|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
After years of back-and-forth deliberations, Mountain View is taking another stab at a zoning framework that has the potential to significantly alter the density and character of its residential neighborhoods.
The area under consideration – known as the R3 zoning district – covers a broad swath of the city, with dense clusters and scattered pockets of housing that make up about half of the city’s multifamily residences.
For years, Mountain View has grappled with the issue of how to incentivize new developments in the R3 zone that would create more housing diversity and growth, while also protecting rent-controlled apartments, most of which fall within this zoning designation.
The Environmental Planning Commission recommended that the city take steps towards these goals, but stopped short of endorsing a proposal to increase density in the R3 district, at least in the short term.
The commissioners split on the proposal in a 2-4-1 vote at a study session Wednesday evening, recommending against increasing density as an explicit goal of the R3 updates.
Bill Cranston, Hank Dempsey, Paul Donahue and Joyce Yin largely aligned on their reasons for not supporting the goal at this time, citing a preference to approach the issue from a holistic perspective that would take into account the nuances of how this kind of development would play out on the ground.
“I am all for a city growing (but) it doesn’t have to be here and right now. It does take time, and I think it takes thoughtfulness. A precise plan is the most thoughtful way of doing so that may ensure as much of the benefits that we can get out of density,” Yin said.
Dempsey expressed concerns about the potential cost of adding more housing without fully considering its impact on neighborhoods. “I’m actually totally open to it. I just would like to see it a little bit more grounded about exactly what it is we’d be getting,” he said, expressing ambivalence to the idea.
But Commissioners Alex Nunez and Chris Clark were not in favor of a wait-and-see approach, a stance that several public commentators expressed as well.
“I think there are key areas within R3 where it makes sense to study increased densities to allow a greater mix of housing types and uses. And as folks have pointed out before, we don’t have any more land. The only way to go is up,” Clark said, adding that the additions did not have to be “super high” and that it was important for the buildings to transition sensitively with the neighborhood.
A key consideration during the deliberations was the city’s proposed “sub-districts” that divide the R3 zone into four categories. The city presented zoning updates to the community in 2022, which it now has largely discarded in favor of a framework that it originally proposed in 2020.
In the updated version, the city has created a housing typology that has buildings of different scale – some the size of a regular house while others take up an entire block – corresponding to residential areas of low, medium and high density.
At the low end, dwellings are two and a half stories in height, with the staff report providing examples of duplexes, fourplexes and townhouses. At the high end, buildings can go up to six stories in height as mid-rises.
Parting ways from the 2020 version, city officials are proposing splitting one of the subdistricts (R3-D) into two categories, (R3-D1 and R3-D2), the latter creating an opportunity for more density, said Advanced Planning Manager Eric Anderson.
Nunez said he saw the advantage of potentially extracting more concessions from developers in exchange for denser housing, but also noted that he wanted to be sensitive to residents’ concerns.
The other commissioners asked how the D2 subdistrict, which had the highest proposed density, differed from the city’s existing “R4” zoning designation.
“Well, we haven’t gotten there yet. They’d be about the same density,” Anderson said, adding that it was entirely possible the City Council could get rid of the R4 designation or keep it as a “floating zone” for unspecified developments.
The commissioners largely favored merging the D2 sub-district into R4 zoning instead. “I too like the idea of consolidation. If it looks and smells like an R4, maybe it ought to be an R4,” Dempsey said.
With the timeline for the proposed R3 updates, the commissioners strongly supported adopting a phased approach that would meet state compliance deadlines.
The commission’s recommendations will be forwarded to the City Council, which tentatively plans to discuss the R3 zone updates in a study session at its April 9 meeting.
EPC made the right prudent calls to wait and see
R3 has very few opportunities for growth today. The city will be very disappointed, when the 7th RHNA cycle rolls around, that they didn’t create more opportunities now. Planning for the 7th cycle will have to start by 2029, which is sooner than you think. There will be no appetite then to reopen this can of worms.