Town Square

Post a New Topic

Plans to densify Mountain View apartment complex wins council support

Original post made on Feb 24, 2021

A majority of Mountain View City Council members supported plans to significantly boost the size of a large apartment complex along Middlefield Road, planting four-story buildings in a complex that's been around since the 1960s.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, February 24, 2021, 1:01 PM

Comments (7)

Posted by bkengland
a resident of Whisman Station
on Feb 24, 2021 at 2:25 pm

bkengland is a registered user.

There was significant support for this project voiced by members of the public who spoke and submitted letters. This should be covered in the article. On the trail connection piece, there was an ask for Staff to come back at a future meeting to discuss what might be done through the Capital Improvement Program. Councilmember Showalter didn't say a new connection wouldn't work, but only that it would be a challenge. A new connection is just one option: Improving on existing access is also in discussion.


Posted by Shane
a resident of Willowgate
on Feb 24, 2021 at 2:50 pm

Shane is a registered user.

I am a long-time homeowner living next to the proposed project. I also represent the Cypress Point Community Preservation Group (CPCPG). CPCPG has 69 members who are mostly homeowners and would be directly impacted by the high-density housing development. CPCPG has argued the reasons and rationale why they are opposed to this ill-conceived project and support a scaled-down project that would fit into our beautiful medium-density neighborhood. The proposed project would more than double the current number of tenants and add hundreds of cars to a narrow, dead-end, cul-de-sac. Problems with traffic safety would be a nightmare. There are already 15 proposed, under construction, and completed high-density housing developments in our area. This one is by far the black sheep of the litter. It is unwanted, unneeded, and 5-years of continuous construction and disruption of our daily lives is totally unacceptable. The lack of concern by some members of City Council was absolutely astounding to me. There was more concern about the apartment renters than the property tax-paying homeowners. CPCPG will continue to fight against this project because we have no choice. We will have to live with this mistake permanently.


Posted by Mom and pop landlord
a resident of Waverly Park
on Feb 24, 2021 at 4:03 pm

Mom and pop landlord is a registered user.

This story is illustrative of the challenge we face in providing affordable housing. Five year approval process and millions in concessions adds a lot of cost and additional and expense to new units. All of that planning cost and concession cost needs to be recouped in… Higher rents. All the while supply is lower, driving surrounding rents up. This is the death spiral we live in.


Posted by Terrie Rayl
a resident of Willowgate
on Feb 24, 2021 at 4:15 pm

Terrie Rayl is a registered user.

I wanted to make a correction to this article. Actually Sally Lieber voted to continue to look at keeping the project as part of the P Zoning in the General Plan and ensuring that the project stayed as proposed and not able to increase to 80 units per acre since this was a Gatekeeper Project and did not come through the normal Zoning project channel. So there were four votes on this item and it did win a majority.


Posted by Local
a resident of Martens-Carmelita
on Feb 24, 2021 at 4:18 pm

Local is a registered user.

I wonder if anyone considered the impact to schools in this area? Will there be enough classroom space? What impact will this amount of housing have on our water supply? I agree that the area will have to deal with greatly increased traffic on a narrow street entrance, and the noise of a "five year building process" is a lot to ask of the neighborhood.
Yes, low income housing is needed, but does Mountain View have to carry the load for Los Altos, Menlo Park, etc, forever? I was always told that those making the decisions on a project, should vote as though it was being built next to THEIR home. I wonder if this is being done?


Posted by Hala
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Feb 24, 2021 at 5:58 pm

Hala is a registered user.

Re-zoning this dead end substandard street Cypress Point Dr (36 ft wide) from medium density to high, where the residents number might increase from 750 to potentially 1600 people with vehicles, not to mention the impact of the Adult Education Center parking issues at the corner of this street, represents a great burden on the existing community and their well being. In addition, the removal of the 62 heritage trees, many of them currently act as a barrier to HYW 85 pollution and noise, cannot be mitigated for many many years by young trees that won’t even be planted until the end of this project which is estimated to take five years. Where is the environmental justice in this argument?
A General Precise Plan, which this project lacks, that requires a much more thorough evaluation of community and environmental impacts is essential to having a balanced and responsible development for this neighborhood.


Posted by marknn
a resident of North Whisman
on Feb 24, 2021 at 11:43 pm

marknn is a registered user.

I live in the neighborhood, on Middlefield rd and this is a great development - the developer really addressed concerns of Cyprus Point residents by _reducing_ number of cars that can exit into cyprus point road even compared to today: most of the new cars will go straight into Middlefield - please check the plans before concern trolling.... To those concerned homeowners who live on Cyprus point I envy you - parking lot on the the side of cyprus road is getting replaced with green space and public park, with some nice looking townhouses *and* reduced number of cars that will be able able to exit on your road and you are still complaining? Speaking of entitlement....

Yes, schools/water/utilities have been studied, ad nasseum, nothing is ever getting built without those being signed off.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

In order to encourage respectful and thoughtful discussion, commenting on stories is available to those who are registered users. If you are already a registered user and the commenting form is not below, you need to log in. If you are not registered, you can do so here.

Please make sure your comments are truthful, on-topic and do not disrespect another poster. Don't be snarky or belittling. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

See our announcement about requiring registration for commenting.


Get the most important local news stories sent straight to your inbox daily.

A fond farewell from the Peninsula Foodist
By paloaltoonline.com | 13 comments | 3,989 views

Palo Alto Utilities breeds mistrust with lack of transparency around outages
By Sherry Listgarten | 28 comments | 3,191 views

Palo Alto has an escalating transparency problem -- the police have shut their doors
By Diana Diamond | 6 comments | 1,519 views

Porn
By Chandrama Anderson | 2 comments | 997 views

My letter to council on PHZ zoning
By Steve Levy | 1 comment | 95 views