|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
A developer in Mountain View is planning to build hundreds of homes in the East Whisman neighborhood that will include 150 affordable apartments, with half of them slated for families – a prospect that normally would give the city a lot to cheer about.
But in this case, the developer is proposing to put all the affordable units in one building that has far less parking or access to amenities, like pools and fitness centers, than the market-rate units it is planning to build on the same site.
The developer, Prometheus Real Estate Group, has submitted plans for a mixed-use development on a 10.6-acre site, located at 675 and 685 E. Middlefield Road. Currently, the property has two office buildings and a surface parking lot on it.
In its place, Prometheus is proposing to build 836 residential units across three buildings, seven to eight stories in height. The project includes a six-story office building, an 8.5 level office garage and a publicly accessible park about a half-acre in size.
The Environmental Planning Commission unanimously supported the project at their meeting on Wednesday evening, although not without some reservations about the developer’s intentions to bar lower-income tenants from accessing the market-rate amenities.
“It really creates just an awkward environment, and I think it’s fundamentally a little bit unfair,” said Commissioner Chris Clark, a sentiment shared by the other commissioners at the Nov. 20 meeting.
Mountain View requires that market-rate developers designate at least 15% of their units as inclusionary, affordable housing. If a developer opts to build affordable units off-site, the requirement is 20%, according to a report presented to the planning commission.
Prometheus aims to meet this obligation by building 150 affordable units, approximately 18% of its total housing commitment. It is proposing to give the city $12 million in supplemental funding to offset the below-market rate (BMR) units that are not getting built.
The $12 million could be used to advance other affordable housing projects in the city’s pipeline, according to Mountain View Housing Director Wayne Chen. But it also could be funneled back to Prometheus to support its standalone BMR building.
The scenario concerned some commissioners, who noted that the funding then would be subsidizing the developer that gave it. Their preference was to have 15% inclusionary units distributed throughout the market-rate project with full access to amenities.
“I would say let’s just go for the inclusionary 15%, to be quite honest. Equal access to pools, equal denial to pools,” said Commissioner Alex Nunez, who was in favor of spreading out the affordable units evenly across all three residential buildings.
Another concern was the timing of the $12 million payout, which is expected to occur before the start of construction for the BMR building. The commissioners strongly recommended that the city implement escalator fees to counter inflation, in case the project is delayed.
The commissioners also encouraged Prometheus to reconsider the use of its 8.5 level parking garage that has been designated for office workers. The structure has 638 stalls, and is located across from the BMR building.
Commissioner Joyce Yin pressed Prometheus to make it more accessible to lower-income tenants, as the BMR building only has 33 available spaces, whereas the two market-rate buildings have underground parking with a combined total of 687 spaces.
Prometheus representatives indicated a willingness to allow for shared parking spaces with the office garage, particularly in the evenings. But they did not address some of the other equity issues raised by the commissioners.
The public also weighed in with comments, urging the city to stick to inclusionary housing policies.
“It’s very important that we have non-exclusionary housing,” said Mountain View resident Bill Lambert, who also serves as a trustee for the Mountain View Whisman School District. “This is how we are going to make healthy communities. This is how we’re going to help address poverty, which is an underlying issue in our community.”
Commenters also raised concerns about the removal of heritage trees. Prometheus is taking out nearly all of the 241 trees on the site, including 40 heritage trees. In its place, it is planting 346 new trees that will nearly double the tree canopy in 20 years, according to the staff report.
Residents encouraged the city and developers to do more to incorporate existing heritage trees into their plans rather than axe them.
Ultimately, the commissioners supported the mixed-use development, recommending that the City Council work with Prometheus to craft a plan that would allow lower-income tenants to use amenities across the residential buildings.
“This is not an economic argument. It’s not an architectural argument. It’s really a very basic civilian argument, which is, I would never want the kids that grow up in that (BMR) building to feel lesser,” said Commissioner Hank Dempsey. “That’s why we have inclusionary housing, right?”
This is silly nonsense. Lots of poor people live next to neighbors that have pools.
The market rate residents are subsidizing the poor people, let them have their pool. Why do they need to subsidize the Poor’s amenities too? What’s next? Equal access to the gym? To the fire pit? To the valet parking? Where does it end? Why does everyone feel like they should get first class for the price of economy? You get what you pay for, like anything else.
This is proof that there is a huge gap between YIMBY messaging (“abundant, affordable housing and inclusive, sustainable communities”) and what’s actually happening.
Let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The really big issue is that we have the BMR units.
San Jose just approved a development with a datacenter (to heat the whole complex) ~700 market rate units in a high rise, an office tower and ~ 200 BMR units in a separate building (I’m sure these numbers are wrong but you can look it up in the Merc). Whatever it is, it’s way better than being on the waiting list.
Hey, did you hear about the new housing development where “the developer is proposing to put all the affordable units in one building that has far less parking or access to amenities, like pools and fitness centers, than the market-rate units it is planning to build on the same site.”
Apparently the developer wants to bar lower-income tenants from accessing the pools. Can you even imagine? Gotta keep the riff-raff out of the pool in order to make the market rate units as attractive as possible.
This kindof reminds me of prohibitions back in the day against the use of drinking fountains by some people. The excuse back then was germs. What’s the excuse now?
By all means, let’s build Mountain View in a way to make it clear who are the First-Class citizens, and who are Second-Class. Hint: the first class citizens work at Google. Everyone else: stay out of the pools.