November 2025

Mayor Kamei, Vice Mayor Ramos, and Members of the City Council,

We understand the city council will have a public hearing on Tuesday, December 9, on the Historic Ordinance and Local Register Update.  

As the impact of SB79 on our historic downtown is now known, the designation of a historic district to be placed on the Mountain View local historic register (which would include the downtown historic retail district and adjacent commercial buildings) is now one of the most significant and time-sensitive of the actions needed to preserve our downtown with the creation of an SB79 local alternative plan.  

We request the support of council on this issue as there is no other option if we are to have a historic downtown that preserves the history and identity of our city, particularly in this time of urbanization. 

Please see the attached slides numbers 3, 4, 7, 8, 12, 13, 18-20 to see why declaring this historic district is a key component to an SB79 local alternative plan. In particular, note that the Redwood City Extended Main Street historic district, described on slide 20, is similar in many ways to our downtown historic retail district and is already certified as an official historic district.

We are happy to answer any questions about our request for a historic district. Also, we would be happy to set up a time (via Zoom or in person) to walk through this updated rendition of our slides.

Robert Cox, Louise Katz, Peter Spitzer, Hala Alshahwany, Leslie Friedman, Maureen Blando, Muriel Sivyer-Lee, Nazanin Dashtata, Jerry Steach, Nancy Stuhr, Lorraine Wormald, Alice De Guzman, David Lewis, Carol Lewis, and Julia Ha

For the Steering Committee of Livable Mountain View

Mayor Kamei, Vice Mayor Ramos, and members of the City Council, 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on item 4.3: Amendment of Section 11 of City Council Policy A-13.

We support this amendment and ask for your vote of approval. It is in the public interest to ensure that any council member who wants his or her vote on a council matter changed must do so in a timely fashion. Advocacy groups such as ours often spend much time rallying public support for an issue before approaching the council with our recommendations. Having a matter brought back months later for a new vote diminishes the public’s ability to effectively organize and present its views to the council. Furthermore, all public stakeholders deserve the certainty that a strict time limit on council vote changes provides.  

Thank you for considering our views.

Robert Cox, Maureen Blando, Peter Spitzer, Muriel Sivyer-Lee, Jerry Steach, Julia Ha, Nazanin Dashtara, Chuck Muir, Hala Alshahwany, Leslie Friedman, David and Carol Lewis, Lorrie Wormald, and Nancy Stuhr

For the Steering Committee of Livable Mountain View 

Mayor Kamei, Vice Mayor Ramos, and Members of the Mountain View City Council, 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Item 6.2: Gatekeeper Process 

1. We support the historic preservation fee. At the discussion of the Historic Ordinance and Register Update at the last EPC meeting, the EPC supported finding money to restore the historic facades of buildings on Mountain View’s local historic register, particularly those in the downtown.  A key example is the Rogers Building 142-156 Castro Street, which could lose its position on the local historic register unless the façade is restored. Under SB79, such buildings could be demolished if they do not remain on the local historic register.
2. We support the recommendation on the park fee as a community benefit. While a 25% of property dedication for park land may seem out of proportion compared to alternative benefits, the council should keep in mind that dedicating land for a park would be done as an alternative to paying the park in-lieu fee. 
3. We support removing the community facility benefit. Typically, this “benefit” has been to allow the occasional use of an office conference room by community organizations. We do not know of any community organizations that have taken advantage of such a benefit here in Mountain View. It is much less useful now that many community groups hold many of their meetings on Zoom. In any case, this “benefit” is of miniscule value compared to something substantial like a dedicated park.  We do not want to encourage developers to opt for it as alternate to a real community benefit.

 Thank you for listening to our views.

 Robert Cox, Louise Katz, Muriel Sivyer-Lee, Peter Spitzer, Julia Ha, Hala Alshahwany, and Nazanin Dashtara

For the Steering Committee of Livable Mountain View