Town Square

Council moves ahead with new housing fees

Original post made on Jun 8, 2012

The City Council acted quickly on Tuesday so as not to miss out on as much as $24 million in funds from apartment projects in the city planning pipeline.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, June 8, 2012, 1:46 PM


Like this comment
Posted by Rodger
a resident of Sylvan Park
on Jun 8, 2012 at 7:00 pm

The last think we need in Mountain View is more apartments, how can we get the city council to stop letting the builders load us up with more apartments.

Like this comment
Posted by George
a resident of Rex Manor
on Jun 8, 2012 at 8:13 pm

Onward and Downward.... Hey, Council... let's either stop more developments or stick it to the developers...

Egads,,, we really need more houseing for "the poor folks"... Damn, if they can't afford to live here, let them move to Tracy, Turlock or help raise Alviso..

I don't even know if we should allow any more apts or condos.. Why should we concern ourselves with more police, fire, city services, etc.... This is really stupid..

Remember, there will be an election... Other than Means and Inks, toss them all out..

Bye George

Like this comment
Posted by Merlin
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Jun 9, 2012 at 10:35 am

We do not need more units. We need a strong police force and fire department. Think quality of life on a long term basis. I would like to live in Los Altos Hills, Atherton or Hillboro but I can't afford it but I can afford to live in Mountain View. I love living in Mountain View. So folks who can't live here should live where they can just like we all do. Ido not believeit is Mountain View's charter that we should be the poster child for Chapter 8 housing.

Please do not lower the quality of life in Mountain View.

Like this comment
Posted by Sounds Racist to me
a resident of North Whisman
on Jun 9, 2012 at 11:32 pm

I cannot believe the stupid comments made above regarding income, affordability, and location. MVPD is strong. MVFD is a great force. MV is doing WAYYYY better than Palo Alto. Let us hope the two numb-skulls above keep their jobs and can continue to live in MV OR they can take their closed-minded selves to a more affordable area to meet their needs. MV is a growing community. Council should be concerned with traffic congestion and gridlock (no thanks to Palo Alto) because people from other areas will not FIGHT TRAFFIC to come shop in MV. It's a delicate balance that Council should seriously keep in sight if they want to generate tax revenue.

P.S. it's just not people of color who are hurting and cannot afford to live in MV, it is also senior citizens on fixed incomes, AND baby boomers who have lost their jobs and still have a family to feed and kids in college.

Like this comment
Posted by Otto Maddox
a resident of Monta Loma
on Jun 11, 2012 at 3:06 pm

Again, property rights. Or the lack thereof.

What do we think these very limit number of low income housing units are accomplishing? In a city of 80,000 or so people.

Nothing is the right answer.

I've known people who get these "below market" rate units. They just sit in them forever.

Like this comment
Posted by Garrett
a resident of another community
on Jun 11, 2012 at 7:22 pm

Lets see here, City Center Apartments had a unit for rent at 2,800 dollars a month, that would be 33,600 a year. For the 1/3 rule, if you don't know what that means. It means that 1/3 of your monthly income should cover your rent or house payment, now if your yearly is 33,600 in rent your income should be over 100,000 dollars a year. Now remember folks, you got food, car, insurance, gas, power, cable, savings, clothing, taxes, health costs other then car insurance, and other costs I might be forgetting. Now remember this is also based on a single person. I make 32,000 dollars a year