing with different material, if visible from public rights-of-way or other publicly-accessible property), and where the change is more extensive than what would be associated with minor alterations;

12. New window or door openings visible from public rights-of-way or other publicly-accessible property;

13. Foundation and structural repair or replacement that alters or removes a character-defining feature;

14. Relocation of a principal structure or accessory structure which contributes to the property’s significance to a different parcel within the City of Mountain View. Upon relocation, the historic resource shall remain 33

Page 19 of 29 ends

on the Historic Register, identified with its new address, which shallrequire a modification to the Historic Register pursuant to Section 36.55.39.

Relocation outside of city limits shall be reviewed as demolition; or

15. Any other alteration, project, or activity not applicable to subsection (c) or (i) of this section.
f. Major HP permit process. Upon receipt of a complete application, the zoning administrator shall hold a duly noticed public hearing in accordance with Division 16 (Applications, Hearings and Appeals) of this Article. The zoning administrator may approve or disapprove the major HP permit, subject to appeal to the city council.
g. Finding. An HP permit may be approved or conditionally approved if the approval body or official finds that the proposed alteration will not result in a substantial adverse change in the integrity of the historic resource. This may be established by confirming that the proposed alteration is consistent with the SOIS. A proposed alteration that would result in a substantial adverse change may be approved only pursuant to Section 36.55.45.
h. Appeals. Decisions made under this Section may be appealed to the city council in accordance with Section 36.56.50 (Appeals).
i. Exempt Alterations. No HP permit is required for an exempt alteration. Any alteration limited to one or more scopes of work included in this subsection shall be considered an exempt alteration. The director may establish and maintain a list of other alterations that, based on objective characteristics and substantial evidence documented in writing, the director determines categorically meet the definition of an exempt alteration. The director may not exempt an alteration that may remove, materially alter, or permanently obscure a character-defining feature. In addition to any HP permit exemption provided in this subsection, nothing in this Division shall be construed to prevent or require an HP permit for an alteration involving the ordinary repair and maintenance of any architectural feature of a historic resource pursuant to Section 36.55.50, or actions required for public safety pursuant to Section 36.55.55. An alteration that is exempt from the requirement to obtain an HP permit pursuant to this subsection may remain subject to other permit requirements including but not limited to the permit requirements in Chapter 8 and other permit requirements in Chapter 36 of the City Code.

1. Maintenance and repair of existing windows and doors to retain operability and performance;
34

Page 20 of 29 ends

2. Painting or coating of previously painted or coated surfaces, including in a different color;

3. In-kind maintenance and replacement of siding, trim, and light fixtures;

4. Full or partial replacement of roofing material in-kind, or with different material in areas not visible from public rights-of-way or other publiclyaccessible property;

5. Installation or replacement of roof equipment when fully obscured behind an existing screen or parapet;

6. Installation of underground utilities;

7. Interior renovation or remodeling that does not alter an interior feature identified as a character-defining feature;

8. Seismic strengthening not visible from public rights-of-way or other publicly-accessible property;

9. Minor sign installations (e.g., address numbers, commemorative plaques);

10. Replacement signage installed in the same location as existing, approved signage;

11. Construction of a new detached accessory structure, such as a garage, trash enclosure, or pergola, that is not visible from public rights-of-way or other publicly-accessible property;

12. Changesto site or landscape featuresthat do not alter, remove, or obscure a character-defining feature, including but not limited to heating, ventilation, and air Conditioning (HVAC) and other mechanical equipment not visible from a public right-of-way or other publicly accessible property; walkways; driveways; minor landscape improvements; patio dining areas; and backyard landscaping and site features; or

13. Work which would otherwise not require the issuance of a building permit pursuant to Chapter 8 of the City Code, provided the work does not remove, materially alter, or permanently obscure a character-defining feature.

In addition to the examples above, the following are examples of exempt alterations specific to historic district limited contributors. Such actions may also require development review approval pursuant to other provisions of this Article. 35

Page 21 of 29 ends

14. Horizontal addition to a principal building on the site;

15. New or demolished accessory structures; or

16. Changesto exterior materials, including but not limited to windows, doors, siding, trim and roofing.
j. Notwithstanding any other provision of this division, where state law requires application ofstrictly objective standards or ministerial approval, the City shall not impose a discretionary or nonobjective historic preservation standard on a housing development project. Nothing in this subsection limits review authorized by CEQA where CEQA legally applies. This division shall not be applied to deny, condition, delay, or otherwise regulate a housing development project to the extent preempted by state law.

SEC. 36.55.45. Demolition or other substantial adverse change. a. Applicability. No historic resource (except a historic district limited contributor, provided that such demolition is eligible for an HP permit) shall be demolished or altered in a manner that would result in a substantial adverse change in the integrity of the historic resource unless approved pursuant to this section. “Demolition” shall mean total destruction of a historic resource or an alteration that removes or destroys such a substantial portion of the resource’s characterdefining features that the resource no longer retains sufficient integrity to convey its historic significance. Inconsistency with the SOIS is relevant evidence but does not, by itself, establish demolition or another substantial adverse change.

Property owners may submit an application to the director under this section for approval of the proposed demolition or other substantial adverse change and any associated removal from the Historic Register.
b. Concurrent project required. Demolition or other substantial adverse change to the integrity of a historic resource shall not be approved unless concurrent alterations to, or improvements or modifications in the location of, the historic resource are also approved.
c. Additional materials. In addition to any required application materials for the concurrent project, an application pursuant to this section shall include:

1. Documentation of the benefits and general plan implementation offered by the concurrent project. “Benefits” shall be limited to identifiable benefits arising from the proposed use, design, or operation of the concurrent project and shall not require an unrelated monetary payment, dedication, or improvement. “General plan implementation” shall include 36

Page 22 of 29 ends

how preservation of the historic resource prevents effective implementation of the general plan.

2. Documentation of a reasonable range of feasible alternatives that would avoid demolition or materially reduce loss of the historic resource, including preservation, rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, relocation, incorporation into the project, or reduced alteration, and the rationale for rejection.

3. An acknowledgment of the repayment requirements for any tax incentive received for the preservation of the historic resource , and the loss of future tax incentives or other benefits pursuant to Section 36.55.60. d. Public hearings. Upon receipt of a complete application pursuant to this section, and following departmental review and any review required under Section 21000 et seq. of the Public Resources Code (the California Environmental Quality Act), the zoning administrator shall hold a duly noticed public hearing in accordance with Division 16 (Applications, Hearings and Appeals) of this Article.

The city council shall review the evidence in support of the request and the zoning administrator's recommendation. Pursuant to subsection (g)(3), if the historic resource would no longer be eligible for inclusion in the Historic Register, the city councilshall not remove the historic resource from the Historic Register until after construction has commenced and the resource no longer meets findings (a), (b), (c), or, if applicable, (d) in Section 36.55.10.
e. Findings. The city council may approve a demolition or other substantial adverse change to the integrity of a historic resource pursuant to this section only if it makes the following required findings:

1. The concurrent project advances specifically identified general plan policies and provides identifiable benefits that, after consideration of feasible preservation alternatives, outweigh the loss of the historic resource, considering consistency with the vision established by the general plan and other City policies, impacts on surrounding properties, design quality, and other factors; and

2. The concurrent project that would modify or replace the historic resource complies with the general plan, applicable provisions of Chapter 36 of the City Code, and any applicable precise plan, and is concurrently receiving approval for any necessary discretionary permits; and
37

Page 23 of 29 ends

3. The proposed project complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

These findings are in addition to any findings required for the concurrent application.
f. Post-approval actions.

1. Prior to any construction activity, the applicant shall provide documentation of the historic resource in the form of a Historic American Building Survey (HABS)-style outline report and HABS-style digital photographs prepared by a qualified professional. These materials shall be provided to the Mountain View Public Library in digital and hard copy formats.

2. No demolition permit or building permit shall be issued to demolish or alter the historic resource, and such demolition or construction activities may not commence, until a building permit(s) to construct the replacement project pursuant to subsection (b) is issued.

3. If the historic resource would no longer be eligible for inclusion in the Historic Register, the historic resource shall remain on the Historic Register until the authorized demolition of the historic resource, after which the director shall bring a modification to the Historic Register to the city council pursuant to Section 36.55.39, to reflect the change in status of the property in question.

SEC. 36.55.50. Duty to maintain.

All property owners of historic resources shall keep in good repair all of the portions of such resources whose maintenance is necessary to prevent the deterioration and decay of the historic resource’s character defining features. It shall be the duty of the chief building official to enforce this Section. For purposes of this Division, the term “chief building official” shall have the same meaning as “building official” as defined in Chapter 8 of the City Code.

SEC. 36.55.55. Hazardous conditions.

None of the provisions of this division shall be construed to prevent any measures of construction, alteration, removal, demolition or relocation necessary to correct the unsafe or dangerous condition of any structure, other feature, or part thereof, that presents an imminent hazard to surrounding properties or occupants and where such condition has been declared unsafe or dangerous by the chief building official or the fire chief; provided, however, that when the structure is a historic resource, and where the proposed measures have been declared 38

Page 24 of 29 ends

necessary by the chief building official or the fire chief to correct the condition, only such work as is necessary to correct the unsafe or dangerous condition that presents an imminent hazard to surrounding properties or occupants may be performed pursuant to this section.

If the hazardous condition was the result of the neglect or failure of the current or prior owner(s) to maintain, secure, or stabilize the building in accordance with the applicable requirements, enforcement provisions pursuant to Section 36.55.70 shall apply.

SEC. 36.55.60. Incentives and benefits available to historic resources on the Historic Register.

Property owners of historic resources are eligible for special incentives and benefits to encourage historic preservation, and investment, improvement and maintenance of historic resources, as described in this section and as more specifically detailed by city council policy.

Unless otherwise stated, the following incentives are available to individual historic resources and primary contributors to historic districts. Any proposed alteration resulting from benefits shall adhere to the SOIS and shall not impact public health and safety. a. Historic plaque program. Individual historic resources listed on the Historic Register shall be provided with a plaque suitable for mounting on or near the property, if requested by the owner. Historic districts shall receive one sign for each public street intersection serving the district for installation subject to applicable requirements of the City Code, if requested by a majority of district owners or directed by city council.
b. Zoning benefits. Properties on the Historic Register are eligible for exceptions to zoning provisions of this Chapter or of an applicable precise plan, including the following:

1. Nonconformance. All existing structures, site conditions, and characterdefining featuresthat also existed on the site during the historic resource’s period of significance shall be considered conforming with respect to this Chapter. New additions, changes of use, and other modifications governed by this Chapter shall comply with the provisions of this Chapter;

2. Previous use. Any use that existed on the site during the historic resource’s period of significance, which is not currently a permitted use, shall be an allowable use on the site subject to approval of a conditional use permit; and

3. Minimum parking. Reduction in minimum parking requirements of this Chapter.
39

Page 25 of 29 ends

c. Other City Code requirements. Properties on the Historic Register are eligible for exceptions and special provisions applicable to other requirements, including the following:

1. Building code. Historic resources shall have use of the currently adopted California Historical Building Code (Title 24, Part 8 of the California Building Standards Code), and any local amendments thereto adopted in Chapter 8 (Buildings) of the City Code, for maintenance, alterations, and changes of use that comply with the SOIS, which offer alternative solutions intended to protect historic buildings from the adverse impacts of certain requirements of the regular building code.

2. Condominium conversions. Historic resources shall be eligible for condominium conversions of six (6) residential units or fewer in a single historic resource pursuant to Subsection (c) (Exclusions) of Section

28.12.10 (Permit) of Article VII (Residential Condominium Conversions) of Chapter 28 (Subdivisions).

3. Parkland dedication requirements. Historic resources shall be eligible for reductions to parkland dedication requirements per Chapter 41 of the City Code. Reductions shall be determined by city council policy or resolution.

4. Other impact fees. Projects on Historic Register properties are eligible for reductionsto impact fees and feesin lieu of other requirements, including, but not limited to, below-market-rate housing program in-lieu fees, housing impact fees, transportation impact fees, and water and sewer capacity fees. Reductions shall be determined by city council policy or resolution.

5. Green building requirements. Historic resources shall be exempt from locally adopted mandatory green building requirements.
d. Permit fee reductions. Projects on Historic Register properties are eligible for reductions to planning, public works and building permit processing fees.

Reductions shall be determined by city council policy or resolution. e. Mills Act Contract. The property owner of al historic resource may be eligible to submit an application and enter into a contract with the City of Mountain View for rehabilitation and maintenance of historic resources pursuant to the Mills Act, Government Code Section 50280, et seq.
f. Tax Rebate. The city council may, by adopted policy, establish a program to provide a rebate of the City of Mountain View portion of the historic resource’s property tax.
40

Page 26 of 29 ends

g. Historic building rehabilitation loan fund. The city council may establish a historic building rehabilitation loan fund by resolution, which may be amended from time to time.Nothing in this policy shall obligate the City to fund, capitalize, or continue such a program.
h. Cancellation of Benefits. Approval by the city council of a request for removal of a historic resource from the Historic Register, including requests for demolition or substantial adverse change which would result in removal from the Historic Register, shall constitute cancellation of any contract or agreement which confers an incentive. Repayment of the tax rebate in subsection (f),shall be required if any were provided between the approval and the end of the tax period, on a pro rata basis.

SEC. 36.55.65. Application of other laws.

Nothing in this division shall be construed to abrogate the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or any otherstate, federal or local law relative to the preservation of historical resources or the environment.

SEC. 36.55.70. Enforcement.
a. Any person who knowingly violates a requirement of this division or knowingly fails to obey an order or permit issued pursuant thereto shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to the enforcement provisions and procedures of Section 36.58.55, et seq. (Enforcement of Provisions) of this Article. b. Any person who constructs, alters, removes, or demolishes a historic resource in violation of this division shall be required to reconstruct or restore the historic resource to its appearance prior to the violation to the extent such restoration is physically possible, to the extent the City determines, after notice and an opportunity to be heard, that restoration is technically feasible, lawful, and reasonably proportionate to the violation. If full restoration is infeasible, the City may require a remedial plan addressing the remaining resource, documentation of lost features, stabilization, and other measures reasonably related to the violation. This remedy shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal prosecution and penalties or other remedies provided by law. c. If the historic resource is demolished or altered in a manner that would result in a substantial adverse change in itsintegrity, the affected parcels shall remain on the Historic Register unless and until the city council approves a development project or modification pursuant to Section 36.55.45, and construction of the project has commenced. Following a determination of a violation, the director shall provide the property owner written notice identifying any required corrective action and 41

Page 27 of 29 ends

a reasonable period to submit an application for restoration or remedial work, an application pursuant to Section 36.55.45, or another application appropriate to resolve the violation. If the property owner does not submit the required application within the period specified in the notice, the applicable application is denied, or the violation otherwise remains unresolved, the City may convene a code-enforcement hearing pursuant to Section 36.58.55, et seq. Following a final determination that a person knowingly demolished a historic resource, or knowingly caused the irreversible destruction of one or more character-defining features, in violation of this division, the hearing officer may, after making written findings concerning culpability, the extent and irreversibility of the harm, economic benefit obtained, prior violations, cooperation, feasibility of restoration, and proportionality ofthe remedy, and that lesserremedies are inadequate, direct that the City shall not issue a permit authorizing new construction in place of the historic resource, other than restoration or remedial work, for a period of up to 5 years from the date of violation. The duration and scope of the restriction shall be no greater than reasonably necessary to address the violation and shall account for any change in ownership occurring after the violation. The restriction shall terminate earlier upon completion of an approved restoration or remedial plan, or approval of an application pursuant to Section 36.55.45. After the administrative order becomes final, the City shall record notice of the final order against the affected property. Upon expiration or earlier termination of the restriction, the City shall promptly record a notice of release. d. Affected parcels shall be ineligible for benefits under Section 36.55.60 unless the historic resource is restored. Repayment of the City tax rebate benefit in subsection (f) of Section 36.55.60 may be required for up to the previousfive years before the enforcement action is taken, with interest, to the extent authorized by the agreement or policy under which the benefit was granted and after notice and an opportunity to be heard.
e. All remedies contained in this section for the handling of violations or enforcement of the provisions of this division shall be cumulative and not exclusive of any other applicable provisions of city, county or state law.

SEC. 36.55.75. Other provisions.
a. SB 79 temporary exclusion. In accordance with Government Code Section 65912.161(b)(1), all properties designated on the Historic Register on or before January 1, 2025 shall be excluded from applicability of Government Code Section 65912.157, until one year following the adoption of the seventh revision of the housing element of the general plan. Such properties shall be identified on the Zoning Map with an icon designated as “Properties excluded from Government Code Section 65912.157 (SB 79) until one year following the adoption of the seventh revision of the housing element.”
42

Page 28 of 29 ends

b. Previous Historic Register. The Mountain View Register of Historic Resources in effect on the effective date of the ordinance adopting this subsection shall remain in effect and continue to be the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources pursuant to this Division.
c. State and National eligible resources – single-family dwellings and duplexes.

1. Any single-family dwelling or duplex in an “R” zoning district identified in Exhibit A adopted concurrently with this ordinance which has been identified as eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historic Places as of the effective date of the ordinance adopting this subsection shall also be subject to the HP permit requirements of Section 36.55.40 and the procedural requirements of Section 36.55.45, except Subsection (f)(3).

2. No property may be added under this subsection after the effective date of the ordinance. If a property under this subsection is subsequently listed on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources, the provisions applicable to listed historic resources shall prevail over the provisions of this subsection.

3. This subsection shall cease to apply to an identified property upon the earliest of: (1) city council designation or a final decision not to designate the property under Section 36.55.15; or (2) completion of applicable environmental review specifically evaluating cessation of interim protection for the property; or (3) June 30, 2028. Staff shall present the status of each property identified in Exhibit A to the city council no later than June 30, 2028, together with a recommendation concerning designation, continued interim protection, or completion of environmental review addressing cessation of interim protection. Failure to meet this deadline shall not terminate the requirements of this subsection.

SECTION 4. Publication. Pursuant to Section 522 of the Mountain View City Charter, it is ordered that copies of the foregoing proposed Ordinance be posted at least two (2) days prior to its adoption in three (3) prominent places in the City and that a single publication be made to the 43

Page 29 of 29 ends

official newspaper of the City of a notice setting forth the title of the Ordinance, the date of its introduction, and a list of the places where copies of the proposed Ordinance are posted.

SECTION 5. Effective Date. Pursuant to Section 519 of the Mountain View City Charter, this Ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days from and after the date of its adoption. – – – – – – – – – – –
CDD/EA-08-19-26o
Exhibit: A. Properties Subject to Section 36.55.75(c)
44 Exhibit A
Single-Family Dwellings and Duplexes in “R” Zoning Districts, Eligible for California Register of Historical Resources or National Register of Historic Places August 2026
This exhibit implements Section 36.55.75(c) (State and National eligible resources – singlefamily dwellings and duplexes) of the Mountain View City Code.

The following properties are single-family dwellings and duplexes identified as eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historic Places, which are subject to the HP permit requirements of Section 36.55.40 and the procedural requirements of Section 36.55.45, except Subsection (f)(3).

These properties are not on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources as of the effective date of the ordinance adopting Section 36.55.75(c). If subsequently listed on the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources, the City Code provisions applicable to listed historic resources shall prevail over the provisions of Section 36.55.75(c). 177 ADA AVENUE (APN 160-46-057)
272 BUSH STREET (APN 158-22-048)
415 BUSH STREET (APN 158-30-020)
537 BUSH STREET (APN 158-25-074)
97 CHURCH STREET (APN 158-04-056)
334 CHURCH STREET (APN 158-25-075)
655 EUNICE AVENUE (APN 197-32-002)
280 LESLIE COURT (APN 160-29-021)
340 PALO ALTO AVENUE (APN 154-08-041)
604 PETTIS AVENUE (APN 154-31-048)
462 SLEEPER AVENUE (APN 197-37-026)
395 VELARDE STREET (APN 158-29-084)
344 VIEW STREET (APN 158-23-021)
1209 VILLA STREET (APN 154-09-043)
45 Attachment 2
-1-
ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW

AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO EXCLUDE PROPERTIES DESIGNATED ON THE MOUNTAIN VIEW REGISTER OF HISTORIC RESOURCES PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 2025 FROM GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65912.157 (SENATE BILL 79) AND

FINDING THAT THE AMENDMENTS ARE EXEMPT FROM REVIEW UNDER THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT,
PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(b)(3),

AS RECOMMENDED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION WHEREAS, Senate Bill (SB) 79, signed into law on October 10, 2025 and codified in Government Code Sections 65912.155 to 65912.162, will make a qualified transit-oriented housing development project, as defined, an allowed use on any site zoned for residential, mixed, or commercial development that is located within a specified distance of a transit-oriented development stop, as defined, in urban transit counties (defined as a county with more than 15 passenger rail stations), which includes Santa Clara County, if the development complies with applicable requirements, as specified in the statute; and WHEREAS, SB 79 (Gov. Code § 65912.161(b)(1)(F)) allows a local agency to defer the application of SB 79 for any historic resource designated as of January 1, 2025 on a local register until after adoption of the next housing element by adopting an ordinance to exclude such sites; and
WHEREAS, on January 27, 2026, the City Council directed City staff to evaluate and prepare potential amendments to the City’s Zoning Code and Zoning Map to preserve locally designated historic resources from the application of SB 79, consistent with the authority provided under Government Code Section 65912.161, and to return to the City Council with recommended implementing ordinances; and
WHEREAS, 24 parcels (as shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though fully set forth herein) within the areas affected by SB 79 were designated as historic resources on the local register prior to January 1, 2025; and WHEREAS, the City has complied with the procedures and requirements set forth in Government Code Section 65853, et seq., and Section 36.52.40, et seq. (Zoning amendments), of the Mountain View City Code; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on August 19, 2026 and recommended the City Council approve the Zoning Map Amendment; and 46 -2-
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on September 22, 2026 on this Ordinance and received and considered all information, documents, and comments presented at said hearing regarding the amendment to the Zoning Map, including the recommendation from the Environmental Planning Commission, the City Council report, and project materials; now, therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council hereby makes the findings for a Zoning Map Amendment pursuant to Section 36.52.70 of the City Code:
a. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan because it implements the General Plan’s goals and policies supporting the preservation and protection of the City’s historic and cultural resources. The amendments are consistent with General Plan Policy LUD 11.1 (Historical Preservation) as they exclude existing locally designated historic resources and properties from the application of SB 79 until the City’s next Housing Element update. This approach preserves the City’s ability to identify, evaluate, and protect historic resources while maintaining consistency between the Zoning Code and the General Plan. The amendment implements the authority provided in Government Code Section 65912.161 to exclude qualifying historic resources from the application of SB 79. At the same time, SB 79 continues to apply in eligible areas that are not subject to the exclusion, thereby preserving opportunities for housing development consistent with state law. The amendment does not alter the General Plan land use designations, underlying Zoning Districts, or permitted land uses and, therefore, maintains consistency with the General Plan’s land use policies while ensuring that implementation of SB 79 does not inadvertently compromise the preservation of significant historic and cultural resources during the interim period before the next comprehensive Housing Element update; b. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City as it implements the authority provided under Government Code Section 65912.161 to exclude locally designated historic resources from the application of SB 79. The amendment supports the public interest by preserving the City’s historically significant resources while maintaining implementation of SB 79 in all other eligible areas. Because the amendment does not modify the underlying Zoning Districts, permitted land uses, or development standards applicable to the affected properties, it will not adversely affect the public health, safety, convenience, or general welfare; c. The site is physically suitable (including, but not limited to, access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and absence of physical constraints) for the requested zoning designation and anticipated land use development. The site is physically suitable (including, but not limited to, access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and absence of physical constraints) for the requested zoning designation and anticipated land use development because the proposed amendment does not change the 47 -3-
underlying zoning designation, General Plan land use designation, permitted land uses, or development standards applicable to the affected properties. Rather, the amendment identifies locally designated historic resources that are excluded from the application of SB 79 pursuant to Government Code Section 65912.161. Existing access, public utilities, surrounding land uses, and physical site conditions will remain unchanged, and the amendment will not affect the physical suitability of the properties for development otherwise allowed under the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and
d. The proposed amendment is in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed project, including the amendment, complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the amendment is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption, which provides that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. The amendment does not approve any physical development, increase development intensity, change existing land use designations, or modify underlying zoning regulations or development standards. As a separate and independent basis, Government Code Section 65912.160(c)(2) states that an ordinance consistent with the provisions of SB 79 shall not be considered a project under CEQA. Therefore, the proposed Zoning Map amendment is not a project under CEQA and does not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 2. The Zoning Map Amendment, identifying 206 Bush Street (APN 158-22-032), 445 Calderon Avenue (located on the common lot shared by APN 158-57-001 through 158-57-019), 124-126 Castro Street (APN 158-15-038), 142-156 Castro Street (APN 158-15-038), 169-175 Castro Street (APN 158-20-012), 201 Castro Street (APN 158-22-011), 228 Castro Street (APN 158-13-039), 298 Castro Street (APN 158-13-047), 350 Franklin Street (APN 158-12-020), 394 Franklin Street (APN 158-12-024), 403 Hope Street (APN 158-23-049), 425 Hope Street (APN 158-23-067), 302 Loreto Street (APN 158-30-047), 484 Loreto Street (APN 158-30-060), 157 Moffett Boulevard (APN 158-44-001), 372 Mountain View Avenue (APN 154-08-023), 360 Oak Street (APN 158-12-007), 390 Palo Alto Avenue (APN 154-08-039), 472 South Shoreline Boulevard (APN 154-25-052), 322 View Street (APN 158-23-020), 327 View Street (APN 158-23-015), 1043 Villa Street (APN 158-13-007), 515 Villa Street (APN 158-22-031), and 1074-1076 Wright Avenue (APN 150-23-009) as “Properties excluded from Government Code Section 65912.157 (SB 79) until one year following the adoption of the seventh revision of the housing element,” as shown in Exhibit A, is hereby approved.

SECTION 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the other remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared unconstitutional.
48 -4-
SECTION 4. Publication. Pursuant to Section 522 of the Mountain View City Charter, it is ordered that copies of the foregoing proposed Ordinance be posted at least two (2) days prior to its adoption in three (3) prominent places in the City and that a single publication be made to the official newspaper of the City of a notice setting forth the title of the Ordinance, the date of its introduction, and a list of the places where copies of the proposed Ordinance are posted.

SECTION 5. Effective Date. Pursuant to Section 519 of the Mountain View City Charter, this Ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days from and after the date of its adoption. – – – – – – – – – – –
CDD/EK-09-22-26o-1
Exhibit: A. Zoning Map Amendment
49 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
H
H
H
H
H
H
H H
H
H
H H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
kj

ROCK ST

VIEW ST

EASY ST

BUSH ST

W DANA ST
OAK ST

HOPE ST

PETTIS AVE

NILDA AVE

BEGEN AVE

HANS AVE

ROSE AVE

SAN LUIS AVE

FRANKLIN ST

CLYDE AVE

MERCY ST

ALVIN ST

ARNOLD AVE

SLADKY AVE

ORTEGA AVE

DIERICX DR

PEAR AVE

FERGUSON DR

CENTRAL AVE

TULANE DR

BAYSHORE PKWY

BURGOYNE ST

PALO ALTO AVE

GRETEL LN

CENTRE ST

ADA AVE

ALTA AVE

TODD ST

ALICE AVE

CHIQUITA AVE

WRIGHT AVE

ANZA ST

BONITA AVE

HACKETT AVE

EVANDALE AVE

WALNUT DR

MONTALTO DR

SPRING ST

EMILY DR
OAK LN

WYANDOTTE ST

TRUMAN AVE

FORDHAM WAY

LEONA LN HUFF AVE

CHESLEY AVE

PLYMOUTH ST

MARICH WAY

COLONY ST

FLYNN AVE

LOGUE AVE

CRITTENDEN LN

YUBA DR

MOUNTAIN VIEW AVE

LOLA LN

DALMA DR

STIERLIN CT

SAN RAMON AVE

MACON AVE

RAVENDALE DR

DELL AVE

WALKER DR

BORANDA AVE

N BERNARDO AVE

MORGAN ST

MARIPOSA AVE

CRISANTO AVE

MARTENS AVE

JOAQUIN RD

PARK DR

MORTON CT

SNOW ST

GEST DR

SHOREBIRD WAY

FAY WAY

SAN PIERRE WAY

MAUDE AVE

MEADOW LN

LIMETREE LN

ALISON AVE

CLARK RD

YOSEMITE AVE

KITTOE DR

PRESTON DR CAROL AVE

BLOSSOM LN

SAN LEANDRO AVE

LAURA LN

SHERLAND AVE

GILMORE ST

NORTH DR

SUN MOR AVE

SOLANA DR

KAREN WAY

LORETO ST

MURLAGAN AVE

YALE DR

KATRINA WAY

LANE AVE

WILLOWGATE ST

FAIRMONT AVE

LUBICH DR

JACKSON ST

MARILYN DR

SIERRA AVE

ISABELLE AVE

VICTORY AVE

OAK AVE

LINDA VISTA AVE

WHITNEY DR

APRICOT LN

VELARDE ST

FAYETTE DR

SAN RAFAEL AVE

ERNESTINE LN

JUDSON DR

ORANGETREE LN

FAIRBROOK DR

ANNA AVE

KENT DR

GOLDEN WAY

TAMI WAY

PAUL AVE

MAYFIELD AVE
LEE DR

NATIONAL AVE

CYPRESS POINT DR

LIDA DR

BEVERLY ST

MILLER AVE

LINCOLN DR

CAMILLE CT

E DANA ST

BROOKDALE AVE

SALADO DR

PACIFIC DR

PIAZZA DR

MINARET AVE

COLLEGE AVE

RUSTIC LN

SEVELY DR

FAIR OAKS ST

HIGH SCHOOL WAY

APPLETREE LN

SPACE PARK WAY

MADISON DR

MUIR DR

SOUTH DR

WAVERLY PL

SHADY SPRING LN

BETLO AVE

BONNY ST

AWALT DR

ELSIE AVE

LANDINGS DR

CRESTVIEW DR

CONTINENTAL CIR
BAY ST

EHRHORN AVE

NITA AVE

IVAN WAY

JARDIN DR

ADELE AVE

BLACKFIELD WAY

BENTLEY SQ

VASSAR AVE

EDNAMARY WAY

PAMELA DR

SAW MILL LN

SULLIVAN DR

TROPHY DR

JESSIE LN

GEMINI AVE

DIABLO AVE

PLAZA CT

GREENVIEW DR

BARBARA AVE

EICHLER DR

RICH AVE

VAQUERO DR

RAINBOW DR

LASSEN AVE

CHURIN DR

SONIA WAY

GLENBOROUGH DR

CARMELITA DR

PALMER AVE

COLUMBIA DR

GABRIEL AVE

FOXBOROUGH DR

DREW AVE

DEVONSHIRE AVE

MORA DR

PEACOCK AVE

BEATRICE ST

TYLER PARK WAY

DE FRANCE AVE

HOSPITAL DR

HIGDON AVE

DOANE AVE

WENTWORTH ST

WASATCH DR

ELDORA DR

HORIZON AVE

JACKSON ALY

TERMINAL BLVD

TOWNE CIR

BENJAMIN DR

HOLLINGSWORTH DR

LA SALLE DR

ORMONDE DR

WAGNER AVE

ORCHARD AVE

PACCHETTI WAY

POLARIS AVE

VINCENT DR

NOTRE DAME DR

COAST AVE

BROWER AVE

MORAGA DR

YORKTON DR

HAMILTON AVE

SAN DOMAR DR

DE VOTO ST

SAN PABLO DR

MONTEBELLO
AVE

CAMP AVE

BORELLO WAY

TAMALPAIS ST

MCCARTY AVE

LELAND AVE

TOFT ST

VICTOR WAY

YARDIS CT

WAKE FOREST RD

REINERT RD

STARR WAY

PACIFIC AVE

MONROE DR

CORNELL DR

NICHOLAS DR

KITTYHAWK WAY

MARDELL WAY

ELKA AVE

VERNON CIR

POLK CT

WILLIAMS WAY

LLOYD WAY

SHARY AVE

POST ST

PASTEL LN

DOYLE PL

SUNNYVIEW LN

PEARTREE LN

GRANADA DR

UNIVERSITY AVE

SAN CLEMENTE WAY

DENNIS LN

EMMONS DR

DOVERTON SQ

S WHISMAN RD

FORDHAM CT

HARPSTER DR

RIDGEMONT DR

CIRCULO

SAN LUCAS AVE

SAN CARLOS AVE
OAKJEWELL PL

VILLAGE CT

MAGNOLIA LN

ESTRADA DR

TRYNA DR

WALTHAM ST

RAMOS CT

THE AMERICANA

TELFORD AVE

RUTH AVE

STANFORD AVE

FERRY MORSE WAY

WOODSTOCK LN

HOUGHTON ST

SAINT GILES LN

YORKSHIRE WAY

CREEDEN WAY

LAUREL WAY

CUERNAVACA

ADAMS CT

WESTFORD WAY

KENZO CT

GAMEL WAY

HILARY AVE

SUSSEX SQ

FRONT LN

S OAK ST

THADDEUS DR

CRANE AVE

VILLA ROBLEDA DR

BEAUMONT SQ

CHERRYTREE LN

CHETWOOD DR

LORENE CT

SOLANA CT

TULANE CT

ALLEY WAY

ALDEAN AVE

WHITS RD

SAN SIMEON DR

WILSON CT

CORNELIA CT

AITKEN AVE

CECELIA WAY

ORMONDE WAY

MOON BEAM DR

SERENA CT

BEACON ST

ANDRE AVE

SAN ARDO WAY

JASON WAY

VILLA NUEVA WAY

LILAC LN

CLYDE CT

MINTON LN
OUR LN

C ASSANDRA WAY

WHISMAN PARK DR
GARDEN

JEFFERSON DR

EATON LN
CT

VARSITY CT

WILDROSE WAY

CRAIG CT

LAMBERT WAY

MELBA CT

POPPY PL
MONTEBRENTON CT

WILD CHERRY LN

TYRELLA CT

FRANKLIN AVE

ANTHONY CT

ANDSBURY AVE

JAMES DR

LEVIN CT

SAN VERON AVE

NEWMAN PL

ROCK CT

E SAN MARCOS CIR

BRODERICK WAY

JUNCTION AVE

COTTAGE CT

BOND WAY

THOMPSON CT

PORTERFIELD CT

SAN MARCOS CIR

VAN BUR EN CIR

KELLER DR

LYNWOOD AVE

CHATHAM WAY

WASHINGTON ST

MONTGOMERY ST

CANNA CT

AMALFIWAY

MILTON CT
DON CT

DRUCILLA DR

EL RANCHITO WAY

PILGRIM AVE

BRUCKNER CIR

WOODLEAF

THOMPSON SQ

ARMAND AVE

WHISMAN CT

DEVONSHIRE CT

OWENS CT

SAN CARRIZO WAY

SILVERWOOD AVE

DORCHESTER DR

STACEY CT

OLIVE CT

DEVRI CT

SKYVIEW CT

CAPPELLETTI CT

FOREST GLEN ST

KATIE CT

MIDDLEFIELD AVE

MANSFIELD DR

GANTRY WAY

PROMETHEAN WAY

STARLITE CT

KENTMERE CT

RUNNINGWOOD CIR

GOLF CT

RIALTO CT

BLUELAKE SQ

LESLIE CT

MOUNTAIN LAUREL CT

FLOWER LN

ANDERSON CT

TIANA LN

ST JULIEN WAY

QUINCY DR

ANNIE LAURIE AVE

LUCE CT

DIERICX CT

BRYN MAWR CT

CARVER PL

PERMANENTE WAY

JENNIFER CT

MCCARTHY AVE

RICH PL

SOLACE PL

BEDFORD LOOP

ST JULIEN CT

LEKSICH AVE

LOTUS LN

STRATFORD CT

IRENE CT

VILLA NUEVA CT

MOUNT VERNON CT

NEWTON DR

DEL MEDIO CT

CORTO ST

WINSTON PL

ASHLEY PL

NEDSON CT

PLUMTREE LN

WOBURN CT

TAYLOR CT

BONITA CT

HEARTWOOD LN

WOODGREEN

MERIDIAN WAY

GLADYS CT

SHEILA CT

PERICH CT

REDCLIFF CT

PALMITA PL

TAHOE TER

TOWN SQUARE DR

SAN LUCAS CT

OAK HAVEN PL

STAMM AVE

MARGO DR

TREE DR

EXCELL CT

KATHY WAY

ORCHARD GLEN CT

HAMWOOD TER

HEDGEROW CT

WINDROSE PL

HILO CT

THOMAS CT

CHESLEY CT

ST EMILION CT

MARJORIE CT

MELBA WAY

CHRISTOBAL PRIVADA

BROOK PL

ASTOR CT

FRANCES WAY

FRANKLIN CT

CAMBRIDGE LN

PHYLLIS CT

SPENCER CT

COLLINS CT

HOLLAND CT

BEDFORD DR

PLUM CT

BRIGHTON PL

LAUELLA CT

SAN RAMON CT

BORANDA CT

WINFIELD DR

WARNER CT

PERIMETER RD

GLEN UNA CT

CONCORD CIR

MORNING SUN CT

GRANADA PARK CIR

ROSLYN CIR

JENKINS LN

SHELBY DR

ARBOR CT

LAYLA CT

PARK CT

MIDROCK CORNERS

MILANO WAY

PARKER CT

PATRICIA CT

RATHMORE LN

HEATHER CT

FAIRHAVEN CT

GARY CT

NANCY CT

WHELAN CT

MARILYN CT

CHATHAM CT

THATCHER DR

REDWOOD CT

SHOWERS CT

MARCIA CT

PEPPERWOOD CT

PENNY LN

CLAIRE CT

SILVA AVE

WHITNEY CT

SAN RAMON AVE

PARKER ST

ELMWOOD ST

TRIPIANO CT

CAMILLE LN

SAN LUPPE DR

SONDGROTH WAY
TER

ALAMO CT

WORTHAM

WHISMAN STATION DR

PETIE WAY

SWANSON WAY

HOLLY CT

LENA CT

SANTA ROSA AVE

CHARMAIN CIR

SNYDER LN

JACARANDA DR

DUKE WAY

WOODHAVEN PL

BOURBON CT

BELSHAW DR

W SAN MARCOS CIR

CARLA CT

MORGAN CT

FREEDOM LN

MARCELYN AVE

KERN CT

SANTA CLARA AVE

DARYA CT

BELLA CORTE

CALISTOGA WAY

SORRENTO CT

EICHLER CT

SERRA SAN BRUNO

MARIANNE CT

EMERSON LN

ESPINOSA LN

RONDEN CT

FILOMENA CT

ABRAHAM CT

N SAN ANTONIO RD

PRISCILLA CT

GLEN ALPINE CT
WAY
WAY

CALAVERAS CT

PEACHTREE CT

SHERLAND CT

AMHERST CT

LEMONTREE CT

ST EMILION WAY

MAYFLOWER CT

ASBURY WAY

WELLESLEY CT

MARILYN PL

FARREL CT

RHONE CT

BEAUME CT

BARCELONA CT

RICHARD CT

PRESTON CT

MEDOC CT

TAAFFE ST

DISTEL CIR

DISTEL DR

MARINER DR

INDUSTRIAL AVE

COMMERCIAL ST

SAN ANTONIO WAY

JORDAN AVE

SHERWOOD AVE

VILLA ST

LATHAM ST

LEVIN AVE

FARLEY ST

FAIRCHILD DR

MONTECITO AVE

SIERRA VISTA AVE

BRYANT AVE

TYRELLA AVE

SYLVAN AVE

LEGHORN ST

CALDERON AVE

DALE AVE

SHOWERS DR

CUESTA DR

ESCUELA AVE

SLEEPER AVE

MOORPARK WAY

TERRA BELLA AVE

CLARK AVE

STIERLIN RD

THOMPSON AVE

BRYANT ST

INDEPENDENCE AVE

E DANA ST

LEONG DR

DEL MEDIO AVE

LA AVENIDA AVE

GLADYS AVE

MIRAMONTE AVE

GARCIA AVE

PIONEER WAY

MARINE WAY

E CHARLESTON RD

JANE LN

CASEY AVE

CHURCH ST

EUNICE AVE HEATHERSTONE WAY

SAN ANTONIO CIR

CALIFORNIA ST

W MIDDLEFIELD RD

GRANT RD

N WHISMAN RD

N RENGSTORFF AVE

CUESTA DR

W EVELYN AVE

S SHORELINE BLVD

MIRAMONTE AVE

S RENGSTORFF AVE

PHYLLIS AVE

CENTRAL EXPY

W EL CAMINO REAL

N SHORELINE BLVD

ELLIS ST

MOFFETT BLVD

CASTRO ST

E EVELYN AVE

CHARLESTON RD

E MIDDLEFIELD RD

E EL CAMINO REAL

OLD MIDDLEFIELD WAY

SAN ANTONIO RD

8. 2.

3. 14.

6. 1.

16. 17.

9. 5.

4. 10.

2. 3.

2. 4.

4. 1.

3. 2.

4. 3.

3. 1.

2. 4.

19. 12.

1. 11.

7. 15.

18. 5.

13. 4.

3. 6.

3. 2.

1. 1.

2. 1.

5. 5.

3. WINDMILL PARK LN

2. CARLOS PRIVADA

3. ELENA PRIVADA

1. COMSTOCK QUEEN CT

8. GEORGETOWN DR

2. MOUNTAIN SHADOWS DR

3. CAMPBELL DR

1. CEDARBROOK WAY

5. WINWOOD CT

19. PASEO CT

4. SUTTER CREEK LN

4. WINDINGWOOD CT

1. BAYWOOD CT

11. HART CT

14. JASMINE CT

3. HILLWOOD CT

16. KASRA DR

3. WOODGREEN LN

4. COTTONWOOD CT

2. WILDFLOWER PARK LN

4. WOODLAND PARK LN

1. EMPIRE CT

15. JORDAN CT

17. OBERG CT

2. DEERWOOD CT

18. PARVIN DR

3. PARAGON CT

12. HUNTINGTON CT

2. CAMERON DR

4. ROYAL OAK CT

9. GOLI CT

5. FABLE CT

3. SAW MILL CT

2. GLENMEAD CT

1. BEL AIR CT

1. ANA PRIVADA

5. SHEFFIELD CT

6. WELLINGTON CT

6. FREDERICK CT

2. GLENWOOD CT

13. ISIS CT

1. FOUNTAIN PARK LN

7. GEORGETOWN CT

10. GREYHAWK CT

4. MARIA PRIVADA

5. REBECCA PRIVADA

SPRINGER RD

AMPHITHEATRE PKWY

EL MONTE AVE

W EL CAMINO REAL
£¤101
}85
}237
}82
Fire
Station 3
Fire
Station 1
Fire
Station 2
Fire
Station 5
Fire
Station 4
Municipal
Operations
Center
Whisman
Sports
Center
Senior Center
Performing
Arts Center
Library
City Hall
Mtn. View
Sports
Pavilion
Police-Fire
Administration
El Camino
Hospital
Bayshore
NASA Station
Middlefield
Station
Whisman
Station
Mountain View
Transit Center
Crittenden
Middle
School
Theuerkauf
Elementary
School
Castro
Elementary
School
Landels
Elementary
School
Graham
Middle
School
Bubb
Elementary
School
Springer
Elementary
School
Alta Vista
High School
Mountain View
High School
Community
Center
San Antonio
Station
Imai
Elementary
School
Varsity
Park
Springer Park
Gateway
Fairmont Park
Eagle Park
McKelvey Park
Castro Park
Jackson
Park
Thaddeus Park
Wyandotte/Reinert Park
San Veron
Park
Gemello Park
Rex-Manor
Park
Chetwood Park
Creekside
Park
Eldora Park
Charleston
Park
Magonolia
Park
Klein
Park
Dana Park
Pioneer Park
Mercy-Bush
Park
Sylvan Park
Bubb Park
Cuesta Park
Cooper
Park
Sleeper Park
Rengstorff
Park
Crittenden
Hill
Vista slope
Landels Park
Shoreline
Amphitheatre
Willowgate
Garden
Whisman Park
San Antonio
Transit
Center
Monta Loma
Elementary
School
Sierra
Vista Park
Mariposa Park
Stevenson
Elementary
School
Stevenson
Park
Del Medio
Park
Devonshire
Park
Teen Center
Imai Park
Monta
Loma Park
Senior Garden
Shoreline at
Mountain View
Palo Alto
Medical
Foundation
Kaiser
Permanente
Mountain View
Vargas
Elementary
School
Heritage Park
Wyandotte Park
Evandale Park
A
A
A
A
AW
CN
CN
CN
CN
CN
CN
CN
CO
CO
CO
CRA
CRA
CRA
CRA
CRA
CS
CS
CS
F
ML
ML
ML
ML
MLsd
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM-40
MM-40
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P(13)
P(14)
P(17)
P(18)
P(19)
P(23)
P(24)
P(25)
P(26)
P(27)
P(28)
P(29)
P(30)
P(30)
P(30)
P(31)
P(32)
P(35)
P(37)
P(38)
P(38)
P(38)
P(39)
P(40)
P(41)
P(41)
P(5)
P(6)
P(7)
P(8)
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PRE PF
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1-10
R1-10
R1-10sd
R1-20
R1-7
R1-7.5
R1-7.5
R1-7.5
R1-7.5
R1-7.5
R1-7.5
R1-8
R1-8
R1-8
R1-8
R1-8
R1-8
R1-8
R1-8.5
R1-8.5h1s
R1-8h1s
R1-9
R1-9
R1h1s
R1h1s
R1sd
R1sd
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2-10
R2-10sd
R2-9
R2-9
R2-9
R2-9sd
R2h1s
R2h1s
R2h1s
R2sd
R2sd
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1.25
R3-1.25
R3-1.25
R3-1.25
R3-1.25
R3-1.25
R3-1.25
R3-1.25
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5h1s
R3-1h1s
R3-1h1s
R3-1h1s
R3-1h1s
R3-1h2s
R3-1h2s
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2.2
R3-2.2
R3-2.2
R3-2.2h1s
R3-2.2sd
R3-2.5
R3-2.5
R3-2.5
R3-2.5
R3-2.5
R3-2.5
R3-2.5h1s
R3-2.5h1s
R3-2sd
R3-2sd
R3-3
R3-3
R3-3
R3-3
R3-3
R3-3
R3-3
R3-3
R3-3sd
R3-3sd
R3-4
R3-D
R4
R4
R4
R4
R4
RMH
RMH
RMH
RMH
RMH
R3-1.5
County of Santa Clara, ParcelQuest, City of Mountain View EXHIBIT A - Historic Properties Excluded
from SB 79
Map Copyright October 2008 City of Mountain View, California. Data sources: Santa Clara County GIS, City of Mountain View GIS. Parcel-level map accuracy not implied; this map is not to be used for ¯
property transactions. Note that with the exception of some private streets, zoning is parcel-based and is not shown extending to the centerline of rights-of-way.

Precise Plans
P(5) 460 N. Shoreline Blvd
P(6) San Ramon
P(7) Mayfield
P(8) San Antonio Station
P(13) California-Ortega
P(14) 2100 California St
P(17) Villa-Mariposa
P(18) Evelyn Ave Corridor
P(19) Downtown
P(23) Castro-Miramonte Triangle
P(24) El Camino Medical Park
P(25) Grant-Phyllis Triangle
P(26) Grant-Martens
P(27) Grant-Phyllis
P(28) 1101 Grant Road
P(29) 111 Ferry-Morse Wy
P(30) Sylvan-Dale
P(31) Mora-Ortega
P(32) Evandale Area
P(35) Whisman Station
P(37) South Whisman
P(38) El Camino Real
P(39) North Bayshore
P(40) San Antonio
P(41) East Whisman
July 2026
City of Los Altos
City of Palo Alto
Town of Los Altos Hills
City of Sunnyvale

NASA AMES

RESEARCH CENTER

MOFFETT FIELD
0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Feet
a
Height/Story Limitations
Special Design Combining
Overlay Zones
PF - Public Facility
P - Planned Community/Precise Plan
F - Flood Plain
A, AW - Agriculture
Special Purpose Zones
MM - General Industrial
ML - Limited Industrial
Industrial/Manufacturing Districts
CRA - Commercial/Residential-Arterial
CS - Commercial-Service
CO - Commercial-Office
CN - Commercial-Neighborhood
Commercial/Professional Districts
! ! !RMH - Mobile Home
! ! !
! !
R4 - High Density
R3 - Multiple Family
R2 - One and Two Family
R1 - Single-Family
Residential Districts
Legend
SB 79
TOD Zones *
Properties excluded from Government Code Section
65912.157 (SB 79) until one year following the
adoption of the seventh revision of the Housing
Element
H
* Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and subject to change without notice.
sd
h,s
50 ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
H
H
H
H
H
H
H H
H
H
H H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
n
n
kj

VIEW ST

BUSH ST

W DANA ST
OAK ST

HOPE ST

PETTIS AVE

FRANKLIN ST

MERCY ST

CENTRAL AVE

PALO ALTO AVE

CENTRE ST

WRIGHT AVE

ANZA ST

YUBA DR

MOUNTAIN VIEW AVE

DALMA DR

BORANDA AVE

PARK DR

SNOW ST

YOSEMITE AVE

BLOSSOM LN

LORETO ST

LANE AVE

WILLOWGATE ST

FAIRMONT AVE

JACKSON ST

MARILYN DR

SIERRA AVE

VELARDE ST

PAUL AVE

CYPRESS POINT DR

CAMILLE CT

HIGH SCHOOL WAY

BONNY ST
BAY ST

EHRHORN AVE

VASSAR AVE

TROPHY DR

JESSIE LN

GEMINI AVE

EICHLER DR

SONIA WAY

BEATRICE ST

WENTWORTH ST

ELDORA DR

HORIZON AVE

JACKSON ALY

ORCHARD AVE

POLARIS AVE

VINCENT DR

MCCARTY AVE

VICTOR WAY

PACIFIC AVE

SHARY AVE

GRANADA DR

HARPSTER DR

HOUGHTON ST

FRONT LN

S OAK ST

JASON WAY

LILAC LN

MINTON LN

WILDROSE WAY POPPY PL

WILD CHERRY LN

ANDSBURY AVE

WASHINGTON ST

MONTGOMERY ST

CANNA CT

EL RANCHITO WAY

OLIVE CT

PROMETHEAN WAY

MOUNTAIN LAUREL CT

ANDERSON CT

MCCARTHY AVE

LOTUS LN

CORTO ST

HEARTWOOD LN

MERIDIAN WAY

PALMITA PL

OAK HAVEN PL

STAMM AVE

ORCHARD GLEN CT

FRANCES WAY

PLUM CT

GRANADA PARK CIR

LAYLA CT

PARK CT

PATRICIA CT

FAIRHAVEN CT

GARY CT

NANCY CT

MARCIA CT

ELMWOOD ST

CAMILLE LN

PETIE WAY

SANTA ROSA AVE

SANTA CLARA AVE

EICHLER CT

ABRAHAM CT

CALAVERAS CT

ASBURY WAY

MARINER DR

VILLA ST

CALDERON AVE

STIERLIN RD

BRYANT ST

CHURCH ST

W EVELYN AVE

S SHORELINE BLVD

CENTRAL EXPY

W EL CAMINO REAL

CASTRO ST

3. 4.

1. 2.

3. 2.

1. 3. WINDMILL PARK LN

2. MOUNTAIN SHADOWS DR

1. CEDARBROOK WAY

4. SUTTER CREEK LN

3. WOODGREEN LN

2. WILDFLOWER PARK LN

4. WOODLAND PARK LN

3. SAW MILL CT

2. GLENWOOD CT

1. FOUNTAIN PARK LN
}85
}82
Fire
Station 1
Performing
Arts Center
Library
City Hall
Police-Fire
Administration
Mountain View
Transit Center
Landels
Elementary
School
Graham
Middle
School
Gateway
Fairmont Park
Eagle Park
McKelvey Park
Jackson Park
Rex-Manor
Park
Eldora Park
Dana Park
Pioneer Park
Mercy-Bush
Park
Landels Park
Willowgate
Garden
Mariposa Park
Kaiser
Permanente
Mountain View
A
CN
CN
CN
CO
CRA
CRA
CRA
CS
CS
ML
MM
P
P
P
P
P(17)
P(18)
P(19)
P(23)
P(38)
P(5)
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PF
PRE PF
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1
R1-8
R1h1s
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2-9
R2-9
R2-9sd
R2sd
R2sd
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1 R3-1
R3-1
R3-1
R3-1.25
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1.5
R3-1h1s
R3-1h1s
R3-1h2s
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2
R3-2.2
R3-2.5
R3-2.5
R3-2.5
R3-2.5
R3-2.5h1s
R3-3
R3-3
R3-3
R3-3
R3-3sd
R3-4
R4
R4
RMH
County of Santa Clara, ParcelQuest, City of Mountain View EXHIBIT A - Historic Properties Excluded
from SB 79
Map Copyright October 2008 City of Mountain View, California. Data sources: Santa Clara County GIS, City of Mountain View GIS. Parcel-level map accuracy not implied; this map is not to be used for ¯ property transactions. Note that with the exception of some private streets, zoning is parcel-based and is not shown extending to the centerline of rights-of-way.

July 2026
City of Los Altos
City of Palo Alto
Town of Los Altos Hills
City of Sunnyvale

NASA AMES

RESEARCH CENTER

MOFFETT FIELD
0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Feet
a
51 City of Mountain View
Legislation Text

CITY HALL
500 CASTRO STREET
File #: 206402, Version: 1
Ambulance Billing and User Fees
Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Mountain View Adopting the Revised Ambulance Billing and User Fees to Be Used by the Mountain View Fire Department for Advanced Life Support Emergency Ambulance Transportation Services and Authorizing the Applicable Fees to Be Reflected in the City’s Master Fee Schedule as “Actual Costs (as Established by Santa Clara County),” to be read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment 1 to the Council report).

City of Mountain View Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/8/2026
powered by Legistar™ 52
DATE: October 13, 2026
CATEGORY: Consent
DEPT.: Fire
TITLE: Ambulance Billing and User Fees

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Mountain View Adopting the Revised Ambulance Billing and User Fees to Be Used by the Mountain View Fire Department for Advanced Life Support Emergency Ambulance Transportation Services and Authorizing the Applicable Fees to Be Reflected in the City’s Master Fee Schedule as “Actual Costs (as Established by Santa Clara County),” to be read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment 1 to the Council report).

BACKGROUND
The Santa Clara County Emergency Medical Services (EMS) 9-1-1 System for emergency ambulance transport includes advanced life support (ALS) first responder services provided by fire agencies (including Mountain View Firefighters responding in a fire apparatus), and ALS ambulance transport services by a private ambulance provider. In recent years, there have been challenges with the availability and timeliness of the private ambulance response. There have also been instances in which ambulances are dispatched without paramedics, thus requiring the City’s Firefighter Paramedics to staff the private ambulances.

To enhance patient transport service to Mountain View residents, the City Council approved the purchase of a Fire ambulance in Fiscal Year 2022-23. The ambulance arrived in October 2024, and was placed in service in Mountain View on April 9, 2025. 53 Ambulance Billing and User Fees
October 13, 2026

Page 2 of 4 ends

Figure 1: New City of Mountain View Ambulance

ANALYSIS
The Mountain View Fire Department (MVFD) provides ALS Emergency Ambulance Transportation Services under a contract with the Santa Clara County EMS Agency. Per this contract, the City must bill patients for ambulance transport based on the established Santa Clara County-approved Ambulance Billing and User Fees as shown in Exhibit A to the Resolution (Attachment 1). These are considered the standard fees charged for ALS Ambulance Services across Santa Clara County and are the same fees that the private ambulance company currently charges to City residents that they transport. Effective July 1, 2026, Santa Clara County revised the Ambulance Billing and User Fees in Exhibit M of the agreement with Rural/Metro of California, Inc. and County of Santa Clara.

Since the City does not independently establish Ambulance Billing and User Fee rates, staff recommends that the City Council authorize the applicable ambulance fees in the City’s Master Fee Schedule be identified as “Actual costs (as established by Santa Clara County)” rather than as fixed dollar amounts. This will streamline future administrative updates and allow the City to implement future County-approved rate adjustments as they become effective without requiring separate City Council action. Staff will update the Master Fee Schedule, as appropriate, to reflect the then-current County-established rates. This will ensure that the City’s ambulance billing remains consistent with the rates required under the County agreement while avoiding the need for recurring Council actions when the County adjusts its rates. 54 Ambulance Billing and User Fees
October 13, 2026

Page 3 of 4 ends

While this emergency transport resource is primarily committed to serving the City of Mountain View, it is possible that in the rare event of a multi-casualty incident in the County, or in surrounding counties under the local and state mutual aid plans, the Mountain View Fire Department may be required to respond and render aid utilizing the City’s ambulance. Billing for use of this City resource for mutual aid will be in accordance with Ambulance Billing and User Fees established by Santa Clara County.

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year 2025-26 was the first full fiscal year that the City’s ambulance was operational, generating $237,935 in ambulance billing and user fee revenue. This revenue is in addition to the County EMS reimbursement for MVFD-provided ALS services and provides additional recovery of the City’s costs to operate ALS-level EMS services.

Adoption of the revised ambulance billing and user fees will align the City’s charges for ambulance transportation services with the applicable fees established by Santa Clara County, as reflected in the City’s Master Fee Schedule as “Actual Costs (as established by Santa Clara County)”. The revised fees are expected to result in additional cost recovery. Actual revenues will depend on ambulance transport volume, payer mix, insurance reimbursement rates, collection experience, and future changes to County-established fees. Revenue from ambulance billing and user fees will be deposited into the General Operating Fund to offset a portion of the costs associated with providing these services.

Please see below for information about whether the recommended action for this agenda item is subject to or exempt from the Levine Act.

EXEMPT FROM THE LEVINE ACT
☒ General policy and legislative actions
For more information about the Levine Act, please see the Fair Political Practices Commission website: www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/pay-to-play-limits-and-prohibitions.html. 55 Ambulance Billing and User Fees
October 13, 2026

Page 4 of 4 ends

ALTERNATIVES

1. Do not adopt the Resolution.

2. Direct staff to provide additional information.

3. Provide other direction.

PUBLIC NOTICING—Agenda posting.

Prepared by:

Amanda Slovick
Senior Management Analyst
Approved by:

Brian Jones
Fire Chief
Audrey Seymour Ramberg
Assistant City Manager
Attachments 1. Resolution
56 Attachment 1
-1-

CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW
RESOLUTION NO.

SERIES 2026

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW ADOPTING THE

REVISED AMBULANCE BILLING AND USER FEES TO BE USED BY THE MOUNTAIN VIEW FIRE

DEPARTMENT FOR ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT EMERGENCY AMBULANCE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES TO BE REFLECTED IN THE CITY’S MASTER FEE SCHEDULE AS “ACTUAL COSTS (AS ESTABLISHED BY SANTA CLARA COUNTY)”
WHEREAS, the Mountain View Fire Department provides Advanced Life Support (ALS) Emergency Ambulance Transportation Services pursuant to a contract with the County of Santa Clara; and
WHEREAS, the agreement between the City of Mountain View and the County of Santa Clara requires the City to bill patients for ambulance transport based on ambulance and billing user fees and rates established by the County,
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2025, City Council adopted ambulance billing and user fees in accordance with the Emergency Medical Services Agreement between Rural/Metro of California, Inc., and County of Santa Clara; and
WHEREAS, the proposed ambulance billing and user fees in Table 1 and Table 2 of Exhibit A reflect updated user fees and billing rates in accordance with the current Emergency Medical Services Agreement between Rural/Metro of California, Inc., and County of Santa Clara, Exhibit M, Tables 1 and 2 as revised on July 1, 2026; and
WHEREAS, the proposed ambulance billing and user fees include a price list of user fees per service level, along with fees for any Equipment/Supplies used and/or medications administered; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED: that the City Council of the City of Mountain View hereby approves and adopts the Revised Ambulance Billing and User Fees; and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED: that this Resolution shall be effective upon the date of its adoption. – – – – – – – – – – –
Exhibit: A. Ambulance Billing Rates and User Fees
57 EXHIBIT A
Emergency Medical Services
Agreement 07/01/26 – Exhibit M -2-

AMBULANCE BILLING AND USER FEES
Table 1: User Fees
Service Levels Price
ALS-1 $3,480.27
ALS-2 $3,480.27
BLS $2,784.22
Mileage $118.17
Hourly Ambulance Standby $409.70
Hourly Paramedic – Individual $204.84
Hourly EMT – Individual $136.56
58 EXHIBIT A
Emergency Medical Services
Agreement 07/01/26 – Exhibit M -3-
Table 2: User Fee Schedule for Disposable Supplies and Medications Equipment/Supplies
AIRWAY/NASAL $62.95
AIRWAY/ORAL $34.34
BAG VALVE MASK $208.88
BANDAGE, ELASTIC $16.87
BANDAGES TRIANGULAR $28.61
BED PAN $28.61
BLANKET, DISPOSABLE $68.67
BLOOD GLUCOSE TEST $57.23
BURN SHEET $105.87
CERVICAL COLLAR $206.02
COLD/HOT PACK $42.92
CPAP PROCEDURE $887.03
DEFIB PADS $125.91
DRESSING - MAJOR $28.61
DRESSING - MINOR $28.61
EKG ELECTRODES $54.37
EKG MONITOR 12 LEAD $271.83
EMESIS BASIN/BAG $22.30
ENDOTRACHEAL TUBE INTRODUCER/GUM ELASTIC BOUGIE $191.14 HEADBED IMMOBILIZER $48.65
HEPA MASK $71.54
HOOD, SPIT SOCK $47.11
INTRAVENOUS SALINE LOCK $150.65
INTRAVENOUS INFUSION SET $254.66
INTRAVENOUS START KIT $114.37
INTUBATION SUPPLIES $128.76
IO SUPPLIES $852.69
VIDEO LARYNOSCOPE BLADE $47.32
LMA SUPREME - SUPRAGLOTTIC AIRWAY $56.79
MECONIUM ASPIRATOR $25.44
NEBULIZER $134.49
NON-REBREATHER MASK $31.48
O2 CANNULA WITH END-TIDAL $97.20
O2 MASK/CANNULA $65.81
OB PACK $228.91
PATIENT MOVER $91.83
PLUERAL DECOMPRESSION $194.70
PULSE OXIMETRY $120.18
RAZOR, DISPOSABLE $2.38
59 EXHIBIT A
Emergency Medical Services
Agreement 07/01/26 – Exhibit M-4-
SPLINT ARM $42.92
SPLINT LEG $42.92
SPLINTING (EXTREMITY) $206.02
STRAP,5 FOOT IMMOBIZATION $31.67
SUCTION TUBE $88.70
SUCTIONING $180.26
TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT $48.30
TOURNIQUET, COMBAT $172.04
UNIVERSAL PRECAUTIONS $80.12
URINAL $28.61
Medications
ACETAMINOPHEN $346.44
ACTIVATED CHARCOAL $58.14
ADENOSINE $165.96
ALBUTEROL $68.67
AMIODARONE $110.38
ASPIRIN $17.17
ATROPHINE $48.65
ATROPHINE HIGH DOSE $229.47
BENADRYL $48.65
CALCIUM CHLORIDE $48.65
DEXTROSE 10% 25G IN 250ML BAG $69.35
DOPAMINE DRIP $154.52
DUODOTE AUTOINJECTOR $143.79
EPI 1:1,000 1MG/1CC $80.12
EPI 1:10,000 $80.12
GLUCAGON $815.49
GLUCOSE PASTE $24.93
LIDOCAINE 2% $62.95
MIDAZOLEM $4.55
MORPHINE $48.65
NARCAN $91.56
NITROGLYCERIN TABLET $2.45
NITROPASTE $22.29
NORMAL SALINE FLUSH PLS 10cc $42.78
NORMAL SALINE 1000cc $277.56
ONDANSETRON INJECTABLE $99.57
ONDANSETRON ORAL DISSOLVING TABLET $82.24
SODIUM BICARB $85.84
STERILE WATER $68.67
TRANEXAMIC ACID 1,000MG $16.33
60 City of Mountain View
Legislation Text

CITY HALL
500 CASTRO STREET
File #: 206211, Version: 1
Pathways to Housing Annual Progress Report
Accept the 2026 Pathways to Housing Homeless Response Strategy Implementation and Expenditure Plan's first Annual Progress Report.

City of Mountain View Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/8/2026
powered by Legistar™ 61
DATE: October 13, 2026
CATEGORY: Consent
DEPT.: City Manager’s Office
TITLE: Pathways to Housing Annual Progress
Report

RECOMMENDATION
Accept the 2026 Pathways to Housing Homeless Response Strategy Implementation and Expenditure Plan's first Annual Progress Report.

BACKGROUND
On June 10, 2025, the City Council adopted the Pathways to Housing—Homeless Response Strategy Implementation and Expenditure Plan (the Plan), a roadmap for addressing homelessness in Mountain View over the next 7 to 10 years. The Plan is designed to be a living document, incorporating ongoing reviews and regular updates, such as this Annual Progress Report.

Following extensive stakeholder engagement and analysis, the Plan includes a vision statement and a set of principles that guide five goals, supported by 13 strategies and 45 actions. It includes a plan for implementation and expenditures that prioritizes the timing of each strategy and identifies the need for new partners and resources to implement new and enhanced strategies.

Vision: The City of Mountain View is committed to working with itslocal and regional partnersto help people at risk of losing housing remain housed and help those experiencing homelessness access services and secure available and safe housing.
62 Pathways to Housing Annual Progress Report
October 13, 2026

Page 2 of 8 ends

Alignment with Strategic Priorities and Other Plans
The Plan supports the Community for All and Intentional Development and Housing Options strategic priorities and aligns with the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element Displacement Response Strategy and the 2020-2025 Santa Clara County Community Plan to End Homelessness, the County of Santa Clara’s roadmap for ending homelessness in the county.

Focus and Framework
The focus of the Plan is to promote regional collaboration and leverage the City’s existing resources, authority, and expertise by continuing and enhancing a core set of current services and exploring additional opportunities to build on the City’s existing homelessness response. The Plan sets a course for collective action to guide further planning to address homelessness over the next seven-to-10 years.

As shown in Figure 1 below, the Plan includes 45 actions, organized in three ways: by type of action (continue, enhance, or explore); timeline (immediate, short-term, medium-term, longterm); and cost (by range). 63 Pathways to Housing Annual Progress Report
October 13, 2026

Page 3 of 8 ends

Figure 1: Summary of Action Items by Framework, Timeline, and Cost

ANALYSIS
The Plan’s first year of implementation runs from July 2025 through June 2026, covering the first 12 months following its adoption in June 2025. The Plan builds on the City’s work over the past decade and charts a path to address homelessness in Mountain View over the next 7 to 10 years.

This section highlights initiatives, programs, and services active during the Plan’s development; substantial ongoing efforts that require staff resources; and special projects, such as Phase 2 of the Safe Parking Program expansion at Shoreline Lot B. Each action falls into one of four implementation status categories: completed, ongoing, in progress, or not started, as defined below.
• Completed: All tasks or milestones have been achieved, and no further action is required. • Ongoing: The action is continuous in nature and does not have a defined endpoint. • In Progress: Action is underway, with measurable steps being taken toward implementation.
• Not Started: No substantive action has been taken to date. 64 Pathways to Housing Annual Progress Report
October 13, 2026

Page 4 of 8 ends

Figure 2 below summarizes implementation progress across all 45 actions by their intended timeframe, reflecting both the continuation of established programs and services and the completion of new efforts undertaken since the Plan’s development.

Figure 2: Action Implementation Progress by Timeframe
Figure 3: Summary of Year One Implementation
The Plan includes a metrics chart with performance, workload, and informational-only metrics that provide context for homelessness data, such as current counts of residents experiencing 65 Pathways to Housing Annual Progress Report
October 13, 2026

Page 5 of 8 ends

homelessness. Data for Fiscal Year 2025-26 is included in Attachment 1. A comprehensive Implementation Matrix detailing each action and its progress is provided in Attachment 2.

Accomplishments Highlights
Over the past year, notable progress has been made on several key initiatives identified in the Plan. The summary below highlights actions, in numerical order, that have been completed or on which substantial progress has been made.
• Regional Meetings: Convened bimonthly meetings with jurisdictions in Santa Clara County through the Inter-City Unhoused Response Collaborative, to share information about homeless programs and services, provide updates, and discuss policies and actions in response to the impact of parking regulations on the movement of people living in vehicles in the public rights-of-way. Staff also presented at the first Regional Safe Parking Forum, led by District Five County Supervisor Margaret Abe-Koga, and serves on the Regional Safe Parking Policy Setting Working Group. Convening regional meetings is an ongoing Immediate action. (Action 1.2.a)
• Expand and Preserve Affordable Housing Options: Advanced five fully affordable housing projects in the City’s pipeline, including adding 123 units for the unhoused population to the City’s portfolio. Affordable housing creation is an ongoing Long-Term action. (Actions

2.1.a and 2.3.b) Milestones during this reporting period are summarized below. o Nearly completed construction: 1265 Montecito – 85 total units, which includes 42 Rapid Rehousing Units and 39 Project-Based Vouchers.
o Began construction: Corso (formerly Lot 12) – 120 total units, including 20 Rapid Rehousing units, 10 Permanent Supportive units, 15 units for individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities, and 25 Project-Based Vouchers. o Secured all funding and began planning for construction:
 87 E. Evelyn – 161 total units for the income-qualifying general public with a Mountain View live/work preference.
 96 W. ECR – 79 total units, including 12 Rapid Rehousing Units, and 12 Permanent Supportive Housing units.
 La Bella (formerly 1020 Terra Bella) – 108 total units, including 27 Rapid Rehousing units, 10 units for individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities, and 23 Project-Based Vouchers.
66 Pathways to Housing Annual Progress Report
October 13, 2026

Page 6 of 8 ends

• New Affordable Housing Funding: Competed for and received a $50 million grant from the state, the largest grant in the City’s history. Also partnered with the Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation to launch the Mountain View Affordable Housing Fund to secure new funding sources for affordable housing through philanthropic efforts and donor engagement; Intuit was the first corporate donor with a $500,000 contribution. Securing new funding sources for affordable housing is an In Progress Short-Term action. (Action

2.1.b)
• Ongoing Funding for Current Homelessness-Related Initiatives: Transitioned the funding of existing homelessness-related initiatives, such as the Safe Parking Program, Permanent Supportive Housing Program, Outreach and Case Management Services, and health and hygiene services at program sites from one-time, limited-period funds to more sustainable ongoing funding sources. Funding existing homelessness-related initiatives is an ongoing Immediate action. (Actions 3.1.a, 3.1.b, 4.1.c, 4.3.a, 5.2.c) • Direct Financial Assistance Program: Partnered with the Community Services Agency of Mountain View, Los Altos, and Los Altos Hills (CSA), the City’s designated safety net provider and official “Resource Hub” for unhoused and unstably housed residents, to develop the program, establish performance measures, and execute a $150,000 funding agreement to implement the program. CSA has distributed approximately $50,000 in assistance payments.

Exploring a Direct Financial Assistance Program is a completed Short-Term action. (Action

3.1.d)
• Communication and Outreach: Continued the Human Services Division's long-standing outreach and communications with Community-Based Organizations to reach unstably housed and homeless residents. Also participated in the Language Access Plan training and strengthened integration with the Multicultural Engagement Program. Staff supported this work by sharing program and resource flyers in multiple languages at events and engaging community members with limited English proficiency to increase awareness of available services. Communication and outreach about available resources and services is an ongoing Immediate action. (Actions 4.1.e and 4.1.f)
• Pilot Funding to Local Organizations: Developed guidelines for the Pilot Funding to Local Organizations Program and identified and selected The United Effort Organization to receive a $50,000 grant to address low-cost barriers identified through the County of Santa Clara’s Mountain View provider network. The Program will be implemented once the grant agreement is executed in the coming months. Providing pilot funding to local organizations is an in progress Short-Term action. (Action 4.2.a)
• Safe Parking Expansion at Shoreline Lot B: Completed Phase 1 of the two-phased expansion of the Safe Parking Program at Shoreline Lot B, resulting in an additional 30 oversized vehicle parking spaces for living and 18 commuter vehicle parking spaces for non-living purposes. 67 Pathways to Housing Annual Progress Report
October 13, 2026

Page 7 of 8 ends

Completion of Phase 2 is anticipated to occur in early 2027. Expanding the Safe Parking Program is a completed Immediate action. (Actions 4.3.a and 4.3.d) • Reopening Faith-based Safe Parking Sites: Engaged with the County of Santa Clara Office of Supportive Housing, the operator of the Safe Parking Program, to support the reopening of the program at one site, providing ongoing services at two faith-based sites. Engaging with partners to provide ongoing safe parking services is a completed Immediate action. (Action

4.3.b)
Next Steps – Year Ahead
In addition to the key initiatives described above, which include substantial ongoing programs, Human Services Division and Housing Department staff will continue to manage and coordinate essential programs, strengthen collaboration with community partners, and lead education and outreach efforts. Staff will continue advancing existing programs and services while moving forward with high-impact special projects, including the opening of Phase 2 of the Safe Parking Program expansion at Shoreline Lot B.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action to accept the 2026 Pathways to Housing Annual Progress Report.

Please see below for information about whether the recommended action for this agenda item is subject to or exempt from the Levine Act.

EXEMPT FROM THE LEVINE ACT
☒ General policy and legislative actions
68 Pathways to Housing Annual Progress Report
October 13, 2026

Page 8 of 8 ends

CONCLUSION
The first year of the Plan's advanced key initiatives and continued the City’s decade-long foundation of homelessness response programs and services. Staff expanded the Safe Parking Program at Shoreline Lot B (Phase 1), continued funding and coordination for existing homelessness-related initiatives, partnered with the Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation to create the Mountain View Affordable Housing Fund, and advanced five significant affordable housing developments. As the City enters the second year of implementation, staff will continue to advance the Plan’s strategies and actions, with a focus on sustained coordination, strategic resource alignment, and the implementation of high-impact projects.

PUBLIC NOTICING
The Council agenda is advertised on Channel 26, and the agenda and this report appear on the City’s website. Staff also notified the Pathways to Housing Advisory Committee, the County of Santa Clara representatives, and the City’s Coordinating Together Network of CBOs.

Prepared by:

Parneet Dhindsa
Human Services Manager
Reviewed by:

Wayne Chen
Housing Director
Kimberly S. Thomas
Deputy City Manager
Approved by:

Audrey D. Seymour
Assistant City Manager
CMO_HS_206211_2026.10.13
Attachments: 1. Metrics Report Year One

2. Implementation Matrix Year One
69 Attachment 1
Pathways to Housing Metrics Report Year One

1. Relates to the City’s contract with Community Services Agency of Mountain View, Los Altos, and Los Altos Hills (CSA). CSA serves a higher number of clients as the community’s lead Emergency Assistance Network provider. 2. Acronyms: CSFRA – Community Stabilization and Fair Ret Act; MHRSO - Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Ordinance; TRAO - Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance; MVMP – Mountain View Mediation Program. 3. Community Development Block Grant; pass-through funds redistributed to eligible organizations serving low-income residents. 4. Includes Below Market Rate and Notice of Funding Available units.

Performance or Workload Metrics
Based on Fiscal Year 2025-26 data
Program Description Benchmark Actual
Clients Served through City-funded
Programs and Partnerships
Housing Problem-Solving and Case
Management clients1
229 1,401
Permanent Supportive Housing clients 20 33
Safe Parking clients 101 226
Total 350 1,460
Safe Parking Exit to a temporary or permanent housing
destination
50% 43%
Permanent Supportive Housing Households served and maintained in the program
20 20
CSA Resource Hub Unhoused and unstably housed clients
provided case management and referral
services
1,200 2,935
Collaboration and Coordination
with CBOs and Partners
Meetings 10 10
Ongoing Communications with CBOs Resources, flyers, and updates shared electronically
104 126
Coordination with County of Santa Clara
Office of Supportive Housing
Meetings 12 12
Rent Stabilization Program Community members assisted by the Rent Stabilization Program, concerning CSFRA,
MHRSO, TRAO, Housing Help Center,
MVMP, via email, phone, and/or in-person2
3,466 3,454
Affordable Housing Households served by CDBG Public Services program3
1,032 1,855
Affordable Housing Deed-restricted affordable housing units approved4
574 575
Informational Only
Activity Data Provided
Point-in-Time Count
January 2025
879 people experiencing homelessness on a single night
Living in Vehicle Count
July 2026
428 vehicles used for living purposes on City streets
Pipeline Inventory of Units
for the Unhoused
August 2026
22 Permanent Supportive Housing and 101 Rapid Rehousing units 70 Legend
Cost Estimates
$ - less than $149,999
$$ - $150,000 - $299,999
$$$ - $300,000 - $499,999
$$$$ - $500,000 - $1M+
Timelines
Immediate: Less than 1 year
Short-Term: 1-3 years
Medium-Term: 4-7 years
Long-Term: 7+ years 1
Pathways to Housing Implementation Matrix Year One
# ACTION FRAMEWORK TIMELINE LEAD DEPARTMENT/

DIVISION COST STATUS
Goal 1: Increase Regional Collaboration and Coordination to Address the Homelessness Crisis Strategy 1.1: Collaborate and promote action by other jurisdictions

1.1.a
Work with regional partners on legislative
advocacy to obtain state and federal funding to
support the Plan, to be included in the next
Housing Element.

Continue Immediate Human Services Division
Housing Department None Ongoing

1.1.b
Develop a digital toolkit of homeless programs
and policy best practices to provide
implementation guidelines for other
jurisdictions.

Explore MediumTerm
Human Services Division
Housing Department None Not Started
Strategy 1.2: Strengthen partnerships to address regional homeless needs

1.2.a
Convene quarterly regional meetings with
adjacent jurisdictions to coordinate and share
information about homeless programs and
services.

Explore Immediate Human Services Division None Ongoing

1.2.b
Pilot a street outreach program with
neighboring cities, to be staffed by non-public
safety personnel.

Explore Short-Term Human Services Division
PD-NES Unit $$ Not Started
71 Legend
Cost Estimates
$ - less than $149,999
$$ - $150,000 - $299,999
$$$ - $300,000 - $499,999
$$$$ - $500,000 - $1M+
Timelines
Immediate: Less than 1 year
Short-Term: 1-3 years
Medium-Term: 4-7 years
Long-Term: 7+ years 2
Pathways to Housing Implementation Matrix Year One
# ACTION FRAMEWORK TIMELINE LEAD DEPARTMENT/

DIVISION COST STATUS
Goal 2: Expand and Preserve Affordable and Supportive Housing Options Strategy 2.1: Advance existing affordable housing projects

2.1.a Implement the City’s current 1,300 unit
housing pipeline. Continue MediumTerm Housing Department $$$$ Ongoing

2.1.b
Partner with the private sector, philanthropy,
and public agencies to secure new funding
sources for affordable housing.

Continue Short-Term Housing Department None In Progress Strategy 2.2: Increase the affordable housing pipeline

2.2.a
Expand the existing affordable housing
pipeline, which includes an additional 200 units
of rapid rehousing/permanent supportive
housing, to be included in the Shoreline Area
Plan.

Enhance Long-Term Housing Department $$$$ Ongoing

2.2.b
Assess the City’s regulatory framework and
land use regulations to address any barriers to
housing development in accordance with the
adopted Housing Element.

Explore Long-Term Housing Department None Ongoing
72 Legend
Cost Estimates
$ - less than $149,999
$$ - $150,000 - $299,999
$$$ - $300,000 - $499,999
$$$$ - $500,000 - $1M+
Timelines
Immediate: Less than 1 year
Short-Term: 1-3 years
Medium-Term: 4-7 years
Long-Term: 7+ years 3
Pathways to Housing Implementation Matrix Year One
# ACTION FRAMEWORK TIMELINE LEAD DEPARTMENT/

DIVISION COST STATUS
Strategy 2.3: Diversify affordable supportive housing

2.3.a
Support the development of innovative
housing for special needs and vulnerable
populations.

Explore Long-Term Housing Department $$$$ Ongoing

2.3.b
Evaluate options to increase the supply of
affordable housing units, including very low
and extremely low-income units.

Explore Short-Term Housing Department $$$$ Ongoing

2.3.c
Continue exploring Interim Housing solutions,
such as the LifeMoves Mountain View project
at 2566 Leghorn, with developers and
operators to strive to narrow the gap to
“functional zero” for all unhoused
subpopulations.

Continue Short-Term Housing Department $$$$ Ongoing
Goal 3: Support Homelessness Prevention
Strategy 3.1: Expand existing housing stability and case management services

3.1.a
Provide ongoing funding for the current
Permanent Supportive Housing Program for 20
households.

Continue Immediate Human Services Division
Housing Department $ Ongoing

3.1.b Provide ongoing funding for current homeless
prevention case management services. Continue Immediate Human Services Division $ Ongoing 73 Legend
Cost Estimates
$ - less than $149,999
$$ - $150,000 - $299,999
$$$ - $300,000 - $499,999
$$$$ - $500,000 - $1M+
Timelines
Immediate: Less than 1 year
Short-Term: 1-3 years
Medium-Term: 4-7 years
Long-Term: 7+ years 4
Pathways to Housing Implementation Matrix Year One
# ACTION FRAMEWORK TIMELINE LEAD DEPARTMENT/

DIVISION COST STATUS

3.1.c
Provide additional funding to expand the
Permanent Supportive Housing Program to
increase the number of households receiving
resources.

Enhance MediumTerm
Human Services Division
Housing Department $ Not Started

3.1.d
Explore a homeless prevention emergency
direct financial assistance rent relief program,
with CSA as the Emergency Assistance Network
provider.

Explore Short-Term Human Services Division
Housing Department $ Completed
Strategy 3.2: Complete the development of and implement the City’s Displacement Response Strategy

3.2.a Develop a program for the acquisition/
preservation of rent-stabilized housing units. Continue Short-Term Housing Department $$$$ Ongoing

3.2.b Develop a community ownership action plan
for innovative housing models. Continue Short-Term Housing Department $ In Progress

3.2.c Implement a local ordinance to require the
replacement of protected units. Continue Short-Term Housing Department None Completed

3.2.d
Evaluate options for alternatives to housing
displacement, including first right of return,
affordable housing preferences, and
partnerships with landlords.

Continue MediumTerm Housing Department None Ongoing
74 Legend
Cost Estimates
$ - less than $149,999
$$ - $150,000 - $299,999
$$$ - $300,000 - $499,999
$$$$ - $500,000 - $1M+
Timelines
Immediate: Less than 1 year
Short-Term: 1-3 years
Medium-Term: 4-7 years
Long-Term: 7+ years 5
Pathways to Housing Implementation Matrix Year One
# ACTION FRAMEWORK TIMELINE LEAD DEPARTMENT/

DIVISION COST STATUS
Goal 4: Increase Access to and Continue Supportive Services for Unhoused and Vulnerable Residents Strategy 4.1: Share information about homelessness resources

4.1.a
Publicize existing programs and services
provided by CSA in their role as the City’s
homeless resource hub.

Continue Immediate Human Services Division None Completed

4.1.b
Partner with County of Santa Clara Behavioral
Health Services and share information about
mental health and substance use prevention
services.

Continue Immediate Human Services Division None Ongoing

4.1.c
Continue current funding to CSA for bilingual
case management staffing for outreach and
housing assessments.

Continue Immediate Human Services Division $ Ongoing

4.1.d
Expand funding for CSA case management
staffing to expand the outreach scope to the atlarge, unhoused population.

Enhance Short-Term Human Services Division $ Not Started

4.1.e Increase communication and outreach to nonEnglish-speaking communities. Enhance Immediate Human Services Division None Ongoing 75 Legend
Cost Estimates
$ - less than $149,999
$$ - $150,000 - $299,999
$$$ - $300,000 - $499,999
$$$$ - $500,000 - $1M+
Timelines
Immediate: Less than 1 year
Short-Term: 1-3 years
Medium-Term: 4-7 years
Long-Term: 7+ years 6
1 Staff has preliminarily scoped the cost and currently recommends updating from a no-cost dollar sign to a single dollar sign (less than $149,000).

Pathways to Housing Implementation Matrix Year One
# ACTION FRAMEWORK TIMELINE LEAD DEPARTMENT/

DIVISION COST STATUS

4.1.f
Continue and expand outreach distribution of
information and referral resources to unhoused
residents and the community.

Continue Immediate Human Services Division None Ongoing

4.1.g
Explore opportunities for CSA to periodically
host nonprofit community partners to enhance
or expand services available at
CSA, the City’s homeless resource hub.

Explore Immediate Human Services Division None Ongoing

4.1.h
Explore opportunities for the City to offer some
Housing Help Center clinic hours at CSA and for
CSA to share information about its homeless
prevention and housing support services during
City-based Housing Help Center clinic hours.

Explore Immediate Housing Department None Ongoing
Strategy 4.2: Tailor supportive services to meet unique needs

4.2.a
Provide pilot funding to local organizations
such as Reach SV and the United Effort
Organization to address needs identified
through the County of Santa Clara’s Mountain
View provider network.

Explore Short-Term Human Services Division $ In Progress

4.2.b
Conduct a one-time survey to the living-invehicle community to gain additional insights and help tailor existing programs, as feasible.

Explore MediumTerm Human Services Division $1 Not Started 76 Legend
Cost Estimates
$ - less than $149,999
$$ - $150,000 - $299,999
$$$ - $300,000 - $499,999
$$$$ - $500,000 - $1M+
Timelines
Immediate: Less than 1 year
Short-Term: 1-3 years
Medium-Term: 4-7 years
Long-Term: 7+ years 7
Pathways to Housing Implementation Matrix Year One
# ACTION FRAMEWORK TIMELINE LEAD DEPARTMENT/

DIVISION COST STATUS
Strategy 4.3: Maintain a sustainable base level of Safe Parking

4.3.a
Recognize and maintain the City-owned
Shoreline Lot B as the City’s base level of
service for the Safe Parking Program
Continue Immediate Human Services Division None Completed

4.3.b Engage with faith-based partners to support
reopening of Safe Parking sites. Continue Immediate Human Services Division None Completed

4.3.c
Continue relationships with affordable housing
developers interested in providing space for a
new temporary Safe Parking site.

Continue Immediate Human Services Division None Ongoing

4.3.d
Pursue an expansion of Safe Parking capacity,
maintaining base capacity at Shoreline Lot B, to
be funded by the Shoreline Regional Park
Community Fund.

Enhance Short-Term Human Services Division $$ Completed Goal 5: Maintain Healthy and Safe Neighborhoods
Strategy 5.1: Engage and provide local businesses, community members, and City staff with resources to help address concerns related to people experiencing homelessness

5.1.a
Partner with Momentum for Health TRUST
Program to promote awareness and use of
mobile mental health crisis response services.

Continue Immediate Human Services Division None Ongoing 77 Legend
Cost Estimates
$ - less than $149,999
$$ - $150,000 - $299,999
$$$ - $300,000 - $499,999
$$$$ - $500,000 - $1M+
Timelines
Immediate: Less than 1 year
Short-Term: 1-3 years
Medium-Term: 4-7 years
Long-Term: 7+ years 8
Pathways to Housing Implementation Matrix Year One
# ACTION FRAMEWORK TIMELINE LEAD DEPARTMENT/

DIVISION COST STATUS

5.1.b Share information about resources available to
address health and safety concerns. Enhance Immediate
Human Services Division
Housing Department
PD-NES Unit
None Ongoing

5.1.c Provide communitywide Mental Health First
Aid trainings. Enhance Short-Term Human Services Division $ Not Started

5.1.d Explore providing Narcan as part of first aid
resources at City facilities. Explore Short-Term Human Services Division PD-NES Unit None Not Started Strategy 5.2: Provide services to minimize and address environmental health concerns from litter and other waste associated with unhoused residents

5.2.a Maintain the Biannual Clean Streets
Program. Continue Immediate Human Services Division
PD-NES Unit None Ongoing

5.2.b Conduct the Annual Living-in-Vehicle Count
in Mountain View. Continue Short-Term PD-NES Unit None Ongoing

5.2.c
Support hygiene and basic health and
safety services at program service delivery
sites.

Continue Immediate Human Services Division $ Ongoing

5.2.d
Continue coordination across City
departments and external agencies for
encampment clean-up.

Continue Immediate PD-NES Unit None Ongoing

5.2.e Participate in the County of Santa Clara’s
Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan. Continue Immediate Fire Department None Ongoing

5.2.f Provide garbage receptacles as part of the
Biannual Clean Streets Program. Enhance Short-Term Human Services Division PD-NES Unit None Ongoing 78 Legend
Cost Estimates
$ - less than $149,999
$$ - $150,000 - $299,999
$$$ - $300,000 - $499,999
$$$$ - $500,000 - $1M+
Timelines
Immediate: Less than 1 year
Short-Term: 1-3 years
Medium-Term: 4-7 years
Long-Term: 7+ years 9
Pathways to Housing Implementation Matrix Year One
# ACTION FRAMEWORK TIMELINE LEAD DEPARTMENT/

DIVISION COST STATUS
Strategy 5.3: Provide public safety services to address issues associated with homelessness

5.3.a Continue communitywide public safety
outreach and referrals. Continue Immediate PD-NES Unit None Ongoing

5.3.b Provide annual fire and safety inspections and
safety information at existing safe parking sites. Continue Immediate Fire Department PD-NES Unit None Ongoing 79 City of Mountain View
Legislation Text

CITY HALL
500 CASTRO STREET
File #: 206299, Version: 1
Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan, Project 23-37-Authorize Amendment to Professional Services Agreement
Authorize the City Manager or designee to amend the existing professional services agreement with San Francisco Estuary Institute, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) (Business Entity No. 1141169), to amend the scope of services, extend the term to December 31, 2028, and increase compensation by $150,000 for an amount not to exceed $1,022,880.

City of Mountain View Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/8/2026
powered by Legistar™ 80
DATE: October 13, 2026
CATEGORY: Consent
DEPT.: Community Services Department
TITLE: Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan,
Project 23-37—Authorize Amendment to
Professional Services Agreement

RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager or designee to amend the existing professional services agreement with San Francisco Estuary Institute, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) (Business Entity No. 1141169), to amend the scope of services, extend the term to December 31, 2028, and increase compensation by $150,000 for an amount not to exceed $1,022,880.

BACKGROUND
On August 30, 2022, the City Council authorized a professional services agreement with San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) to develop the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan. On May 14, 2024, the City Council authorized an amendment to the agreement with SFEI to increase compensation and revise the scope of services to include a more robust role in the community outreach for the Plan. On November 18, 2025, the City Council authorized an additional amendment to the agreement to increase compensation to enable SFEI to complete additional coordination, analysis, and revisions that were necessary to produce the final Plan.

On June 23, 2026, Council adopted the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan (Plan). The Plan updates and expands the City’s 2015 Community Tree Master Plan into a broader framework focused on biodiversity, urban forestry, habitat connectivity, climate resilience, and community well-being. The Plan was developed by SFEI and a cross-departmental City Project Team through a multi-year process that included technical analysis, extensive community engagement, interdepartmental collaboration, and review by various City commissions.

One of the initial implementation efforts identified in the Plan is to develop a web-based Tree Selector Tool that can be used to find appropriate tree species for specific sites, based on factors such as site conditions, biodiversity support, climate resilience, and ecosystem service benefits.

The tool is intended to be user-friendly and available to both the public and City staff, in order to support future City projects, development, and community tree planting efforts. In light of SFEI’s skillset and experience, staff proposes working with SFEI to develop the web-based Tree Selector 81 Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan, Project 23-37 –
Authorize Amendment to Professional Services Agreement
October 13, 2026

Page 2 of 3 ends

Tool. This requires an amendment to the existing SFEI agreement. Funding for the development of the tool was added to Project 23-37, Biodiversity Strategy, and approved as part of the Fiscal Year 2026-27 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget.

ANALYSIS
Tree Selector Tool
The Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan identifies 25 different actions with short-term, mediumterm, and long-term priority levels. Included in short-term priorities is Action 5: Further develop native and climate-resilient planting guidance to support proper installation, maintenance, and sourcing of native plant materials. To support this action, the Plan recommendsthe development and implementation of an interactive web-based plant selector tool that incorporates planting lists and guidelines. The interactive, functional tool would help City and private development project managers, as well as members of the community, select plants and develop plant palettes that are appropriate for their specific site and desired project outcomes.

Action 13: Update the City tree list and Tree Ordinance to increase urban forest health, species diversity, and age diversity, provides more specific direction on how the tool would be used for tree selection based on criteria such as tree form, area requirements, biodiversity support, known challenges and maintenance issues, and other benefits. The tool will update and replace the City street tree list and should be updated regularly based on monitoring, staff experience, and expert guidance.

The development of the tree selector tool will advance implementation of both Action 5 and Action 13 by providing a practical, interactive resource for selecting appropriate tree species based on site conditions, biodiversity benefits, climate resilience, maintenance considerations, and other factors.

SFEI Scope of Work
Staff recommends continuing to contract with SFEI for the development of the web-based tree tool. SFEI is a recognized leader in urban ecology and environmental planning and was instrumental in developing the Plan. Through this work, SFEI has developed a strong understanding of the City’s biodiversity, urban forestry, and climate resilience goals, as well as the local environmental conditions that should inform tree and plant selection. Retaining SFEI will allow the City to build upon this existing expertise and ensure that the tool is consistent with the recommendations and priorities established in the Plan. SFEI will work closely with the City’s IT Department to ensure the tool is developed in accordance with City policies and can be seamlessly accessed through the City’s website. SFEI will host and maintain the tool for the 82 Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan, Project 23-37 –
Authorize Amendment to Professional Services Agreement
October 13, 2026

Page 3 of 3 ends

duration of the agreement. Attachment 1 includes a more detailed description of the scope of work for this task.

The current agreement with SFEI expires on December 31, 2026 and all tasks in the current scope of services have been completed. Staff recommend extending the term of the agreement and amending the scope of services to include the development of the tree selector tool in close collaboration with the City’s IT Department, other staff and key stakeholders. The proposed new term of the agreement is through December 31, 2028, to ensure that a robust tool can be developed, tested and implemented.

FISCAL IMPACT
Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan, Project 23-37, is funded with $1,160,000 from the Capital Improvement Program Reserve Fund. Currently, there is sufficient funding available for the recommended action, which will utilize substantially all of the remaining project budget. No additional appropriation is being requested at this time.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Do not approve the recommended professional services agreement amendment.

2. Provide other direction.

PUBLIC NOTICING—Agenda posting.

Prepared by:

Brenda Sylvia
Assistant Community Services Director
Lindsay Wong
Senior Management Analyst
Reviewed by:

John Marchant
Community Services Director
Approved by:

Audrey D. Seymour
Assistant City Manager
Attachment: 1. Proposed Scope of Services
83 1
ATTACHMENT 1

SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY INSTITUTE SCOPE OF SERVICES
San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) will provide the following services related to the development of a web-based tree selection tool for the City of Mountain View (City).

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Task: Develop an Interactive Tree Selection Tool
Total budget: $150,000
Project objective: Develop a user-friendly, web-based tree selection tool (“tool”) to allow users to identify recommended tree species based on tree selection criteria. The tool will use the guidelines, species recommendations, and associated selection criteria from Guide B: Plant Lists (“Guide B”) of the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan (“Plan”).

Project timing: For the purposes of this scope, we have assumed a 2-year project, starting November 2026 and ending October 2028.

SFEI project responsibilities:
● Organize a database with the recommended tree species and associated selection criteria from the tree lists in Guide B of the Plan into a format that feeds directly into the tool. Tree selection criteria included are currently published in the Guide B updated city tree list: tree height, spread, and relative size; growth rate; water needs; growth strategy; root damage potential; minimum required growing space; California native status; and notes on pest, pathogen, and stress susceptibility.
● Develop the tool with input from City staff to support its eventual linkage from the City's website.
● Host the tool for an interim period, with plans to eventually transfer ownership and stewardship to the City.
● Participate as a member in three (3) two-hour Working Group meetings with City staff and other Working Group members (subject-matter experts, and stakeholders). The City will establish the Working Group and plan, facilitate, and host the meetings.

Deliverables:
● A user-friendly, web-based tree selection tool for use by City staff and the public, hosted by SFEI in the interim and eventually transferred to the City. ● A database of tree species and associated selection criteria that feeds into the tool. ● Participation in three (3) two-hour working group meetings hosted by the City. 84 City of Mountain View
Legislation Text

CITY HALL
500 CASTRO STREET
File #: 206133, Version: 1
Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network

1. Receive a report on the Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network.

City of Mountain View Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/8/2026
powered by Legistar™ 85
DATE: October 13, 2026
CATEGORY: Unfinished Business
DEPT.: City Manager’s Office
TITLE: Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber
Network

RECOMMENDATION

1. Receive a report on the Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network.

BACKGROUND
As part of the Fiscal Years 2023-25 Council Work Plan, Council maintained the exploration of expanding broadband access under the Community for All strategic priority. Given the complexity of the issue, on May 9, 2023, Council received a staff report recommending an initial broadband needs assessment and gap analysis.

In February 2024, after issuing a Request for Proposal (RFP) and thoroughly reviewing and evaluating proposals, the City entered into an agreement with Entrust Solutions (Entrust) to conduct a broadband needs assessment and gap analysis to assist the City in evaluating policy options for broadband infrastructure improvement going forward.

The study was conducted from March 2024 through August 2024 and culminated in a Summary Report presented to the City Council at a Study Session on February 25, 2025. The scope of work was organized into four technical memoranda covering an Asset Inventory, a Broadband Market Assessment, a Broadband Needs Assessment, and a Gap Analysis and SWOT Matrix, resulting in seven findings. One of the key findings was:

The City Would Benefit from a City Fiber Network Conceptual Design — A fiber backbone can connect City facilities and anchor institutions, expand the traffic communication network, and address underserved neighborhoods.
86 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 2 of 13 ends

At the conclusion of the meeting, the Council directed the development of a Fiber Network Conceptual Design.

ANALYSIS
Given the Council direction, this project was subsequently carried forward into the Fiscal Years 2025-27 Council Work Plan, with the stated goal to "Develop the conceptual design for a citywide fiber network."
The City again contracted with ENTRUST to conduct a City of Mountain View Fiber Network Study (Attachment 1), building on their prior work on the Broadband Assessment and Gap Analysis. The study presents the conceptual fiber network design, a phased implementation approach, construction cost estimates, and a theoretical Internet Service Provider (ISP) business model and financial analysis for City Council consideration.

The City Conceptual Design was drafted using the following factors to determine route mapping and phasing sequences:
• Existing City infrastructure
• City prioritized sites, facilities, and locations
• Network resilience and redundancy; and
• Fiscal responsibility and strategic investment
Existing City Infrastructure
The City of Mountain View currently maintains approximately 3.7 miles of conduit infrastructure within the public right-of-way. These conduit assets provide potential pathways that could support the installation of future fiber optic infrastructure without requiring additional trenching or roadway excavation and help inform the design mapping.

In addition, the City currently uses INET, a Comcast-owned and maintained fiber network, to support all City communication needs and services, including interconnection between City sites.

The INET network itself has evolved and aged over time, and it can no longer meet all the City’s communication needs, primarily because the assets are old, are no longer maintained by Comcast, and simply cannot provide the speeds and connectivity required for the future of the City’s critical sites.
87 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 3 of 13 ends

City-Prioritized Sites, Facilities, and Locations
Staff provided Entrust with an initial list of 291 prioritized sites, facilities, and locations to guide potential network design expansion. Each location was subsequently assigned a priority level from one (1) to three (3), reflecting its relative importance to City operations and community services. The list included a broad range of identifiable locations such as parking facilities, parks and recreation locations, civic buildings, schools, medical facilities, and other public-serving sites.

Notably, some identified sites are either private entities or separate public agencies but are important community assets. Their inclusion would ultimately be determined by the entity or agency seeking inclusion and by the successful negotiation of their inclusion.

The prioritization framework guided the phasing of the network expansion plan. Higher-priority sites were addressed earlier in the design process to ensure that critical services and infrastructure are supported first, with path-redundant routes. Lower-priority sites were incorporated in later phases, allowing the City to align deployment with operational needs, available budget resources, and potential partnerships. This phased approach ensures that the network delivers the greatest value and impact from the outset.

Because not all locations require direct fiber connectivity in the initial deployment phases, the list was refined to focus on sites that best support logical network routing and near-term operational needs. Through this process, the original list of 291 locations was narrowed to a manageable set of 82 sites, which were ultimately incorporated into the final conceptual design.

Priority 1 sites − include 21 locations identified as the most essential City facilities, such as administrative buildings like City Hall, fire and police locations, and public works facilities.

Prioritizing these locations ensures that core government operations and critical public safety functions receive secure, high-capacity connectivity first, establishing the foundational network needed to support broader City services.

Priority 2 sites − include 19 locations that, while not core-critical, provide strong public service value and have direct City involvement, such as other community facilities like the Library, Downtown Transit Center, and Center for Performing Arts, among others. It also includes medical facilities and Mountain View High School.

Priority 3 sites − include 42 additional sites, such as community facilities like transit stations, medical facilities, mobile home parks, other public administration facilities, and school facilities.

These locations offer long-term value and can be integrated opportunistically, supported by inter-agency or public-private partnerships and engagement with Internet Service Providers (ISPs).
88 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 4 of 13 ends

A breakdown of sites by category and priority is provided below.

Table 1: Number of Sites by Category and Priority
Category Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Total
Administration Buildings 3 2 5
Civic/Community Facilities 5 8 6 19
Fire and Police 8 8
City Works 5 1 6
Medical Facilities 2 1 3
Recreation 8 8
Schools 1 26 27
Mobile Home Parks 6 6
Total 21 19 42 82
Network Resilience and Redundancy
The conceptual fiber network design emphasizes a resilient architecture with redundant routing paths throughout each phase of implementation, with particular focus on Priority 1 sites to ensure path diversity and full redundancy, so that no single fiber cut can interrupt services.

Rather than concentrating redundancy in a single stage, the phased plan intentionally includes segments in every phase that either establish new looped routes or reinforce existing backbone corridors. This layered approach reduces reliance on single-path connectivity and helps ensure that critical facilities can remain connected via alternate routes if individual fiber segments are disrupted by construction, maintenance, or unforeseen events.

The conceptual fiber network design is illustrated on the following page. 89 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 5 of 13 ends

90 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 6 of 13 ends

The following phased implementation plan outlines how the backbone and lateral routes connect priority facilities and reinforce network resilience. It’s important to note that construction phasing and site prioritization serve different purposes and do not necessarily align. A Phase 1 route may pass a Priority 3 site that could be efficiently connected if the City chooses to do so.

Inclusion along an early-phase route does not change a site’s assigned priority or commit the City to provide connectivity.

Phase 1a Civic Center Loop – This phase (Table 2 below, and Attachment 2 – Figure 1 Phase 1a) is designed to mark the City’s initial transition from reliance on the legacy INET system to a Cityowned fiber backbone. It represents the smallest capital investment in the overall implementation plan at $1,096,128 and serves as the starting point for moving municipal communications onto infrastructure owned and controlled by the City.

By focusing on a compact loop within the Civic Center area and connecting several high-priority facilities, the City can begin migrating critical communications services while limiting the initial construction scope and cost. This early deployment also provides an opportunity to establish construction standards and operational procedures that will guide future network expansion.

Table 2: Phase 1a Civic Center Loop
Phase 1a Sites Segment Priority
City Hall Civic Center Loop 1
Fire Station 1 Civic Center Loop 1
Police-Fire Administration Building Civic Center Loop 1 City Parking Lot 11 Civic Center Loop 1
Library Civic Center Loop 2
Performing Arts Center Civic Center Loop 2
City Parking Garage 1 Civic Center Loop 2
Eagle Swimming Pool Complex Civic Center Loop 2
Mountain View Medical Offices Civic Center Loop 2
Mountain View Chamber of Commerce Civic Center Loop 3
Mountain View Academy Civic Center Loop 3
91 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 7 of 13 ends

Phase 1b Redundant Citywide Backbone Expansion - Phase 1b represents the first major expansion of the City’s fiber backbone beyond the Civic Center area established in Phase 1a. With an estimated construction cost of $6,836,544 and approximately 10.79 miles of new fiber infrastructure, this phase would extend the network along key corridors to reach additional critical facilities and operational centers across the City, as shown in Table 3 below and Attachment 3 – Figure 2 Phase 1b. Although significantly larger in scale than the initial deployment, the design builds directly on the backbone architecture established in Phase 1a by expanding redundant connectivity across multiple areas of the City.

Table 3: Phase 1b Redundant Citywide Backbone Expansion Phase 1b Sites Segment Priority
Fire Station 4 Operations Center Loop 1
Municipal Operations Center Administration Operations Center Loop 1 PD Women’s Dorm Operations Center Loop 1
PD Men’s Dorm Operations Center Loop 1
City Warehouse Operations Center Loop 1
Fleet Services Operations Center Loop 1
Mountain View Transit Center Operations Center Loop 2
Jose Vargas Elementary Operations Center Loop 3
Yew Chung International School Operations Center Loop 3 Whisman Elementary School Operations Center Loop 3
Moffet Mobile Home Park Operations Center Loop 3
Adobe Building Operations Center Loop 3
VTA Bus Terminal Operations Center Loop 3
Fire Station 5 Northern Shoreline Extension 1
Shoreline Maintenance Facility Northern Shoreline Extension 1 Fuel Station Northern Shoreline Extension 1
Shoreline Amphitheatre Northern Shoreline Extension 1
Flare Station Northern Shoreline Extension 1
92 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 8 of 13 ends

Phase 1b Sites Segment Priority
Immigrant House North Rengstorff Extension 1
Fire Station 3 North Rengstorff Extension 1
Community Center North Rengstorff Extension 1
Mountain View Senior Center North Rengstorff Extension 1 Administrative Offices, CSD Recreation Division North Rengstorff Extension 1 The View Teen Center North Rengstorff Extension 2
Rengstorff Pool House North Rengstorff Extension 2
Shoreline Gate House North Rengstorff Extension 2
Waldorf School of the Peninsula North Rengstorff Extension 3 Learning Links Preschool North Rengstorff Extension 3
Avenidas Rose Kleiner Center -Senior Day Care North Rengstorff Extension 3 Fire Station 2 Fire Station 2 Extension 1
Mountain View Sports Pavilion Fire Station 2 Extension 2 Grahm Middle School Fore Station 2 Extension 3
Phase 2 Community Facilities - Phase 2 (Table 4 below and Attachment 4 – Figure 3 Phase 2) continues the expansion of the City’s fiber backbone by extending connectivity to 12 additional civic, transportation, and recreational facilities within the City. With an estimated construction cost of $3,624,192 and approximately 5.72 miles of new fiber infrastructure, this phase focuses on connecting additional municipal and community facilities and strengthening redundancy along several existing backbone corridors.

Table 4: Phase 2 Community Facilities
Phase 2 Sites Segment Priority
Mountain View High School Grant Road Connector 2
Sutter Health Mountain View Center Grant Road Connector 2 School District Admin Building Grant Road Connector 3
Maintenance Building Grant Road Connector 3
93 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 9 of 13 ends

Phase 2 Sites Segment Priority
Sunset Estates Mobile Home Park Grant Road Connector 3
New Frontier Mobile Home Park Grant Road Connector 3
San Antonio Transit Center San Antonio Connector 2
San Antonio Cal Train Station San Antonio Connector 2
Michaels Restaurant Shoreline Recreational Lateral 2
Shoreline Golf Pro Shop Shoreline Recreational Lateral 2 Rengstorff House Shoreline Recreational Lateral 2
Shoreline Boathouse & American Bistro Shoreline Recreational Lateral 2 Phase 3 Network Access Laterals – Phase 3 focuses on extending the City’s fiber network through a series of shorter lateral connections designed to reach additional community-serving facilities throughout the City (Table 5 below and Attachment 5 – Figure 4 Phase 3). Because most of these sites were Priority 3, many of these laterals are single routes extending to a site without providing the redundant path that mission-critical sites require. With an estimated construction cost of $5,100,480 and approximately 8.1 miles of new fiber infrastructure, this phase connects a total of 26 facilities, many of which are non-City sites, such as educational, childcare, and other community-oriented sites that were not directly served by the backbone routes established in earlier phases. However, it remains to be seen whether these non-City agencies would seek to join the network and fund the associated costs.

Table 5: Phase 3 Network Access Laterals
Phase 3 Sites Segment Priority
Alta Vista High School Eunice Connector 3
Action Day Primary Plus School Eunice Connector 3
El Camino Hospital Miramonte Connector 3
St Francis High School Miramonte Connector 3
Community School of Music & Arts California Connector 3 Springer Elementary Lateral Connection 3
94 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 10 of 13 ends

Phase 3 Sites Segment Priority
Middlefield Station Lateral Connection 3
Whisman Sports Complex Lateral Connection 2
Crittenden Middle School Lateral Connection 3
Whisman Station Lateral Connection 3
Stevenson Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Theuerkauf Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Tiny Einstein Child Development Center Lateral Connection 3 Palo Alto Preparatory Lateral Connection 3
St Stephen Lutheran School Lateral Connection 3
Moorpark Mobile Home Park Lateral Connection 3
Gabriela Mistral Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Mariano Castro Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Amy Imai Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Sahara Mobile Village Lateral Connection 3
Benjamin Bubb Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Edith Landels Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Post Office Lateral Connection 3
Monta Loma Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Santiago Villa Mobile Home Park Lateral Connection 3
St. Joseph’s Catholic School Lateral Connection 3
95 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 11 of 13 ends

Fiscal Responsibility and Strategic Investment
The plan is designed to divide implementation into phases, sub-phases, or individual segments, aligning investment with available budgets, grant opportunities, and shifting operational priorities. Coordination with Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects, utilities, and other construction partners can reduce excavation costs and enable the City to build incrementally.

Later phases can be adjusted as new development occurs or opportunities emerge, while maintaining priority for critical City facilities. Table 6 provides the total estimated costs for each phase of the plan and the total for all phases.

Table 6: Total Estimated Costs for Each Phase of the Conceptual Design Plan Component Linear Feet Unit Cost Total Cost
Phase 1a Civic Center 9,134 $120 $1,096,128
Phase 1b Redundant Network Expansion 56,971 $120 $6,836,544 Phase 2 Community Facilities 30,201 $120 $3,624,192
Phase 3 Network Access Laterals 42,504 $120 $5,100,480
TOTAL 138,810 $120 $16,657,344
In addition to the estimated costs associated with the phasing of the fiber network design, staff asked Entrust to evaluate theoretical models for potential revenue derived from the provision of ISP services. The models are intended to inform whether there are any opportunities for the City to potentially monetize the development of the fiber backbone phases.

Under this framework, service would be introduced incrementally in alignment with backbone construction, rather than as a full systemwide deployment. For example, following completion of an initial backbone phase (Phase 1), the City could launch service within the areas served by that phase to assess operational performance, customer demand, and financial outcomes.

Subsequent backbone expansions would enable additional service-area launches (Phases 2 and 3). This approach is intended to illustrate a practical theoretical implementation pathway for a retail model, while allowing results to be evaluated at each stage before underwriting further investment.

The financial analysisshows that none of the three modeled municipal retail broadband scenarios covers its operating costs as a stand-alone enterprise, even before accounting for debt service on any retail startup capital. The scenarios assume that the City backbone is independently funded and constructed. They evaluate the additional capital and operating requirements to provide theoretical retail service to residents and businesses within 175 feet of the proposed 96 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 12 of 13 ends

routes. At a modeled 30 percent take rate (subscribers), the annual Year 10 operating losses range from approximately $943,000 for Scenario 1 to $494,000 for Scenario 3. Retail network launch capital ranges from approximately $3.37 million to $6.31 million and is separate from initial backbone construction costs.

For additional information on the retail scenario analysis, refer to the Appendix in the Summary Report (Attachment 1).

California Environmental Quality Act
Phase 1a of the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as the operation and installation of mechanical equipment or electrical conveyances (Section 15301). On a separate and independent basis Phase 1a of the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as the replacement or reconstruction of existing facilities (Section 15302). On a separate independent basis Phase 1a is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as a minor alteration to land (Section 15304).

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no immediate fiscal impact associated with receiving the Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network or adopting Phase 1a. Funding for implementation of Phase 1a will be evaluated as part of the upcoming CIP budget process and staff will return to Council with a recommendation.

The recommendation also directs staff to establish a Technology Upgrade Reserve to support the potential future implementation of Phase 1b and other critical citywide technology upgrades, security needs, and investments. Funding for this reserve will be considered as part of the City’s forthcoming budget process and will be subject to available resources and Council approval. No funding for Phase 1b is requested at this time.

LEVINE ACT
California Government Code Section 84308 (also known as the Levine Act) prohibits city officials from participating in any proceeding involving a “license, permit, or other entitlement for use” if the official has received a campaign contribution exceeding $500 from a party, participant, or agent of a party or participant within the last 12 months. The Levine Act is intended to prevent financial influence on decisions that affect specific, identifiable persons or participants. For more information see the Fair Political Practices Commission website: www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/pay-toplay-limits-and-prohibitions.html 97 Conceptual Design for a Citywide Fiber Network
October 13, 2026

Page 13 of 13 ends

Please see below for information about whether the recommended action for this agenda item is subject to or exempt from the Levine Act.

EXEMPT FROM THE LEVINE ACT
☒ General policy and legislative actions

ALTERNATIVES

1. Do not approve the recommendation and provide staff with alternative direction.

PUBLIC NOTICING
Agenda posting.

Prepared by:

Arn Andrews
Assistant City Manager
Christina Gilmore
Intergovernmental Relations Manager
Approved by:

Kimbra McCarthy
City Manager
Attachments: 1. City of Mountain View Fiber Network Study Report

2. Figure 1 – Phase 1a

3. Figure 2 – Phase 1b

4. Figure 3 – Phase 2

5. Figure 4 – Phase 3
98 DRAFT
City of Mountain View
Fiber Network Study
Conceptual Design and Phasing
with Business Model
and Financial Analysis
ENTRUST Solutions Group, a Leidos Company
October 2, 2026
Attachment 1
99 Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 2
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 3 STUDY PURPOSE AND APPROACH ...................................................................................... 4 PLANNING SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 4 CONCEPTUAL NETWORK DESIGN ........................................................................................ 6 EXISTING CITY INFRASTRUCTURE ............................................................................................. 6 CITY PRIORITIZED SITES AND FACILITIES ................................................................................... 6 NETWORK RESILIENCE AND REDUNDANCY ................................................................................ 7 PHASED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ........................................................................................ 9 PHASE 1A CIVIC CENTER LOOP ................................................................................................ 9 PHASE 1B REDUNDANT CITYWIDE BACKBONE EXPANSION.........................................................13 PHASE 2 COMMUNITY FACILITIES.............................................................................................18 PHASE 3 NETWORK ACCESS LATERALS....................................................................................21 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES.....................................................................................26 COST ASSUMPTIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES ...............................................................................26 FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND STRATEGIC INVESTMENT..............................................................27 PARTNERSHIP CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................................27 APPENDIX A............................................................................................................................28 THEORETICAL BUSINESS MODEL AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ........................................28 RETAIL BROADBAND MODEL ....................................................................................................28 NETWORK PASSING ANALYSIS.................................................................................................28 FINANCIAL ASSUMPTIONS AND REPORTING BASIS.....................................................................29 SCENARIO 1 RETAIL SERVICE FOLLOWING PHASE 1..................................................................31 SCENARIO 2 RETAIL SERVICE FOLLOWING PHASES 1 AND 2 ......................................................34 SCENARIO 3 RETAIL SERVICE FOLLOWING PHASES 1 THROUGH 3..............................................37 DELIVERY MODEL AND PARTNERSHIP CONSIDERATIONS ..............................................40 Table of Contents
100
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 3
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Executive Summary
The City of Mountain View can theoretically develop a City-owned fiber backbone in phases to improve the reliability of municipal communications and extend connectivity to community facilities. The conceptual design provides a blueprint for potential future investment, prioritizing the public-service purpose of the backbone and allowing implementation to proceed incrementally as City needs, funding, and opportunities evolve.

The proposed backbone connects 82 prioritized sites through approximately 26.3 miles of fiber infrastructure, with a conceptual construction cost of $16.66 million. Phase 1a establishes a Civic Center loop; Phase 1b expands the backbone to critical facilities across the City; and Phases 2 and 3 extend connections to additional community facilities and network laterals.

Redundant routes prioritize essential City operations, while implementation can be divided into smaller projects to match budgets, grants, and coordinated construction opportunities.

The conceptual construction costs represent the physical fiber backbone and do not include the network electronics that would be required to activate and operate the network. Electronics requirements and associated costs will depend on the operating architecture ultimately selected by the City, including whether the network supports City facility connectivity, dark fiber, active transport, or other partnership models. These requirements would be developed during subsequent engineering.

The study also evaluates the theoretical use of the proposed backbone to provide municipal retail broadband service. None of the three modeled stand-alone municipal retail scenarios covers its operating costs under the assumptions evaluated, even before debt service on retail startup capital. Accordingly, the retail analysis is presented as a theoretical evaluation rather than a recommended implementation strategy. The detailed Business Model and Financial Analysis is provided in Appendix A.

The conceptual routes and construction cost estimates will ultimately require detailed engineering and field verification before implementation. As the backbone develops, opportunities may also emerge for coordination with other public agencies or private partners that could leverage City-owned infrastructure, subject to future City decisions and negotiated arrangements.
101
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 4
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Study Purpose and Approach
The City of Mountain View contracted ENTRUST Solutions Group, a Leidos company, to conduct a Last Mile Broadband Deployment Design and Engineering Study. This study brings together the conceptual fiber network design, phased implementation approach, construction cost estimates, and theoretical business model and financial analysis for City Council consideration.

The City currently relies on INET, a Comcast-owned and maintained fiber network, for communications and interconnection between City sites. The conceptual design addresses the necessary transition to City-owned infrastructure as the legacy system ages and no longer meets all of the City’s connectivity and service needs. In addition, the study builds on the prior Broadband Needs Assessment and Gap Analysis, as well as City-provided information about infrastructure and priority locations.

PLANNING SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
The conceptual network design provides a planning roadmap. It is not a full engineering study and does not resolve construction methods, building entry locations, or the side of a street where fiber would be installed. Individual projects would proceed through field surveys and standard engineering to verify assumptions, develop a High-Level Design (30 percent HLD), a Low-Level Design (60 percent LLD), and a Final Design.

The City Conceptual Design was created using the following factors to determine the route and phasing:
• Existing City infrastructure
• City prioritized sites, facilities, and locations
• Network resilience and redundancy
• Fiscal sustainability and strategic investment
The business model evaluation uses the proposed phased network framework, to estimate construction costs, develop a residential and business passings analysis, and estimate retail startup requirements. The report also considered joint-build opportunities, partnerships, regional collaboration, the competitive environment, and funding options. However, backbone construction is treated separately from the theoretical retail network launch capital and operating analysis.

As the network expands beyond core municipal operations, the proposed phased design could potentially connect additional facilities that also play an important role in community life.

Schools, healthcare providers, transit facilities, and other civic locations benefit from improved connectivity that supports education, transportation coordination, and access to digital services.1 1 The inclusion of private facilities does not establish that the City has the ability to provide connectivity services to those facilities. These locations are identified for planning purposes only and do not represent a commitment to provide service.
102
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 5
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Expanding the network to these facilities increases the overall value of the infrastructure investment while strengthening the City’s ability to support a wide range of public services.2 2 Municipal fiber backbones can provide a foundation for addressing unserved or underserved areas. For example, Santa Monica used its CityNet fiber network to connect affordable housing through a digital inclusion pilot. Further assessment would be needed to identify applicable opportunities in Mountain View. Source: City of Santa Monica, "Santa Monica’s Digital Inclusion Pilot Connects Residents with 10 Gigabit Broadband," December 1, 2015 (https://www.santamonica.gov/press/2015/12/02/santa-monica-s-digital-inclusion-pilot-connects-residents-with-10- gigabit-broadband).
103
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 6
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Conceptual Network Design
The network design translates the City’s facility priorities into a proposed backbone and subsequent connecting routes. It identifies where existing conduit could be used, which facilities could be reached, and how redundant paths could support continuity of essential services. The discussion below establishes the basis for the phased routes and cost estimates that follow.

EXISTING CITY INFRASTRUCTURE
The City of Mountain View currently maintains approximately 3.7 miles of conduit infrastructure within the public right-of-way. These conduit assets provide potential pathways that could support the installation of future fiber optic infrastructure without requiring additional trenching or roadway excavation.

Because conduit systems often support multiple municipal functions and may contain undocumented segments or varying levels of available capacity, a comprehensive review of existing conduit assets is recommended. Conducting a conduit inventory and condition assessment would help confirm available routes, identify unused capacity, and determine how the infrastructure could support future communications needs.

In addition, understanding the location, condition, and capacity of existing conduit infrastructure allows future fiber deployments to build upon existing pathways where feasible. Leveraging these assets can help reduce construction costs, minimize disruption to streets and sidewalks, and accelerate implementation timelines for future network expansion.

CITY PRIORITIZED SITES AND FACILITIES
Mountain View staff provided a list of 291 prioritized sites, facilities, and locations to guide potential network expansion. Each location was assigned a priority level from one (1) to three (3), reflecting its relative importance to City operations and community services. The list included a broad range of identifiable locations such as parking facilities, parks and recreation locations, civic buildings, schools, medical facilities, and other public-serving sites. It should be noted that some identified sites are either private entities or separate public agencies, but are important community assets. Their inclusion would ultimately be determined by the entity or agency seeking inclusion and by the successful negotiation of their inclusion.

Priority 1 sites included 21 locations that were determined to be the most essential City facilities, such as administrative buildings, fire and police locations, priority civic facilities, and public works facilities. Prioritizing these locations ensures that core government operations and critical public safety functions benefit first from secure, high-capacity connectivity, establishing the foundational network needed to support broader City services.

Priority 2 sites included 19 locations that, while not core-critical, provide strong public service value and have direct City involvement, such as other community facilities like the library, Transit Center, performing art center, and others. It also includes medical facilities and Mountain View High School.
104
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 7
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Priority 3 sites included 42 additional sites, including community facilities like transit stations, medical facilities, mobile home parks, other public administration facilities, and school facilities.

These locations offer long-term value and can be integrated opportunistically, supported by inter-agency or public-private partnerships and potential Internet Service Provider (ISP) engagement. ISPs may find it economically beneficial to invest further in Mountain View where existing City-owned fiber could be leased to support their networks, should the City choose to make that fiber available under negotiated lease arrangements.

A breakdown of sites by category and priority is provided in Table 1.

Table 1 Number of Sites by Category and Priority
Category Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Total
Administration Buildings 3 2 5
Civic/Community Facilities 5 8 6 19
Fire and Police 8 8
City Works 5 1 6
Medical Facilities 2 1 3
Recreation 8 8
Schools 1 26 27
Mobile Home Parks 6 6
Total 21 19 42 82
The prioritization framework is used to guide the phasing of the network expansion plan. Sites with higher priority levels were addressed earlier in the design process to ensure that critical services and infrastructure are supported first, with path redundant routes. Lower-priority sites were incorporated in later phases, allowing the City to align deployment with operational needs and available resources or partnerships. This phased approach ensures that the network delivers the greatest value and impact from the outset.

NETWORK RESILIENCE AND REDUNDANCY
The conceptual fiber network design, shown in Figure 1, emphasizes a resilient architecture that incorporates redundant routing paths throughout each phase of implementation, most critically for the Priority 1 sites to ensure path diversity and full redundancy, ensuring that no single fiber cut can interrupt services. Rather than concentrating redundancy in a single stage, the phased plan intentionally includes segments in every phase that either establish new looped routes or reinforce existing backbone corridors. This layered approach reduces reliance on single-path connectivity and helps ensure that critical facilities can remain connected via alternate routes if individual fiber segments are disrupted by construction, maintenance, or unforeseen events. 105
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 8
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 1 Conceptual Design Routes
106
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 9
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA The following phased implementation plan describes how the backbone and lateral routes connect priority facilities and reinforce network resilience.

Phased Implementation Plan
PHASE 1A CIVIC CENTER LOOP
Phase 1a is designed as the City’s initial transition from reliance on the legacy INET system to a City-owned fiber backbone. This phase represents the smallest capital investment ($1,096,128) within the overall implementation plan and serves as the starting point for moving municipal communications onto infrastructure owned and controlled by the City.

By concentrating on a compact loop within the Civic Center area and connecting several highpriority facilities, the City can begin migrating critical communications services while limiting initial construction scope and cost. This early deployment also provides the opportunity to establish construction standards and operational procedures that will guide future network expansion. Once these transition processes are established, subsequent phases can expand the backbone to additional sites and service areas, building on the operational experience gained during the initial deployment.
107
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 10
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 2 Phase 1a Conceptual Design Routes
108
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 11
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Note: Construction phasing and site prioritization serve different purposes and do not necessarily align. A Phase 1 route may pass a Priority 3 site that could be efficient to connect if the City chooses to do so. Inclusion along an early-phase route does not change a site’s assigned priority or commit the City to provide connectivity.3 Phase 1a includes the installation of approximately 1.72 miles of new fiber backbone from City Hall to connect critical City facilities like Fire Station-1 and the Police-Fire Administration Building utilizing 2,088 feet of existing conduit along S. Shoreline Boulevard between Church Street and Villa Street as shown in Figure 2. The proposed route passes the City Parking Garage and Parking Lot 11 before closing a redundant loop path back to City Hall along Castro Street.

This Phase 1a loop was designed with specific consideration to establish a core redundant ring around the Mountain View Civic Center which includes city facilities such as City Hall, the Center for Performing Arts, Public Library and Civic Center Plaza. Eleven priority sites are contained within this design, passing within less than 150 feet of the loop (See Table 2). The design focuses on creating a redundant loop architecture by directly connecting high-priority sites along with adjacent Priority 2 and 3 sites and improving overall network reliability.4 In addition to providing initial connectivity for critical facilities, the design incorporates multiple redundant connection paths that allow subsequent phases to interconnect with the backbone, including at least four connection points for Phase 1b routes and a designated lateral connection to support a future Phase 3 extension.

Table 2 Phase 1a Sites
Site Segment Priority
City Hall Civic Center Loop 1
Fire Station 1 Civic Center Loop 1
Police-Fire Administration Building Civic Center Loop 1 City Parking Lot 11 Civic Center Loop 1
Library Civic Center Loop 2
Performing Arts Center Civic Center Loop 2
City Parking Garage 1 Civic Center Loop 2
Eagle Swimming Pool Complex Civic Center Loop 2
Mountain View Medical Offices Civic Center Loop 2
Mountain View Chamber of Commerce Civic Center Loop 3
3 Site priorities, including those assigned to parking facilities, are flexible planning designations and may be revised at any point during the planning process as City needs, opportunities, and decisions evolve. 4 The conceptual design assumes existing City-maintained connectivity pathways between facilities within the Civic Center Plaza campus, which were treated as existing infrastructure for purposes of the network layout. 109
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 12
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Site Segment Priority
Mountain View Academy Civic Center Loop 3
The Phase 1a routing also positions the City to take advantage of the anticipated California Middle Mile Broadband Initiative (MMBI) alignment expected to pass immediately adjacent to portions of the Civic Center area.5 While the MMBI will provide a public-access long-haul fiber corridor capable of connecting Mountain View to regional interconnection points and data centers in Los Angeles, Sacramento, and other major exchange locations, the City’s proposed routing maintains a degree of physical separation from the anticipated state alignment. This provides a measure of path diversity in the event of a construction cut or outage along the state middle-mile route.

Because the Phase 1a loop passes near several potential interconnection locations, the design preserves flexibility for future tie-ins to the MMBI as construction of both networks progresses.

Depending on the timing of middle-mile construction, the City could establish an interconnection during Phase 1a or incorporate a connection point during Phase 1b or Phase 2 expansions.

This approach allows the City to benefit from the long-haul transport capabilities of the statewide network while maintaining multiple local routing options that support redundancy and future backbone expansion.

With the Civic Center backbone established, the next phase of implementation focuses on expanding the network beyond the civic core to reach additional operational and public safety facilities across the City.
5 The California Middle-Mile Broadband Initiative (MMBI) was authorized through California Senate Bill 156 (2021) and includes approximately $3.25 billion in state funding to construct an open-access middle-mile fiber network across California. Deployment of the statewide network is ongoing, with segments expected to become operational through 2026 as construction progresses. California Department of Technology, Middle-Mile Broadband Initiative (MMBI), available at: https://broadbandforall.cdt.ca.gov/middle-mile-broadband-initiative/ 110
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 13
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA PHASE 1B REDUNDANT CITYWIDE BACKBONE EXPANSION
Phase 1b represents the first major expansion of the City’s fiber backbone beyond the Civic Center area established in Phase 1a. With an estimated construction cost of $6,836,544 and approximately 10.79 miles of new fiber infrastructure, this phase would extend the network along key corridors to reach additional critical facilities and operational centers across the City as shown in Figure 3. While significantly larger in scale than the initial deployment, the design builds directly on the backbone architecture established in Phase 1a by expanding redundant connectivity across multiple areas of the City.
111
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 14
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 3 Phase 1b Conceptual Design Routes
112
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 15
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA The first and most critical segment extends redundant service to several high-priority public safety and operational facilities, including Fire Station 4, the Police Department Men’s Dormitory, Police Department Women’s Dormitory, the Municipal Operations Center, Fleet Services, and the City Warehouse (Operations Center Loop). This segment not only passes additional Priority 1 sites but also efficiently connects some Priority 2 sites, while creating a redundant ring that connects back to the Phase 1 backbone at two locations near West Evelyn Avenue and Castro Street. These dual interconnection points provide multiple routing options between the Civic Center backbone and the expanded network, improving overall system resiliency and ensuring that critical operational facilities maintain redundant connectivity paths.

From the same connection point at West Evelyn Avenue, a separate segment extends approximately 2.31 miles north, utilizing 1.27 miles of existing conduit, toward North Shoreline Boulevard (Northern Shoreline Extension). This route expands the City network toward the Shoreline area, passing Amphitheatre Parkway and several additional Priority 1 facilities including Fire Station 5, the City Maintenance Facility on North Shoreline Boulevard, and the Shoreline Amphitheatre. Extending the network toward this portion of the city establishes a backbone corridor that supports additional connectivity opportunities while improving overall geographic diversity of the City network.

A third segment extends approximately 1.65 miles south along Castro Street to Miramonte Avenue, before continuing east along Cuesta Drive to Fire Station 2, passing two additional City priority sites along the route (Southern Extension). In addition to connecting this critical facility, the route establishes a backbone corridor that supports future redundancy planning in the southern portion of the City.

The final segment extends from South Shoreline Boulevard to connect additional Priority 1 facilities including the Administrative Offices for the Community Services Department Recreation Division, while passing both the Mountain View Senior Center and the Mountain View Community Center (North Rengstorff Avenue Extension). The route then proceeds north along North Rengstorff Avenue, connecting Fire Station 3 and the Immigrant House, before continuing toward Amphitheatre Parkway where it connects with the northern Shoreline segment to complete the northern loop of the City network.

Phase 1b connects 17 Priority 1 sites and passes additional Priority 2 and 3 locations along the proposed routes, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3 Phase 1b Sites6
Site Segment Priority
Fire Station 4 Operations Center Loop 1
6 Private institutions, including Google Day Care and Waldorf School of the Peninsula, are shown as potential planning opportunities because of their location and community-serving functions. Their inclusion does not commit the City to connect or serve them. Any participation would depend on the City’s determination of public benefit, the institution’s interest, and mutually agreed arrangements. 113
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 16
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Site Segment Priority
Municipal Operations Center Administration Operations Center Loop 1 PD Women’s Dorm Operations Center Loop 1
PD Men’s Dorm Operations Center Loop 1
City Warehouse Operations Center Loop 1
Fleet Services Operations Center Loop 1
Mountain View Transit Center Operations Center Loop 2
Jose Vargas Elementary Operations Center Loop 3
Google Day Care Operations Center Loop 3
Yew Chung International School Operations Center Loop 3 Whisman Elementary School Operations Center Loop 3
Moffet Mobile Home Park Operations Center Loop 3
Adobe Building Operations Center Loop 3
VTA Bus Terminal Operations Center Loop 3
Fire Station 5 Northern Shoreline Extension 1
Shoreline Maintenance Facility Northern Shoreline Extension 1 Fuel Station Northern Shoreline Extension 1
Shoreline Amphitheatre Northern Shoreline Extension 1
Flare Station Northern Shoreline Extension 1
Immigrant House North Rengstorff Extension 1
Fire Station 3 North Rengstorff Extension 1
Community Center North Rengstorff Extension 1
Mountain View Senior Center North Rengstorff Extension 1 Administrative Offices, CSD Recreation
Division North Rengstorff Extension 1
The View Teen Center North Rengstorff Extension 2
Rengstorff Pool House North Rengstorff Extension 2
Shoreline Gate House North Rengstorff Extension 2
Waldorf School of the Peninsula North Rengstorff Extension 3 114
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 17
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Site Segment Priority
Learning Links Preschool North Rengstorff Extension 3
Avenidas Rose Kleiner Center -Senior Day
Care North Rengstorff Extension 3
Fire Station 2 Fire Station 2 Extension 1
Mountain View Sports Pavillion Fire Station 2 Extension 2 Grahm Middle School Fore Station 2 Extension 3
115
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 18
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA PHASE 2 COMMUNITY FACILITIES
As shown in Figure 4, Phase 2 continues the expansion of the City’s fiber backbone by extending connectivity to 12 additional civic, transportation, and recreational facilities within the City (See Table 4). With an estimated construction cost of $3,624,192 and approximately 5.72 miles of new fiber infrastructure, this phase focuses on connecting additional municipal and community facilities while strengthening redundancy along several existing backbone corridors.

The first segment extends south from Fire Station 2 along Grant Road, utilizing approximately 8,026 feet of existing conduit, to reach Mountain View High School and the Sutter Health Mountain View Center. From Fire Station 2, the segment also extends north along Sylvan Avenue and west along East Evelyn Avenue, creating a redundant segment that improves network resiliency for facilities located along this corridor while reinforcing the broader backbone architecture established in the earlier phases (Grant Road Connector).

A second segment connects at two points along the North Rengstorff Avenue Extension constructed in Phase 1b and extends south toward the San Antonio Caltrain Station and the San Antonio Transit Center (San Antonio Connector). This segment expands the City network into an important regional transportation corridor while creating additional interconnection opportunities between the City backbone and nearby transportation facilities.

The final segment utilizes the existing Phase 1b backbone along North Shoreline Boulevard to extend connectivity to several Priority 2 locations associated with the Shoreline recreational and waterfront area, including facilities supporting boating, dining, and other public recreational activities (Shoreline Recreation Lateral). This extension allows the City network to reach key community-serving destinations while leveraging the backbone infrastructure established during earlier phases.
116
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 19
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 4 Phase 2 Conceptual Design Routes
117
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 20
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Table 4 Phase 2 Sites
Site Segment Priority
Mountain View High School Grant Road Connector 2
Sutter Health Mountain View Center7 Grant Road Connector 2 School District Admin Building Grant Road Connector 3
Maintenance Building Grant Road Connector 3
Suset Estates Mobile Home Park Grant Road Connector 3
New Frontier Mobile Home Park Grant Road Connector 3
San Antonio Transit Center San Antonio Connector 2
San Antonio Cal Tran Station San Antonio Connector 2
Michaels Restaurant Shoreline Recreational Lateral 2
Shoreline Golf Pro Shop Shoreline Recreational Lateral 2 Rengstorff House Shoreline Recreational Lateral 2
Shoreline Boathouse & American Bistro Shoreline Recreational Lateral 2 7 Inclusion of this private institution establishes neither an obligation nor an intent for the City to become a service provider to private industry. Future Internet service providers may see value in leasing dark fiber strands from the City to serve such facilities, should the City choose to make that fiber available under negotiated lease arrangements. 118
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 21
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA PHASE 3 NETWORK ACCESS LATERALS
As shown in Figure 5, Phase 3 focuses on extending the City’s fiber network through a series of shorter lateral connections designed to reach additional community-serving facilities throughout the City. Because most of these sites were Priority 3, many of these laterals are just that – single routes extending to a site without providing the redundant path that mission-critical sites require. With an estimated construction cost of $5,100,480 and approximately 8.1 miles of new fiber infrastructure, this phase connects a total of 26 facilities, many of which include non-city sites such as educational, childcare, and other community-oriented sites that were not directly served by the backbone routes established in earlier phases (See Table 5). 119
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 22
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 5 Phase 3 Conceptual Design Routes
120
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 23
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA The largest segment within Phase 3 creates a southern loop beginning from the Alta Vista High School, extending slightly north and west along Eunice Avenue to connect with the Phase 2 Fire Station 2 Connector at Grant Road (Eunice Connector). Another larger segment connects from that same point along Grant Road and connects El Camino Hospital Mountain View and St.

Francis High School, before connecting to the Phase 1b backbone along Miramonte Avenue (Miramonte Connector). A third large segment connects all the way out to Springer Elementary.

These segments extend the network into the southern portion of the City while also creating an additional loop connection that strengthens overall network resiliency.

A separate segment extends from the San Antonio Station area to connect with the Phase 1b backbone along California Street, establishing a secondary path between these corridors and improving routing diversity for facilities served in this portion of the City (California Connector).

Beyond these larger connections, Phase 3 consists primarily of a series of shorter lateral segments designed to connect individual community facilities to the existing backbone network.

In total, approximately 20 separate segments, each generally less than 0.5 miles in length, extend service to additional school district facilities, childcare centers, and other communityserving locations throughout the City.

Table 5 Phase 3 Sites
Site Segment Priority
Alta Vista High School Eunice Connector 3
Action Day Primary Plus School Eunice Connector 3
El Camino Hospital Miramonte Connector 3
St Francis High School Miramonte Connector 3
Community School of Music & Arts California Connector 3 Springer Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Middlefield Station Lateral Connection 3
Whisman Sports Complex Lateral Connection 2
Crittenden Middle school Lateral Connection 3
Whisman Station Lateral Connection 3
Stevenson Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Theuerkauf Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Tiny Einstein Child Development Center Lateral Connection 3 Palo Alto Preparatory Lateral Connection 3
St Stephen Lutheran School Lateral Connection 3
Moorpark Mobile Home Park Lateral Connection 3
121
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 24
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Site Segment Priority
Gabriela Mistral Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Mariano Castro Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Amy Imai Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Sahara Mobile Village Lateral Connection 3
Benjamin Bubb Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Edith Landels Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Post Office Lateral Connection 3
Monta Loma Elementary Lateral Connection 3
Santiago Villa Mobile Home Park Lateral Connection 3
St. Joseph’s Catholic School Lateral Connection 3
Together, these lateral connections expand the reach of the City network to a broader set of public facilities while leveraging the backbone infrastructure established in earlier phases.

However, it is yet to be determined if these non-city agencies would seek to join the network and fund the associated costs of joining.
122
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 25
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 6 Complete Conceptual Design
123
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 26
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Construction Cost Estimates
Table 6 presents the conceptual construction estimate for the City backbone. The total is $16,657,344 for approximately 138,810 linear feet of fiber infrastructure. Phase 1a and Phase 1b together total $7,932,672; the cumulative estimate after Phase 2 is $11,556,864. These costs are separate from the theoretical retail network launch capital analyzed later in this study.

Table 6 Estimated Construction Costs by Phase
Component Linear Feet Unit Cost Total Cost
Phase 1a Civic Center 9,134 $120 $1,096,128
Phase 1b Redundant Network Expansion 56,971 $120 $6,836,544 Phase 2 Community Facilities 30,201 $120 $3,624,192
Phase 3 Network Access Laterals 42,504 $120 $5,100,480
TOTAL 138,810 $120 $16,657,344

COST ASSUMPTIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES
The construction cost estimates presented for the conceptual network design are preliminary and based on current market conditions. These estimates should be refined as a project phase progresses through detailed design engineering and the competitive public bidding process. At the conceptual planning stage, assumptions must be made regarding construction methods and routing conditions that cannot be fully verified until detailed engineering is completed. For purposes of this analysis, all new fiber construction has been assumed to be underground, which represents a conservative (yet the costliest) assumption. The first work in a high-level design (HLD) of design engineering would determine where existing utility poles exist, and if they can be used to attach cable, which would substantially reduce the anticipated construction cost by as much as 50-75%.

Where existing conduit infrastructure is known to be available along the proposed routes, the conceptual design cost estimate assumes that these assets will be utilized where practical, thereby reducing the amount of new construction required.

As future phases advance into design engineering and field surveying, existing infrastructure assets will be verified and documented in greater detail. This process may identify additional conduit, fiber pathways, or other infrastructure that could be utilized, reducing the need for new construction. Design engineering may also identify alternative routing strategies or construction techniques that could lower the overall project cost.

Construction costs may also be reduced through effective coordination with other utilities, private entities, and public agencies. Programs such as dig once or joint trenching, as well as coordination with other capital improvement projects involving excavation within the City’s rightof-way (ROW), can significantly reduce costs. Labor associated with underground excavation 124
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 27
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA typically represents 50 to 70 percent of total construction costs, making coordinated construction activities an important opportunity to reduce overall project expenses.

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND STRATEGIC INVESTMENT
Implementation can be divided into phases, sub-phases, or individual segments to align investment with available budgets, grant opportunities, and changing operational priorities.

Coordination with Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects, utilities, and other construction partners can reduce excavation costs and allow the City to build incrementally. Later phases can be adjusted as new development occurs or opportunities emerge, while maintaining priority for critical City facilities.

PARTNERSHIP CONSIDERATIONS
As the City-owned backbone develops, opportunities may emerge to partner with qualified Internet service providers or other private entities that can leverage portions of the City’s fiber infrastructure. Potential arrangements could include dark-fiber leases, shared infrastructure, or other negotiated partnerships that allow the City to retain ownership of strategic infrastructure while supporting additional private investment.

The value and structure of any potential partnership would depend on the interests of individual providers, the assets made available by the City, and the terms of a negotiated agreement.

Further evaluation of partnership structures should therefore occur through future discussions with qualified providers as the backbone develops.
125
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 28
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Appendix A
Theoretical Business Model and Financial Analysis
The following theoretical financial analysis evaluates the estimated operational revenues and expenses, as well as the necessary start-up capital, if the City were to consider to monetize its current and/or potential future publicly owned fiber-optic network by selling retail subscriber data services to residents and businesses as a stand-alone public enterprise.

The analysis is intended to help the City understand the costs of monetizing a public asset, the potential value of a private partner, the need to attract capital, and how projected revenues could inform any negotiations. It is a theoretical evaluation of potential revenues, expenses, and business model implications, rather than a business plan, feasibility study, definitive financial statement, or pro forma.

RETAIL BROADBAND MODEL
The financial scenarios presented below are evaluated within the context of a theoretical phased retail deployment framework, in which the City pursues hypothetical retail broadband services served by its independently funded backbone network. Under this framework, service would be introduced incrementally in alignment with backbone construction, rather than as a full systemwide deployment. For example, following completion of an initial backbone phase (Phase 1), the City could launch service within the areas served by that phase to assess operational performance, customer demand, and financial outcomes. Subsequent backbone expansions would enable additional service area launches (Phase 2 and Phase 3). This approach is intended to illustrate a practical theoretical implementation pathway for a retail model, while allowing results to be evaluated at each stage before underwriting further investment.

New stand-alone broadband enterprises require significant direct costs to deliver services, as well as a minimum level of staffing and industry expertise. Some municipalities, particularly ones that already operate an electric utility, may already have some of the support staff and infrastructure in place that can be leveraged for a broadband enterprise, such as billing support and software, fleet vehicles and maintenance, and even field staff. However, broadband typically has specific requirements with respect to equipment and technical expertise and is prohibited from being subsidized by any electric utility, which means new staff and assets specifically for broadband still must be acquired.

Examining the anticipated revenues and expenses of such an endeavor can give the City a realistic understanding of the risks and investment needed to transform a public fiber network into a functioning, competitive retail broadband enterprise. Most of the cost drivers, staffing needs, and equipment listed in these estimates will be required whether the network is operated directly by the City or by a private ISP through a P3.

NETWORK PASSING ANALYSIS
Placing a 175-foot buffer on either side of the conceptual backbone network and crossreferencing it with City-provided address point data allows for quantification of the network’s potential service area. This approach identifies residential and business locations that fall within a distance generally considered feasible for standard service drop connections, without 126
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 29
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA requiring significant additional lateral construction. As such, the resulting passings represent the portion of the community that could be served in a cost-effective manner under a hypothetical typical retail deployment model.

The number and distribution of these passings are a primary driver of the network’s financial performance, as it defines the base of potential subscribers from which revenues could be derived. Areas outside of this buffer would require additional infrastructure investment to serve, increasing the cost per connection and potentially impacting overall project viability. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 7.

Table 7 Address Passings within 175 Feet by Phase
Phase Passings
Phase 1 4,082
Phase 2 1,530
Phase 3 3,180
Total 8,792

FINANCIAL ASSUMPTIONS AND REPORTING BASIS
ENTRUST estimated potential revenues and operating expenses, as well as enterprise start-up capital expenses required to connect and serve retail customers, such as customer equipment, installation, and networking equipment. Notably, these retail broadband model start-up capital expenses are separate from initial network backbone and plant construction (shown in Table 6), that would be necessary to construct the three-phase conceptual design.

The model uses the following assumptions and reporting conventions:
• 30% take rate (subscribers) reached in Year 3, with 3% annual residential churn • $52.50 average monthly service revenue per subscriber, based on the modeled service-tier mix
• Network maintenance = 4% of network value
• Staffing levels assume a new, stand-alone enterprise and use fully loaded costs • Excludes debt service on start-up CAPEX.
• Excludes the City backbone network construction costs. • Annual revenue, operating expense, and EBITDA results represent Year 10, not a 20-year average.
• Financial estimates are expressed in today’s dollars with 0 percent inflation or cost-of-living adjustment, as described in the Executive Summary.
• Bad debt is estimated at 1% of total revenue and is included in operating expenses.8 • Gross revenue includes recurring service charges and installation fees. 8 Bad debt represents accounts receivable recognized as revenue but subsequently determined to be uncollectible; therefore, these amounts are included in total reported revenue. 127
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 30
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization (EBITDA) represents operating performance before these expenses and is shown as a loss in every scenario. Annual revenue, operating expense, and EBITDA figures are Year 10 estimates, rounded to the nearest dollar.

The model excludes debt service on both the City backbone and retail network launch capital. 128
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 31
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA SCENARIO 1 RETAIL SERVICE FOLLOWING PHASE 1
Scenario 1 assumes that Phase 1 of the City backbone has been completed and evaluates retail service within that footprint. Table 8 summarizes the modeled network scale, subscribers, Year 10 operating results, and retail network launch capital.

Table 8 Scenario 1 Phase 1 Summary
Parameter Value
Total Network Length (miles) 12.51
Total Passings 4,082
Total Subscribers (30% take rate) 1,224
Estimated Annual Gross Revenues (Year 10) $775,135
Estimated Annual OPEX (Year 10) $1,718,457
Estimated Annual EBITDA (Loss) (Year 10) 9($943,322)
Network Launch CAPEX $ 3,370,00010
However, the requisite operational expenses (OPEX) - staffing and annual direct expenses to operate a retail network of that size - are estimated at $1,718,457, broken down into various cost drivers as shown in Figure 7.
11 9 Excludes debt service on $3.37M of network launch CAPEX 10 Excludes City network backbone costs of $7.9M.
11 Staffing reflects the portion of each employee’s duties allocated to this function, including both part-time and fulltime assignments, totaling the equivalent of approximately 7 full-time positions (FTEs). 129
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 32
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 7 Scenario 1 Year 10 Revenue and Operating Expenses Estimate The estimated EBITDA is a loss of $943,322, which – even if construction and network launch capital is fully funded – would not make the network viable as a stand-alone enterprise. This is primarily due to the low-density customer base in and around the existing network in the Phase 1 design.

Additionally, the successful startup and launch of the retail network will require more than $3.37 million in capital expenses (CAPEX) to connect customers, as shown in Figure 8. The network launch CAPEX required speaks to the need for additional investment in the City’s network to transform it into a functional, sustainable retail subscriber network. This capital could be secured through debt, a General Fund loan/subsidy, or private investment. However, as noted, the EBITDA estimate would not support any debt service.
130
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 33
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 8 Scenario 1 Network Launch CAPEX Estimate of $3.37 Million 131
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 34
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA SCENARIO 2 RETAIL SERVICE FOLLOWING PHASES 1 AND 2
Scenario #2 integrates the existing Phases 1 and 2 City backbone network, resulting in an additional 1,530 passings over 5.7+ miles of new backbone relative to Scenario #1 (see Table 7).

Table 9 Scenario 2 Phases 1 and 2 Summary
Parameter Value
Total Network Length (miles) 18.23
Total Passings 5,612
Total Subscribers (30% take rate) 1,684
Estimated Annual Gross Revenues (Year 10) $1,065,668
Estimated Annual OPEX (Year 10) $1,894,593
Estimated Annual EBITDA (Loss) (Year 10) ($828,925)12
Network Launch CAPEX $ 4,330,00013
The modeled customer base reaches 1,684 subscribers. Figure 9 shows the Year 10 revenue and operating expense estimates; Figure 10 shows the required retail network launch capital. 12 Excludes debt service on $4.33M of network launch CAPEX 13 Excludes additional City network backbone construction costs of approximately $3.6 million for Phase 2, bringing the cumulative backbone cost for Phases 1 and 2 to approximately $11.56 million. 132
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 35
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 9 Scenario 2 Year 10 Revenue and Operating Expenses Estimate The estimated negative EBITDA of $828,925 indicates that the network is still not profitable as a stand-alone entity, even with additional subscribers.

It is important to note that in Scenario #2, while gross revenues increase, the rise in direct service and administrative costs does not increase by the same rate, reflecting the early stages of economies of scale as the network expands. Scenario #2 increases the customer base by approximately 38% and network launch capital requirements by approximately 29%, while only modestly reducing the negative EBITDA. This trend is driven by the fixed nature of many operational expenses, which do not scale linearly with the customer base. Staffing requirements also increase over the forecast period as the network matures, but personnel are added based on operational workload and capacity requirements rather than in direct proportion to subscriber growth.14 As subscribers increase, these fixed costs are distributed across a larger base, improving overall operating efficiency, although not yet to the point of achieving positive net income.

It is also important to note that the Scenario 2 CAPEX figure includes approximately $4.33 million in network launch capital required to connect customers, which would require significant annual debt service that cannot be supported by the net operational income. As a result, additional capital investment would be required to fully implement this scenario and support service delivery at the projected scale, as illustrated in Figure 10. 14 Core management, administrative, and engineering functions are assumed to support growth within their available capacity, while additional customer support, NOC, field service, or other operational personnel may be added as subscriber levels and associated workload require additional staffing capacity. 133
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 36
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 10 Scenario 2 Network Launch CAPEX Estimate of $4.33 Million 134
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 37
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA SCENARIO 3 RETAIL SERVICE FOLLOWING PHASES 1 THROUGH 3
Scenario #3 integrates the existing backbone from Phases 1, 2 & 3, resulting in total of 8,792 passings (see Table 7).

Table 10 Scenario 3 Phases 1 through 3 Summary
Parameter Value
Total Network Length (miles) 26.33
Total Passings 8,792
Total Subscribers (30% take rate) 2,637
Estimated Annual Gross Revenues (Year 10) $1,669,522
Estimated Annual OPEX (Year 10) $2,163,393
Estimated Annual EBITDA (Loss) (Year 10) ($493,871)15
Total Start-up CAPEX $ 6,314,15716
The modeled customer base reaches 2,637 subscribers, an increase of 1,413 subscribers over Scenario 1. Figure 11 shows the Year 10 revenue and operating expense estimates; Figure 12 shows retail network launch capital.
15 Excludes debt service on $6.31M of start-up CAPEX.
16 Excludes additional City network backbone construction costs of approximately $5.1 million for Phase 3, bringing the cumulative backbone cost for Phases 1, 2, and 3 to approximately $16.66 million. 135
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 38
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 11 Scenario 3 Year 10 Revenue and Operating Expenses Estimate Despite the increase in subscribers and revenues, the model continues to reflect negative EBITDA of approximately $493,871, indicating that the network is not financially viable as a stand-alone enterprise at this stage. In addition, more than $6.31 million in network launch CAPEX would be required to connect the projected customer base, as shown in Figure 12, which would further burden the project with significant annual debt service.

While revenues increase as the network expands, the proportional growth in direct service and administrative costs remains more moderate, reflecting the continued impact of fixed operational expenses. As described in Scenario #2, staffing increases as operational demands require additional capacity but does not increase in direct proportion to subscriber growth. Scenario #3 increases the customer base by approximately 115% and network launch capital requirements by approximately 87% relative to Scenario #1, while reducing the annual EBITDA loss by approximately 48%. This scenario demonstrates a more pronounced scaling effect compared to earlier phases, as the operating cost structure supports a larger subscriber base. As a result, operating efficiency improves meaningfully, although not yet to the point of achieving positive net income under a stand-alone model.
136
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 39
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Figure 12 Scenario 3 Network Launch CAPEX Estimate of $6.31 Million It is important to note that Scenario #3 assumes the City backbone network has already been constructed and does not include the debt service associated with that investment. As a result, the total capital required to fully implement this scenario is higher than reflected in the model and would require additional funding to support the projected level of service, particularly in the current interest rate environment and given private capital return expectations 137
Mountain View Fiber Network Study Page 40
ENTRUST Solutions Group October 2, 2026 Mountain View, CA Delivery Model and Partnership Considerations
Across all scenarios, financial performance improves as the network expands, primarily because many operational costs are fixed and do not scale linearly with the number of subscribers. However, the results indicate that scale alone is not sufficient to achieve financial viability under any of the stand-alone municipal retail models.

In addition, the retail model scenarios depicted do not include the debt service needed to cover the core backbone network construction, nor the network launch CAPEX, which could present challenges in securing the necessary initial funding. This is especially true with currently elevated interest rates, and the ROI demands for private capital are even higher.

Soliciting a public-private partnership (P3) with a qualified ISP is one approach that could significantly reduce annual expenses by taking advantage of existing ISP operations, staffing, and experience. It is difficult to gauge the level of any cost savings that individual ISPs can realize without knowing the terms of any potential partnership and access to proprietary financial data, but some general assumptions can be made.

ISPs typically already have many of the support staff already in place for other neighboring markets (billing, network operations and engineering, etc.), and can share these costs across multiple markets, thus eliminating the need for new hires. An ISP that is already working within the Bay Area may be able to reduce the annual staffing costs discussed by as much as 50-70%.

ISPs have standard operating procedures and processes and often have many of the technical field staff already in place, which can significantly reduce the costs of ongoing network maintenance by over 50%. Additionally, some of the bigger ISPs often have proprietary operational approaches and favored equipment and material pricing from vendors that allow them to significantly reduce network launch CAPEX.

While there may be opportunities for additional cost savings, any potential savings will hinge on the individual ISP and their unique existing markets, equipment, staff, and resources. Any cost-reduction strategies are dependent on the terms of any partnership which will only be identified through detailed negotiations and analysis in coordination with potential ISP partners.

In addition to operational efficiencies, a private partner may also bring access to capital, vendor pricing advantages, and potential eligibility for additional grant funding. These factors could reduce both operating and capital costs, improving the overall feasibility of the network and supporting a more scalable and sustainable deployment approach. Further evaluation of partnership structures and cost-sharing opportunities should be explored through detailed discussions with qualified ISPs.
138
Attachment 2
Figure 1: Phase 1a
139
Attachment 3
Figure 2: Phase 1b
140
Attachment 4
Figure 3: Phase 2
141
Attachment 5
Figure 4: Phase 3
142
City of Mountain View
Legislation Text

CITY HALL
500 CASTRO STREET
File #: 206071, Version: 1
LinkedIn Development Agreement Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue
Introduce an Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Approving a First Amendment to the Development Agreement By and Between the City of Mountain View and LinkedIn Corporation for the LinkedIn Middlefield Campus on a 28.7-Acre Site Located at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue (APNs:
165-38-001 and 165-38-009) to Extend the Term by Five Years, to be read in title only, further reading waived, and set a second reading for October 27, 2026 (Attachment 1 to the Council report).

City of Mountain View Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/8/2026
powered by Legistar™143
DATE: October 13, 2026
CATEGORY: Public Hearing
DEPT.: Community Development
TITLE: LinkedIn Development Agreement
Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield
Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue

RECOMMENDATION
Introduce an Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Approving a First Amendment to the Development Agreement By and Between the City of Mountain View and LinkedIn Corporation for the LinkedIn Middlefield Campus on a 28.7-Acre Site Located at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue (APNs: 165-38-001 and 165-38-009) to Extend the Term by Five Years, to be read in title only, further reading waived, and set a second reading for October 27, 2026 (Attachment 1 to the Council report).

BACKGROUND
Project Location: 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100- 1200 Maude Avenue (APNs: 165-38-001, 165-38-009), at the northeast corner of East Middlefield Road and the State Route (SR) 237 service road, on the eastern edge of the Mountain View city limit, adjacent to the City of Sunnyvale.

Project Site Size: 28.7 acres
General Plan Designation: High-Intensity Office
Zoning Designation: P(41) East Whisman Precise Plan (EWPP) Surrounding Land Uses:
• North: A portion of the Sunnyvale Municipal Golf Course • South: One to two-story office buildings
• West: SR-237 service road and higher-intensity office developments across SR-237
• East: a mix of office and multifamily residential uses (in the City of Sunnyvale)
Figure 1: Project Location
144
LinkedIn DA Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue
October 13, 2026

Page 2 of 10 ends

Current Site Conditions: The site comprises two parcels—700-810 East Middlefield Road (APN 165-38-001) and 1100-1200 West Maude Avenue (APN 165-38-009). The 700-810 East Middlefield Road parcel includes a six-story office building and six-level parking structure that were constructed as part of Phase 1 of the previously-approved campus redevelopment project.

The 1100-1200 West Maude Avenue parcel is currently developed with four, one- and two-story office buildings.

Applicant/Owner: Victor Sanchez for LinkedIn Corporation Project Overview
Prior Entitlement
On November 27, 2018, the City Council approved a Planned Community Permit and Development Review Permit for LinkedIn’s office campus redevelopment project to demolish two existing office buildings and construct three, six-story office buildings; two, six-level parking structures; and retain three, two-story office buildings, resulting in 1.08 million gross square feet of office area on a 28.7-acre campus site. The project also included a Zoning Map Amendment to rezone the site from the ML (Limited Industrial) District to the P (Planned Community) District, a Development Agreement (DA) between the City and LinkedIn Corporation, a Heritage Tree Removal Permit to remove 138 Heritage trees, and a Vesting Preliminary Parcel Map to merge three lots into two. The project was approved to be completed in two phases (See Attachment 5 - City Council report dated November 27, 2018).

On December 11, 2018, the Council conducted the second reading of the ordinances approving the Zoning Map Amendment and DA (Ordinance Numbers 15.18 and 16.18, respectively). The terms of the DA included a $350,000 public benefit fee payable to the City to be used for improvements anywhere in the City, as directed by the Council. The originally approved term for the DA was seven years with an expiration date of January 10, 2026, with the possibility of a onetime, three-year extension (per Section 1.3 of the DA) if at least one of the new buildings has been completed along with payment of an additional $150,000 public benefit fee to the City. In accordance with Section 6.3 of the DA, the initial term was extended for 48 days due to the COVID-19 pandemic-related moratorium on construction imposed in 2020, resulting in an updated expiration date of February 27, 2026. Following completion of Phase 1 in December 2021, which included a 182,542 net new square foot office building, the applicant subsequently exercised the option to extend the expiration date to February 27, 2029 and paid the additional $150,000 public benefit fee to the City. See Attachment 4 – Original Development Agreement with Extension Letter for the original DA.
145
LinkedIn DA Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue
October 13, 2026

Page 3 of 10 ends

As part of the Phase 1 building permits, the applicant made payments for certain community benefits and impact fees, the amount of which exceeds the amount that was due on a pro rata basis for the Phase 1 portion of the overall project, given that approximately 30% of the entitled floor area was constructed with Phase 1. See Table 1 for a comparison of required contributions as part of the Phase 1 project, and remaining fee estimates due for Phase 2.

Table 1: Phase 1 Project Contributions
Required for the Project Paid with Phase 1 Due for Phase 2 DA Public Benefit Fee $350,000 $500,000 (includes
$150,000 for first
extension)
$1,600,000
proposed (within
60 days of
executing the
proposed DA
amendment)
Public Benefits (Capital
Improvement Project
Fund)
$11,000,000 $5,500,000 $5,500,000
Future East Whisman
Development Impact
Fees (EWPP was not
adopted at time of
project approval)1
$31.05 per net new
square foot. The DA
provided that if the
adopted EWPP Fees are
less than $31.05 per net
new square foot, the
owner will be entitled to
a credit against future
East Whisman fees.
$5,667,929.10 (paid
based on Phase 1’s
182,452 net new square
feet at a rate of $31.05
per net new square
foot)
The final fee will be
based on the Phase
2 net new area of
429,491 at the rate
at time of building
permit submittal.

The fee will be
adjusted based on
the credit of fees
overpaid during
Phase 1, prior to
the adoption of the
fee.

Housing Impact Fees $16,209,507 (in 2018
dollars)
$10 million revolving
loan for the purpose of
financing below market
rate housing within the
City.
$6,209,507 (in
2018 dollars.

Amount will
increase based on
rates in effect at
time of Phase 2
building permit
submittal)
1 The City Council adopted the East Whisman Development Impact Fee on May 24, 2022, resulting in $10.75 per net new square foot of office area. As of October 2026, the current fee amount is $12.57 per net new square foot. 146
LinkedIn DA Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue
October 13, 2026

Page 4 of 10 ends

Phase 2 of the project consists of demolishing an existing office building (along Maude Avenue) and associated surface parking and constructing two additional six-story office buildings along the SR-237 service road with 429,491 square feet of combined net new floor area, as well as a six-level parking structure along Maude Avenue. The applicant has assessed the need for additional time to adjust the development phasing for Phase 2, following the post-pandemic change in office operations and the uncertainty regarding the future configuration of LinkedIn’s workforce.

Section 6.7 of the DA provides that it may be amended in writing by mutual consent of the parties, subject to approval by the Council, and in accordance with the procedures of state law (Government Code Section 65868) and Section 36.54.40(a) (Amendment, modification, or termination) of the City Code.

Proposed Amendment
On June 22, 2023, the applicant submitted a formal application (PL-2023-120) requesting an amendment to the approved DA to allow for sufficient time to utilize the vested development rights for the remaining 429,491 square feet of net new floor area as part of the Phase 2 development (see Attachment 3 - Development Agreement Amendment Request). The proposed amendment will extend the DA expiration by five additional years to February 27, 2034. This would result in a total DA term of 15 years.

The applicant notes that the additional time requested to complete Phase 2 is due to delays related to the COVID-19 pandemic, supply chain shortages, labor issues, evolving market conditions, interest rate and operating expense increases, and other factors beyond the applicant’s control.

The applicant has offered to provide additional public benefits in the amount of $1,600,000 in exchange for a five-year term extension. The amendment request is limited only to the time extension and does not include any modificationsto the entitled project design and components.

See Attachment 1 – Draft Development Agreement Ordinance for the full terms of the proposed DA.

Prior Meetings and Hearings
Administrative Zoning Public Hearing – DA Amendment
The Zoning Administrator held a public hearing on June 24, 2026, to consider the DA amendment request and recommended approval to the City Council (see Attachment 2—Administrative Zoning Recommendation Hearing – June 24, 2026). No members of the public provided comments on the item.
147
LinkedIn DA Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue
October 13, 2026

Page 5 of 10 ends

ANALYSIS
General Plan
The project site has a General Plan land use designation of High-Intensity Office. The proposed DA amendment is consistent with the objectives, policies, land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan for the High-Intensity Office Land Use Designation and the East Whisman Precise Plan, which allow intensities up to 1.0 floor area ratio (FAR) for highly sustainable developments that provide innovative site, architectural, and landscape designs and transportation demand management (TDM) measures which support the City’s goals for reducing trips and improved bicycle and pedestrian circulation in area. The project complies with the following General Plan Policies:

LUD 3.1 (Land use and transportation). Focus higher land use intensities and densities within one-half mile of public transit service and along major commute corridors.

The proposed DA amendment will facilitate the completion of a higher-intensity office development within one-half mile of public transit service (Middlefield VTA Light Rail Station) and along major commute corridors (SR-237, East Middlefield Road, and Maude Avenue).

LUD 8.3 (Enhanced publicly-accessible bicycle and pedestrian connections). Encourage new and existing developments to enhance publicly accessible bicycle, pedestrian, and transit connections.

The proposed DA amendment will further build out the approved higher-intensity office development and associated improvements that incorporate enhanced, publicly-accessible bicycle and pedestrian connections as part of the project design and improvements, including a north-south bicycle track connecting Maude Avenue to East Middlefield Road.

LUD 10.5 (Building energy efficiency). Incorporate energy-efficient design features and materials into new and remodeled buildings.

The project provides LEED® Platinum-designed buildings which incorporate roof-mounted photovoltaic panels to generate energy for the sites, native plantings, planted terraces and roofs, and the use of recycled water inside the buildings and for the landscaping. 148
LinkedIn DA Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue
October 13, 2026

Page 6 of 10 ends

LUD 10.7 (Beneficial landscaping option). Promote landscaping options that conserve water, support the natural environment, and provide shade and food.

The project landscape design includes native plantings, planted terraces and roofs, and the use of recycled water inside the buildings and for the landscaping.

East Whisman Precise Plan
The project site is in the P(41) East Whisman Precise Plan zoning district and is within the precise plan’s Employment Area South, which allows office use. The campus redevelopment project was approved prior to the Council’s adoption of the precise plan in November 2019. The precise plan adoption also rezoned the project site from P to P(41) East Whisman Precise Plan. The project meets Employment Area South public path and open space targets by providing publiclyaccessible bicycle and pedestrian paths through the campus and publicly-accessible open space, including a large open space area along the Middlefield Road frontage. It also complies with design standards for streetscapes and frontages by incorporating a distinctive building and open space design at the prominent intersection of East Middlefield Road and the SR-237 service road.

The project is also consistent with the applicable development standards and guidelines outlined in Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code, including, but not limited to, water-efficient landscaping and parking standards.

Project Design
The applicant is not proposing any modifications to the entitled project design, which included retaining three existing office buildings and constructing three new six-story office buildings and two new six-level parking structures, resulting in an approximately 1.08 million gross square foot office campus (612,033 net new square feet). The project was approved to be constructed in two phases. See Attachment 5 - City Council Report dated November 27, 2018 for details of the entitled project design.

Phase 1 of the project was completed in December 2021, which consists of a six-story office building, a six-level parking structure, site and landscaping improvements, and offsite improvements. The applicant has also completed all public improvements with Phase 1, except for a publicly-accessible bicycle track parallel to the SR 237 service road, which will be completed with Phase 2.
149
LinkedIn DA Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue
October 13, 2026

Page 7 of 10 ends

DA Amendment
A DA is a voluntary contract, authorized by state law and entered into between a public agency and a project developer/owner, through which land use entitlements can be vested for the duration of the DA’s term to allow the project to be implemented over time (typically in recognition of substantial public benefits to be provided by the project). The applicant has proposed the DA amendment (Exhibit A of Attachment 1 – Draft Development Agreement Amendment Ordinance) in order to complete the remaining Phase 2 of the project with sufficient certainty and predictability, as they note their commitment in making significant investments to complete an employment center that will enhance the image and identity of the City while satisfying remaining public improvements and fee payments.

The proposed amendment would extend the DA’s expiration date by five years to February 27, 2034. The proposed amendment also includes clarifying provisions about how the applicant may vest development rights under the DA. Specifically, the DA amendment states that if Phase 2 building permits are issued before the new expiration date, construction has commenced, and the building permits are kept active thereafter, the vested rights under the DA will continue past the expiration date of the DA. However, the vesting of rights shall not in any circumstance extend beyond ten years from the issuance date of the first Phase 2 building permit used for the purposes of vesting. This limitation is included to provide certainty to the parties, and to ensure the construction process does not continue indefinitely.

Public Benefit Fee
As a condition of the additional time extension, the proposed DA amendment requires the applicant to pay an additional $1.6 million public benefit fee to the City within 60 days of DA amendment execution. The $1.6 million public benefit fee payment equates to $320,000 for each year of the extension. The extension provides LinkedIn the flexibility to plan for its future growth while remaining headquartered in Mountain View. The extension of the term will also allow for the remaining impact fee payments to be paid with Phase 2 building permits.

The public benefit fee will be deposited in the City’s General Operating Fund upon receipt and may be used for any lawful public purpose that creates a public benefit. The Council may determine the intended use of the public benefit fee now or at a later date. Potential uses considered by Council could include the acquisition or improvement of park land, or a contribution to the Mountain View Affordable Housing Fund to advance affordable housing opportunities on a citywide basis.

Based on currently identified park land acquisition opportunitiesin the vicinity of the project site, and the ongoing need to identify funding in support of affordable housing development, staff 150
LinkedIn DA Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue
October 13, 2026

Page 8 of 10 ends

recommends an allocation of $1.1 million for park land acquisition and $500,000 to the Mountain View Affordable Housing Fund. The project site is located within the Whisman Planning Area, which according to the Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan, has 1.73 acres of park land per 1,000 residents (plus an additional 1.41 acres of trails per 1,000 residents). Allocating $1.1 million to support park land acquisition would allow the City to combine these and other funds to pursue one of the property acquisition opportunities the City has identified in the area. The public benefit fee is also an opportunity to strengthen the City’s support for the Mountain View Affordable Housing Fund, established earlier this year with an initial City contribution of $1 million and a $500,000 contribution from a corporate partner, Intuit. Allocating $500,000 from the development agreement to the Fund will allow staff to leverage additional corporate partner donations.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
In addition to approving the campus redevelopment project on November 27, 2018, the City Council also certified a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 2017092025), which analyzed the potential environmental consequences of the project.

The previous EIR for the campus redevelopment project concluded that all significant environmental impacts would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with the incorporation of mitigation measures and standard City conditions of approval, except for five significant and unavoidable intersection impacts, for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program (MMRP) was adopted.

The proposed amendment to the DA does not alter the environmental conditions assessed in the certified EIR and would not result in any new environmental impacts beyond those previously evaluated and mitigated with the MMRP. Furthermore, the proposed amendment to the DA does not result in any changes to the Project and does not require any revisions to the EIR due to the identification of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. There has been no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete. None of the circumstances in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163 are present; therefore, no further environmental review is required.

FISCAL IMPACT
The project site has a current total assessed value of approximately $285 million. The City’s existing share of property tax is approximately $457,000 per year. If the site is developed as proposed, the City would receive approximately $1.5 million per year in additional property tax revenue, for a total of approximately $1.95 million per year. 151
LinkedIn DA Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue
October 13, 2026

Page 9 of 10 ends

As part of the DA, the applicant will also provide an additional public benefit contribution of $1.6 million to the City.

SUBJECT TO THE LEVINE ACT
☒ Land development entitlements
☒ Contract or franchise agreement

CONCLUSION
The Zoning Administrator recommended that the City Council approve the amendment to the DA, as the project will provide an additional $1.6 million public benefit fee pursuant to the proposed amendment terms. The applicant has indicated that an additional five-year DA term is essential for the development of Phase 2 of the project given the current office real estate environment. The proposed DA amendment is consistent with the General Plan, the EWPP, Chapter 36 of the City Code, and other adopted City regulations, and would help support completion of the approved campus redevelopment project, while retaining a major employer headquartered in Mountain View. Additionally, the DA amendment complies with CEQA and would not result in any new or substantially more severe significant environmental impacts than identified in the previously certified campus redevelopment project EIR.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Approve the DA amendment with revisions.

2. Refer the DA amendment back to the Zoning Administrator for additional consideration.

3. Deny the DA amendment.
152
LinkedIn DA Amendment at 700-810 East Middlefield Road and 1100-1200 Maude Avenue
October 13, 2026

Page 10 of 10 ends

Mountain View City CouncilOctober 13, 2026

Mountain View City Council
October 13, 2026