We stand with Mayor Karen Bass of Los Angeles and other public officials urging you to veto SB79.
Despite recent amendments, this proposed legislation is still deeply flawed. The historic protections it offers are only for buildings on a city’s local historic register. There is no provision for historic districts like Mountain View’s three-block historic retail district. SB79 would allow buildings which are seven stories or higher to be constructed immediately adjacent to buildings on our local historic register, destroying the look and feel of a unique historic retail district. Cities with historic districts near transit up and down the Bay Area Peninsula will be similarly impacted.
Mountain View is one of only two cities in Santa Clara County with a state pro-housing designation. In the last few years, our city council has upzoned large areas of our city even beyond what was required in our housing element despite being a city of only 13 square miles. Additional upzoning from SB79 will seriously challenge the limits of our infrastructure for which there will be no state funding.
And SB79 does nothing to improve the amount of AFFORDABLE housing that can be constructed near transit stations. Mountain View, like other Bay Area cities, faces a shortage of AFFORDABLE housing, not luxury housing. Almost 15% of the apartments constructed in our city since 2016 lie vacant. Destroying residential neighborhoods to build more of them will not make housing more affordable in our city.
Robert Cox, Louise Katz, Nazanin Dashtara, Muriel Sivyer-Lee, Toni Rath, Peter Spitzer, Maureen Blando, Jerry Steach, David Lewis, Carol Lewis, Hala Alshahwany, Carole Griggs, Leslie Friedman, Nancy Stuhr, Natalie Solomon, Sean O’Malley, Diane Gazzano, Lorrie Wormald, Alice De Guzman, and Julia Ha
For the Steering Commitee of Livable Mountain View Mountain View, California
We urge you to vote NO when SB79 comes back to the senate for its concurrence vote. While the bill was amended in the Assembly to allow some protections for buildings on a city’s local historic register, these will be insufficient to preserve the look and feel of Mountain View’s Historic Retail District H and the immediate vicinity, which includes buildings not only on our city’s local historic register, but also eligible for the California and National Historic Registers.
The key point is that many buildings on these historic registers are adjacent to others which are not on those registers, but complement their look and feel to provide a historic presence in the core three blocks of our downtown. SB79 would allow these adjacent buildings to be demolished and replaced by 7 story or higher modern buildings. These new buildings would tower over our few remaining historical buildings leaving us with a sad reminder of who we once were and what we once had. Our former historic retail district would be ruined.
Thank you for considering our views on this critical issue.
Robert Cox, Louise Katz, Nazanin Dashtara, Muriel Sivyer-Lee, Toni Rath, Peter Spitzer, Maureen Blando, Jerry Steach, David Lewis, Carol Lewis, Hala Alshahwany, Carole Griggs, Leslie Friedman, Nancy Stuhr, Natalie Solomon, Sean O’Malley, Diane Gazzano, Lorrie Wormald, and Alice DeGuzman
For the Steering Committee of Livable Mountain View
Santa Clara County Assessor Candidate Rushi Kumar:
Several members of the Livable Mountain View steering committee received communications from your campaign, indicating that you are seeking our organization’s endorsement for your candidacy for Santa Clara County assessor.
Livable Mountain View will not be endorsing a candidate for the Santa Clara County Assessor’s race this year.
Our organization’s focus is on lobbying on land use issues that affect the City of Mountain View. While we have done candidate endorsements, we only endorse candidates for offices in which the elected official will have a significant role in shaping the land use policy in Mountain View. Consequently, all our previous candidates’ endorsements were for those running for Mountain View City Council.
Once again, thank you for your interest in Livable Mountain View.
Robert Cox, Jerry Steach, Carole Griggs, Muriel Sivyer-Lee, Maureen Blando, Leslie Friedman, Hala Alshahwany, Peter Spitzer, and Nancy Stuhr
For the Steering Committee of Livable Mountain View
First, we would like to thank the Mountain View Voice for drawing attention to Senate Bill 79 (SB79), which if passed, could have profound consequences to our city’s downtown historical retail district and residential Mountain View neighborhoods.
The language of the bill is complex. Information received in answers to questions about its impacts from Senator’s Weiner’s office have not been entirely consistent. To understand the bill’s impact, it is imperative to consult the text of the bill itself. If it is passed into law, the text of the bill will be standard guiding its implementation.
SB79 is a threat to Mountain View’s Historic Retail District
In response to Livable Mountain View’s concerns that the bill could lead to the replacement of Mountain View’s downtown historic retail district (the 100-300 blocks of Castro Street), the Voice cites SB79’s provision for a local alternative plan. It is important to note that there are limitations set in the text of SB79 to what can be proposed in such an alternative plan. In particular, section 65912.161 (a)(2) reads:
The plan shall not reduce the maximum allowed density for any individual site on which the plan allows residential use by more than 50 percent below that permitted under this chapter.
Mountain View’s downtown historical retail district would be classified at Tier1 area under SB79:
“Tier 1 transit-oriented development stop” means a transit-oriented development stop within an urban transit county served by heavy rail transit or very high frequency commuter rail.
The SB79 text states that:
For a transit-oriented housing development project within one-quarter mile of a Tier 1 transit-oriented development stop, , … a local government shall not impose any height limit less than 75 feet.
For a transit-oriented housing development project further than one-quarter mile but within one-half mile of a Tier 1 transit-oriented development stop, … a local government shall not impose any height limit less than 65 feet.
Applying the rule that under a local alternate plan that the maximum allowed density will not less than 50% of what is permitted, means that heights permitted in the local alternative plan may not be less than 32.5 feet within ½ mile of the Caltrain station and not less than 37.5 feet within ¼ mile of the Caltrain station. These height limits imply a minimum allowance of 3-4 story residential buildings (6-8 stories with the state density bonus), where 1-2 story historical buildings exist now. This puts Mountain View’s entire downtown historic retail district at risk.
SB79 Local Alternative Plans Explicitly Permit Impact Zones to be declared around Bus Stops
The Voice article states that SB79 “would not apply to bus lines in the city”. However, the SB79 Section 65912.161 (e) states:
A local transit-oriented development alternative plan may designate any other major transit stop or stop along a high-quality transit corridor that is not already identified as a transit-oriented development stop as a Tier 3 transit-oriented development stop.
The California Public Resources Code, Section 21155, defines a high-quality transit corridor as “a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.” The Castro and Showers bus stops along El Camino have service intervals during morning and evening peak times of less than 15 minutes, and so could be included in an SB79 local alternative plan which seeks to add density to compensate for density lessened in other areas.
SB79 and Mountain View’s Historic Preservation and Register Update Do Not Contain Explicit Protections for the Historic Retail District
The Voice article quotes Vice Mayor Ramos, saying: “If it’s specific properties that have truly historic context then I don’t doubt that we can find ways to make that protected.” However, SB79 specifically (and purposely) contains no language stating that historic buildings will have any special consideration. Much of the debate around amendments to SB79 involves whether language protecting historic buildings will be added.
Mountain View is currently updating its Historic Preservation and Register Update. There is already a draft list of buildings being circulated for comment. But there is no city effort to provide special historic status to the entire historic retail district which encompasses the 100-300 blocks of Castro Street and the area between Bryant and Hope Streets. This means that even if a few buildings in the historic retail district are eventually qualified as historic before developers tear them down, others adjacent to them could be demolished and replaced with buildings which are a minimum of 3-4 stories and up to 14 stories, towering over the few remaining historical buildings leaving us with a sad reminder of who we once were and what we once had.
Robert Cox and Louise Katz For the Steering Committe of Livable Mountain View
We are sending you this letter in opposition to Senate Bill 79, introduced by Senator Scott Wiener.
The city of Mountain View has consistently been an advocate for good development. We are one of the few cities in the region that has earned a pro-housing designation from the legislature. Our city has accomplished this with the participation of all stakeholders when it enacts housing policy.
SB79 would allow five to seven story buildings (10 to 14 with state density bonus) to be built 5 feet from a single-family home or small apartment building. We have these small buildings throughout our community. This proposed legislation, SB79, would not conform to the precise plans that we already have in place, which support increased density. SB79 fails to require any additional affordable and low-income housing, and does not require a single concession from developers. It fails to protect any historical resource now or in the future. This bill could open the door to the destruction of all or part of Mountain View’s historic retail district (the 100-300 blocks of Castro Street), the heart of our community.
According to our Rental Housing Committee, Mountain View has a 12.5 percent vacancy rate for market-rate apartments built in the last eight years. The owners of these apartments are obviously willing to let housing sit vacant to keep rents high. Allowing five to seven story buildings that deny the occupants of neighboring buildings light and privacy will not change those high vacancy rates, and will not lower rental pricing.
Robert Cox, Louise Katz, Nazanin Dashtara, Muriel Sivyer-Lee, Toni Rath, Peter Spitzer, Maureen Blando, Jerry Steach, David Lewis, Carol Lewis, Hala Alshahwany, Carole Griggs, Leslie Friedman, Nancy Stuhr, Sean O’Malley, Diane Gazzano, Lorrie Wormald, Alice DeGuzman, Chuck Muir, Julie Muir, and Roger Noel
For the Steering Committee of Livable Mountain View
Mountain View Caltrain Station: 6-7 story buildings (12-14 stories with state density bonus)
San Antonio Caltrain Station: 6-7 story buildings (12-14 stories with state density bonus)
El Camino & Showers Bus Rapid Transit 522: 5-6 story buildings (10-12 stories with state density bonus)
SB79 Section 65912.161 (e): A local transit-oriented development alternative plan may designate any other major transit stop or stop along a high-quality transit corridor that is not already identified as a transit-oriented development stop as a Tier 3 transit-oriented development stop.
El Camino & Castro Bus Rapid Transit 522: 5-6 story buildings (10-12 stories with state density bonus)
SB79 Section 65912.161 (e): A local transit-oriented development alternative plan may designate any other major transit stop or stop along a high-quality transit corridor that is not already identified as a transit-oriented development stop as a Tier 3 transit-oriented development stop.
Whisman Light Rail Station: 5-6 story buildings (10-12 stories with state density bonus)
Middlefield Light Rail Station: 5-6 Story buildings (10-12 stories with state density bonus)
NASA Bayshore Light Rail Station: 5-6 Story buildings (10-12 stories with state density bonus)
DISCLAIMER: Impact zones were developed by Livable Mountain View after reading the text of SB79 and after consulting with people knowledgeable about the legislation. However, our organization does not include elected state officials, their staff, or real-estate attorneys. Ours is a good faith effort to map the impact of SB79, but the placement and size of the actual impact zones determined, should SB79 become law, may be larger or smaller than those depicted here.
NOTE: We have received word from people in communication with Senator Wiener’s staff that the impact zones around train and light rail stations should be larger. The half-mile radius is from ANY point in the transit center, not just the single point in the middle of the transit center.
NOTE: SB79 Section 65912.157 (d) explicitly provides for state density bonus to be applied on top of SB79 base allowances: A transit-oriented housing development project under this section shall be eligible for a density bonus, incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios pursuant to Section 65915 or a local density bonus program, using the density allowed under this section as the base density.
SB79 opens the door to level our historic downtowns
Between 8/18 and 9/12 the California Senate and Assembly will take their final votes on whether to pass Senate Bill 79 (SB79). This bill would permit housing in 6-14 story buildings BY RIGHT anywhere within a half mile of any Caltrain stop including neighborhoods and the many historic downtowns up and down the peninsula. There are no exceptions for historic buildings or districts. This means, for example, Mountain View’s Castro Street historic buildings which are adjacent to the Caltrain tracks in blocks 100-300 could be torn down and the Mountain View City Council would have NO ability to stop this destruction. All cities with homes and historic downtowns along the Caltrain line could face a similar fate.
Furthermore, any neighborhood within one-half mile of train, light rail, or frequent bus stops will be rezoned to permit 5-14 story buildings BY RIGHT.
Mid-Peninsula residents can call Senator Josh Becker at (916)-651-4013 and Assemblymember Marc Berman at (650)-324-0224 and say “I live in your district and oppose SB79.”
As this is a statewide bill, all California residents can help defeat SB79 by contacting their state legislators and say, “I live in your district and I oppose SB79”
Robert Cox and Louise Katz For the Steering Committee of Livable Mountain View
SB79 opens the door to level our historic downtowns
Between 8/18 and 9/12, the California Senate and Assembly will take their final votes on whether to pass Senate Bill 79 (SB79). This bill would permit housing in 6-14 story buildings BY RIGHT anywhere within a half mile of any Caltrain stop including neighborhoods and the many historic downtowns up and down the peninsula. There are no exceptions for historic buildings or districts. This means, for example, Mountain View’s Castro Street historic buildings which are adjacent to the Caltrain tracks in blocks 100-300 could be torn down and the Mountain View City Council would have NO ability to stop this destruction. All cities with homes and historic downtowns along the Caltrain line could face a similar fate.
Not only will we lose irreplaceable historic resources, SB79 also weakens the state’s own requirements for affordable and low-income housing and will cancel out local community developed precise plans. These already include significant upzoning and increased density in our cities that provide housing far beyond that required by our state.
Furthermore, any neighborhood within one-half mile of train, light rail, or frequent bus stops will be rezoned to permit 5-14 story buildings BY RIGHT.
Mid-Peninsula residents can call Senator Josh Becker at (916)-651-4013 and Assemblymember Marc Berman at (650)-324-0224 and say “I live in your district and oppose SB79.”
As this is a statewide bill, all California residents can help defeat SB79 by contacting their state legislators and say, “I live in your district and I oppose SB79”
Robert Cox, Louise Katz, Nazanin Dashtara, Muriel Sivyer-Lee, Toni Rath, Peter Spitzer, Maureen Blando, Jerry Steach, David Lewis, Carol Lewis, Hala Alshahwany, Carole Griggs, Leslie Friedman, Nancy Stuhr, Sean O’Malley, Diane Gazzano, Lorrie Wormald, Alice DeGuzman, Chuck Muir, Julie Muir, and Roger Noel
For the Steering Committee of Livable Mountain View
Recent Comments