|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Mountain View’s latest development to win approval is a new three-story building with 25 apartments and commercial space, replacing a single-story strip mall in the Castro neighborhood.
The approval, granted unanimously by the City Council Tuesday, enables the demolition of two commercial buildings and a single-family home across roughly a half-acre at 601-649 Escuela Ave. and 1873 Latham St., near the corner of Escuela Avenue and Latham Street. It will be replaced with a three-story building including 25 apartments, ground-floor commercial space and ground-level and underground parking.
The new development approved at 183 Latham St. will provide 25 new apartments and commercial space near Castro Park. Map courtesy Google.
Of the proposed units, four will be deed-restricted for eligible households to rent at below market rates. Below the housing, the ground floor will be occupied by 2,400 square feet of commercial space and surface parking. The building would also have a second-floor courtyard and a roof deck with a covered barbecue area.
The developer is obligated to pay $1.3 million into the city’s park land dedication fund in lieu of providing additional open space.
As part of the redevelopment project, developer Guggenheim Realty Group Inc. plans to widen the sidewalks to make them more pedestrian-friendly. The main entrance for the building will be on Latham Street — rather than Escuela Avenue — because there is more vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian traffic on Escuela Avenue, according to Public Works Director Dawn Cameron.
Bruce England, representing the Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning, a volunteer advocacy group, said that the coalition supports the project and wants to see high-quality sidewalks added to benefit the kids, parents and young bike-riders he sees in the area.
To accommodate the required number of parking spaces, the developer plans to use “stackers,” or mechanical systems that store parked vehicles on platforms that can be raised, lowered and moved around to fit more cars into a smaller space. The development would also have short- and long-term bike parking, according to a staff report.
However, even with the use of stackers, there would not be room on the ground floor to expand the commercial square-footage, according to architect Kurt Anderson. “I don’t have a lot of land to work with,” he said.
Of the tenants in the existing buildings, those who had been living in single family home slated to be demolished already vacated the unit in January 2021. They may be eligible for relocation benefits and a first right of refusal to occupy a comparable rental unit. The city is working on reaching out to them, according to the staff report.
Meanwhile, the tenants at the commercial buildings have had a difficult time during the pandemic, and the owner doesn’t yet know whether the businesses will come back when the new building is complete, Anderson said. Three of the nine commercial tenant spaces are already vacant, while the other six include businesses such as a tax services office, party supply store and a gift shop, according to Ellen Yau, senior planner.
Since the redevelopment will cut commercial space from roughly 6,000 square feet to 2,400 square feet, it’s likely that not all of the six existing businesses on-site would be able to come back, according to Anderson.
“What are we doing to help them if they want to return?” Councilmember Lisa Matichak asked.
“I know they (the businesses) have had an incredibly difficult time through COVID,” Anderson said. “I don’t have an answer.”
Driver faces murder charge for Mountain View woman's death in alleged DUI crashApril 16, 2026 12:00 pm
From what I can see, the developer did everything right with this project, it’s nice to see. It looks like it will be a good addition to the area.
Does MV really support a “diverse and caring community” like they say they do? This week they made their answer clear when they put up signs displacing RV residents while simultaneously approving a Castro Park building project that does little to expand affordable housing. The new building proposal approved in Castro park will designate only 4 of 25 rental units to be deed-restricted for below market rate. 4/25 affordable units are simply not enough when the SF Chronicle recently found there is 1 home available per 1,206 residents who make between $100,000 and $125,000 annually. According to the Bay Area’s Regional Housing Determination Needs Report from 2020, the total housing need is more than 114,000 units for the over 25% of Bay Area residents who qualify as “very low income.” At least a quarter of the new units should be deed-restricted for below market rate.
@Abby, great comment. People who care about affordable housing for low-income and average wage-earners (i.e, households who earn less than $150K according to 2019 Census Data) need to pay attention to the number of BMR units created in every housing project.
“The new building proposal approved in Castro park will designate only 4 of 25 rental units to be deed-restricted for below market rate.”
4/25 = 16%
FYI: “The Housing and Neighborhoods Division administers housing programs for extremely low to moderate income renters and homebuyers … The City, along with other investors, provides funding to subsidize the rents in the affordable apartment developments. There are currently 1,197 subsidized apartments in Mountain View … BMR rental and ownership units are incorporated into some new market rate developments, where between 15-25% of the units may be affordable. ” – https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/comdev/preservation/homebuying/default.asp
So the existing “requirement” in MV is that between 15-25% units are affordable. But it is more like a “goal”. 16% meets these arguably insufficient standards.
Data shows developers wildly prefer building market-rate housing over housing for the poorest and/or average residents. Over the last RHNA cycle, 2015-2023, permit issue statistics show that 7,082 out of 8,078 permits were targeted for those earning >120% of Area Median Income (about $175K, according to 2019 census data). https://mv-voice.com/news/2021/08/16/mountain-view-seeks-to-update-housing-plans-following-new-requirement-to-allow-11k-new-homes
7,082/8,078 = 88%, which means that over the past eight year cycle, a whopping 12% of permits were for more “affordable” units. Not even 15%!
No legislation has been passed to change this situation going forward, despite all of the hullabaloo re “affordable housing” bills like SB9/SB10. The public is being conned.
Kudos to you, Abby, for paying attention to the number of BMR units created in this new housing project.
There is no such thing as affordable housing. It’s called subsidized housing. That’s like saying there’s affordable money. We should build an affordable grocery store and an affordable auto mall next haha