►
From YouTube: October 19, 2022 Regular Meeting of the Mountain View Environmental Planning Commission
Description
Live Teleconference of the Regular Meeting of the Mountain View Environmental Planning Commission scheduled for Wednesday, October 19, 2022
A
During
this
declared
State
of
Emergency,
the
meeting
will
be
conducted
in
accordance
with
California
government
code,
54953e
AS
authorized
by
the
resolution
of
the
city
council.
Please
contact
the
clerk
at
city.clerk
mountainview.gov
to
obtain
a
copy
of
the
applicable
resolution.
A
Our
members
of
EPC
are
participating
in
this
meeting
via
video
conference
with
no
physical
meeting
location
members
of
public
wishing
to
observe
the
meeting.
Live
May
do
so
at
mountainview.legistar.com
on
YouTube,
at
mountainview.gov
YouTube
and
on
Comcast
at
Channel
26..
As
noted,
the
meeting
agenda
members
of
the
public
May
provide
oral
comment
during
the
public
comment,
sections
of
a
particular
item
by
joining
the
zoom
webinar
at
the
webinar
ID
of.
A
C
C
A
A
The
the
first,
the
next
item
in
the
agenda
is
oral
Communications.
This
person
at
a
meeting
is
reserved
for
persons
wishing
to
address
the
EPC
on
matters
that
are
not
on
the
agenda.
Papers
will
be
allowed
to
speak
on
any
topic
for
up
to
three
minutes
during
the
section.
State
law
prohibits
the
commission
from
acting
on
any
non-agenda
item,
but
any
member
of
the
public
on
the
line
like
to
provide
comment
on
a
non-agenda
item.
A
A
Figure
out,
why
Zoom,
why
I
can't
find
my
screens
on
Zoom
here
in
a
minute,
so
the
main
item
on
our
genocide
is
a
public
hearing
for
the
Middlefield
Park
master
plan
to
our
web.
Do
any
Commissioners
wish
to
have
any
make
any
disclosures
regarding
contact
with
the
applicant
or
visit
to
the
site?
Commissioner,
am
I.
A
Okay,
commissioner
Dempsey.
I
I,
this
is
the
site.
I
met
with
the
applicant
version.
A
J
A
And
I
had
a
meeting
with
the
applicant
and
I
visited
the
site
as
well,
but
we
will
begin
with
a
presentation
by
Lindsay
Higgins
assistant,
community
development,
director,
Lindsay
Sarah.
D
All
right
good
evening,
chair
Cranston
and
vice
chair,
yin
and
Commissioners
I'm
here
tonight
to
present
to
you
the
Middlefield
Park
master
plan.
I,
do
want
to
note
that
I
will
be
discussing
various
sort
of
major
components
of
this
project
and
key
highlights.
But
I
will
not
be
talking
about
every
single
component
of
this
project
in
this
presentation
but
of
course,
I'm
happy
to
talk
through
anything
further
tonight
with
the
EPC
in
September
2020.
The
applicant's
Google
in
partnership
with
lendlies,
submitted
an
application
for
this
Middlefield
Park
master
plan
to
the
city.
D
The
master
plan
is
located
in
the
East
wisdom,
precise
plan,
it's
approximately
40
acres
in
size
across
14,
existing
Parcels,
located
on
the
Eastern
edge
of
the
city.
The
map
on
your
screen
here
shows
the
boundaries
in
yellow
of
the
master
plan
and
it's
generally
bounded
by
Ellis
Street
on
the
West
Side
Middlefield
Road
and
mod
Avenue
on
the
south,
the
city
limit
boundary
on
the
East
and
the
City
and
County
of
San
Francisco
sfpuc
property
to
the
north.
D
D
And
lastly,
the
site
is
in
close
proximity
to
the
Moffitt
Airfield,
so
there
are
height
and
land
use
restrictions
for
which
this
master
plan
plan
is
consistent.
With
those
this
Project's
gone
through
a
series
of
community
meetings.
There
are
public
meetings
with
EPC
and
Council
study
sessions.
Early
last
year,
there's
been
multiple
meetings
with
the
development
Review
Committee
on
some
of
the
design
aspects
of
the
master
plan,
as
well
as
a
series
of
community
meetings
to
gather
input.
D
In
terms
of
the
master
plan
itself,
the
applicant
is
proposing
a
sort
of
a
maximum
development
program
that
includes
up
to
1900
high
density
residential
units,
which
are
shown
here
in
Orange
in
seven
locations,
labeled
r,
on
the
graphic
on
your
screen,
they're,
proposing
2.4
acres
of
land,
dedication
for
affordable
housing
to
the
city,
approximately
1.3
million
square
feet
of
office
and
r
d
is
proposed,
shown
in
blue
in
five
locations.
D
Labeled
o
on
your
screen
about
50
000
square
feet
of
ground
floor
commercial
that
is
labeled,
active
use
and
shown
in
red
on
your
screen
in
five
of
the
residential
locations.
Ellis
Park,
as
well
as
the
P2
parking
structure
and
approximately
10
acres
of
parks
and
open
space,
are
proposed
with
just
under
seven
acres
of
land
proposed
to
be
dedicated
to
the
city
for
public
parks.
These
are
labeled
Gateway
Park
on
the
South
Side.
A
bridge
opens
base.
D
And
Bob
Park
in
the
center,
in
addition
to
those
three
public
parks,
the
applicant
is
also
proposing
a
2.8
are
privately
owned,
publicly
accessible,
called
copas
open
space,
labeled,
Ellis
Park
shown
adjacent
to
the
VTA
tracks.
D
In
addition
to
these,
there
are
also
two
District
parking
structures:
labeled
with
a
p
and
shown
in
Gray
on
the
screen,
which
are
really
proposed
to
serve
the
majority
of
parking
for
the
office
buildings
and
otherwise
each
office
location
is
proposed
to
have
some
parking
on
site
and
every
residential
and
mixed
use
building
is
proposed
to
have
parking
on
site.
D
In
addition
to
these
areas,
languages
there
are
six
private
service
streets
proposed
to
be
constructed
to
provide
access
from
the
public
streets
to
the
associated
buildings,
in
addition
to
pedestrian
and
bicycle
connections
and
Pathways
throughout
the
project
area.
Finally,
the
applicants
proposing
an
optional
design
feature
to
incorporate
a
private
District
utility
system
that
could
include
a
sexual
utility
plant
in
the
01
location,
which
could
serve
the
entire
master
plan
area
with
water,
Wastewater
recycled
water,
thermal
energy
and
electricity.
D
This
optional
feature
is
that
the
applicant's
discretion
to
pursue
the
master
plans
located
in
the
East
was
in
mixed
use
and
high
intensity
office.
Land
use
designation
of
the
general
plan
shown
here
on
the
left.
The
master
plan
is
consistent
with
these
Landings
designations
and
the
equipment
change
area
of
the
general
plan
within
the
ethos
and
precise
plan
shown
on
the
right
hand
side
here,
the
master
plan
spans
three
different
characters
sub-areas
the
high
intensity,
character
area,
the
mixed
use,
I'm,
sorry,
medium
intensity,
character
area
and
the
low
intensity
employment
character
area.
D
D
D
So
I'm
looking
at
the
phasing
of
this
project
in
a
little
bit
more
detail
phase
one
includes
the
market
rate
residential
units
at
R1
and
R2
constructing
a
portion
of
the
Ellis
Popa,
open
space
adjacent
to
those
two
locations,
dedicating
the
2.4
acres
of
land
for
affordable
housing
at
r4a
and
R6,
dedicating
the
land
for
a
half
acre,
Gateway
Gateway,
also
implementing
and
constructing
modifications
to
the
VTA
bus
duckout.
D
That
is
along
Middlefield
Road
today
to
accommodate
a
new
MID
block
crossing
a
across
Middlefield
Road,
as
well
as
other
sidewalk
and
roadway
improvements
on
Middlefield
Road
phase.
Two
is
locations
at
01
and
O2
to
dedicate
the
1.3
acre
Bridge
open
space
area,
which
is
comprised
of
two
different
Parcels
on
either
side
of
the
VTA
tracks.
The
intended
purpose
of
this
land
is
to
accommodate
a
future
city
design
and
constructed
head
bike
Bridge,
which
is
identified
in
the
East
wisman
precise
plan
Additionally.
D
The
applicant
would
be
responsible
to
install
new
traffic
signals
on
Ellis
to
accommodate
a
new
private
service
Street
between
01
and
R2,
as
well
as
new
mid-block
Crossings
on
Ellis
and
lastly,
new
sidewalk
and
bike
lane
improvements
along
Ellis
Street
as
well
for
phase
three.
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
construct
the
market
rate
residential
units
at
R3,
r4b
and
R5,
as
well
as
dedicate
over
five
acres
of
land
for
mod
Park.
D
Instructs
new
mid-block,
Crossings
or
sorry.
A
new
MID
block
Crossing
on
Logue
Avenue,
connecting
the
Bridge
open
space
to
mod
Park.
D
Additionally,
today,
there's
a
cul-de-sac
on
Logue
Avenue
that
cul-de-sac
needs
to
be
reconstructed
and
shifted
all
the
way
to
the
northernmost
part
of
the
project
site,
and
so
that
reconstruction
would
be
part
of
this
space.
Additionally,
new
sidewalks
and
bike
lane
improvements
on
mod
and
log
Avenue.
One
thing
I
do
want
to
point
out
is
that
the
precise
plan
envisions
removing
street
parking
along
one
side
of
the
street
for
Logue
Avenue,
mod
Avenue
and
Clyde
Avenue
in
order
to
accommodate
a
buffered
on-street
bike
Lanes
on
both
sides.
D
So
this
project
would
be
implementing
that
street
configuration
on
all
three
Street
frontages
along
the
project
for
phase
four.
This
is
the
last
phase
office
location
is
030405
would
be
constructed,
as
well
as
the
district
parking
structures,
P1
and
P2,
as
well
as
two
new
minwa
Crossings,
to
provide
direct
access
to
those
parking
structures
and
sidewalk
and
bike
lane
improvements
on
Clyde
Avenue.
D
So
why
is
Google
Lindley
submitting
a
master
plan
within
this
precise
plan
area?
The
list
on
your
screen
here
are
really
all
the
reasons
that
are
required
in
the
precise
plan
for
a
master
plan.
D
D
This
area
for
any
development
to
occur,
requires
a
master
plan
in
order
to
accommodate
and
plan
for
a
future
public
park,
and
the
applicant
has
done
that
in
this
case.
On
number
two
for
Street
c,
which
is
also
shown
on
here.
Street
c
is
the
public
street
that
the
East
was
the
precise
plan
identified.
D
D
And,
lastly,
item
number
three
on
here
related
to
the
location
of
parks
on
the
linear
Park
identified
in
the
precise
plan
which
is
shown
here
as
that
bold
green
line
along
the
northern
part
of
the
master
plan
area
in
investigating
that
era
is
further
receiving
an
applicant's
Department.
That's
shipping,
backspace
South
to
actually
increase
the
size
of
mob
Park
and
the
Bridge
open
space
was
a
more
appropriate
design.
D
So,
ultimately,
the
master
plan
does
satisfy
all
these
requirements
per
the
precise
plan
so
getting
into
the
residential
development.
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
construct
up
to
1
520
market
rate
units
they're
pursuing
rental
units
initially,
but
they
are
proposing
and
providing
the
flexibility
by
including
incorporating
condo
Maps
to
potentially
have
ownership
units
as
well
in
the
future.
D
D
D
In
addition
to
the
residential
market
rate
housing,
the
city
has
a
below
market
rate
housing
requirement,
which
includes
the
15
inclusionary,
affordable
units
to
be
provided
within
the
market
rate
development
Additionally.
The
city
has
the
non-residential
housing
impact
fee
based
on
Commercial
development,
and
those
fees,
of
course,
go
towards
funding,
affordable
housing.
D
So
this
Project's,
affordable
housing
obligations
include
paying
a
housing
impact
fee
for
the
commercial
component
of
the
of
the
development
proposed
at
about
19.3
million
in
lieu
of
providing
inclusionary
units.
The
applicants
pursuing
a
BMR
alternative
mitigation
based
on
the
city's
BMR
regulations,
which
is
an
option
that
they
can
pursue.
So,
ultimately,
the
city
requires
an
alternative
mitigation
to
exceed
the
inclusionary
requirement
and
Advance
other
city,
housing
goals
and
objectives
around
affordable
housing,
and
it's
not
the
discretion
of
the
council
to
approve
it.
D
The
applicant's
BMR
alternative
mitigation
proposal
includes
dedicating
2.4
acres
of
land
on
two
parcels,
r4a
and
R6,
shown
here
in
Black
delivering
those
Parcels
as
part
of
the
phase
one
building
permits,
and
this
would
put
at
least
one
of
the
sites
r4a
about
four
years
earlier
than
what
would
be
required.
D
So,
with
this
alternative
mitigation,
the
city
hired
a
consultant
team,
strategic
economics,
insightful
Consulting
to
help
us
evaluate
the
proposal.
We
worked
on
identifying
quantitative
and
qualitative
criteria
to
evaluate
this
confirm
compliance
with
the
land,
dedication
requirements,
look
at
the
development
potential
of
these
sites,
as
well
as
the
funding
needs
to
deliver
the
units
and
really
try
to
base
this
on
local
Mountain,
View
Trends,
as
well
as
based
on
Outreach
to
affordable
housing
Developers.
D
Some
of
the
main
points
I
want
to
make
is
that
there
is
sufficient
land
to
accommodate
more
than
15
affordable
units,
which
is
a
key
component
of
compliance,
and
that
this
approach
does
require
significant
external
funding
and
local
city
funding,
likely
that
wouldn't
exist
with
an
inclusionary
requirement.
D
In
addition
to
the
residential
components
of
the
project,
the
applicant
is
building
about
50
net
new
office
area.
This
means
they're
requesting
about
630
000
square
feet
from
the
precise
plan
development
reserve
for
the
new
office.
D
The
master
plan
includes
about
622
000
square
feet
of
bonus.
Non-Residential
far,
which
requires
Community
benefit
contribution
of
about
16.9
million
as
part
of
the
bonus
far
the
projects
required
to
be
lead,
platinum
and
incorporate
other
sustainability
requirements.
And,
lastly,
the
projects
required
to
comply
with
the
job
housing
linkage
program,
which
really
is
intended
to
coordinate
office
and
residential
development
as
a
strategy
to
ensure
office
doesn't
outpace
housing
development
in
the
area,
and
this
project
is
compliant
with
that
jobs.
D
Housing
linkage
program
in
terms
of
active
uses
on
the
site,
the
Project's
required
to
provide
a
minimum
of
5
000
square
feet
at
Ellis.
Middlefield
per
the
precise
plan
intended
to
accommodate
neighborhood
commercial
uses,
and
so
this
50
000
square
feet
proposed
by
the
applicant
includes
that
5000.,
the
active
uses
are
really
neighborhood
commercial
uses,
as
defined
in
the
precise
plan.
Things
like
Retail,
Services,
restaurants
and
Civic
and
Community
spaces,
and
a
good
portion
of
this
area
is
proposed
to
be
participating
in
the
applicants.
D
Community
benefit
program
geared
towards
small
businesses,
so
getting
into
the
community
benefits.
Google
lendlies
is
required
to
provide
19.1
million
of
community
benefits
in
lieu
of
paying
the
community
benefit
and
fee.
They
are
proposing
to
fulfill
the
obligation
in
two
ways.
One
is
a
cash
payment
within
90
days
of
approval
of
half
a
million
dollars,
and
these
are
being
referred
to
as
people-centric
funds
they're
intended
to
serve
programs
and
needs
at
the
discretion
of
council
related
to
the
items
you
see
listed
here
in
this
red
box
on
your
screen.
D
This
program
is
made
up
of
a
couple
different
components,
including
constructing
21,
000
square,
feet
of
subsidized
ground
floor,
commercial
space
in
R1
and
R2,
providing
capped
rents
for
those
spaces,
as
well
as
a
tenant
Improvement
allowance
to
build
out
the
space
they're,
also
proposing
to
construct
a
thousand
square
foot
Community
Pavilion,
building
in
Ellis
Park
Popa
that
will
have
minimal
rents
and
available
to
the
community
for
its
use,
and
then
they
also
providing
about
a
three
million
dollars.
D
D
Since
a
good
portion
of
this
community
benefit
proposal
is
based
on
subsidized
constructed
space,
the
city
had
strategic
economics
review
the
value
assumptions
that
Google
had
as
part
of
this
program,
and
while
strategic
and
economics
and
Google's
numbers
didn't
perfectly
match,
it
did
show
that
with
the
cash
payment,
as
well
as
considering
all
carrying
costs
that
the
developer
will
have
for
the
subsidized
space,
including
all
Impact
fees
required.
D
The
value
of
the
entire
Community
benefit
proposal
is
more
like
19.2
to
19.6
million,
and
that
variation
is
really
just
based
on
any
ground
floor,
commercial
that
might
be
exempt
from
certain
impact
fees,
and
so,
in
the
end,
the
community
benefit
program
is
compliant.
Another
thing,
just
briefly
worth
mentioning
is
because
it's
a
lot
of
this
program
is
is
concentrated
in
R1
and
R2,
which
is
part
of
phase
one.
It
does
mean
that
the
applicant
is
Advanced
delivering
much
of
the
community
benefits
as
part
of
phase
one
moving
on
to
public
access.
D
The
red
arrow
represents
24
7,
multimodal
Public
Access
through
the
project
area
for
bikes
and
Peds,
which
aligns
with
the
multi-use
pathways
and
the
private
service
streets
throughout
the
project
area.
These
are
all
required.
Connections.
In
the
precise
plan,
I
will
note
there
is
only
one,
that's
an
additional
connection.
D
Aside
from
the
three
public
parks
and
Open
Spaces
that
are
proposed
to
be
dedicated
to
the
city
and
would
be
designed
then
constructed
by
the
city
in
accordance
with
our
standard
public
park
design
process,
Google's
proposing
this
ello
Park
Popa
open
space,
this
space
will
be
designed,
constructed
and
maintained
by
Google
lenses,
and
in
doing
so,
the
applicants
requesting
a
Parkland
credit
of
up
to
75
percent
of
this
2.8
acre
area
to
count
towards
their
Parkland
obligations.
D
The
applicant
has
provided
a
conceptual
design
shown
here
which
includes
a
series
of
recreational
elements,
things
like
playgrounds,
Sports,
Court
and
an
educational
demonstration
garden.
Ultimately,
the
final
design
of
this
space
would
come
with
subsequent
permits
submitted
with
the
city
to
the
city
that
include
detailed
site
and
building
designs.
D
Another
component
of
this
project
is
the
20-year
development
agreement.
The
applicant
has
requested
to
build
out
their
project
beyond
the
standard
two-year
entitlement
period
as
part
of
the
development
agreement.
The
applicant
has
offered
the
following
public
benefits
to
the
city
and
its
residents,
including
offerings
worth
about
11
million
dollars,
which
was
previously
presented
at
the
EPC
and
Council
study
sessions,
albeit
they
were
slightly
adjusted
in
the
distribution
of
of
these
three
items,
but
they
are
the
same.
D
This
includes
a
cash
payment
of
one
million
dollars
for
people-centric
funds
to
be
paid
at
the
building
permit
of
the
first
office
building
to
fund
and
install
public
art
in
Ellis
Popa,
open
space,
valued
at
a
million
dollars
and
a
cash
payment
of
nine
million
dollars
to
facilitate
the
design
construction
of
mod
Park
Parks.
Recreational
amenities.
D
In
addition
to
these
features
during
the
review
of
the
project,
City
and
applicant
agreed
upon
additional
public
benefits,
including
funding
and
preparing
a
quarter
million
dollar
study
for
the
Bridge
open
space
sharing
40
parking
spaces
within
the
project
for
mod
Park
visitors,
allowing
City
use
of
the
Ellis
Plaza
and
Community
Pavilion
building
within
Ellis
Park
multiple
times
a
year
at
no
rent
and
the
applicant
making
good
faith.
Efforts
to
obtain
a
use
tax.
D
Permit
point-of-sale
permit
at
the
project
site
to
allow
the
city
to
get
a
larger
portion
of
sales
use
tax
generated
from
the
construction
of
the
project.
D
Procedurally,
an
important
thing
to
understand
about
the
master
plan
is
how
it
relates
to
Future
permits.
The
applicant
is
required
to
obtain
permits
from
the
city
for
each
phase
of
development
to
actually
construct
development
based
on
the
feedback
from
the
council
study
session
in
2021,
the
master
plan
is
proposed
to
utilize
the
streamlined
review
process
outlined
in
the
precise
plan,
which
allows
future
permits
consistent
with
a
master
plan
to
be
approved
at
an
administrative
zoning,
public
Hearing
in
lieu
of
a
city
council,
public
hearing.
D
So
looking
at
the
graphic
on
your
screen,
if
the
master
plan
is
approved,
the
applicant
would
be
required
to
submit
a
zoning
permit
for
each
development
phase.
That
permit
would
go
through
the
typical
development
review
process,
with
City
staff.
Reviewing
for
compliance,
there
would
be
a
public
community
meeting.
The
project
would
be
reviewed
by
the
development
Review
Committee
and
finally,
the
zoning
administrator
would
make
the
final
decision
on
the
permit
at
a
public
hearing.
D
The
Za
does
always
have
the
ability
to
refer
permit
to
city
council
when
needed,
which
really
would
be
in
cases
where
there
are
inconsistencies
or
major
modifications
proposed,
as
requested
at
the
prior
study
session,
staffs
Define,
minor
and
major
modifications
to
the
master
plan
to
make
it
clear
what
the
review
structure
and
Authority
would
be.
So
minor
modifications
are
really
exceptions
allowed
in
the
precise
plan
or
identified
in
the
master
plan
or
Allowed
by
a
plan
Community
permit.
L
D
The
last
development
component
is
related
to
the
best
intentive
map,
that's
being
requested,
as
shown
on
your
screen.
The
applicants
proposing
to
create
18
new
Parcels
up
to
1900
residential
condo
units
or
lots
and
140
vertical
subdivision
lots
for
commercial
use
and
the
private
District
system.
N
O
D
The
general
plan
eir,
a
supplemental
eir,
is
prepared
when
to
address
one
or
more
new
significant
effects
not
previously
discussed
in
a
prior
eir
for
this
project.
That
includes
air
quality.
The
precise
plenty
IR
is
a
program
level
ER
that
backmed
has
separate
threshold
standards
for
compared
to
a
development
project.
So
the
precise
plan
eir
noted
that
future
development
projects
would
need
to
evaluate
their
air
quality
impacts
based
on
bacnet's
Project
level
thresholds.
D
D
The
significant
air
quality
impacts
are
directly
tied
to
the
scale
of
this
project,
the
overlapping
construction
and
operational
periods
over
eight
and
a
half
years,
and
the
proximity
of
the
approved
yet
to
be
constructed,
400,
low,
Avenue
residential
project.
So,
with
these
significant
unavoidable
air
quality
impacts
in
order
to
certify
the
eir,
the
city
does
have
to
adopt
statement
of
overriding
considerations
which
note
the
project
benefits
outweigh
the
environmental
impacts
identified,
which
was
included
in
exhibit
one
to
this
to
the
staff
report.
D
I,
do
briefly
want
to
describe
a
little
more
detail
about
the
significant
unavoidable
air
quality
impacts,
so
air
pollutants
are
regulated
at
the
federal
and
state
level.
One
of
the
main
ones
is
the
ozone
which
is
really
comprised
of
reactive,
organic
gases
or
Rog,
nitrogen
oxides
or
nox
and
ultraviolet
light
sources
of
rock
and
knocks
include
emissions
from
project
construction
and
operations.
So
things
like
construction
equipment,
mobile
Vehicles
generators,
paint
and
consumer
products
all
contribute
to
that.
D
Bacmed
has
project
level
thresholds
for
Rog
and
Knox
and
if
a
project
exceeds
those,
it's
considered
an
impact.
Specifically,
this
Project's
operational
emissions
exceed
backmed's
thresholds
for
rogs,
with
the
greatest
emissions
coming
from
architectural
Coatings
and
consumer
products
and
mobile
vehicle
emissions.
A
health
risk
assessment
was
conducted
for
outdoor
air
impacts
at
sensitive
receptors
within
a
thousand
feet,
and
it
concluded
that
400
Logue
Avenue
could
have
impacted
sensitive
receptors.
D
Finally,
the
project
has
mitigated,
to
the
greatest
extent
feasible
to
address
these
air
quality
impacts,
but
the
impacts
cannot
be
addressed
to
a
less
than
significant
level.
Hence
why
it's
a
significant
unavoidable
impact
in
terms
of
next
steps.
An
administrative
zoning
public
hearing
is
scheduled
for
October
26th
to
review
and
provide
recommendation
to
Council
on
the
development
agreement.
D
The
city
council,
public
hearing
is
scheduled
for
November
15th
to
review
all
of
the
recommendations
and
consider
a
final
decision,
and
just
lastly,
as
a
plug
for
anyone
interested
in
receiving
ongoing
email
notification
of
this
project.
Please
visit
our
City
website
and
sign
up
for
those
email
alerts.
D
Staff
does
recommend
that
the
EPC
recommend
the
city
council
adopt
resolution
certifying
the
eir
recommend,
adopting
and
approving
the
master
plan,
as
well
as
the
vesting
tentative
map
and
the
Parkland
dedication.
Credit
being
requested
by
the
applicant
staff
does
have
tonight
representatives
from
the
housing
division
as
well
as
the
public
works
department,
as
well
as
representatives
from
all
of
our
consultant
teams
available
for
questions
as
well.
On
that
note,
the
applicant
does
have
a
presentation
in
Jeff,
Hosea
and
Martin
Wiggins
from
Google
lendlies
will
be
presenting.
A
Let
me
bring
them
forward.
P
All
right
make
sure
everybody
can
see
that
because
I
can't
see
any
faces
now
so
I
can
see
it
all
right.
Thank
you.
Thanks
for
having
us
chair,
Cranston,
Commissioners
and
staff,
my
name
is
Jeff
Isaiah
and
I'm
Google's
urban
planning
league
for
Mountain
View,
we're
really
happy
to
present
our
Middlefield
Park
master
plan.
Tonight
staff
obviously
has
done
a
great
job
outlining
several
key
topics.
P
So
I
will
try
to
keep
this
as
short
as
I
can
and
Not
Duplicate
too
much
I
do
want
to
be
sure
to
thank
Lindsay
in
particular,
but
all
of
the
staff
of
the
city
for
all
the
work
over
the
last
many
years
to
actually
bring
this
project
to
where
we
are.
Today.
P
It's
been,
it's
been
a
joy
to
actually
work
with
the
staff,
so
I'm
joined
tonight
by
Martin
Wiggins
from
lend
lease
and
a
host
of
others,
but
Martin
in
particular.
I
hope
you
can
jump
in
and
introduce
yourself
here.
Q
Yep
hi,
my
name
is
Martin
Wiggins
and
I'm.
The
senior
development
manager
for
Lend
Lease
working
on
Middlefield
Park,
as
Google's
master
plan
advisor
and
residential
development
partner
linlis,
has
been
so
grateful
to
work
with
staff
in
the
community
over
these
last
two
years
to
develop
this
plan
for
New
housing
and
parks
in
proximity
to
Transit
and
jobs.
So
we're
just
honored
to
be
here
with
you
tonight
and
we'll
be
available
to
answer
any
questions.
P
Perfect
thanks
Marty,
so
the
city
approved
the
East
Switzerland
precise
fund
back
in
2019,
which
sets
out
the
vision
to
transform
the
area
by
adding
housing
near
jobs,
Transit
parks
and
local
serving
businesses.
Our
Middle
Field
park
proposal
goes
beyond
compliance
with
the
precise
plan
expanding
on
its
guiding
principles
and
then
delivering
a
comprehensive
Community
benefits
package.
P
Building
on
that
precise
plan,
our
goal
for
Middlefield
Park
is
to
be
a
sustainable,
welcoming
and
vibrant
neighborhood
focused
on
health
and
well-being
and
and
one
that
really
shifts
from
being
car
Centric
to
people-centric,
meaning
we
want
to
prioritize
walking,
biking,
public
transit
and
Community
Health
today
or
happy
day.
Yes,.
Q
O
O
P
Okay,
let's
see
if
it
keeps
up
so
it
really
shifting
from
car
Centric
to
people-centric
and
I.
Think
I,
you
know
described
that
a
little
bit
about
really
prioritizing
walking
and
biking.
Today.
Over
half
the
site
is
surface
parking
lots
so
we're
proposing
to
convert
almost
40
percent
of
the
site
to
parks
and
open
space,
another
25
to
much
needed
housing,
plus
new
retail
and
Community
spaces.
P
Everything
is
designed
to
be
within
a
10
minute:
walk
centered
around
bta's
Middle
Field
Light
Rail
station,
and
then
we
are
also
additionally
targeting
Platinum
certification
under
the
lead
for
neighborhood
development.
P
That
includes
housing
of
up
to
1900
new
homes
with
20
of
those
affordable,
as
Lindsay
said,
open
space,
that's
over
12
acres
and
then
rebuilt
a
new
office
space
totaling
about
1.3
million
square
feet,
phasing
begins
with
all
residential
on
four
different
Parcels
to
market
rate
buildings
at
the
corner
of
Ellis
and
Middlefield,
and
then
two
affordable
residential
Parcels
that
will
be
dedicated
to
the
city
in
the
first
phase
and
phase.
P
One
also
includes
the
building
of
Ellis
Plaza,
which
is
two
and
a
half
acres
of
Parkland
that
will
be
delivered
up
front
and
early
phase.
Two
is
focused
on
rebuilding
the
office
square
feet
that's
been
demolished
in
order
to
build
phase
one.
We
then
follow
up
with
the
remainder
of
the
residential
in
phase
three,
and
then
the
new
office
occurs
in
the
last
last.
P
In
phase
four,
since
we
submitted
our
master
plan
to
the
city
back
in
September
of
2020
We've
hosted
two
large
format:
public
Community
meetings
as
well
as
met
with
a
number
of
local
and
Regional
organizations,
some
of
which
are
listed
here.
We
also
conducted
a
community
survey
and
hosted
a
community
open
house
on
site
in
August
over
140
community
members,
attended
to
learn
about
the
project
and
enjoy
some
fun
family-friendly
activities
and
food.
P
We've
received
a
ton
of
great
feedback,
incorporated
as
as
much
as
we
possibly
could
into
the
project
and
then
actually
received
questions
that
made
us
think
and
go
further
too.
So
the
feedback
has
been
amazing
to
make
the
project
better.
P
As
I
mentioned
earlier,
the
project
is
front
loading
housing
delivering
up
to
850
of
the
1900
homes.
In
the
first
phase,
20
of
all
the
homes
in
the
master
plan
area
will
be
affordable
through
the
Project's
land
dedication
strategy,
as
the
staff
report
States
and
I
think
Lindsay
said
the
same
thing.
The
alternative
mitigation
proposal
provides
a
greater
benefit
than
providing
on-site
units
in
part
by
allowing
the
city
to
deliver
95
more
affordable
homes
than
requested
by
code
required
by
code
Additionally.
P
The
strategy
will
allow
the
city
to
serve
lower
income
renters
across
a
deeper
range
of
affordability,
from
60
Ami
and
below
further.
The
city
will
be
able
to
just
to
decide
on
the
size
and
mix
of
these
units.
On-Site
Services
could
also
be
made
available
to
Residents,
who
would
otherwise
have
to
travel
off-site
for
such
services,
and
the
city
will
continue
to
own
the
land
and
perpetuity
allowing
the
city
to
best
serve
the
needs
of
the
community
over
the
long
term.
P
At
a
high
level.
This
is
our
parks
and
open
space
Network.
This
is
one
of
the
cornerstones
of
the
master
plan.
This
has
been
refined
based
on
input
from
both
planning
and
park
staff,
so
we
want
to
thank
them
for
all
the
time
they
put
into
helping
develop
the
social
space
Network,
as
mentioned
in
the
phasing
plan,
we're
not
just
giving
the
city
land
for
them
to
build
parks
on.
We
are
actually
delivering
almost
two
acres
of
Ellis
Park
in
Phase
One,
at
no
cost
to
the
city.
P
Bringing
a
vibrant,
New,
Plaza
and
park
online
in
the
in
the
very
first
phase
will
support
new
small
and
local
businesses,
encourage
Transit
use
and
give
us
a
head
start
on
expanding
the
tree.
Canopy
growth
we've
gotten
a
lot
of
excellent
input
from
the
community
on
what
they'd
like
to
see
in
the
park
and
we're
really
appreciative
of
that
guidance,
and
it's
helped
us
create
a
part
concept
that
will
better
support
the
community
around
us.
P
With
the
tree
canopy
coverage,
we
plan
to
double
and
nearly
triple
the
tree
canopy
on
our
land.
By
the
time
the
plan
is
built
out
with
an
additional
seven
acres
of
land,
where
the
city
will
build
new
parks.
The
tree
that
tree
canopy
amount
will
be
even
greater
and
as
we
get
into
architectural
design,
we'll
be
looking
at
opportunities
for
rooftop,
Terraces
or
Gardens.
That
can
add
even
more.
This
is
all
key
to
helping
Middlefield
Park
become
a
resilient
and
sustainable
Community
where
people
want
to
gather
and
live
Google's.
P
Also
in
the
process
of
planting
nearly
14
000
trees.
Right
now
in
Gilroy
at
our
tree
farm,
they
consist
of
about
26
native
species
and
right
now
are
at
a
size
of
about
15
gallon,
equivalent
or
larger.
So
as
a
reminder,
you
know
what
we're
all
we're
planting
these
directly
into
the
ground
and
grow
bags,
which
should
yield
larger
trees,
contributing
to
bigger
canopies
and
thicker
trunks
compared
to
typical
box
trees
as
well.
P
Most
of
the
19
million
dollars
is
required
for
bonus
far
office,
but,
as
the
staff
report
showed
most
of
that
new
office
isn't
delivered
until
the
last
phase
of
the
development.
So
this
is
a
significant
upfront.
Investment
in
the
community
so
greatly
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
collaborate
with
the
city
and
the
community
to
deliver
on
the
vision
of
East
Westman
precise
plan.
P
Thank
you
to
the
Commissioners
for
your
consideration
tonight
and,
like
I
said,
we
look
forward
to
answering
any
questions
you
may
have
either
myself
Marty
or
a
number
of
others
that
are
online
listening
so
appreciate
the
time.
A
So
the
the
next
portion
of
the
meeting
is
an
opportunity
for
commission
members
to
ask
questions
of
Staff
applicant,
so
we
won't
open
up
for
UPC
questions.
I
I
Think
the
analysis
that
was
provided
either
by
the
app
in
our
or
through
staff,
the
the
resistant
represent
numbers,
and
in
my
assumption,
is
that
that
really
comes
down
to
how
you
know
the
the
the
layout
of
the
units,
the
bedroom
counts
and
those
sorts
of
things
and
and
how
those
were
analyzed.
O
D
I
It's
specifically
the
affordable
housing,
so
it's
the
20
of
which
would
I
think
in
at
least
for
the
letter
would
be
380
units,
but
the
the
cycle,
strategic
economics
analysis
concluding
that
only
338
could
be
delivered
on
the
the
two
Parcels
of
2.4
Acres,
so
I
don't
know
I'm.
Just
my
assumption
is
that
you
know
with
the
land
dedication.
If
the
city
wants
to
somehow
get
to
380
they
they
probably
can
it's
just
a
matter
of
the
the
unit
mixed
and
and
how
it's
laid
out.
I
D
So
the
380
units
for
the
20
percent
is
really
what
the
applicant
sort
of
brought
forward
as
part
of
The
Proposal
and
in
terms
of
what
cycle.
Consulting.
D
In
their
report,
which
was
338
units,
that's
really
based
on
a
particular
type
of
affordable
housing,
in
this
case
family
housing,
and
that
was
something
that
was
decided.
You
know
for
staff
to
look
at
because
that
was
that's
a
typical
or
a
common
type
of
affordable
housing.
We
see
in
Mountain
View.
D
It
seemed
appropriate
for
this
area
of
the
city,
but
also
it
is
a
way,
as
some
can
say,
it's
a
conservative
Assumption
of
how
many
units
you
could
fit
on
this
site
for
an
affordable
housing
project,
because
family,
affordable
housing
often
results
in
fewer
units
based
on
larger
units
and
more
bedrooms,
and
things
like
that.
So
the
difference
there
is
really
just
based
on
sort
of
the
assessment
that
was
done.
You
know
to
analyze
this
proposal,
I
think
another
key
Point
that
I
think
you're
sort
of
getting
at
is.
D
Ultimately
you
know
if
this
master
plan
is
approved
and
the
land
is
dedicated
to
the
city.
The
city
has
the
discretion
and
decision
to
decide
what
type
of
affordable
housing
can
go
there
and
different
types
of
affordable
housing
can
yield
different
unit
counts,
and
so
the
ability
to
potentially
you
know
achieve
380.
I
can't
say
you
know.
That
is
the
possibility.
It
just
depends
on.
Ultimately,
what
is
proposed
and
decided
upon
not
only
from
council's
Direction,
but
also
what
an
affordable
housing
developer
brings
forward.
I
E
Thank
you,
I
think
I
saw
Rene,
Amma
call
tonight.
So
maybe
this
is
a
question
for
either
Lindsay
or
Renee.
I
wanted
to
better
understand
and
it
sounds
like,
despite
the
scale
all
those
projects,
there
is
not
an
anticipated
significant
impact
on
the
utility
system,
but
I
didn't
quite
follow
the
comment-
and
this
was
at
the
very
end
of
the
staff
report
on
page
31,
about
a
large
portion
of
the
Recycled
Water
customer
base
to
be
removed
in
East
wisman.
So
can
you
walk
me
through
that?
As
a
there's?
K
Yeah
foreign,
civil
engineer
and
I
sure.
E
K
E
A
And
I
don't
know,
I
may
I'm
gonna
throw
one
and
sing
here.
I
asked
a
question
about
this
of
Lend
Lease
during
my
meeting
with
him
and
Martin
had
some
specific
discussion
about
the
impact.
If
they
did
the
the
onset,
it
might
actually
be
helpful
to
you
for
you
to
hear
that
it
was
did
I.
Ask
that
question
of.
If
you
did
of
the
on-site
utilities
versus
that
so
Martin.
Could
you
elaborate
on
how
that
on
site
would
could
impact
the
use
of
recycled
water
reclaimed
water
from
the
city.
Q
Yes,
I.
Thank
you,
chair,
Cranston
I
will
do
my
best
and
just
for
City
staff.
We
also
have
a
district
system
specialist
from
Google,
Drew,
Wenzel
and
so
he's
standing
by
if
we
want
to
dive
any
deeper
I.
If
I'm
recalling
our
discussion,
chair,
Cranston
I,
think
what
I
probably
would
have
said
was
there's
an
within
the
district
system.
Q
There
are
three
different
systems:
there's
thermal
there's
micro
grid
and
there's
a
recycled
water
system
which
collects
Wastewater
from
the
buildings
and
and
creates
recycled
water
to
you
to
pipe
back
to
the
buildings
within
the
master
plan.
And
so,
if
we
proceed
with
that
option
and
we're
producing
our
own
recycled
water,
then
the
we
would
not
in
that
case
be
using
the
Recycled
water
that
is
coming
through
the
city's
expanded
infrastructure.
A
Yeah
thanks
other
questions.
Vegetarian.
G
Thanks,
actually
I
was
going
to
go
back
to
the
affordable
housing
question
which
was
related
to
what
commissioner
Clark
had
asked
and
I
was
just
wondering.
G
G
Has
anyone
asked
the
non-profit
that
build
the
affordable
housing,
what
they
think
it
could
get
out
of
it,
since
they
will
most
likely
be
building
it
and
it
would
be
their
architecture
firms
designing
it?
G
That's
one
question
and
also,
if
there's
an
Associated
sort
of
estimated
cost,
that
would
go
with
it
and
there's
a
second
part
to
this
question,
which
is
the
the
unit
distribution
I,
know
the
jobs,
housing
linkage
and
maybe
my
memory
is
off-
was
for
every
thousand
square
feet
of
office,
there's
about
three
units,
but
we
know
as
we're
talking
about
that.
A
studio
is
very
different
from
a
three
bedroom
for
a
family,
so
I
I,
don't
recall
the
specific
language
for
the
jobs
housing
linkage.
G
So
maybe
you
can
refresh
me
on
that,
because
maybe
that'll
help
in
determining
sort
of
what
what
the
technical
goal
is
of
the
jobs,
housing
linkage
and
then
we
could
kind
of
move
from
there.
In.
D
The
discussion
sure
I
think
krisha.
If
you
could
promote
Michaela.
B
D
Tinker
and
she
can
from
our
housing
division
could
help
also
respond
to
this,
but
commissioner
Yin
I
think
a
couple
things.
If
I
can
remember
all
your
questions,
the
first
one,
so
the
evaluation
that
was
done
by
sideful
Consulting
actually
was
based
on
feedback
that
we
got
from
the
affordable
housing
Developers.
So
a
lot
of
that
work
is
incorporating
that
feedback
in
terms
of
what
could
be
done.
I
will
say
it's
not
like.
We
were
talking
specifically
to
them
about
hey
here's,
a
site.
D
What
would
you
do
exactly
on
this
site?
Because
we
didn't.
C
D
Have
all
that
information
available
fully
at
that
time,
but
we
did
talk
about
sort
of
the
growing
trends
of
affordable
housing
and
what
they're
they're
accomplishing
in
some
of
their
current
projects.
G
Whether
or
not
there
was
sort
of
an
evaluation
of
cost
associated
with
it
so
that
the
Society
Council
could
determine
whether
or
not
this
is
something
that
is
feasible
because
you
know
it
is
I've
got
to
say
that
it
is
great.
That
Google
had
listened
and
is
providing
these
great
potential
benefits
by
delivering
the
land
and
doing
it
early.
G
But-
and
you
know-
and
that
would
be
a
terrific
win-win
situation.
However,
you
know
the
ideal
was
inclusionary
units
and
this
is
an
alternative
mitigation.
So,
if
we're
doing
an
alternative,
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that,
in
the
win-win
scenario
that
we
actually
at
the
City
win,
so
that
would
be
determined
by
cost
and
unit
type
and
makeup
and
that
that's
what
I'm
I
know
we're
at
still
the
master
plan
stage.
But
it
would
be
good
to
know
that
we
can
achieve
feasibly
the
goal
that
city
is
trying
to
aim
for
yeah.
D
And
I
think
what
you're
hitting
on
is
kind
of
The
Balancing
Act,
with
a
proposal
like
this,
where
a
lot
of
the
work
that
strategic
and
cycle
Consulting
did
was
really
based
on
what
we
can
sort
of
best
know
and
assume
now,
and
so
that
did
include
the
funding
needs
component,
where
taking
the
338
units
and
kind
of
laying
out
a
potential
sort
of
Financial
or
fiscal
aspect
to
it,
and
what
that
funding
need
would
be
to
actually
deliver
those
units,
so
that
was
included
in
in
that
exhibit
and
the
sort
of
intent
with
that
was
really
to
your
point
to
try
to
bring
forward
what
this
actually
means.
D
If,
if
this
is
going
to
be
considered
by
decision
makers
and
I,
think
just
the
last
Point
real
quick
before
I
hand
it
off
to
Michaela
is
the
job
housing
linkage.
So
you
have
it
correct.
It's
basically,
three
residential
units
for
every
thousand
square
feet
of
net
new
office
development,
there's
no
particular
specificity
on
the
type
of
housing
unit.
It's
just
housing
units
in
general,
and
so
with
that
Michaela
did
you
have
anything
to
add
as
well.
G
Sorry,
just
a
little
additional
question
tagged
on
is
maybe
Michaela.
You
know
this
you're
saying
that
the
market
for
affordable
housing
is
really
looking
for
what
type
of
unit,
because
I
know,
at
least
for
the
market
rate
Google.
In
the
sorry,
the
staff
report
had
stated
that
or
was
it
the
sorry
there
were
so
many
exhibits?
G
I,
don't
remember
where
this
came
from
that
for
market
rate
housing
Market
is
showing
that
studio
units
are
in
demand,
but
I
wanted
to
know
what
is
in
demand
for
affordable
housing,
because
honestly
I
don't
know
why
there's
a
difference
but
also
go
ahead
and
tell
me,
since
you
know
the
answer
for
the
affordable
portion.
M
Sure
I'd
be
happy
to
so
there's
a
couple
factors
at
play
that
helped
us
to
determine
what
Market
or
what
unit
mix
we
would
be
looking
at
as
likely
for
these
sites,
and
of
course
you
know
because
these
are
sites
are
dedicated
to
the
city.
Ultimately,
we
will
have
the
discretion
of
whatever
unit
mix.
We
think
is
right
for
the
city
at
that
time,
but
the
reason
that
we
looked
at
a
family
mix,
which
typically
means
around
a
little
over
50
percent
twos
and
three
two
and
three
bedrooms
is
twofold.
M
One
is
that
many
of
the
funding
opportunities
that
exist
right
now
prefer
that
unit
mix
so
there's
more
funding
available
for
projects
that
have
that,
but,
more
importantly,
in
the
city
right
now,
a
very,
very
large
percent
of
our
affordable
housing
units
are
Studios
and
one
bedrooms.
We
don't
have
very
many
two
bedrooms
and
three
bedrooms
and
our
demand
is
highest
for
twos
and
threes
right
now
in
the
city.
Because
of
that
mismatch,
so
that's.
We
also
know
that
this
is
a
priority.
This
is
something
that's
in
our
housing
element.
M
Okay
and
also
partially
I
should
just
say
because
of
the
cost
of
having
a
larger
family
and
trying
to
afford
housing.
A
I'm
gonna
jump
to
Krishna,
Gutierrez
and
just
just
in
menu
that
you
can
hear
us.
Let
us
know
we
all
we're
seeing
is
a
black
screen
and
not
seeing
any
response.
Krishna
Gates.
H
Sure
so
I
have
a
quick
question.
So
I
appreciate
the
majority
of
the
housing
coming
on
board,
for
the
city
is
the
first
step,
which
is
great
and
a
lot
of
how
work
went
into
making
this
happen
through
Community
input
and
Google's
diligence,
which
is
wonderful
to
see.
My
question
is
more
of
a
light.
100
one
in
terms
of
the
park
allocation
space,
I
I
noticed
that
there
was
an
area
that
designated
for
either
a
certain
type
of
field
or
a
dog
park
and
in
the
end,
through
this
process.
H
D
I'll,
just
let
you
kind
of
see
about
Ellis,
Park,
open
space
is
conceptual,
so
really
it's
kind
of
a
maximum
amount
of
elements
you
might
see
in
it.
So
there
is
some
room
for
things
shifting,
but
in
terms
of
when
the
details
would
be
known
is
really
when
the
R1
and
R2
building
designs
come
forward
and
are
submitted
as
part
of
that
phase
one
zoning
permit.
So
that
would
be
part
of
that
first
phase
that
you
would
see
a
lot
of
that
stuff.
D
I
will
note
that
a
portion
of
the
ls
Popa
open
space
is
also
in
phase
two
for
the
office
building.
That's
along
Ellis,
so
not
all
of
it
will
come
online
at
once,
but
the
designs
would
be
provided
you
know
comprehensively
for
that
space.
H
Okay,
great
and
then
my
second
question
is
in
terms
of
funding,
what's
up
how's,
that
going
to
be
looked
at
by
the
city
council
and
then
by
us
in
general?
Are
we
looking
to
and
bear
with
me,
as
many
of
you
know,
I'm
new
to
the
EPC,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
some
basic
questions,
sometimes
like
right
now,
the
probability
of
funding
and
getting
that
that
money
to
be
able
to
make
a
difference
with
this
type
of
construction?
H
D
Commissioner,
Gutierrez
I'm,
assuming
you're
referring
to
the
affordable
housing,
yep,
okay,
so
I,
don't
know
if
we
want
to
bring
back
Michaela
to
help
answer
that
question,
but
really
the
funding
commitments
from
the
city
but
would
officially
be
coming
online
once
that
land
is
dedicated
and
the
city
is
pursuing
development
on
those
sites.
D
However,
I
will
note
that,
with
the
recent
discussions
at
Council
about
the
affordable
housing
strategy,
we
have
a
whole
pipeline
laid
out
and
for
best
that
we
can
do
for
a
project
that
hasn't
been
approved.
We
have
started
to
integrate
and
at
least
associate
the
idea
that
these
land
dedications
could
be
coming
online
and
so
potentially
incorporating
them
into
our
pipeline.
D
Should
should
these
Master
plans
both
this
one
and
North
Bay
Shore
be
approved
so
Michaela
I,
don't
know
if
you
have
anything
to
add
about
sort
of
the
availability
of
funding
and
commitments
for
that
for
the
affordable
sites.
M
For
thank
you
at
our
August
30th
study
session
with
the
council.
We
laid
out
our
estimated
funding
needs
for
the
city's
affordable
housing
pipeline
over
the
next
five
years,
and
we
did
include
these
two
land
dedication
sites
and
our
guests
of
what
our
pipeline
might
look
like
and
we
estimated
how
many
funds
we
currently
have
in
our
coffers.
As
you
said,
how
much
we
expect
to
get
in
future
fees
and
then
what
the
funding
gaps
that
we
expect
may
be,
and
we
do
expect
a
funding
Gap
over
our
whole
pipeline.
M
We
have
a
very
ambitious
pipeline
in
the
city
of
Mountain
View,
but
we
also
laid
out
in
the
study
session
a
strategy
for
hoping
to
fill
that
funding
Gap.
So
we
can
achieve
the
pipeline,
and
that
includes
several
measures,
including
reviewing
our
commercial
impact
fees,
making
Partnerships
with
public
agencies
to
increase
funding,
availability,
making
Partnerships
with
private
companies
and
philanthropic
agencies
to
increase
funding
availability.
M
And
then
the
last
piece
is
partnering,
with
the
Regional
Buffa
on
their
housing
funding
measure
that
we
hope
will
bring
in
significant
funds
for
affordable
housing
and
there's
some
additional
State
funds
that
we
are
currently
seeking.
That
may
or
may
not
also
add
to
that.
So
essentially,
we
anticipate
a
funding
Gap,
but
we
also
have
strategies
in
place
that
we
are
currently
pursuing
to
hopefully
fill
that
fund
account.
J
Technology
glitch.
If
commissioner
Dempsey
wants
to
go
I'd
be
happy
to
okay.
J
Right,
don't
know
what
happened
there
so
I'm
glad
I
at
least
got
to
hear
that
last
bit
of
what
I
think
was
commissioner
gutierrez's
question
around
some
of
the
funding
related
to
the
affordable
units,
so
I
guess
a
a
few
questions
here
with
I
and
it's
hard
to
know
exactly
where
to
start,
but
I'm
gonna
kind
of
take
a
stab
here.
First,
with
regards
this
is
the
question
for
staff.
J
J
D
I,
don't
know
that
we
have
a
specific
some
of
the
recent
development
agreements
that
have
been
approved
for
single
phase
development
projects
are
typically
seven
years
that
have
been
approved,
so
this
would
be
a
longer
DNA.
J
And
then,
in
terms
of
those
single
phase,
development
agreements,
how
big
do
they
get
in
terms
of
level
of
like
units
or
development
like
scale.
D
J
Okay,
interesting,
okay,
so
I'll
kind
of
ask
a
few
other
questions.
So
I
guess
this
one
is
for
Jeff
the
applicant
Jeff
hi
Jeff
in
terms
of
that,
I
think
that
first
Slide,
the
phase
one
slide
that
you
showed
or
that
part
of
the
process
I
noticed
that
the
parcels
for
the
affordable
land
dedication
were
included
as
part
of
that
phase.
One
can.
J
Can
you
help
clarify
what
it
means
with
regards
to
the
inclusion
or
like
the
the
reasoning,
or
you
know,
yeah
the-
how
how
this
is
included
into
that
phase.
One
like.
P
Absolutely
I
I
can
definitely
take
a
shot
of
starting
that
and
Martin
can
come
in
behind
me
for
sure.
So,
as
you
noted
the
the
phase
one
in
the
lower
left
along
Middlefield
and
Elvis
That's,
the
market
rate
residential
there's
two
buildings
there
and
then
the
two
affordable
projects
Parcels,
are
over
on
mod
Avenue.
P
You
know
we
chose
those
sites
in
particular
because
a
we
can.
We
have
the
ability
to
make
them
shovel
ready
just
as
soon
as
we
possibly
can
so
that
expedites,
the
delivery
of
those
the
day,
the
dedication
of
those
to
the
city
and
and
so
I-
think
that's
a
that's.
Definitely
a
bonus
to
the
city.
P
You
know,
there's
a
number
of
other
reasons:
it's
it's
well
integrated
within
the
neighborhood.
Even
the
surrounding
Parcels,
as
the
precise
plan
continues
to
build
out,
we'll
add
more
residential
around
these.
So
they
you
know
they
will
be
fully
integrated
within
the
within
the
neighborhood
for
sure.
So.
J
By
phase
one,
it
really,
it's
sounding
to
me
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
it's
sounding
to
me
like
phase
one
means
that
those
two
Parcels
along
mod
and
the
highway
phase
one
includes
the
trans,
the
land
transfer.
It's
not
right,
like
it's
not
up
to
that
380..
It
means
like
as
a
phase
one
we
will
have
transferred
by
the
completion
of
that
person.
We
will
have
transferred
those
Parcels
to
the
city.
Yes,.
J
Cool
and
then
with
regards
to
I
guess
our
our
Consultants
disciple
staple
I,
forget
stifle
I,
have
a
question
if,
if
okay
for
them,
I
noticed
as
part
of
the
attachment
with
regards
to
the
analysis
of
the
alternative
mitigation
that
the
the
analysis
was
created
based
off
of
2021
estimates
or
standards
for
the
the
prevailing
costs
at
that
time,
around,
like
I,
guess
like
what
whatever
the
inputs
would
be
around
like
material
labor
costs,
land
costs,
Etc
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
com
I
was
confirming
that,
with
the
with
our
consultant.
N
J
Okay,
cool
and
then
I'm
one
thing
I'm,
actually
because
I
I
heard
commissioner
again
speak
to
or
ask
questions
relating
to
this
affordable
kind
of
unit,
alternative
mitigation.
I
think
commissioner
Gutierrez
was
asking
about
something
similar
I
had
a
computer
glitch,
sorry,
everyone,
but
I
think
he
was
asking
about
something
similar
and,
to
be
honest,
my
questioning
was
around
that
as
well.
So
I
guess
one
of
the
things
that
I'm
thinking
through,
because
I
noticed
that
in
that
alternative
mitigation
report,
the
the
Figures
were
based
off
of
2021
numbers.
J
You
know
before
you
know
a
lot
of
that
like
supply
chain
crisis
stuff
was
really
hitting
the
news,
I'm
sure
it
was
going
on
before,
but
like
really
started
to
escalate
in
a
way
that
was,
you
know
publicly
conscious
ongoing
inflation,
you
know
like
8.7
percent,
etc,
etc.
J
J
You
know
delivered
into
physical
reality
or
would
not
I
guess
the
risk
assessment
would
be.
You
know.
To
what
extent
did
you
guys
assess
because
I
see
a
lot
of
word
in
there
like
potential
the
potential
value,
the
land
transfer,
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
but
to
what
extent
did
you
guys
conduct
a
risk
assessment
of
you
know
what
could
prevent
those
units
from
actually
being
developed
into
reality
by
an
affordable
housing
developer
in
partnership
with
the
city
and
what
were
the
results
of
that
risk
assessment?.
N
We
didn't
specifically
do
a
risk
assessment,
I
think
in
the
way
that
you're
framing
it.
However,
we
did
look
at
a
lot
of
the
city's
current
projects
and
historical
projects
that
the
city's
been
doing,
that
we've
worked
on
over
the
years
and
I
would
just
say
the
following
that
the
hope
is,
of
course,
we
don't
know
what
will
happen
with
the
supply
chain,
but
the
hope
is
that
you
know
as
interest
rates
increase
as
the
fed.
You
know
make
some
moves
that
there
will
be
some
abating
and
construction
cost
increases.
N
So
there
is
that
there
is
that
hope
that
that
will
Abate,
obviously
no
guarantee,
but
there's
that
hope.
Secondly,
alongside
of
this
there's
a
recognition
on
both
the
public
sector
side
and
the
private
sector
side
of
just
the
need
for
more
funding
for
affordable
housing
as
Michaela
articulated
earlier.
N
So
there
are
there's
the
other
side
of
it
where
funding
is
just
really
being
recognized
as
being
more
and
more
pivotal,
and
but
you
know
last
I
would
just
say
that
you
know
it
it.
We
never
know
what
it's
going
to
take
to
get
these
delivered,
but
the
fact
that
this
land
is
getting
dedicated
to
the
city
as
public
land
that
the
city
can't
do
what
it
would
like
to
do
on
it
with
respect
to
affordable
housing.
O
J
It
it
it's
fair
to
say
that
the
city
is
in
control
of
what
they
would
plan
in
partnership
with
an
affordable
housing
developer,
what
they
would
plan
to
develop
or
construct
on
that
site
right,
but
I'm
I
guess
my
question
would
be.
Would
you
agree
that
the
city
and
affordable
developers
are
in
control
of
external
factors
that
any
developer,
I
believe
would
say,
are
extremely
that
they're
extremely
sensitive
to
when
it
comes
to
the
you
know,
feasibility
of
a
project
or
that
could
impact
the
feasibility
of
a
project.
N
Absolutely
the
developers
are
sent
positive
to
whatever's
going
on
at
the
time
of
development.
Absolutely
true,
but
that's
that's
that's
what
developers
have
to
deal
with
on
a
daily
basis,
so
I
think
that
it
is
really
helpful
for
the
city
to
have
the
ability
to
make
some
of
the
decisions
that
it
would
not
normally
be
able
to
make
by
owning
the
property.
J
So
then
yeah,
because
what
I'm
trying
to
understand
and
and
I'm
hoping
you
can
help
me
understand
this
is
in
what
form
does
the
city
being
able
to
plan
for
what
they
would
like
to
build
on
that
land
make
up
for
the
risk
of
any
external
Factor
risk?
M
It
can
jump
in
here,
yeah
Doom
too
I'm,
not
sure
we
know
the
risk
of
the
external
factors
develop
preventing
development.
This
is
an
issue
we
face
for
all
of
our
developments
in
our
pipeline.
M
I
think
the
the
benefit
that
you're
getting
at
you
know
is
it
a
mitigation
that
we
have.
The
land
dedication
is
that,
should
there
be
some
sort
of
factor
that
is
out
of
our
control,
makes
development
infeasible,
like
you,
know,
a
spike
in
construction
costs
that
was
unanticipated
or
a
pandemic,
although
we
managed
to
get
some
great,
affordable,
housing
online
during
the
pandemic.
M
M
You
know
make
up
the
Lost
cost
because
there's
holding
costs
associated
with
the
land,
whereas
in
this
case
there
would
be
that
the
city
owns
it
and
we
could
wait
and
ride
out
that
risk
or
find
a
way
to
mitigate
that
risk
and
then
develop
so
I
think
we
all
are
interested
in
having
the
units
be
developed
as
quickly
as
possible
and
that's
their
housing.
Division's
current
strategy
is
to
pursue
that,
but
should
there
be
a
risk
like
that,
it
wouldn't
be
a
an
end
game
for
those
developments
like
it
might
be.
J
Right
and
I
appreciate
that
Michaela
and
I
I
guess,
like
my
hang
up,
is
you
know,
I
I?
What
I
just
heard
you
say
was:
should
there
be
a
risk
like
that
and
I'm
concerned
that
there
wasn't
assessment?
There
was
not
an
assessment
of
that
possibility.
Even
right,
we
can't
assess
for
all
the
infinite
number
of
risks,
but
what
was
the
assessment
done
of
the
potential
risks
right
and
so
I
guess
Jeff
I
am
going
to
ask
in
terms
of
that
20-year
development
agreement.
J
What
is
the
reasoning
for
seeking
a
two-decade
development
agreement
like
what?
What
are
what
is
lendlease
and
Google,
going
to
be
able
to
do
with
those
20
years
that
they
couldn't
do
in
10.,
for
example,
or
15
or
any
lesser
arbitrary
number
of
years?.
P
Sure
so
I
I
can
again
I'll
start,
but
there's
a
there's.
A
number
of
people
that
are
probably
more
more
educated
than
I
am
on
it
as
well
as
as
Lindsay
said.
You
know
typical
development
agreements
of
seven
years
for
a
single
phase
of
like
one
building
one
office
project.
P
It
is
pretty
typical.
So
as
we
you
know,
look
to
do.
Four
different
phases
have
to
demo
some
parcels,
build
others
and
then
rebuild
and
then
continue
on.
There's
a
process
to
it.
So
you
know
part
of
it
comes
down
to
housing
absorption
as
well.
P
You
don't
want
to
build
residential
and
have
any
empty
units
sitting,
so
we
need
to
make
sure
that
the
first
phases
are
full
before
we
move
into
the
next
phases
and
then
over
20
years,
typically
there's
seven
to
eight
year
economic
Cycles,
like
one
we're
in
right
now,
and
so
you
know
this
will
allow
us
to
either.
You
know
to
stretch
past
that
one
of
those
next
economic
cycles
and
be
able
to
the
weather
that
storm
both
with
the
city
and
and
with
this
agreement.
P
So
you
know
with
having
the
the
new
office
built
in
the
last
phase.
You
know
it
helps
us.
You
know
push
that
out
a
little
bit
longer.
Of
course,
we
hope
we
can
do
it
sooner
than
that,
but
this
is
a
pretty
tight
timeline
to
develop
this
much.
You
know
to
develop.
40
acres,
I
want
to
say
so.
Yeah.
J
Last
question:
I
swear:
are
you
guys
planning
to
use
union
labor
for
the
construction.
P
We
have
a
great
partnership
with
a
number
of
the
labors
and
unions,
and
so
yes,
this
is
something
that
we've
looked
at,
the
you
know
using
again
on.
F
Thank
you
sure,
so.
I
have
three
questions,
one
about
parking
and
the
two
about
air
quality,
so
the
parking
questions
for
staff
so
Lindsay.
If
you
want
to
feel
this
one
on
page
26
of
the
staff
analysis,
it
says
they
talk
about
parking
and
so
for
this
master
plan
for
active
use,
parking
which
I
understand
is
largely
coming
around
the
park
right.
F
D
F
D
No
you're
correct
the
applicant
has
proposed
two
spaces
per
thousand
okay.
F
That
yeah,
that's
what
I
thought
so
I
want
to
ask
about
that,
because
I
guess
I
want
to
know.
Tell
me
why
you're
not
concerned
about
that
and
I'll.
Let
me
let
me
add
two
other
things
before
you
answer.
The
first
is
as
I
understand
it.
We
aren't
going
to
have
street
parking
or
some
of
the
frontage
for
at
least
for
half
of
the
street
for
some
of
the
areas
around
the
park,
and
that
was
to
make
space
for
bike
Lanes,
which
completely
support.
F
I,
also
noticed
that
the
parking
garage
which
I
think
there
is
some
shared
parking
is
phase
four,
but
the
park
is
being
put
in
in
phase
three,
so
that's
temporary,
but
that
would
prevent
the
the
people
using
the
park,
which
would
be
created
from
using
parking
which
only
comes
in
phase
four.
So
all
if
you
put
all
that
together,
I
just
want
to
help
me
understand
why
you
weren't
worried
about
insufficient
parking
for
people
coming
to
use
the
coming
to
use
mod
yeah.
D
So
it's
a
great
question:
I
think
a
couple
things
just
to
be
super
clear,
so
no
parking
ratios
have
actually
are
being
proposed
to
be
adopted
with
the
master
plan,
so
the
study
and
Analysis
that
was
done
was
really
the
city's
way
of
analyzing.
What
our
potential
parking
ratios
that
might
be
appropriate
to
consider
and
those
would
really
be
locked
in
at
subsequent
permits
that
they
submit
for
each
phase
getting
at
your
specific
question,
so
a
couple
things
I
in
terms
of
parking
for
the
active
use
spaces.
D
Those
are
proposed
to
be
on
the
same
site
as
those
spaces
are
provided,
so
it
would
be
on
site
that
they
would
have
parking
available
for
mod
Park.
In
particular.
This
is
true
for
true.
First
for
five
acre
Park,
the
city
is
likely
going
to
have
some
on-site
parking
like
we
do
at
rainstorm,
Park
or
Cuesta
Park,
so
some
parking
will
be
probably
integrated
into
the
design
of
that
part.
D
D
D
And
so
there
is,
you
know,
potential
for
an
arrangement
to
be
made
potentially
for
parking
related
to
that.
But
in
terms
of
sort
of
specifically
mod
park,
I
think
we
would
be
accommodating
some
parking
on
site.
F
Okay,
so
you
are
not
ultimately
worried
about
the
ability
to
to
have
enough
parking
for
the
people
who
will
use
it.
I
spent
a
lot
of
time
on
soccer
fields
on
weekends,
so
this
is
something
that
I
live
this
question
all
the
time,
but
if
you're
not
worried
about
it
or
if
you
feel
like
it's
we're
good
enough
now
and
that
you
can
actually,
you
know
solve
for
it
with
more
Precision
later
on
when
the
individual
projects
come
up,
you
feel
comfortable
with
it
and
I'm
comfortable
with
it.
We're
cool.
D
F
Got
it
the
next
two
questions
are
mostly
for
for
the
applicant,
so
Jeff,
if
you
want
to,
if
you
want
to
take
a
crack
at
these,
that
should
be
too
hard,
and
if
you
want
to
throw
up
that
phasing
slide,
actually
that
that
that
was
kind
of
important
to
me
or
it's
important
question.
F
First,
one's
super
easy
and
it's
just
is
Google
and
lendlies.
Are
you
planning
on
keeping
all
the
buildings
operational,
even
if
they're
in
later
phases
to
be
developed,
I,
assume,
you're,
not
gonna,
end
leases
and
kick
anybody
out?
Are
these
gonna
be
fully
like
people
going
to
work
and
eating
their
lunch
and
doing
their
whole
thing
until
you're,
getting
ready
to
knock
the
building
down.
P
Martin
probably
knows
a
little
bit
more
particulars,
but
most
of
the
a
lot
of
these
but
yeah
go
ahead.
Marvin
yeah!
Actually
it's.
Q
A
little
bit,
commissioner
Dempsey's
pretty
question
it's
a
little
bit
too
early
to
say
there
is
a
contemplation
to
there's,
certainly
some
demo
that
has
to
be
done
to
prepare
land
to
be
dedicated
to
the
city
in
phase
one.
So
before
we
break
ground
on
any
construction,
we're
dedicating
almost
three
acres
of
land
to
the
city
for
parks
and
affordable
housing,
and
so
we've
got
to
clear
those
sites
in
advance.
Q
We
may
see
the
need
strategically
to
clear
more
sites
just
for
construction
staging
and
phasing
Etc,
so
there
could
be
other
sites
that
that
come
down
more
quickly
and
I
think
there
will
be
other
cases
where
it's
safe.
You
know
likely
you
can't
say
for
sure,
but
likely
that
some
people
would
be
still
working
in
in
the
building
and
then
sort
of
waiting
for
their
new
building
to
be
done
and
then
moving
over
to
that
building.
So
I
think
it's
probably
a
bit
of
a
mixed
bag
and
I.
F
We
want
people
hanging
out
there
having
coffee
and
walking
the
dog
and
throwing
a
frisbee
and
taking
their
kids
to
the
soccer
games
like
I'll,
be
doing
what
I
wouldn't
want
to
see
happen
and
I've
seen
this
I've
seen
this
occur
with
other
Office
Buildings
with
a
tenants
leave,
then
the
office
building
sits
dormant
some
of
that
for
years,
and
what
I
wouldn't
want
to
see
happen
is
for
this
to
turn
into
a
bit
of
a
ghost
town,
because
there's
a
bunch
of
spaces
that
are
now
just
bereft
of
people
and
and
that
ends
up
kind
of
leaving
a
weird
vacuum.
F
That's
that's
not
appealing,
I
think
that
that's
actually
sort
of
the
opposite
of
activation.
It's
kind
of
unsettling.
S
F
Anyway,
I
would
just
say
that,
as
our
goal
is
to
make
this
active
and
Lively,
you
might
cut
against
that
by
clearing
out
whole
sections
and
leaving
it
vacant
for
two
years.
So
that
was
my
sensitivity.
Thank
you
for
listening
last.
One
I
want
to
talk
about
air
quality
because
as
real
sensitive
about
this,
when
we
did
555
and
I
want
to
ask
about
log
and
I
want
to
ask
about
r4a.
F
So
if
I
understand
400
load
is
that
is
not
actually
in
this
master
plan.
It's
it's
a
building,
that's
between
the
twos,
it's
the
South!
It's
to
the
bottom
and
to
the
right.
It's
right
there!
Yeah
there
you
go.
My
understanding
is
that's
the
building
that
was
flagged
as
having
sort
of
unremediable
air
quality
problems
during
phase
two
construction.
Is
that
correct,
correct,
okay,
and
is
that
is
that
a
lindley's
building?
Do
you?
Y'all
does
Google
own
that.
F
Well,
I
hope
you're
having
very
friendly
conversations
with
them
about
all
the
dust.
That's
going
to
be
coming
their
way,
so
I'm
I,
guess
I'm
as
long
as
you're
going
to
try
to
work
that
out
with
him,
and
it
looks
if
I
recall
from
the
staff
report
as.
T
D
Yeah
terms
of
current
building
code
requires
certain
Merv
air
filters,
which
yeah,
if
they
kept
their
windows,
closed
and
doors
closed,
that
it
would
mitigate
it
down.
80
percent,
so
it'd
be
below
the
significant
impact
and
it
would
be
considered
less
than
significant,
but
I
do
want
to
just
mention.
You
know
the
city,
nor
the
developer
can
really
control
what
happens
on
that
site
and
so
conservatively.
That's
why
we've
assumed
a
significant
unavoidable
impact
is
because
we
can't
dictate
if
those
doors
and
windows
stay
open
or
closed
totally.
F
Fair,
the
good
news
is
it's:
that's
a
commercial
building
as
I
understand
it
or
is
it
is
a
commercial
building
going
in
is
that
the
new
one.
D
So
it's
a
commercial
building.
Today
it
is
proposed
to
be
a
residential
building
with
residential
units
yep,
okay,.
F
Well,
that
you
know
that
it
always
worries
me
a
little
bit
when
we're
doing
infill
like
this,
because
it's
easy
to
forget
the
people
that
live
there
that
have
to
live
in
a
construction
zone,
and
you
know
I,
imagine
there'll,
be
conversations
with
folks
about
just
you
know:
keep
your
window
shut
for
the
next
two
years.
F
I
sure
hope
they
all
have
air
conditioning,
but
I
guess
all
I
would
do
is
ask
that
you
really
treat
the
folks
there
as
neighbors,
whether
you
know,
especially
if
you
don't
own
the
building,
because
you're
asking
a
lot
of
it.
You're
asking
a
lot
of
them
because
for
some
folks
they'd
rather
leave
the
window
open
and
save
the
money
and
not
pay
for
air
conditioning
right.
But
this
is
going
to
be
two
years
of
air
conditioning
and
that's
not
insubstantial.
F
So
I
just
I
want
to
make
sure
we
all
flag
that
that
there
is
a
cost
being
put
on
the
people
that
live
there
and
they're,
not
your
tenants,
so
that
same
concept
applies
perhaps
even
more
with
r4a.
So
that's
that
little
chunk
that
had
the
little
chunk
of
one
that
sits
in
the
middle
of
three
so
I.
This
actually
is
a
question
for
staff.
Does
the
eir
address
the
air
impacts
for
the
folks
that
are
going
to
be
living
in
r4a
when
phase
three
is
completed
because
they
are
they're?
F
D
So
a
couple
things
one
one:
it
was
identified
in
the
AR
that
similarly
placed
residential
development
that
occurs
throughout
the
lifespan
of
this
master
plan
are
likely
to
have
similar
impacts
as
400
log.
If
they're
sort
of
within
similar
distances,
I
will
say
you
know
part
of
this
comes
down
to
the
timing
of
of
that
r4a
construction
once
they
give
us.
You
know
land.
D
If
this
is
approved,
there
is
a
lead
time
to
do
that,
and
since
it's
phase
three
that's
sort
of
surrounding
that
site,
there
is
a
chance
that
we
could
be
under
construction
around
similar
timelines
by
the
time
everything
sort
of
pans
out.
So
it's
hard
to
really
pre-assume.
If
there
might
be
an
impact
there
or
not,.
F
As
long
as
it's
covered
in
the
IR
and
as
long
as
the
city
is
looking
at,
this
I
simply
want
to
flag
again.
What
is
a
sensitivity
for
me,
which
is
looking
out
for
the
environmental
health
of
folks
that
live
in
places
when
you're
doing
and
fill
around
them
living
in
living
an
r4a
if,
if
that's
already
done
and
folks
are,
are
inhabiting
it
then
having
if
three
pops
up
then
after
it
that
could
be.
That
could
be
a
lot.
F
F
So
I
guess
I
would
simply
ask
please
be
very,
very
mindful,
as
you're
thinking
about
your
mitigations
just
remember,
there's
gonna
be
people
living
there
and
please
treat
them
with
the
utmost
kindness.
That's
it
I'll
get
off
myself
box.
That's.
F
A
All
right
so
I
have
a
I,
have
a
few
I
guess:
I
I
just
want
to
make
sure
this
is
absolutely
I.
I
think
this
is
the
answer
that
I
read
in
this
report
that
Mr
Anderson.
This
is
for
you,
my
read
of
the
staff
report
and
then
Lindsay
is
that
the
fact
that
this
potential
air
quality
issue
is
coming
up
is
because
it
was
not
studied
in
this
forum.
A
In
the
original
East
wisdom,
precise
plan,
ear
and
the
way
I
read
it,
it
sounds
like
any
sufficiently
large
master
plan
within
East,
Richmond
or
any
of
our
areas
could
in
fact
trigger
this,
and
it's
not
the
the.
This
is
not
a
Google's
Lindley
specific
issue.
You
make
the
master
plan
large
enough
and
we
didn't
include
it
in
our
ear
for
the
precise
plan
this
will
get
triggered.
Is
that
fair.
D
Yeah
so
I
think
a
couple
things
the
scale
of
the
project,
the
amount
of
phasing
that
occurs.
Those
are
key
functions
that
could
have
happened
with
it.
You
know
certain
projects,
you
know
555
as
an
example
West
Middlefield,
where
it
can
trigger
this
significant
impact.
So
this
is
not
sort
of
only
a
situation
that
would
happen
with
a
40
acre
master
plan,
but
it
can't
happen
in
other
development
projects.
D
I
do
want
to
note
just
just
for
clarity
as
well.
The
precise
plan
eir
really
focused
on
meeting
certain
thresholds
required
for
that
type
of
policy
document,
and
so
the
what
any
development
is
proposed
in
East
wisman.
D
A
Yeah
so
I
guess,
my
impression
is
if
they
submitted
if
10
different
individual
projects
are
submitted,
none
of
those
individual
projects
would
have
been
likely
to
trigger
this
issue.
That
comes
up
it's
only.
It's
only
becomes
visible
because
it's
10
we're
looking
at
all
10
projects
all
at
the
same
time,
essentially
10
different
buildings.
D
I
guess
that's
one
way
to
look
at
it.
Yeah
is
the
scale
kind
of
all
of
it
happening
as
one
project
so
yeah.
That
would
be
part
of
it.
A
No,
this
is
regarding
the
floor
market
rate,
housing,
calculation,
the
alternative
mitigation,
the
calculations
be
available
still.
A
The
the
analysis
highlighted
a
specific
issue
of
the
number
of
units
that
are
being
proposed
on
the
two
sites.
Just
like
you
did,
I
did
my
own
research
and
I
reached
out
to
a
person.
I
know
that
is
a
non-profit,
a
glow
market
rate,
housing
developer
and
said:
hey
they're,
talking
about
putting
400
units
in
two
spots.
Do
you
agree?
This
would
be
a
problem
and
what
I
heard
was
yep.
The
state
has
a
certain
amount
of
funding,
The
Sweet
Spot.
A
Has
the
report
states
on
the
in
the
summary
says:
the
sweet
spot's
like
90
to
100
units,
whether
this
is
338
or
380?
What
you
basically
have
is
four
times
that
amount
and
that
the
the
state
has
a
certain
amount
of
money,
and
so
when
they
look
at
projects
they
say
hey,
we
can't
put
all
of
our
money
in
one
basket.
A
Many
non-profit
units,
for
example,
of
margaritas-
and
it
wasn't
clear
to
me
in
Cecil's
analysis
that
when
they
compared
the
of
the
value
of
the
two
proposals,
the
fact
that
we
would
have
the
developers
would
have
to
go
through
four
phases,
even
if
it
was
two
different
developers
and
the
two
properties
that
they
would
be
unlikely
to
be
able
to
get
both
of
them
approved
by
the
state.
The
state
at
the
exact
same
year
means
that
it's
going
to
take
four
years
of
design
just
just
once.
A
The
designs
are
ready
to
even
be
able
to
go
and
ask
for
the
money,
and
that's
a
long
time
and
I
know.
Michaela
and
and
and
team,
went
off
and
looked
at
this.
But
that's
that's
a
long
time
and
I
didn't
see
that
analysis.
And
so
my
question
is:
does
the
analysis
that
was
done
on
the
comparability
of
the
alternative?
A
Take
that
into
account
and
therefore-
and
if
it
doesn't,
that
means
there
is
additional
cost
that
will
be
incurred,
because
that
construction
will
be
farther
out
into
the
future
that
they
use
the
five
percent
inflation
rate
and
so
I'm
I'm
questioning
the
direct
comparison
of
the
two.
As
was
presented
in
the
report.
D
Sure
yep
so
krisha
can
you
bring
back
Libby,
seifel
and
Michaela.
N
So,
thank
you
for
your
question.
We
did.
We
did
look
at
this
I'm.
Sorry
if
it
wasn't
clear
enough
in
the
write-up
it
was
discussed
in
the
developer
stakeholder
meetings.
N
A
Okay,
so
you're
at
the
time
you
did
a
Time
Value
calculation
in
order
to
make
sure
it
was
comparable.
I
didn't
see
any
kind
of
interest
rate
current
present
value
of
that
evaluation
done.
When
I
looked
at
the
report
to.
N
Be
able
to
see
it
you're,
you
are
correct.
We
did
everything
in
constant
dollars,
so
we're
looking
at
I
mean
you
know,
that's
the
way.
The
analysis,
typically,
we
would
do,
is
we're
looking
at
what
it
would
be
like
at
the
time
of
development.
Assuming
all
things
are
equal,
so
we're
using
2021
revenues
we're
using
2021
costs,
but
obviously
you
know
if
it.
If
it
happens
in
the
future,
there
will
be
increases
on
both
sides.
N
I,
that
is
I,
think
what
you're
saying
is
that
our
funding
Gap
is
looking
at
what
the
funding
Gap
is
as
of
2021.,
and
you
are
correct
that
there
may
be
higher
funding
needs
in
the
future,
depending
on
what
the
ratio
is
between
development
costs
and
revenues
and
what
funding
sources
are
available,
but
it
it.
It's
always
a
challenge
with
these
projects
to
figure
out
exactly
what
it's
going
to
be
like
in
the
future.
A
M
I,
don't
have
much
else
to
add
I.
Think
the
one
thing
I
guess
I
would
add
is
if
other
costs
go
up,
so
will
land
costs,
so
that's
another
factor
that
we'll
have
to
just
we
would
have
to
factor
in,
but
typically,
as
Libby
said,
we
analyze
things
in
the
current
costs
and
then,
when
we're
actually
developing,
we
usually
build
in
escalators
based
on
the
construction
timelines.
Libby.
M
Can
you
chime
in
on
the
time
frame
in
terms
of
the
phases
I
think
chair,
Cranston
had
said
you
know
this
could
take
four
years
to
raise
the
funds.
I
was
under
the
impression
that,
given
the
tax
credit
timelines,
it
certainly
they
could
not
apply
necessarily
in
the
same
cycle,
but
that
there
are
multiple
Cycles
in
a
year.
Can
you
chime
in
on
that
piece?
M
N
N
You
know
we're
we're
all
waiting
to
see
exactly
how
that
will
roll
out,
but
the
idea
of
the
Supernova
is
that
there
will
be
more
certainty
for
the
development
Community
as
it
applies
for
multiple
funding
sources
from
the
state
at
the
same
time,
so
that,
but
in
terms
of
timing
for
development,
I
mean
they're.
Just
like
any
project.
The
developer
is
going
to
have
to
go
through
design
process
work
with
the
planning
department.
N
Get
approvals
then
we'll
be
you
know
once
they
are
ready
through
that
process,
and
they
know
exactly
you
know
they
know
more
about
what
their
construction
costs
are
going
to
be
right,
because
they
have
to
have
a
certain
level
of
design
to
get
a
pretty
good
idea
of
what
their
construction
costs
are
going
to
be.
They're
then
going
to
apply
for
funding,
so
that
can
take.
You
know
one
or
two
years.
Just
depending
on
what
the
timing
is
for
the
design
and
review
and
planning
process.
A
Yeah
I
don't
know
whether
I
don't
know
whether
this
is
a.
It
was
a
Michaela
question
or
a
Lindsay
question.
The.
A
It's
related
to
the
the
centralized
Services
I
can
remember
the
name
of
it:
the
com,
the
common
electrical
areas,
the
common
water,
but
also
common
heat.
Is
there
anything
in
the
development
in
the
master
plan,
the
agreement
that
would
that
would
potentially
allow
the
the
BMR
sites
that
are
given
to
the
city
to
be
able
to
leverage
the
benefits
of
those
centralized
facilities
to
be
able
to,
but
also
get
some
of
the
benefit
of
that
centralization?
A
It
sounded
like
from
my
meeting
with
with
Martin
and
Jeff
that
it
could
produce
reduced
energy
costs
by
sharing
power
across
the
buildings.
The
centralized
heating
could
reduce
utility
costs
for
those,
and
it
could
be
something
that
actually
could
be.
Is
there
anything
in
the
development
agreement
that
would
preclude?
That?
Is
that
once
it's
dated,
then
we
have
no
access
to
it,
or
is
that
something
that
could
be
considered
for
a
corporation
into
what
we're?
Looking
at
yeah.
D
So
you
bring
up
a
quick,
a
great
question,
so
the
way
that
the
district
system
was
analyzed
in
terms
of
sort
of
our
utility
analysis.
We
did
not
assume
connection
to
the
through
sites
proposed
to
be
dedicated.
However,
you
know
in
Google's
proposal
it
did
incorporate
those
sites
and
we
do
have
language
in
the
master
plan
materials
that
do
speak
to
the
fact
that
the
city
could
connect
at
a
future
date.
You
know
if
that's
desired,
but
some
additional
analysis
would
need
to
be
done.
A
Next
question:
is
it
just
it's
just
Krishna
Gutierrez
is
fond
of
saying
how
he
knew
this
stuff
is
a
new
thing
for
me,
How
likely
and
and
the
Google
enemies.
People
seem
to
make
think
it
was
no
big
deal.
Maybe
it
is
a
public
worst
person,
the
idea
of
I'm
I'm,
the
idea
of
BTA,
saying
Harry,
Berry
pipes
and
wires
and
things
underneath
our
railroad
tracks
to
be
able
to
do
this
stuff.
D
So
there's
two
factors
here:
there's
the
proposed
private
District
utility
system
that
I
think
you're
pointing
out
the
central
plan
is
proposed
on
the
west
side
of
the
tracks
and
then
most
of
the
actual
master
plan
areas
on
the
east
side,
so
Google
if
they
pursue
that
option,
would
be
sort
of
Jack
and
boring
under
the
light
rail
tracks
to
install
that
infrastructure.
D
Addition
to
that
would
be.
You
know,
any
future
Bridge
the
city
builds,
would
be
going
over
the
VTA
tracks
and
so
City
staff
and
including
the
public
work
staff
have
met
actually
with
VTA
and
the
California
Public
Utility
Commission
who's,
actually
the
ultimate
Authority
on
that
Rail
and
they
have
procedures
in
place
and
processes
in
place
to
get
permits
and
approvals
for
both
of
those
type
of
things.
D
D
But
with
those
two
improvements,
as
well
as
I'll,
add
on
to
that
the
mid-block
crossing
and
the
bus
stop
modifications
on
Middlefield
Road,
those
all
sort
of
require
cpuc
and
BTA
approval,
and
in
the
conversations
we've
had
with
them.
There
has
not
been
any
indication
that
that
achieving
approvals
for
those
would
be
impossible
or
prohibited.
It
would
just
be
ultimately
abiding
by
their
rules
and
regulations.
A
Next
question,
and
it
wasn't
clear
to
me,
where
they're
safe
for
one
strategic,
consulting
or
the
same
empathy
or
not,
but
the
value
of
the
the
community
benefit
that
would
help
you
know.
Essentially,
women.
A
A
D
So
with
let
me
back
up
so
two
parts:
one
is
really
the
heart
of
that
question.
I
will
pass
off
to
the
applicant,
because
I
think
it's
really
part
of
their
fundamental
program
that
they
can
explain
how
that
works,
but
I
will
say
in
terms
of
the
valuations
that
were
outlined
in
the
report.
All
of
that
is
in
today's.
You
know
fee
amounts
and
dollar
amounts
and
those
do
escalate
every
year
and
so
with
approval
of
the
D.A.
D
Those
would
continue
to
escalate
every
year
in
Pace
with
our
budget
as
well,
so
Martin
or
Jeff
I'm,
not
sure
who
wants
to
answer
that,
but.
Q
I
could
try
to
add
a
little
color.
Thank
you
Lindsay,
and
thank
you
for
the
question.
Chair
Cranston.
The
the
program
has
a
number
of
parts
to
it.
It's
really
a
suite
of
tools
to
try
to
bridge
gaps
in
allowing
those
small,
small
and
local
businesses
non-profits
underrepresented
groups
to
be
able
to
participate
in
really
in
the
heart
of
the
community.
So
a
big
portion
of
it
is
just
building
the
space,
and
so
that's
definitely
probably
not
going
to
remain
in
2021
2022
dollars.
Q
When
we
build
the
space
we'll
have
to
build
it
wherever
inflation
is
at
wherever
escalation,
all
those
costs
run
there's
another
portion
of
the
program
that
is
kind
of
a
TBD
fund.
That's
set
aside
for
you
know
we
want
to
go
in
and
tailor
the
the
needs
to
each
group
that
that
comes
and
participates
in
the
program
and
those
needs
will
change
and
in
some
cases
those
needs
will
be
paid
out
through
monetary
contributions
to
them
and
so
and
Lindsay.
Q
Let
me
know
if
I'm
saying
anything,
that's
inconsistent,
but
I
think
the
idea
with
those
components
is
that
they're
they're
pegged
sort
of
to
inflation
or
to
an
index.
So
if
it's
something
that's
delivered
in
kind,
that's
it's
constructed,
then
it
is
sort
of
by
definition
set
set
to
what
things
cost
at
that
time.
And
if
it's
a,
if
it's
a
monetary
contribution
to
that
participating
group,
then
that's
tracked
with
with
an
index.
D
Yeah
I
think
commissioner
Cranston
I
think
you
might
be
getting
at
sort
of
the
capped,
rent
or
sort
of
some
of
the
other.
U
A
Okay,
I
was
more
the
total
value
in
how
that's
right.
Okay,
so
yeah
is
the
capital
rent
escalator
as
well.
Q
A
And
then
I
guess
this
is
a
commissioner
Nunez
is
asking
why
the
D.A
is
so
long.
My
question
was
what
happened
if
it
happens
promptly,
so,
if
everything's
built
in
eight
years,
does
that
mean
this
program
goes
away
in
eight
years
and
all
the
all
the
benefits
that
you
know
where
somebody
might
get
for
as
long
as
10
20
years
goes
away
after
eight?
How
does
that?
A
D
How
it's
being
proposed
is
that
it
has
to
have
a
minimum
lifespan
of
10
years
from
one
once
the
space
is
completed.
So
that's
a
minimum,
no
matter
what
and
then,
if
it
is,
the
D.A
goes
beyond
the
10-year
period,
then
it
has
to
be
the
full
length
of
that
da
term
that
the
da
is
active,
so
no
matter
what
it
would
be,
a
minimum
of
10
years.
Q
And
longer
than
that,
because
that's
10
years
from
when
a
group
moves
into
their
storefront
and
it's
going
to
take
us
time
after
this,
hopefully
after
this
master
plan
is
approved,
phase
one
zoning
permit
is
approved,
building
permit
is
approved.
Building
is
built
all
those
things
happen,
while
the
D.A
is
in
effect
and
then
someone
moves
in
and
then
they
get
the
tenant
the
minimum
10
years
that
Lindsay's
talking
about
so.
H
Hey
in
there
Martin
hang
in
there,
man
look,
these
are
good
questions,
we're
getting
to
the
weeds
and
that's
great,
sometimes
and
and
it's
informative,
and
so
a
couple
of
questions.
I
have
too,
though,
pertains
to
just
length
of
time
looking
at
it
from
a
different
perspective
from
chairman
Cranston,
the
affordable
housing
aspect
to
it.
You've
got
anywhere
from
320
to
380
units
that
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
you're
going
to
build
immediately
I
mean
we
still
have
time
to
be
able
to
go
out
and
seek
funding
now
we're
also
entering
well.
H
Some
would
argue
that
we're
already
in
a
recession
I,
dare
say
that
within
the
next
two
to
three
years,
I,
don't
think
that
economic
situation
is
going
to
be
too
peachy
King
around
here.
So
if
we
think
about
the
long-term
value
of
it,
holding
the
asset
of
the
land
and
here's
a
question,
I
don't
think
there
is
a
time
limit
for
us
to
be
able
to
set
forth
this
construction
project
and
and
move
forward
with
it.
H
We
can
afford
to
wait
until
we
come
out
of
this
recession
so
that
it
is
at
that
point
an
opportune
time
for
us,
so
then
propose
the
plans,
get
the
construction
going
along
with
the
monies
that
we'll
need
and
at
that
time
I
would
think
that
the
cost
of
construction
wouldn't
be
as
high
as
it
is
now,
and
so,
if
we
look
at
from
that
economic
perspective,
there's
still
an
opportunity
to
gain
some
wealth
from
that
by
being
diligent
enough
and
not
to
start
something.
H
Now
when
it
could
be
problematic
by
the
time
you
begin.
So
it
is
if,
unless
I'm
mistaken,
is
there
a
time
limitation
for
when
we
can
submit
our
application?
For
you
know
the
low
income,
the
affordable
housing
aspect
to
it
or
not,.
D
A
queen
Chef,
you
could
bring
back
Michaela
I
think
getting
at
your
question.
Usually
folks
are
not
seeking
funding
until
there's
an
actual
proposal
on
the
table,
so
it
would
really
be
necessary
for
us
to
either
release
an
RFP
or
an
RFQ
to
start
that
process
and
as
part
of
Michaela
and
the
housing
team's
efforts.
We're
really
trying
to
be
diligent,
diligent
about
how
we
plan
to
release
that
and
timing
of
that
and
trying
to
be
as
proactive
as
we
can
within
the
parameters
that
we
have.
D
We
have
to
be
really
careful
about
not
sending
out
requests
for
proposals
if
we
don't
actually
have
the
land
delivered
to
us
and
know
all
the
details
of
the
land,
so
Michaela
I,
don't
know
if
you
have
anything
else
to
add
to
that.
H
All
right,
okay,
so
so
then
in
essence,
that's
the
advantage
of
being
able
to
at
least
have
the
land.
Now
once
this
is
done,
and
then
at
the
time
when
it's
appropriate,
based
on
my
understanding
of
what
you've
said
now,
then
the
city
can
move
forward
with
its
plans
to
do
XYZ,
and
then
we
can
look
at
it
with
more
real
numbers
at
that
time,
knowing
right
now.
D
J
Thank
you,
Chuck
Hansen.
This
question
is
for
I
guess
either
Jeff
or
anyone
from
them
loose.
Whoever
was
there
I
guess.
My
question
is
oh,
however,
many
years
ago,
whatever,
like
group
or
team
meeting,
it
was
where
the
idea
to
offer
up
the
separate
land
dedication
you
know
for
the
affordable
units
to
the
city
as
an
alternative
mitigation.
J
I
guess,
like
my
question,
is
you
know?
If
I
can
you
know
kind
of
prompt
it
a
little
bit?
It's
like
whoever
it
was
who
said
something
along
the
lines
of
hey
guys
have
a
great
idea.
Why
don't
we
offer
up
the
land
to
the
city?
They
can
develop
all
the
affordable
housing
over
there
and
we
can
develop
all
the
residential
market
rate
and
office
and
Retail
over
here.
That's
a
great
idea
because.
Q
Well,
do
I
fill
in
I
fill
in
the
blank
now?
Yes,
yeah,
I
love.
That,
because
sure
thank
you
for
the
question,
commissioner
Nunez.
Affordable
land
dedication
is
a
is
a
strategy,
that's
mentioned
in
the
precise
plan
as
a
way
to
to
hit
the
20
Target,
and
it's
also
in
the
BMR
ordinance.
So
we've
always
been
trying
to
maximize
the
amount
of
affordable
units
and
provide
the
most
deeply
affordable.
Give
the
city
control.
There's
the
I
think
the
advantages
have
been
laid
out
at
this
point.
Q
So
it
was
a
strategy
that
we
read
about
in
the
the
precise
plan
and
as
a
way
of
trying
to
maximize
the
number
of
affordable
units
started
to
to
emerge
in
our
minds,
as
probably
the
most
fruitful
strategy
to
maximize
those
units.
J
You
know
with
like
dispersed
amidst
all
of
the
Parcels
of
land.
There
is
no
land
dedication
because
it
sounds
like
that's
only
to
the
benefit
of
us.
If
that's
the
end
result,
then
you
guys
would
be
happy
about
that.
Q
Think
if
we're
trying
to
maximize
the
amount
of
affordable
units
I,
don't
think
that
delivering
a
lower
percentage
of
inclusionary
would
would
be
meeting
the
city's
goals.
J
If
we
said
theoretically
under
this
scenario,
hey
like,
if
the
city
of
Mountain
View
was
personified
and
said,
hey
like
I,
don't
I
want
less
affordable
units.
I
want
you
guys
to
build
less
affordable
units,
but
no
land
dedication.
You
build
it
inclusionary
amidst
all
the
properties
interspersed
within
then
you
guys
would
be
like
happy
about
that.
I'd.
J
Q
It's
not
something:
we've
looked
at
in
a
long
time,
so
I
don't
know
if
that
I
could
give
a
sort
of
a
clear
answer
at
this
point.
Okay,
thank
you.
P
P
You
know
Google
is
committed
to
providing
as
much
affordable
housing
as
we
can
and
we
have
an
affordable
housing
fund
that
does
such
a
thing
and
helps
the
creation
of
affordable
housing,
because
we
do
recognize
that
there
is
a
housing
crisis
in
the
area
right
now,
so
I
I
think
we
would
rather
produce
as
much
housing
as
possible.
So
I
don't
think
we
would
be
just
as
good
with
that
solution
in
that
hypothetical
situation
that
was
proposed
there
by
commissioner
Nunez.
P
But
you
know
we
would
have
to
go
back
and
look
at
it
in
more
detail.
A
Q
No
I
I
recall
those
discussions
at
the
at
the
session,
and
we
did.
We
did
look
at
it.
I
think
we
reconfirmed
that
it's
not
economically
viable
to
get
anywhere
close
to
the
number
of
units
that
the
land
dedication
strategy
provides
and
given
that
the
land
education
strategy
was,
if
I'm,
recalling
correctly
broadly
supported
by
the
EPC
back
in
February
2021
confirming
you
know
as
we
as
we
did
that
we
were
not
going
to
come
anywhere
close
to
that
with
inclusionary
we've
kind
of
haven't
looked
at
it
very
much
since
then,.
D
So
the
direction
that
Council
provided
was
definitely
to
move
forward
in
looking
at
it
and
further,
and
so
here
we
are
at
this
point,
having
studied
it
and
come
conclusion.
E
Just
briefly-
and
maybe
this
is
a
question
for
staff,
so
I
think
the
housing
piece
in
the
first
phase
is
included
in
the
housing
element
pipeline.
So
if
this
is
approved,
those
pipeline
projects
became
actual
like
that
helps
us
gain.
Compliance.
Is
that
right,
but
if,
if
for
whatever
reason,
based
on
what
commissioner
Clark
had
said
earlier,
like
the
different,
the
different
layouts
and
configurations,
it's
possible
that
we
could
have
a
reduced
number
than
what
we're
planning
to
tell
the
state
for
this
coming
housing
element
cycle.
Is
that
right.
D
Correct
so
it
was
assumed
that
the
affordable
housing
sites
and
the
phase
one
residential,
the
R1
and
R2
would
be
implemented
during
the
time
span
of
that
housing
cycle.
So
so
yeah,
that's
what
we've
assumed
in
the
draft
housing.
G
Thank
you
first,
a
couple
questions
that
are
a
little
bit
unrelated
to
what
we've
already
discussed.
I'll
say
this
first
one
is
the
active
uses
on
the
ground
floor
or
around
the
residential
buildings
in
in
the
park.
G
I
I
think
I,
reread
in
the
precise
plan
that
general
office
is
allowed
as
the
ground
floor
use.
I
know
that
you
guys
had
stated
you're
really
trying
to
get
Neighborhood,
Services
in
and
and
and
I
believe
that
you're
you're
going
to
work
in
good
faith
towards
that.
But,
since
you
know
we're
looking
at
a
long
time
period,
we
don't
know
what
may
happen,
and
we
understand
that
sometimes
general
office
is
just
easier
to
lease
out.
G
I
just
I'm
wondering
how
that
works
with
all
the
numbers
that
we've
been
looking
at,
including
the
affordable
housing
in
that
case,
because
it
comes
after
the
fact.
So
it's
just
a
question.
Yeah.
D
So
I
think
the
two
million
dollar
square
foot
development
Reserve-
is
all
Associated
specifically
with
the
net
new
office
development.
It
is
not
presumed
or
to
include
sort
of
the
smaller
offices
that
I
think
you're
referring
to
that
are
allowed
in
neighborhood
commercial
areas,
but
there
is
sort
of
a
square
footage
limit
to
those
spaces
for
those
permitted
office
uses,
but
it
wouldn't
be
something
that
would
be
deducted
from
the
development
Reserve
I.
Think
part
of
what
is
important
to
remember
is
any
space.
D
That's
participating
in
this
Business
program
that
they
have,
as
a
community
benefit,
has
to
fit
very
specific
parameters,
so
any
tenant
that
goes
into
those
spaces
would
have
to
meet
those
qualifications
and
really
the
way
those
are
set
up
and
Martin
or
Jeff
feel
free
to
chime
in,
but
I.
Don't
really
think
that
most
office
users
would
really
qualify
for
that
small
business
program.
Q
For
starters,
the
only
thing
I
can
think
of
that
might
show
up
is
if
a
non-profit
is
looking
for
a
small
amount
of
office
space,
and
we,
you
know,
that's
the
only
thing
I
can
think
of,
and
hopefully
in
that
case
it's
a
non-profit
that
has
some
sort
of
operation
that
can
spill
out
into
the
plaza
into
the
park
a
little
bit
if
it
was
a
non-profit
bike
repair
making
that
up
and
they
had
some
office
space
and
they
also
Spilled
Out
and
did
bike
repair
lessons
in
the
park.
Q
That
might
be
an
affinity.
You
know
sort
of
an
affinity
in
terms
of
matching
the
tenant
to
the
space
they
participate
in
the
program,
and
then
there
could
be
some
small
amount
of
general
office.
But
that's
not
generally
what
the
program's
designed
to
do
and
yeah
I
agree
with
you,
Lindsay
I,
don't
think
it
would.
You
wouldn't
really
have
anyone
that
would
even
fit
the
criteria
so.
G
So,
for
instance,
there
wouldn't
be
an
r
d
firm
that
you
know
was
Associated
or
just
you
know,
tied
in
well
with
what's
already
going
there
going
in
for
office
space,
it
is
its
own
entity,
but
you
know
also
Tech
and
has
office,
and
it
comes
in
it's
just
small.
C
Q
Think
I
said
that
r
d
sounds
like
a
land
use,
that's
subject
to
the
development
reserve,
and
so
the
master
plan
doesn't
contemplate
that
land
use
in
in
active
use.
I
I
could
imagine
a
small
maker
space,
a
small
some,
but
again
they
would
have
to
be.
They
would
have
to
meet
the
criteria,
and
so
it
it
sounds.
It
still
seems
very
much
like
an
outside
an
outside
chance.
An
r
d,
firm
I
think
is
again
just
sounds
to
me
like
a
different
land
use,
that's
not
contemplated
within
the
the
program.
D
Yeah
and
I
think
one
thing,
commissioner:
yen
is
really
if
it's
a
loud
land
use
that's
currently
allowed
in
that
area,
then
it
is
a
use
that
could
go
into
these
ground
floor
commercial
spaces,
with
the
exception
of
those
that
qualify
are
part
of
this
program,
which
will
be
much
more
tailored.
You
know
to
the
specific
parameters
for
that,
so
I
think
I
think
to
your
point.
D
I
can't
definitively
say
that
there
won't
be
some
kind
of
small
or
office
use
that
goes
into
a
ground
floor
space
at
some
point
if
this
development
is
built
out,
but
it's
really
comes
down
to
what
the
precise
plan
allows
today.
G
Right,
I
guess
that's
that
is
the
Crux
of
my
question
is
that
in
the
precise
plan
it
allows
for
r
d
allows
for
general
office
and
I
know.
I
just
didn't
know
is
the
50
000
square
foot
that
is
part
of
the
program.
Those
parameters
cover
the
entire
50
000
square
feet.
That
has
to
be
so.
They
have
to
meet
parameters
of
the
program
in
order
to
be
considered
active
use
within
the
50
000
square
feet.
D
D
Participating
in
that
program
which
may
not
qualify
for
a
typical
office
use,
so
there
are
other
square
footage
where
potentially
that
could
happen.
What
I
will
say
is
that
the
master
plan
attempts
to
lay
out
sort
of
the
intention
of
the
land
uses
that
are
preferred
by
listing
I
think
they
have
a
table
in
there
of
active
uses
in
the
implementation
chapter
that
are
really
geared
towards
more
of
these
services
and
Retail
and
entertainment
type
uses
that
I
think
Google
and
lundlies
have
kind
of
identified
as
their
preferred
tenants.
G
D
G
Because
I
was
just
thinking
twenty
four
thousand.
If
one
thousand
square
feet
is
three
affordable
units,
that's
24
times
three
affordable
units,
it's
like
almost
I
can't
do.
Math
75,
almost
75
I
can
only
Round
Up,
affordable
units
that
we,
you
know,
are
not
getting.
G
G
Let
me
I'm
sorry
I
have
my
notes
here.
You
know
very
small
question.
I
know:
there's
24
7
access
to
get
to
the
bridge
through
Ellis
Park,
so
that's
fabulous,
but
then
the
park
itself
has
limited
hours,
I'm,
assuming
that's
just
like
a
regular
Park
you're,
not
going
to
put
Gates
around
the
Pathways
and
limit
access.
That
way.
It's
just
sort
of
it's
known
that
when
it's
a
certain
time
you're
not
supposed
to
be
there
all
right.
G
G
A
Yeah,
so
we'll
move
into
public
comment.
Would
any
member
of
the
public
on
the
line
like
provide
comment
on
this
item?
If
so,
please
click
the
raise
hand,
button
and
zoom
or
press
start
on
your
phone
phone
users
can
mute
and
mute
themselves
with
star
six
bpc
clerk
will
start
the
timer
and
let
you
know
when
your
time
is
up
can
I
get.
A
A
So
we
can,
we
can
probably
keep
it
all
right,
keep
it
at
three
minutes
ago
and
visit
here,
9
20.,
all
right.
Let's
keep
it
at
three
minutes.
B
Okay,
I'm,
promoting
Jerry's
and
perfume
one
second.
B
Yes,
one
second.
S
Yes,
thank
you.
My
name
is
Jerry
santarpia
I
am
a
representative
of
the
North
Carolina's
Union,
and
we
come
out
in
full
support
of
this
project.
This
project
will
give
local
hire
so
people
who
usually
got
to
travel
two
hours
in
one
way
will
now
be
able
to
work
where
they
live,
which
is
actually
great
for
the
community,
because
their
tax
base
will
stay
there,
it's
great
for
their
families,
because
they'll
have
more
time
to
stay
at
home
with
them.
S
Also,
it
is
documented
that
90
of
apprentices
are
people
of
color,
so
that
will
also
help
for
equality
and
Equity.
So
we
come
out
in
full
support
of
this
project
and
thank
you
very
much.
B
All
right,
I
am
promoting
Sean
Elise
to
start
should
be
able
to
speak
now.
L
Good
evening,
chair
and
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Sean
Reese
I'm,
a
field
representative
with
the
NorCal
Carpenters
Union
Local
405..
We
are
in
full
support
of
the
Middlefield
Park
master
plan.
This
plan
will
create
thousands
of
construction
jobs
for
the
community
and
it
will
provide
Economic
Opportunity
and
tax
revenue
to
the
city,
county
and
school
districts.
L
It
will
help
alleviate
the
housing
crisis
and
give
the
community
more
housing
opportunities
by
creating
19
000
units.
I
would
like
to
point
out
and
applaud
the
collaboration
between
Google
and
the
City
of
Mountain
View.
In
closing
the
Carpenters
support
this
project
for
the
benefits
it
will
provide
to
the
community.
We
appreciate
your
investment
to
the
community
and
thank
you
for
your
time.
L
A
B
V
I
think
I'm
on
you
hear
me:
yes,
hi!
Thank
you
all
thanks
Commissioners.
This
has
been
a
really
very
deep
and
detailed
conversation
on
your
part,
even
just
in
the
questions
phase,
so
I'm
gonna
have
to
actually
listen
to
it
again
to
catch
all
the
details
on
your
subsequent
discussion.
V
I
just
want
to
highlight
the
letter
that
Mound
View
Coalition
for
sustainable
planning,
wrote
and
I'm
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
Coalition
Cliff
Chambers
might
be
speaking
later
about
some
of
the
details
in
the
letter,
but
we
get
into
is
commissioner
Clark
said
some
of
the
details
around
the
housing
count.
Affordable
and
inclusionary.
Housing
is
very
important
and
also
the
cost
sharing
and
how
that's
all
going
to
work
and
when
that
part
will
be
considered
whether
it's
during
this
phase
with
EPC
and
city
council
or
at
a
later
time.
V
This
is
going
to
come
up
more
in
the
design
phase.
But
if
there
are
any
retail
outlets
that
are
going
to
be
used
for
grocery
or
produce,
they
need
to
be
big
enough
to
have
Landing
areas
and
storage
areas.
So
if
that
needs
to
wait
for
the
design
phase,
fine,
but
if
it
needs
to
be
anticipated,
maybe
that
should
be
thought
through
on
the
trails
and
lighting
the
commissioner
Ian
brought
up
a
moment
ago.
V
The
the
way
that
lighting
is
handled
has
to
be
done
very
carefully,
because
it
can't
be
so
bright
that
it
has
impact
on
on
Wildlife,
but
also
needs
to
be
safe
enough
for
pedestrians
and
bicyclists
that
will
inevitably
use
the
facilities
and,
lastly,
mbcsp
has
long
supported
local,
higher
and
Fair
Labor
practices,
so
we'll
just
throw
our
support
behind
that
as
well.
Thank
you.
B
W
I'm
with
the
Mountain
View
Coalition
for
sustainable
planning
and
we've
had
the
opportunity,
I
think
to
many
sessions
hosted
by
Google
lendlies
to
provide
input.
We
really
appreciate
that
we
have
expressed,
and
now
really
continue
to
express,
strong
support
for
the
overall
mixed
use
development
framework
provided
in
the
master
plan,
as
we
did
participate
back
in
2021
in
the
study
sessions
and
I.
I
really
feel
that
staff
and
the
applicant
did
an
exemplary
job
of
addressing
many
of
the
issues
that
were
discussed
at
that
time.
We're
particularly
pleased
with
the
outcome
of
the
phasing
plan.
W
There's
a
lot
of
front
loading
of
the
Housing
Community
benefits
the
you
know,
the
parks,
Network
Etc,
and
what
you
haven't
really
mentioned
great
deal
about
is
the
small
business
diversification
and
non-profit
inclusion
program,
which
we
think
feel
is
really
a
great
Community
Asset
and
the
other
thing
that
really
wasn't
talked
much
about
is
the
kind
of
some
of
the
really
good
design
features
that
have
resulted
from
the
design
by
the
applicant,
but
but
also
in
terms
of
really
having
a
really
good
Urban
Design.
W
It
really
fits
together
and
I
think
you
know
there's
a
lot
of
very
good
things
about
this
overall
project,
like
you,
we've
had
a
lot
of
concerns
about
whether
or
not
the
actual
delivery
of
the
affordable
housing
units
is
part
of
the
master
plan
will
actually
be
realized
and
you've
had
a
lot
of
good
discussion
about
that,
and
I
won't
repeat
that.
But
there
are
a
couple
of
questions
that
really
I
do
have
after
that
is
there's
a
big
difference.
W
Whether
the
city
has
a
contribution
or
not,
if
they
don't
have
a
contribution
in
21
20
21
dollars,
it's
63.7
to
80.6
million
dollars
of
financing
required
compared
to
just
22.5,
to
39.4
4
million
with
the
city
contribution,
and
really
need
to
understand
why
we
really
hope
that
we
do
have
the
full
380
units
and
we'd
really
like
to
know.
W
If
there's
going
to
be
a
city
contribution,
we'd
really
like
you
to
ask
the
city
to
make
a
commitment
for
the
city
contribution,
because
it
makes
a
huge
difference
in
terms
of
the
the
city,
financing
and
I
think
you
know,
in
close
in
closing
we're
very
pleased
with
overall
master
plan,
I
think
it's
going
to
be
a
jewel
for
the
city
and
we
strongly
support
it.
But
if,
if
you're
not
able
to
realize
the
380
units,
either
really
should
be
a
contingency
plan
for
that.
So
thank
you
very
much.
U
Not
only
is
there
the
opportunity
to
open
up
thousands
of
construction
jobs
for
the
Region's
skilled,
Union
Workforce,
with
prevailing
wages
to
support
Working
Families,
but
we
also
appreciate
the
affordable
housing
to
really
try
to
meet
the
housing
crisis
in
Mountain
View,
in
addition
of
the
opportunities
for
small
businesses,
non-profits
and,
of
course,
support
services
for
residents
of
the
new
retail
and
so
forth
could
support
jobs
and
many
other
job
opportunities
at
the
site.
So
we
really
support
this
plan
and
we're
excited
to
see
this
development.
X
Hi,
yes,
thank
you,
council
member
everybody.
My
name
is
Sharon
denoa
and
I
am
a
resident
at
Mountain,
View
and
I.
Just
had
a
few
questions,
I
appreciate
the
questions
around
current
residents
and
the
traffic,
as
well
as
the
pollution
that
it's
going
to
cause.
My
concern
is
I'm
concerned
about
the
power
load
that
this
is
going
to
offer.
We
typically
have
outages,
frequently
and
I'm
concerned
about
it.
X
Another
concern
I
have
is
that
it
sounds
to
me
that
they
have
both
office
and
housing
and,
although
they
have
committed
to
using
union
labor,
I'm,
also
wanting
to
know,
if
that's
for
the
entirety
of
their
project,
and
if
that
this
labor
is
going
to
be
local
labor
to
the
source
of
it
is
going
to
be
local
to
ensure
that
there
is
no
exploitation
of
labor
on
their
project.
I'm
also
concerned
about
whether
it
is
modular
construction
or
if
this
is
going
to
be
on-site.
X
Construction
based
upon
quality
of
the
duration
as
I
know
that,
while
modular
has
been
something
that's
been
popular
but
that
the
quality
is
low
quality.
Those
are
pretty
much
my
questions
also
that
I
hope
that
the
hours
of
construction
can
be
limited
to
Day
hours,
so
that
it
is
not
disturbing
the
residents
further.
Y
A
A
Z
Hi,
can
you
hear
me
yes,
yep?
Oh
great,
thank
you
good
evening,
chair
Cranston,
Vice,
chair
Joyce
and
Commissioners.
My
name
is
Kenneth
Javier
Rosales
and
I'm
the
planning
senior
associate
with
SV
at
home,
a
non-profit
non-profit
organization
that
advocates
for
affordable
housing
across
Santa,
Clara
County.
Z
Z
Z
Middlefield
Park
will
play
a
significant
role
in
the
growth
of
Mountain
View
in
the
next
decade,
as
it
feeds
into
the
city's
housing
element
bringing
the
obligations.
We
are
confident
that
all
parties,
including
the
city
council,
are
committed
to
actualizing
the
vision
of
Middlefield
Park
and
we
are
excited
about
its
role
in
taking
the
next
step
to
implementing
the
East
wisman
precise
plan.
Thank
you.
So
much
have
a
good
night.
T
Hey
friends,
I'll
keep
a
quick
yay
for
more
housing
yay
for
trees.
The
land
use
looks
good,
but
when
it
comes
to
design
Jeff
come
on,
you
got
this
make
it
weird.
Give
me
something
interesting
to
look
at
give
me
something
fun
to
go
visit
thanks.
A
And
then
we
will
bring
it
back
to
the
commission
for
deliberation
and
action
would
like
to
go
first.
H
Thank
you,
hey
everyone
moves
around
so
much
on
the
screens.
Vice
chair
again,
I
had
a
quick
question
for
you,
so
you
mentioned
that
you
wanted
to
explore
more
of
the
potential
of
an
additional
I.
Don't
know
30
something
or
40
something
housing,
affordable
units
before
we
move
on,
did
I
understand
you
correctly
in
your
last
question
or.
G
G
So
if
that
is
general
office,
and
so
Lund
lease
and
Google
had
said
that
within
their
program,
that
kind
of
thing
is
not
encouraged
and
I
believe
they
are
really
trying
to
get
Neighborhood
Services
in,
but
their
program
encompasses
only
twenty
thousand
out
of
50
000
of
what
is
active
use.
So
if
what
doesn't
qualify
in
their
program
for
the
twenty
thousand
can
then
go
into
the
thirty
thousand
I'm
sure
that's
not
their
intention,
but
you
know.
G
We
know
that
sometimes
over
time
things
can
change
and
it's
allowed
then,
and
in
that
case
we
are
getting.
Maybe
oh
I'm,
sorry
what
was
it
24
000
square
feet
extra
of
office
space
that
does
not
get
accounted
in
our
jobs,
housing,
linkage
and
all
the
other
sort
of
numbers
that
we're
looking
at.
But
that's
the
one
I
was
focusing
on
so.
Y
H
G
Well,
I
would
love
for
this
to
go
to
be
discussed
first
among
us
to
find
out
what
you
guys
think
and
personally
I
do
think
it's
something
that
Council
should
also
look
at.
So
if
that's
the
only
way
is
to
vote
and
put
it
as
a
conditional.
H
Okay,
because
when
you
had
brought
that
up,
I
started
thinking
about
it
from
that
perspective,
because
I
had
it
before
and
when
I
looked
at
the
studies.
I
had
some
questions,
but
what
I
had
seen
there
that
I
don't
based
on
how
you
explored
it
and
explained
it
I
didn't
see
a
remedy
for
it.
So
I'm
with
you,
I
support
your
question
in
terms
of
how
does
this
work,
so
you
have
someone
else
on
your
side
to
explore
that
perspective,
but
that's
all
I
have
right
now.
Thank
you.
G
Okay,
thank
you
appreciate
it
so
I'm
happy
to
hear
what
everyone
else
has
to
say
in
regards,
because
we'll
probably
have
to
vote
on
that.
I
Yeah
I
can
go
so
I
sort
of
looking
at
this
holistically.
I,
I
I
know
this
all
sort
of
came
to
Russian
after
I
left,
Council,
but
I
know
we
were
really
excited
about.
I
You
know
the
precise
plan
that
we
put
in
place
and
the
the
potential
for
these
Master
plans
to
come
through,
which
would
assemble
a
number
of
parcels
and
be
able
to
provide
the
neighborhood
a
lot
of
the
I
think
the
key
elements
that
we'd
hope
would
come
to
fruition
with
a
precise
plan
in
specific
areas,
instead
of
it
all
happening
in
piecemeal
over
some
number
of
of
decades,
through
different
property
owners
and
and
different
concepts
that
might
not
be
fully
planned
out
in
advance
like
you
would
get
with
a
with
a
master
planning
process,
and
so
when
I
had
for
I.
I
So
I'll
just
focus
on
what
my
initial
high
level
concerns
were
and
how
they
were
addressed
and
where
my
concerns
lie
today.
I
think
most
of
my
initial
concerns
you
know
from
a
year
a
year
or
so
ago.
Well,
actually,
two
years
ago,
were
have
been
delayed.
I
Somewhat
I
was
very
concerned
about
the
20-year
da,
just
because
that's
really
not,
let
me
say,
standard
it's
just
something
we
haven't
done
before
and
and
and
part
of
that
is
that
we
just
haven't,
had
something
with
an
assemblage,
this
large
with
all
the
elements,
and
so
what
I'm?
What
I'm
pleased
with
is
is
the
work.
That's
been
done
to
adjust
the
phasing,
so
that
was
the
other
sort
of
big
concern
that
I
had
as
part
of
a
20-year
da.
I
Was
that
if
you
face
this
in
such
a
way
or
in
a
in
a
sub-optimal
way,
you
end
up
with
certain
elements
that
may
or
may
not
get
get
built,
and
so
one
of
the
things
that
we
really
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
had-
or
at
least
one
of
the
things
that
is
important
to
me,
is
to
get
some
of
the
housing
and
the
community
benefits
up
front.
I
Some
of
the
the
open
space,
the
the
Green
Space,
the
connectivity,
the
the
affordable
housing
and
the
and
market
rate
housing
as
well,
especially
in
that
area.
As
we've
seen,
we've
approved
some
other
projects
that
have
we're
currently
sitting
on
the
shelf.
It
may
not
happen,
and
so
this
is
I
think
another
opportunity
to
start
to
move
those
things
forward
in
a
way
that
is
compliant
with
the
precise
plan
and
meets
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
those
goals.
I
So
I
think
my
my
general
concerns
about
the
the
long
length
of
the
da
have
mostly
been
addressed.
My
bigger
concerns
with
the
pazing
have
mostly
been
addressed
by
what's
been
proposed.
I
I
always
go
back
and
forth
between
inclusionary
units
and
land,
because
you
know
they
both
have
their
their
benefits
and
drawbacks,
and
it
really
comes
down
to
I.
Think
the
the
the
site,
the
context
and
all
the
things
around
it
as
to
whether
or
not
the
land
is,
is
more
valuable
than
than
the
inclusionary
unit
and
I.
I
Think
in
this
case
you
know
we,
the
I,
think
the
the
city
very
deliberately
wrote
in
you
know
the
the
alternative
mitigations
or
the
alternative
land
dedication.
As
long
as
it
can
provide.
I
You
know
an
equal
or
greater
benefit
than
the
inclusionary
and
I
think
in
this
particular
Market
environment
and
the
long
length
of
this
D.A
having
the
certainty
of
having
that
land
dedicated
up
front
provides
a
pretty
you
know,
decent
value
to
the
city
and
as
opposed
to
the
inclusionary
units,
just
because
we,
as
the
city
will
have
the
ability
to
to
you,
know,
move
on
that
site
whenever
we
feel
it's
most
appropriate
and
I
think,
and
we
have
the
ability
to
select
the
unit
mix.
I
We
have
the
ability
to
partner
with
a
developer
that
we
we
want
and
design
it
the
way
that
we
want,
and
it
may
take
a
long
time
and
it
may
cost
a
lot
of
money,
but
we
we
have
the
ability
to
select.
You
know
where
we
get
the
funding
from
how
much
we
put
in
how
we
design
that
site
and
and
how
it
all
fits
together.
I
So
those
are
those
are
the
phasing
the
D.A
and
ultimately,
the
the
layout
of
the
the
different
spaces
which
I
know.
There
were
initial
concerns
about
a
couple
years
ago
in
some
of
the
study
sessions.
I
think
all
of
those
have
been
addressed,
but
it
looks
like
a
site
that
or
an
overall
plan
that
really
fits.
I
My
hope
is
that
it
all
obviously
I'd
like
it
all
to
come
to
fruition,
but
in
terms
of
phasing
getting
the
housing
up
front
phase
two,
which
includes
some
other
community
benefits,
is
a
big
chunk
of
the
office,
which
I
think
is
a
good
incentive
for
for
this
to
get
built,
because
office
will
will
have
some
value
there
and
then
that
the
remainder
of
their
office
is
in
phase
four,
so
that
provides
some
encouragement
for
phase
three
to
occur
too,
so
I
think
overall
it
generally.
It's
come
together
quite
well.
I
You
know,
I
still
have
some
concerns
about
the
the
D.A,
obviously
and
hoping
that
this
all
comes
to
fruition
and
that
we
don't
get
stuck
part
way
through,
but
I
I
think
it
will
be
hard
to
find
another
plan.
That's
been
put
together
and
a
a
Consortium
or
or
a
team
behind
this
little
unleash
Google
that
that
can
pull
this
off.
Frankly,
they're,
not
the
only
one
but
they're
one
of
the
few.
I
So
overall
I
have
a
lot
of
confidence
in
in
this
master
playing
Concept
in
the
way
that
it's
come
together.
I
think,
for
me,
the
other
part
of
being
an
EPC
member
is
I.
You
know,
I
always
pay
attention
to
any
the
eir
and
any
you
know,
statement
Civil,
Right
considerations
and,
and
things
like
that,
because
that
is
really
important
for
us
to
look
at
and-
and
the
key
here
is
looking
at
what
caused
this.
I
Why
is
it
being
caused
and
and
do
the
benefits,
outweigh
the
the
cost
and
and
I
think
it's
been
touched
upon
earlier,
especially
in
the
questions
you
know
we're
really
looking
at
the
you
know,
the
the
the
load
project
and
the
combination
of
things
and
the
barrier,
quality
management
districts
rules
where
we're
sort
of
looking
at
a
cumulative
impact
and
I
think
the
mitigations
associated
with
those
that
have
been
identified
should
should
at
least
give
me
some
solos
and
and
I
believe,
ultimately,
that
those
can
be
appropriately
mitigated,
maybe
not
to
the
point
of
not
triggering
overriding
considerations,
but
I
feel
comfortable
recommending
that
we
we
do
that
in
this
particular
case.
I
So,
overall,
the
ground
floor
reach
the
ground
floor.
Commercial
space,
I,
understand
the
concern,
but
I
you
know,
I
work
for
a
small
company
are
one
of
our
four
play.
Like
one
level
is
24
000
square
feet.
That's
really
not
a
lot
of
office
in
the
grand
scheme
of
things.
It's
it's.
I
You
know,
I
I,
look
parking
back
to
walking
the
space
today
and
it's
just
if
we
were
talking
about
a
hundred
thousand
square
feet
or
something
like
that,
then
I
would
be
much
more
concerned,
but
I
I,
don't
necessarily
share
the
same
concern
about
you
know:
20
to
25
000
square
feet
of
commercial
space,
especially
on
the
on
the
ground
floor
where
that's
likely
going
to
be
broken
up
and
and
the
the
uses
for
those
are
probably
going
to
be
pretty
small
and
it
will
be
good
to
have
not
just
it'll
be
great
to
have
retail
and
neighborhood
serving
services.
I
But
some
of
those
Services
can
also
be
commercial
on
nature
as
well,
and
so
I
think
I.
Think
overall,
what's
proposed
Works
quite
well,
I'm,
not
sure
you
know.
If,
if
we
want
to
to
flag
it
as
something
for
for
Council
to
consider
I,
think
that's
fine,
I'm,
not
sure
like
saying
that
it
should
be
housing
instead.
Is
the
right
is
the
right
approach?
Maybe
it
could
be
something
else,
but
I
I,
just
don't
I
guess
the
bottom
line
is
I'm,
just
not
that
worried
about.
Q
I
That
amount
of
square
footage
if
it
were
three
times
that
I'd
be
much
more
worried
so
in
any
event,
I'm
prepared
to
support
the
staff
recommendation
when
folks
are
ready,
I,
don't
there's
there's
nothing
in
my
mind
that
that
requires
you
know
a
significant
change
or
deviation
from
from
what's
been
put
together
after
numerous
Community
meetings
and
and
study
sessions
between
both
EPC
and
Council.
A
Commissioner
Nunez
Vice
chair
again
your
hands
left
up
from
before
I
do
yeah
your
hands
have
been
up
the
whole
time.
Are
you
still
sorry.
A
G
Guess:
okay,
but
he
had
already
started
that
I
was
just
going
to
say
that
you
know
we
didn't
talk
about
it.
Obviously,
Google
and
lendlies
have
done
a
lot
of
work
and
if
I
were
to
sing
the
Praises
of
this
master
plan,
we'd
be
here
all
night,
so
I
think
they're
very
aware
of
all
the
the
positives
and
it's
Testament
to
all
their
community.
Outreach
and
staff
has
worked
very
hard
on
this.
It's
Testament
to
all
that
work
and
also
the
community
activists
that
everyone
is
supporting
this
in
general.
G
So
what
we're
discussing
now
is
just
breast
tax,
because
I
I,
really,
you
know
Take
This
Job
seriously,
we're
here
to
as
the
voice
of
the
the
city,
the
community
and
I
do
want
to
ensure
that
the
win-win
is
truly
a
win
for
Mountain,
View
and
I.
Know
that
commissioner
Clark
wasn't
worried
about
you
know
the
20
I
forgot
26
24
000
square
feet,
but
if
we're
looking
at
jobs,
housing
linkage,
it
doesn't
matter
how
small
it
is.
G
If
it's
general
office,
we
should
be
getting
like
almost
you
know:
75
more
affordable
units,
I'm,
not
saying
you
know,
I
I,
don't
want
any
other
kind
of
use
there,
other
the
neighborhood
serving
retail.
That's
not
what
I'm
saying
I'm
just
saying
if,
in
the
case
that
we're
getting
general
office,
should
we
not
be
looking
at
applying
the
jobs
housing
linkage
to
that
general
office
as
well?
G
So
that's
really
the
point
of
that
conversation
and
then
the
only
point
I
have
in
addition
to
that
is
the
is
back
to
like
my
first
question,
to
staff
about
asking
the
affordable
housing
people.
G
So
when
we
look
at
that
alternative
mitigation,
we're
looking
at
you
know
what
it
is
as
being
appropriate.
G
G
If
inclusive
units
are
not
doable,
then
what
else
can
we
be
gaining
as
a
city
in
order
to
get
the
380
units
that
the
jobs
housing
linkage
States?
We
need
you
see
what
you
mean,
I'm,
not
sure
it
was
a
whole
long
sentence
paragraph
there,
but
the
main
point
is:
we
need
to
get
380
units,
that's
what
the
jobs
housing
linkage
says
for
affordable
housing.
If
the
demand
is
two
in
three
bedrooms,
why
are
we
not
getting
380
with
a
mix
of
the
appropriate
two
and
three
bedroom
units?
G
Why
are
we
settling
for
a
bunch
of
studios
and
less
than
what
the
precise
plan
says,
at
least
for
that's
that's
market
right,
maybe
that's
a
different
conversation,
but
in
general,
that's
the
mix
the
city
wants.
So
why
are
we
not
asking
for
that,
and
can
we
get
that
on
these
two
sites,
380
units
of
what
is
in
demand.
J
Yeah
I
mean
things
I
like
about
this
I,
like
the
labor
union,
a
like
transforming.
J
You
know,
like
non-optimized
parcel
of
land,
to
arguably
something
better
like
the
park,
amenities
that
works
for
me,
I
guess
it's
not
a
it
wouldn't
be
hard
for
anyone
to
Guess
that
my
biggest
concern
with
all
of
this
is
the
alternative
mitigation
from
multiple
or
a
few
angles.
J
Number
one
being
I
I
just
want
to
be
clear.
I
think
someone
from
Silicon
Valley
at
home
might
have
mentioned.
You
know
we're
getting
like
20
or
something
like
that
and
and
it'd
be
great
to
support
because
of
that.
J
I
like
I
want
to
be
clear:
we're
not
getting
20
units
we're
getting
land
we're
getting
land
with
the
potential
the
potential
for
that
to
become
20
inclusionary,
and
the
thing
I
think
about
is
what
is
the
value
of
that
land
and
and
and
to
whom?
Is
that
value
corresponding
to
with
regards
to
the
choices
that
we
as
a
body?
And
then
the
city
council
goes
on
to
make
because
land
has
multiple
ways
of
being
valuable
right,
you
can
use
it
for
agriculture.
J
I'm
I'm
I'm,
not
really
in
agreement
with
that.
You
know
maybe
I'm
around
the
wrong
kind
of
developers.
But
one
of
the
word.
What
the
the
top
word
that
I've
heard
the
most
around
the
developers
I've
been
around
is
risk.
Y
J
Risk
risk
risk
risk
risk
risk
risk.
Sorry,
C,
full
consultant.
You
hear
me
saying
risk
again,
I'm
sorry,
but
it's
it's.
It's
a
lot
of
risk
in
Good
Times
to
be
in
the
development
business
and
right
now.
What
I'm
hearing
we're
going
to
get
is
land
and
labor
costs
associated
with
all
of
the
planning
and
procurement.
The
RFP
we
have
stretched
out
staff
already
and
the
affordable
developer
themselves
have
risk
that
we're
not
even
aware
of
and
so
right
now
what
I'm
hearing
is
and
what
I'm
feeling
and
seeing
is
there's
maybe
three
options.
J
One
is
we
go
with
the
alternative
mitigation
and
we
go
with
what
the
applicant
is
proposing
and
maybe
in
the
future,
I
honestly,
if,
if
by
the
time
phase,
one
or
phase
two
are
done
and
we
don't
have
those
units,
I
I,
think
that's
a
failure,
if
not
by
phase
one
I'm
honestly
worried
that
we
will
just
say
yeah,
let's
do
alternative
mitigation
and
at
the
end
of
this
you
know
10
years
down
the
line
15
years
down
the
line
honestly,
hopefully
not
20
years
from
now
that
there's
no
units
there
no
affordable
units
or
something
subpar.
J
Maybe
we
even
had
to
sell
the
land
because
we
actually
couldn't
find
a
way
to
develop
it.
Maybe
we
had
to
settle
for
less
than
the
380
units,
because
that's
all
that
we
could
do
given
all
the
conditions
and
circumstances
at
that
time,
and
so
that's
something
that,
in
terms
of
understanding,
what's
the
likelihood
of
that
happening,
I'm
not
saying
those
are
the
most
likely
outcomes,
but
we
don't
know
what
the
potential
likelihood
of
that
happening.
Is
we
don't
have
that
risk
assessment
in
front
of
us
to
say,
hey,
here's,
the
alternative
mitigation
and
here's?
J
J
Maybe
we
got
less
units,
but
this
one
is
more
guaranteed
if
Google
is
a
Titan
of
economy
and
lend
lease
is
the
developer
of
the
Sydney
Opera
House
and
the
Patronus
Towers
in
Malaysia.
They
know
what
they're
doing
right
I
don't
understand
why
it
would
be
a
pain
for
them
to
develop
less
affordable
units
in
an
inclusionary
manner,
because
the
truth
is
we
already
have.
You
know
I
heard
commissioner
Clark
say
Hey,
you
know
we
could
decide
whatever
we
want
to
do
with
with
these
units.
J
So
on
on
that
front,
I
feel
like
I'm,
Flying,
Blind,
I'll,
say
for
personally
I
would
say
I
think
as
a
body
we're
Flying
Blind.
Everyone
can
disagree
with
me
if
they
want,
but
that's
something
that
I'm
I'm
really
upset
about,
and
it's
it
and
I
don't
know
that
it's
necessarily
on
the
applicant
which
is
yeah,
but
that
that's
my
thinking
as
far
as
the
retail
goes
I'm
very
much.
J
You
know
appreciative
of
commissioning's
critical
eye
around
the
office
space
and
whether
or
not
that
necessary,
whether
or
not
that
does
have
to
apply
the
jobs
linkage
has
jobs.
Housing
linkage
has
to
apply
to
that
good
catch.
I,
I,
I
I
support
that
kind
of
critical
review,
but
yeah
I
I,
just
don't
know
so
I'm
only
one
of
seven
I'm
gonna
stop
talking
and
hear
what
others
have
to
have
to
say.
E
Thank
you
and
I
do
want
to
say
that
one
of
the
things
I
most
appreciate
about
serving
on
the
EPC
is
the
dialogue
and
working
alongside
colleagues
who
are
so
committed
to
the
Future,
Mountain,
View
and
I
also
know
a
lot
of
hours
have
gone
into
the
East.
Wasn't
a
precise
plan
and
I
do
Echo,
commissioner
Clark's
sentiment.
I
think
this
is
getting
closer
to
realizing
the
vision
we
want
in
in
East,
swissman
and
really
linking
off
of
some
residential
development.
E
I
think
I'm.
The
planning
commissioner,
who
lives
the
closest
to
this
project
and
and
the
master
plan
and
I'm
just
really
excited
with
the
direction
that
it's
going.
It's
not
a
perfect
project.
I
really
believe
that
this
work
is
about
trade-offs
and-
and
we
have
to
wrestle
with
some
of
these
things
that
aren't
exactly
ideal.
E
I
am
comfortable
with
lands,
education,
I
think,
affordable
housing,
financing
is
extremely
complex
and
far
exceeds
my
my
knowledge
and
despite
many
hours,
I've
spent
trying
to
understand
it,
and
so
I
I
think
that
the
flexibility
it
affords
for
us
to
as
a
city
to
be
able
to
say
we
have
this
land.
We
can
work
with
an
affordable
housing
developer.
E
We
can
understand
what
the
need
is
and
where
the
funding
landscape,
what
that
looks
like,
because
it
is
constantly
changing
and
I
I,
would
really
want
to
be
informed
and
better
understand
where
the
affordable
housing
developer
Community
is
coming
at
and
what
they
know
and
and
where
the
cities
funding
ability
lies
because
I
think
that
uncertainty
and
gives
me
a
lot
of
pause
but
I
think
the
opportunity
to
build
out
this
vision
and
have
two
Parcels
dedicated
for
affordable
housing
to
be
developed
in
a
way
that
we
see
fit
and
can
advise
down
the
road
and
that
ameliorates.
E
My
concerns
a
couple
things
that
haven't
come
up
tonight
and
I
I
did
just
want
to
flag.
We
haven't
talked
as
much
about
moot
Mobility
through
the
project
and
I
do
think
that
they're
there's
some
concerns
raised
about
the
traffic
congestion
around
101
in
Ellis.
That
just
cannot
be
addressed,
given
a
host
of
reasons
and
I.
Think
a
lot
of
this
project
hinges
on
VTA
right
and
getting
more
people
to
use
this
highly
underutilized
station
at
the
moment,
and
so
I
I
just
want
to
be
careful
that
we're
going
into
this.
E
Knowing
that
a
lot
of
this
depends
on
getting
more
people
on
public
transit
and
VTA
is
a
critical
partner
in
that
and
really
getting
people
to
to
want
to
live
a
car
light
kind
of
Lifestyle
in
this
in
this
new
area
that
we're
building
and
then
the
last
thing
that
I'll
say
related
to
the
broader
and
East
wisman
precise
plan,
there's
there's
a
hope
right
to
develop
the
village
centers
on
Middle,
Field
and
wissman
and
I
would
encourage
the
applicant
to
think
about
in
their
business
program.
E
Where
is
their
opportunity
really
for
staging?
So,
as
as
that
area
maybe
gets
redeveloped?
Are
there
opportunities
to
think
about
some
of
the
local
neighborhood
serving
businesses
that
exist
in
this
area
and
allow
them?
You
know,
write
a
first
refusal
or
give
them
the
first
kind
of
offer
to
be
considered
for
some
of
the
the
ground
floor,
retail
and
space
that
we've
been
talking
about.
So,
like
commissioner
Clark
I
I
will
plan
to
support
this
project,
but
I
want
to
hear
from
others
about
how
we
can
make
it
better.
F
Thank
you,
Mr,
chair,
I,
guess.
I
should
comment
on
kind
of
the
two.
The
the
two
big
points
of
discussion
tonight
very
simply
I
would
say
that
I
I
I'm
curious
about
the
issue
that
Vice
charity
and
raised
and
I
would
I
would
welcome
either
now
or
later
staff
going
back
and
kind
of
re-examining
whether
that
calculation
was
done
fully
correctly
because
of
his
office
space.
F
It
didn't
get
counted
and
perhaps
I
didn't
catch
the
issue
well
enough,
I
didn't
I,
didn't
catch
it
the
first
time,
so
maybe
I'm
just
confused
about
it.
But
if
that,
if
that
off
that
50
000,
we
were
talking
about
some
part
of
that
wasn't
counted
in
the
linkage.
I'd
like
to
know
why,
so,
anyway,
I
would
support
sort
of
a
re-examination
of
maybe
a
re-explanation
of
how
that
how
that
was
done
on
the
question
of
the
alternative
mitigation.
F
I
think
consistency
matters
so
two
year
year
and
a
half
ago,
I
guess
it
was
I-
was
very
much
in
support
of
the
idea
of
us
going
the
route
of
taking
the
land
because
it
it
appeared
to
let
us
have
more
units
in
total
and
at
the
time
we
were
big
fans
of
as
much
as
we
could
get
Let's
Do
It,
and
this
as
I
understood
it
got
us
more
units
going
with
the
the
land
thing.
F
I
understand
the
the
fear
that
comes
with
you
know
a
looming
recession,
I
totally
get
it
I,
get
it
too
I,
don't
I,
don't
I,
don't
get
the
impression
that
there's
a
lot
of
certainty
in
building
huge
buildings
like
this,
but
as
long
as
staff
can
look
us
all
in
the
eye
and
say
that
they
feel
you
know
that
it's
built
into
the
it's
going
to
get
built
to
the
budget,
and
this
is
the
kind
of
thing
that's
been
done
before.
F
F
Value
that
I
value,
staffs
support
of
the
concept,
I
value
very
much
the
community
support
of
the
concept
you
know
we
heard
from
we
heard
from
the
Carpenters
and
and
sustainable
like
we've-
got
that
long
entry
list
of
folks
that
showed
up
to
say,
there's
so
many
things
that
we
like
about
this
project
and
and
I
didn't
hear
a
lot
of
fear
about
doing
the
land
education.
F
Tell
me
this
is
not
an
unduly
risky
thing
to
do,
but
from
all
of
the
evidence
I've
seen,
it
is
not,
and
that's
good
enough
for
me
to
stick
with
my
you
know
what
I
voted
on
a
year
and
a
half
ago
and
say:
I
am
okay
going
forward
with
this
project
and
with
the
alternative
mitigation.
F
H
Thank
you,
chair.
Well,
first
of
all,
I
haven't
been
a
former
member
of
the
Mountain
View
Westman
School
Board
I
can
tell
you
and
go
sharing
with.
Google
is
tough
and
more
often
than
not,
we
got
Jack's,
not
as
simple
as
that.
I'm
sorry
truth
be
told
man,
it's
it's
a
long
run
out
process.
I
can't
tell
you
how
many
times
you
promised
the
School
site
that
went
out
the
door
in
all
my
five
years
there
and
then
two
years
since
then.
H
Now
the
conversation
steered
towards
them
directly
discussing
this
issue
with
the
city
for
credits.
That's
how
it
goes
so
to
have
something
like
this
go
through
this
process
for
a
number
of
years
and
then
come
back
with
an
actual
proposal
and
an
intent
to
develop
as
needed
to
me
and
I
appreciate
that,
because
you
had
various
Community
inputs
in
general,
not
just
from
the
city
Mountain
View,
but
among
Our
member
fellow
citizens,
which
is
wonderful,
so
we're
not
adverse
to
risk.
H
I
wasn't
part
of
a
board
that
was
cautious,
but
nor
were
we
Reckless,
so
I
know.
I
can
ask
a
question
and
I
can
ask
something
of
a
question
to
Eric
or
perhaps
even
Sandy
Lee,
if
she's
I
think
she's
still
here
when
I
went
through
some
of
these
sessions
with
Google
and
negotiating
and
tactics,
and
also
just
negotiating
good
faith
for
the
most
part.
H
Sometimes
we
wouldn't
have
a
risk
assessment
depending
on
the
subject
matter,
but
here
now
that
we're
dealing
with
this
land,
mass
and
land
transfer
development
and
potential
development
for
affordable
housing
is.
Is
it
customary
to
have
a
risk
assessment
also
Associated
to
the
potentiality
of
this
working
or
not
in
such
a
project?
Eric?
Is
this
how
it
works
through
the
city,
or
is
that
something
that
comes
later
on
or
does
that
even
come
into
play?.
AA
Thanks
for
the
question,
commissioner,
you
know
I'll
I'll
say
that
we're
we're
walking
new
ground
in
a
lot
of
ways
for
this
project.
I
know:
we've
done
some
discussion
around
site
dedication
for
other
other
projects
in
the
past,
maybe
I'll
tee
this
up
to
Lindsay
and
see
kind
of,
as,
as
you
were,
evaluating
this
site
dedication
process
and
what
what
have
you?
AA
You
know
what
what
other
experience,
whether
it's
in
in
Mountain,
View
or
other
cities-
and
you
know
we
work
with
a
lot
of
Consultants-
that
work
with
a
lot
of
other
cities
and
and
how
has
that
kind
of
informed
the
process
and
this
question
of
risk
assessment?
D
Yeah
so
I
think
a
couple
things
we
had
one
project
dedicate
land
in
North,
Bay
Shore,
that
was
the
sobrato
project.
D
There
was
no
kind
of
analysis
like
what
we've
done
for
this
project
for
that
one.
So
this
really
is
quite
honestly,
the
first
time
we've
done
an
analysis
of
a
land
proposal
like
this,
where
we've
looked
at
not
just
sort
of
all
of
the
numerical
information
that
we
can
but
also
look
at
what
could
potentially
be
developed
here
and
what
kind
of
cost
does
that
come
at?
So
you
know
this
is
really
a
new
territory
for
us.
D
Think
we've
learned
a
lot
from
the
city
staff
side
of
really
how
we
could,
potentially,
you
know,
modify
our
programs
or
other
requirements
to
sort
of
address.
Some
of
these
things
we've
learned
along
the
way,
in
terms
specifically
to
some
kind
of
risk
assessment.
D
You
know
I
can't
say
that
we've
done
what
would
be
classified
as
a
risk
assessment
for
I
think
what
has
been
talked
about
here
tonight.
I
think.
A
lot
of
the
work
we're
doing
is
assessing
a
private
proposal,
and
what
does
it
mean
to
deliver
something
on
that
land?
We're?
Definitely
not
the
only
city.
We've
talked
to
other
cities
that
have
done
land
education,
San
Jose
is
a
good
example.
They've
done
quite
a
few
land
education
projects,
and
so
we've
talked
to
them
in
this
process
and
and
I.
D
Think,
a
lot
of
us
are
all
in
the
same
boat
in
terms
of
trying
to
figure
out
what
these
mean.
I.
Think
and
really
what
we've
produced
as
part
of
this
staff
report
and
worked
with
consultant
team
on
is
really
our
best
best
efforts
to
date
on
trying
to
figure
this
out.
D
You
know
I'll,
say
openly
and
honestly
I
can't
say
this
may
not
be
perfect,
but
I
think
it's
it's
really
our
best
guess
and
approach
to
try
to
assess
this
and
I
think
we're
open
as
City
staff
to
how
we
might
be
able
to
do
different
analysis
in
the
future
or
how
we
could
consider
different
things
in
the
future
as
well.
H
Thank
you,
okay,
great!
Thank
you,
Eric.
Thank
you,
Lindsay.
That
helps
out
a
lot
because
I
think
this
is
a
girl,
a
movement
in
progress
right
and
we're
heading
towards
whatever
we
spoke
about
years
that
passed
whether
I
was
on
the
school
board
or
now
with
the
EPC.
It's
all
about
the
Partnerships
you,
you
may
sometimes
ruffle
some
feathers.
H
Sometimes
you
don't,
but
you
get
to
an
end
point:
that's
a
win-win
for
everyone,
as
best
as
you
can,
as
soon
as
you
can
outweighing
all
the
pros
and
cons
and
right
now,
based
on
what
I
see
from
Google
and
what
they've
proposed
I
can't
see
any
font
to
what
they've
suggested
in
doing
so
I'll
be
supporting
this.
That's
not
an
issue.
I.
Think
the
question
now
is:
can
we
believe
in
our
process
to
move
forward?
H
A
And
I
haven't
had
a
chance
to
train
him
if
it
would
be
okay,
if
I
stroke
from
her
okay,
so
I
had
the
at
the
last
meeting
I
suggested.
All
of
you
go
back
and
listen
to
the
study
session
that
Michaela
alluded
to
about
the
the
council
asked
for
affordable
housing
and
I
heard
seven
voices
very
committed
to
finding
ways
to
get
affordable
housing
in
this
city.
I
didn't
hear
oh
we're
going
to
put
this
off
to
some
future
point
in
time
it
was
staff
figured
out.
C
A
Also
heard
that,
based
on
the
precise
plan
or
the
the
housing
element-
and
the
things
have
been
brought
forward,
that
we
have
the
wonderful
problem
of
potentially
having
more
land
owned
by
the
city
than
than
we've
ever
had
before.
So
how
do
we
go?
Get
the
money
to
be
able
to
do
these
kinds
of
things?
So
that's
that's
a
great
news,
I
mean
already
I,
know.
A
She's
she's
been
on
the
attendee
list
here
all
day
and
she's
actually
listening
that
her
and
her
team
Michaela
did
a
great
job
in
that
session
and
they
did
lay
out
a
plan
on
how
you
know
what
do
we
need
to
do?
There
is
no
certainty.
A
The
first
definitions,
I
got
of
management,
was
making
decisions
with
that
with
incomplete
information.
So,
commissioner,
Nunez
welcome
to
the
EPC.
Okay,
we're
not
going
to
have
all
the
answers,
that's
what
we
have
to
deal
with.
Quite
frankly,
I
like
this
and
say
you
know
what
Google
and
Unleashed
have
listened
they
made.
Some
changes
would
I
love
this
to
be,
like
commissioner,
Clark
a
six
or
seven
year,
you
know
development
agreement
and
get
it
all
done
that
time.
A
Absolutely,
but
this
is
I
quite
frankly,
I
look
at
this
and
anything's
been
posed
in
North
Bay
Shore
I
have
far
more
confidence
that
this
will
happen
than
anything
in
North
Bayshore.
Quite
frankly,
this
to
me
looks
like
it's.
It
has
a
lot
of
great
potential
and
I.
Think
Krishna
Court
made
the
comment
earlier
that
things
that
were
submitted
before
have
fallen
by
the
wayside.
A
Well,
guess
what
we
all
saw
an
approved
and
Council
approved
a
development
on
Middlefield,
it's
across
the
street
from
this
and
guess
what
it
went
before
the
DRC
this
week,
it's
back
450
more
units
across
the
street
from
this
okay
Lowe's
has
been
approved.
There's
another
project.
That's
proposed
right
next
to
it
the
potentials
here
for
not
only
this
but
another.
You
know
thousand
plus
units
all
in
this
area,
so
to
raise
jerem's
concern
about
retail
I.
A
The
one
thing
that
I
didn't
mention
when
I
talked
to
my
to
my
housing
friend
was
you
know?
What
do
you
think
of
getting
land
and
his
answer
was
land
is
a
really
good
thing,
so
it
was
the
fact
that
we
were
getting
the
land
I
didn't
hear,
I'm
not
going
to
go,
try
to
figure
out
how
to
get
the
money
it's
like.
If
you
have
land
I,
could
you
know
I'll
try
to
figure
something
out
so
I,
I,
I
I
understand
the
knee?
Is
the
value
of
potential
risk
assessment?
That's
actually
a
Financial
Risk!
A
Okay,
if
I'm
going
to
get
low
money
from
a
bank
or
you
can
go
pay
my
bills
or
you
gotta.
Are
you
gonna
you're
gonna
make
money
for
me
well
that
same
kind
of
assessment
doesn't
happen
as
much
in
in
the
nonprofit
world,
and
so
I
think
you
know,
as
the
landowner
we're
going
to
have
the
ability
to
go.
Do
that
and
and
pick
a
developer
put
it
out
there
and
look
for
a
proposal
just
like
we
did
with
Lot
12
to
be
able
to
find
something
and
make
it
work.
A
On
to
figure
I
think
they
may
be,
you
know
they
can
also
look
trapped
in
the
pencil
even
more
because
you
know
I'm,
it's
gonna
take
a
while
if
you
get
all
these
big
predators,
but
I
think
what
Google
has
done
is.
Is
it's
a
step
in
the
right
direction?
It's
not
perfect.
A
I
I
think
it's
it's
the
transformation
that
we
all
hope
for
in
these
swissmen
is
starting.
You
know.
Hopefully
it's
done
before
what
I
say
earlier:
2042.,
hopefully
I'm
still
kicking
in
2042.,
but
I
think
this
is
the
step
in
the
right
direction.
So
I'm
going
to
be
supporting
it.
Getting
it's
not
perfect,
but
I
think
it's
a
I
think
it's
a
it's
a
project,
we're
supporting
and
we'll
we'll
be
recommending
to
council
that
we
move
it
ahead.
So
that's
amazing,
nice
to
you.
G
Thanks
yeah
I
think
I
was
one
of
the
few
Commissioners
who
very
early
on
really
really
pushed
for
inclusionary,
and
we
didn't
have
enough
information
at
the
time
now
that
we've
got
a
little
bit
more
information
and
not
only
is
Google,
saying
it's
not
feasible
economically
to
do
inclusionary
all
inclusionary
and
the
consultant
is
saying
it
and
staff
agrees
with
the
consultant.
I'm
happy
to
put
aside
the
inclusionary
I
do
see
benefits
a
lot
of
benefits
to
the
alternative
mitigation
of
having
the
land,
so
that
is
a
plus
that
goes
into.
G
Is
this
alternative
mitigation
equal
or
greater
there's
something
to
put
in
the
column
that
says
yes,
this
is
something
we
can
consider
what
I
am
I
guess
if
I,
if
I
want
to
get
really
specific.
The
question
would
be,
then
is
the
land
dedication?
Is
that
enough
land
to
do
the
required
number
of
units
and
what
mixes
that
it
is
great
we
get
to
choose,
but
the
what
we're
choosing
is
limited
to
what
that
land
can
provide.
G
G
G
Does
this
pass
muster
and
that
question
has
not
been
answered
for
me
personally,
I,
don't
know
it
doesn't
seem
like
it.
Given
the
information
we've
gotten
we're
not
going
to
get
the
380.
If
we
want
two
three
bedrooms
and
all
these
other
projects
we're
saying
yeah,
we
really
think
families
should
live
here.
I
think
families
should
live
here
too.
G
G
Certainly
definitely
and
honestly,
I
wouldn't
even
be
looking
at
this.
You
know
we
got
the
information
on
Friday
I.
Just
now
looked
at
it,
so
I'm,
sorry
Jeff,
you
know
when
we
had
had
the
online
thing.
I
didn't
have
the
information
before
me
and
I.
Didn't
I,
don't
want
to.
You
know,
feel
like
I'm
sidetracking
people
or
what
is
the
term
just
you
know
what
I'm
talking
about
anyways.
So
the
main
point
is:
does
the
land
dedication
provide
for
what
is
required
and
what
is
in
demand,
given
what
we
know?
G
G
G
I
Yeah,
so
just
to
address
that
I
I
totally
understand
the
concern,
but
I
think
the
analysis
that
was
done.
We
don't
have
to
have
all
Studios
yet
380
I
think
staff
is
typically
very
methodical
when
it
comes
to
determining
whether
a
benefit
outweighs
you
know
what
would
normally
be
standard
and
we
have
a
consultant.
We
hired
telling
us
that
you
know
it's
it's
reasonably
equivalent
or
Beyond.
I
We
have
staff
telling
us
that
they're
comfortable
with
that
analysis
and
my
understanding
of
the
analysis
was
done
on
Studios
one
bedrooms
and
two
bedrooms
to
to
look
at
you
know
where
we're
getting
at
I
could
be
wrong,
and
someone
could
correct
me
if
I
am,
but
the
other
piece
of
this
is
that
our
requirements
aren't
as
set
in
stone
as
provide
us.
This
number
of
units
based
on
what
today's
market
demand
is
because
market
demand
shifts.
I
You
know
it
could
be
by
the
time
that
we
get
this
land
and
we
identify
an
affordable
housing
developer.
Who
will
work
with
us
on
it?
The
demand
can
be
four
bedrooms
and,
and
so
I,
don't
think
that
I
mean
there's
a
reason.
Why
there's
no
sentence
in
the
precise
part
or
the
or
you
know
in
the
requirements
around
this
that
says
that?
Well,
it
has
to
match
whatever
the
current
market
demand
is
because
then
also,
who
are
you
asking
what
the
demand
is
it
really
there's?
I
There's
demand
for
affordable
housing
in
every
category,
and
so
it
really
comes
down
to
a
matter
of
a
judgment
call
of
one
you
know:
are
we
comfortable
with
the
analysis
that
was
done
to
provide
equivalence,
that
you're
more
here
and
and
if
not,
then,
what's
the
alternative,
I'm
not
sure
like
telling
everyone
to
go
start
from
scratch
and
find
X
number
of
additional
square
feet
for
affordable
housing
and
land
education
is
the
right
way
to
proceed
so
that
that's
the
other
way
that
I
analyze?
This
is
let's
say
I.
I
Let's
say
that
I'm
convinced
that
we
need
a
whole
bunch
of
three
bedrooms
and
we
need
enough
land
and
space
for
nothing.
But
two
and
three
bedrooms:
that's
going
to
require
a
lot
of
additional
land
and
I.
Don't
think
it's
fair
to
have
gotten
this
far
along
in
the
process
where
we've
sort
of
been
saying.
I
Yes,
we're
on
the
right
path
at
every
stage
and
then
at
the
last
minute
say
well,
we
need
two
entry
bedrooms,
so
go
find
a
bunch
of
additional
land
to
dedicate
to
us
and
by
the
way
that
changes
the
entire
economics
of
the
project
shifts
things
around
and
does
all
that.
So,
if
the
question
is,
you
know,
can
we
clarify
for
Council
between
now
and
their
meeting
sort
of
what
what
the
assumptions
were
for
the
for
the
different
analyzes
so
that
they
have
that
information
and
they
can
decide?
I
I
You
know
three
bedroom
units
if,
if
Council
decides
that
they
can
but
I
think
that's
that's
their
purview
and
then
you
know
the
other
thing
that
I
wanted
to
say
is
I
wanted
to
thank
Vice
chair
in
for
for
clarifying,
in
my
my
complete
misunderstanding
of
the
24
000
square
feet
and
what
you
were
getting
at
now.
I
I
told
I,
think
I
I
think
I
get
it
now
in
terms
of
the
calculation
and
and
in
terms
of
the
jobs,
housing,
linkage
and
I
just
wanted
to
give
staff
an
opportunity,
maybe
to
explain
if
they
can
or
or
maybe
this
is
for
another
day.
But
you
know
whether
we
could,
whether
the
precise
plan
even
says
that
that
that
you
know
the
square
footage
of
of
that
nature.
I
Whether
it's
in
the
precise
manner
of
the
master
plan
would
be
required
to
be
part
of
the
job
sales
linkage
or
if
there's
some
exemption
there,
that
you
relied
on
to
where
it
would
basically
be
changing
the
rules
of
the
game
on
them.
To
include
that.
D
Yeah,
so
the
way
that
the
job
housing
linkage
program
is
structured,
it's
really
meant
to
serve
and
be
related
to.
You
know
a
true
office
building,
that's
constructed,
and
that
will
always
you
know
be
designed
and
used
as
an
office
building
I.
Think
the
struggle
with
I
think
what
commissioner
Yin
is
getting
at
is
a
commercial
tenant
space
is
not
a
constant
use.
D
It
can
always
change
over
time,
so
it's
hard
to
assume
that
it
will
always
be
office
if
it
did
get
an
office
tenant
and
so
I
think
the
way
that
this
program
was
set
up.
It
was
not
intended
to
cover
any
of
the
neighborhood
commercial
serving
kind
of
commercial
ground
floor
spaces,
because
those
spaces
could
really
change
over
time.
I
Okay,
I
understand
now
so
yeah
the
the
concern
would
be.
You
know
if
all
those
morph
into
your
general,
you
know
more
obviously
like
environments,
then
we're
probably
not
quite
getting
the
the
job
housing
linkage
that
we
we
should
have,
but
in
general
like
ground
floor,
commercial
space
is
put
up
on
of
those
sizes.
Typically,
don't
support
long-term,
like
office
use.
I
guess
is
what
I'm,
what
I'm
hearing
so
okay?
I
Well,
that
that
helps
me
at
least
I'm,
not
sure
about
others,
but
I
would
be
you
know
just
to
to
throw
out
an
idea.
I
mean
if
others
want
to
to
ask
staff.
I
If
you
know
between
now
and
the
council
meeting,
if
we
can
get
more
information
about
the
inputs
that
were
garnered
for
the
or
developed
as
or
assumed
as
part
of
the
the
analyzes
that
the
you
know,
maybe
Google
and
lendlies
did
and
and
what
our
Consultants
did,
and
especially
assumptions
around
bedroom
count
and
then
be
able
to
stay
to
council
like
hey,
like
you
know,
we're
we're
supposed
to
get
the
equivalent
of
380
units.
I
Here's
the
configurations
that
looks
like
you
know
if
they're
all,
if
you
want
mostly
two
and
three
bedrooms,
it's
it's
going
to
be
a
lesser
unit
count.
If
it's
you
know,
Studios
one
bedrooms
and
maybe
some
two
bedrooms,
then
you
can
get
to
380
and
then
sort
of.
Let
them
decide
give
them
more
information,
basically
about
what
they're
making
a
decision
on
in
terms
of
terms
of
equivalency
or
better.
But
I
don't
know
if
that
would
satisfy.
J
Well,
I
guess:
I
actually
do
appreciate.
J
Commissioner
Clark's
last
kind
of
comment
around
some
transparency
around
the
the
unit
mixture
I
mean
if
we,
if
we
just
think
about
the
last
developer,
asking
for
concessions,
they
were
asking
for
concessions
to
write
like
have
more
Studios
and
one
bedrooms
and,
to
be
quite
honest
like
if
accepting
this
alternative
mitigation
is
gonna,
result
in
a
mixture
of
housing
stock
units
that
are
inadequately
meeting
the
need
of
the
people
who
demand
affordable
housing,
the
most
which
I
think
after
going
through
our
housing
element
procedures,
I
mean
it's
clear:
it's
families
Working
Families
needing
these
units.
J
Then
at
least
we
ought
to
be
transparent
about
saying,
hey,
we're
gonna
have
this
many
studios
for
this
many
Working
Families.
At
the
very
least,
we
should
be
transparent
about
that
yeah
I
mean
I,
have
no
problem
with
accepting
commissioner
Clark's
transparency
proposal
around
the
configuration
type,
but
I
also
don't
have
a
problem
with
commissioner
yin's
suggested
requirement
either
because
as
much
as
like
you
know,
chair
Crossing
I
appreciate
your
paraphrasing
of
my
position.
J
I'm
not
seeking
you
know,
like
100
understanding
of
everything
that
could
theoretically
and
practically
go
wrong.
You
know
I
appreciate
that
you've
done
management
and
I
have
my
own
line
of
profession
and
doing
an
assessment
of
what
could
go
wrong
with
your
project
is
not
trying
to.
You
know,
understand
everything.
It's
called
due.
Diligence
and
I
appreciate
very
much
that
Lindsay
mentioned.
You
know
hey.
This
is
a
new
thing
that
we're
trying
and
we've
we're
Consulting
with
other
people,
other
cities
in
our
region
and
we're
doing
our
best
to
me.
J
Mean
that
there's
no
room
for
iteration
doesn't
mean
there's
no
ruper
improvement
of
a
process,
an
incorporation
of
learnings
I'm,
quite
honestly,
very
comforted
by
that,
because
that's
what
we
need,
because,
as
land
gets
more
scarce
as
costs
go
up,
we're
gonna
have
to
find
more
and
new
Innovative
and
creative
ways
to
do
this,
and
so
I
will
always
be
appreciative
of
an
increasing
Trend
towards
sound
and
proper
due
diligence
of
what
we
have
on
the
table.
J
What
would
happen
if
we
did
nothing
and
what
other
alternatives
are,
and
that's
just
good
practice?
So
that's
where
I
stand
I
could
go
with
commissioner
Clark's
position
and
I
also
have
absolutely
no
issue
at
all
supporting
the
requirement,
as
proposed
by
commissioner.
Yet.
G
Thanks
I
wanted
to
say
thank
you
to
commissioner
Clark
for
supporting
the
the
question
to
staff,
which
is:
can
we
get
more
information,
because
my
point
is
I?
Think
from
what
we
know,
they've
already
said
we
know
the
demand.
Is
this
now
I
mean
we're
doing
all
the
financials
based
on
now,
because
that's
all
we
can
do
right,
and
we
understand
that
so
why?
Why
can't
we
understand
that
this
is
the
demand
now.
So
we
know
what
we're
looking
for.
No
project
is
perfect.
G
I
completely
get
that
too
I'm
not
looking
for
perfect
I'm,
just
looking
to
get
the
requirement
if
we
can
and
if
the
land
dedication
and
we
we
ask
the
affordable
housing
developers,
can
this
land
support
what
we're
aiming
to
get?
If
the
answer
is
no,
we
need
to
know
that
city
council
needs
to
know
that,
if
they're
going
to
vote
on
whether
or
not
this
is
an
alternative
mitigation
of
getting
equal
or
greater
value,
so
I
am
very
happy
and
I
would
be
totally
willing.
If
most
people
want
to
go
that
direction
to
say.
G
Yes,
let's
get
that
information
before
Council,
so
Council
can
make
that
decision
and
say
to
everybody
we're
only
going
to
get
you
know,
potentially
the
328
units
at
one
bedrooms
and
two
bedrooms
and
Studios.
If
we
want
you
know
what
the
precise
plan
requires
or
asks
for
which
we're
not
getting.
If
we
want
to
get
the
right
proportion,
then
we're
going
to
only
get
298
units,
and
this
is
what
we're
voting
on,
but
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
to
know
these
things
because
I
don't
feel
comfortable
voting
fully
wholeheartedly.
G
Yes
on
what
we
have
now
so
I
would
be
in
support
of
that
and
back
to
the
the
retail
part
portion
yeah
with
all
those
people.
I
agree.
Definitely
if
we
can
get
all
50
000
square
feet
for
neighborhood
serving
stuff
all
for
it,
but
because
their
program
only
looks
at
the
21
and
then
there's
the
five
required
by
the
city
that
does
leave
24,
000
and
I
I.
Don't
want
to
be
cynical
but
I'm
learning
that
it's
necessary,
sometimes
that
sometimes
things
happen
and
I
know
again.
G
It's
not
perfect,
but
that's
a
lot
of
affordable
units,
we're
already
struggling
right
now
to
get
the
required.
Why
am
I?
You
know?
Why
are
we
giving
up
almost
75,
affordable
units
if
office
goes
in?
We
know
office
goes
in
quite
readily
over
neighborhood
retail.
That's
everybody
has
said
that
you
guys
have
said
that
everybody
knows
that
is
just
the
case.
So
for
the
for
that
portion.
That
is
not
in
the
program.
G
If
it
is
not
neighborhood
retail
which
I'm
hoping
we
get
but
I
understand,
it
can't
always
be
what
I
want
and
it
goes
to
General
office
we're
losing
out
on
a
lot
of
affordable
housing
there.
Also
so
I
just
want
to
have
plan
C
in
place.
Let's
say
in
case
that
does
happen.
Or
can
we
talk
about
it
with
Google
at
least
put
that
out
there?
Let's
have
a
discussion,
so
those
are
the
things
I'm
aiming
for
if
everyone
is
in
agreement
that
that
sounds
reasonable
thanks.
D
D
So
what
was
assessed
in
the
report
produced?
What
would
essentially
be
a
number
that's
around
17
percent
with
that
338
units,
so
it
would
be
producing
more
units
than
what
would
minimally
be
required
at
the
15
percent.
D
D
So
it
does
assume
more
to
you
know
larger
bedroom
mix,
so
so
that
338
units
really
is
translating
into
that
family
mix
and
the
larger
unit
mix
I
think
what
the
applicant
was
proposing
as
part
of
their
market
rate
units
that
is
leaning
more
towards
the
smaller
Studio
or
one
bedroom
based
on
market
trends
for
high
density
residential
near
Transit,
but
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
that's
kind
of
what
the
basis
of
that
cycle
Consulting
report
was
really
assuming
so.
G
Would
be
great
if
the
table
was
there,
for
you
know
what
is
the
mix
they're
assuming
how
many
units
and
what
is
the
demand,
what
we're
looking
at
and
then
you
can
have
like
comparing
Apples
to
Apples
and
have
the
council
make
a
decision
that
way
because
I
think
it's
less
clear
without
it.
Thank
you.
A
I
guess
I
would
agree
with
that.
I
I,
sorry.
What
you
said
Lindsay
is
what
I
had
read
was
the
student
report
says
that
the
proposal
actually
does
meet
requirements
of
the
precise
plan
for
the
alternative
indication.
If
their
precise
plan,
the
precise
plan,
does
not
require
380
units
actually
lower
than
the
338,
the
338
C4
calculated
would
in
fact
be
more
than
what's
required
for
the
alternative
mitigation,
but
it
just
doesn't
have
to
be
as
high
as
Google
unleashes
calculation
of
what
it
could
be
correct.
D
Yeah,
so
the
15
is
based
on
the
city's
BMR
requirements,
not
the
precise
plan
requirements,
so
that
assessment
was
based
on
those
BMR
requirements
and
it
does
produce
more
based
on
what
cycle
came
back
with.
A
D
A
V
A
I
Yeah
on
that
note,
I
think
that
makes
it
I
think
that
fact,
like
I
was
speaking
to
earlier,
makes
me
feel
like
the
the
risk
there
is
pretty
low,
but
but
by
syrians
right,
like
anything,
can
happen
over
time
and
we're
talking
about
a
long
time
periods,
so
I,
guess
and
I
guess
Lindsay
just
to
clarify,
like
maybe
this
isn't
like
truly
written
out
somewhere
or
maybe
it
is,
but
but
asking
placing
additional
restrictions
on
that
ground
floor
commercial
space
in
those
particular
buildings
would
essentially
that
would
be
something
that
should
be
done
through
an
amendment
of
The,
precise
plan
right.
D
I
mean,
ultimately,
the
precise
plan
allows
these
uses,
so
yeah
I
think
yeah.
You
know
what
what
maybe
a
suggestion
I
would
have
is
that
you
know
I
can
definitely
talk
to
the
applicant
prior
to
going
in
Council
and
seeing
if
they,
if
there
may
be
any
interest
to
put
any
parameters
around
it.
But
ultimately,
what's
allowed
in
the
precise
plan
is
something
that
would
be
allowed
in
the
master
plan.
I
Got
it
so
if
folks
are
amenable
Let
me,
let
me
do
this:
I'll
I'll
go
ahead
and
move
the
staff
recommendation
with,
which
is
two
points,
the
first
being
yes,
Lindsay,
I
think
maybe
in
the
section
where
you
do
talk
about
that
in
the
staff
report,
where
you
talk
about
the
the
ground
floor,
commercial
in
those
residential
buildings,
maybe
just
having
a
sentence
in
there
that
clearly
states
that
you
know
the
and
and
that
space
wasn't
subject
to
the
or
isn't
you
know
normally
subject
to
the
the
jobs
housing
linkage
calculation.
I
Just
so,
if
anyone
has
that
same
question,
they
unders
that
way
it's
just
there
and
they
understand
it
and
instead
of
having
to
to
go
through
the
same
discussion
that
we
just
had
to
try
and
figure
it
out-
and
you
know
if
they're,
if
they
decide
as
part
of
that,
that
they
want
to
revisit
the
the
precise
plan
or
the
details
of
the
precise
family
or
they
can.
But
at
least
they
understand
why
that
wasn't
included
jobs.
I
I
was
in
Lincoln
and
then
the
second
piece
would
be
adding
to
the
section
where
you're
talking
about
the
the
the
alternative
mitigation
for
affordable
housing,
just
including
a
little
bit
more
detail
like
the
the
tables
that
folks
talked
about
of
the
the
unit
mixes,
and
it
doesn't
just
have
to
be
the
one
unit
mix
that
our
Consultants
did,
but
maybe
maybe
just
some
examples
of.
I
If
you
do
this
mix,
here's
like
the
rough
total
that
you
would
get
to
and
then
also
you
probably
already
did,
but
just
make
it
very
clear,
like
chair
Cranston.
Just
did
that
you
know
the
the
the
15
amount
is
is
is
lower
than
basically
what's
being
proposed
in
in
either
of
those
scenarios.
I
That
way
they
can
that
way
they
can
see.
You
know
several
years
from
now,
if,
if
we
do
end
up
with
a
with
this
parcel
and
we're,
you
know,
you
know
going
out
with
an
RFP
for
affordable
housing
developers,
we
know
roughly
sort
of
what
we
could
be
looking
at
in
terms
of
unit
mixes
and
unit.
G
For
that
I
I
do
I
do
second.
That
I
would
also
please
ask
that
then
in
presentations
here
forward
that
there's
no
statement
that
we're
providing
you
know:
20
percent,
affordable
housing,
because
I
think
that
sometimes
I
think
I
heard
that
somewhere
and
I
don't
know
I,
don't
know
where
maybe
it's
just
been
a
long
night,
but
that
shouldn't
be
presented
that
we're
hitting
certain
numbers
when
it's
still
in
flux-
and
we
don't
know
so
maybe
asking
Google
to
amend
in
addition-
would
be
nice.
Thank
you.
F
Q
J
A
A
Great,
thank
you,
everyone
that
we
have
all
saying
I'm,
assuming
we're.
Okay,
we
didn't
have
to
read
everything
there,
because
we
said
we're
moving
this
natural
thing
right,
I.
A
You're
gonna
you're
gonna
you're
gonna-
call
me
on
these.
When
we
don't
do
that
so
item
five
is
commission
stamp
reports,
updates,
requests
and
committee
reports.
No
action
will
be
taken
under
these
items
at
this
time.
So
any
announcements
there.
AA
I'll
go
first,
just
a
few
things.
AA
AA
Certainly,
you
know
the
the
whole
city
does
appreciate
the
work
that
you
do
on
a
Saturn
note,
I'd
like
to
announce
that
Stephanie
Williams,
our
former
zoning
administrator
planning
manager,
has
left
City,
she's
Gone
on
to
work
for
the
city
of
Los
Altos,
so
for
the
time
being,
Lindsay
and
I
and
Rebecca
and
Diana
will
step
in
variously
to
each
of
her
different
roles.
But
we
are
looking
for
a
replacement
as
quickly
as
we
can
update
on
city
council.
AA
AA
So
look
forward
to
that
and
then
just
an
update
about
the
housing
element
process.
We
did
you
know.
A
few
months
ago
we
submitted
our
draft
to
hcd.
We
did
receive
our
comment
letter
back.
That
comment.
Letter
is
posted
online.
We
are
meeting
with
hcd
to
address
those
comments
and
we're
also
meeting
with
different
stakeholders
in
order
to
tee
up
a
full
Suite
of
options
for
the
final
housing
element
for
EPC
and
city
council.
Deliberation.
H
Yeah
I
just
wanted
to
acknowledge
that
I
had
attended
the
recognition
of
service
and,
along
with
chair,
Cranston
and
Lester
Yen
and
Chris
Clark.
So
that
was
a
very
interesting
and
nice
evening
out
and
I
wanted
to
thank
the
chair
for
doing
the
heavy
lifting
and
presenting
what
Feats
the
EPC
had
done
throughout
the
course
of
this
last
year.
A
Any
other
announcements,
and
so
the
date
of
the
next
meeting
there
is
so
with
that
we
will
adjourn
the
meeting
at
10,
39
PM.
Our
next
regulatory
scheduled
meeting
will
be
November,
2nd
2022..
Thank
you.
Everyone
great
evening.