[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6609703,"mediaKeyId","2906755-53490b08acf9daf2bf3cd195217dfad3","parentId",2906755,"title","Mountain View council approves 7‑story, 80‑unit Tirella Avenue development under builder’s remedy amid neighborhood protests","audioSeconds",7960,"startMs",1855000,"endMs",9815000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2906755-53490b08acf9daf2bf3cd195217dfad3&start=1855&end=9815","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2906755-53490b08acf9daf2bf3cd195217dfad3/thumbnail_1855000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6609703/Mountain-View/Santa-Clara-County/California/Mountain-View-council-approves-7story-80unit-Tirella-Avenue-development-under-builders-remedy-amid-neighborhood-protests","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6609703-72d0cfb8289a157cd9cfd7179daa838e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770979018&Signature=V23tiGNesUXbzglKm8dvswHmhZiKNVonvpExrxho5h6~Kq1EBwvnE~EYZB4yOmlICoMTzyB5oSImjqYh0b8BK7HgMuIV~HP1XXbEAUU41o1hdfwzPZfalgx5Es-gc0Mm2B5MtHvfM2nBHMBg9o1ma7O291Lh7h1iF2mVC5QnglEGUoAynliEbNti0Y-wwid2iwIrElM7AdWRmQSadmm9P~LOk7mkjqUnlJmLv7tsBqx0KnRv95thioYo9DSkNRFDOksbXhKx3Eschk7RmSXD5T5IXw2SD6KYWebcY~k7sqTZJEXhoXstecz8B9I9IgpLStL~gqoPhX41d~x9JB3MnA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Coty of Mountain View","date","2025-04-09T06:04:01.267Z","article","The Mountain View City Council voted 6–1 to conditionally approve a seven‑story, 80‑unit residential condominium project at 294–296 Tirella Avenue, finding the proposal qualified for the state’s Housing Accountability Act builder’s remedy and exempt from further CEQA review as an infill project. The vote followed more than two hours of staff presentations, applicant remarks, and public testimony in which neighbors urged delay, argued the project was out of scale for the neighborhood and raised traffic, parking and safety concerns.

City attorney Selena Chen and principal planner Diana Pancholi told the council the project met the statutory qualifications for the builder’s remedy because the applicant submitted a qualifying preliminary application during the period when Mountain View’s housing element was not yet certified. Chen noted the applicant chose to be governed by the 2024 statutory framework in effect when its preliminary application was filed. Pancholi outlined the proposal: a seven‑story building with about three levels of parking, approximately 20,000 square feet of landscaped open area, a roughly 11,000‑square‑foot rooftop deck, and a requirement that 20% of units (16 units) be deed‑restricted for households at 80% of area median income (AMI). Pancholi said the project meets some but not all local zoning and development standards, and that under the builder’s remedy the city may not disapprove the project solely for such inconsistencies.

Forrest Landberger, speaking for the applicant, emphasized the project would add 80 units while removing a single existing house, and said the developer had adjusted design and parking assumptions to respond to feedback. He said the project includes transportation demand management measures intended to reduce car ownership and that the required deeper affordability (20% at 80% AMI) added cost pressure that made certain city standards infeasible. The applicant also requested modifications to several conditions of approval (timing/permit expiration, building code/REACH code items and affordability terms), and said financial feasibility required longer vesting and construction windows than the city’s standard timelines.

Neighbors and dozens of speakers during public comment urged the council to delay action or seek a court determination about the builder’s remedy. Speakers described Tirella Avenue and surrounding blocks as largely one‑ and two‑story neighborhoods and warned the 7‑story building would cause shade impacts, increased traffic at the Middlefield/Tirella intersection, insufficient parking, and noise from rooftop amenities. Multiple neighbors said they had not been invited to previously advertised community meetings. Several asked the council to pursue legal clarity before approving the project.

Council discussion ranged from skepticism about the project’s scale to recognition of state constraints. Councilmember Ramirez, who moved approval of staff’s recommendation, and Vice Mayor Ramos, who seconded, framed the vote as a difficult choice constrained by state law. Councilmember McAllister cast the lone dissenting vote, saying he opposed the project as proposed. Other council members said they were troubled by some design and outreach choices but concluded that under the present statutory and vesting rules the city’s legal exposure made denial risky.

The council included in its conditional approval the staff‑recommended modifications to a set of conditions of approval (including recommended language changes to building code/REACH items, and timing modifications to some permit conditions) and required the applicant to provide 30‑year affordability commitments for the deed‑restricted units. Staff also noted the project is not subject to the city’s tenant relocation ordinance because the site contains a single existing unit.

The approval directs follow‑up tasks for staff and the applicant: finalize the project resolution with the two desk‑item amendments staff presented at the hearing, document the 30‑year affordability commitments, and include the additional modified conditions in the record. The council also instructed staff to continue coordinating on on‑site circulation, tree mitigation and required frontage repairs, and to enforce the project’s MTA (multimodal transportation analysis) recommendations.

Votes at a glance: the motion to conditionally approve the development review permit, tentative map and heritage tree removal permit passed 6–1 (Councilmember McAllister opposed).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","April 8, 2025 Joint Meeting of Mountain View City Council and Shoreline Regional Park Community","oneSentenceSummary","The Mountain View City Council voted 6–1 to conditionally approve a seven‑story, 80‑unit residential condominium project at 294–296 Tirella Avenue under the state Housing Accountability Act’s builder’s remedy provisions, overriding several local zoning inconsistencies and drawing strong neighborhood opposition.","taxTitle","Mountain View, Santa Clara County, California","taxId",2861,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6609695,"Mountain View staff present balanced preliminary FY 2025–26 general fund plan; council asks staff to explore library hours, AI translation and funding shifts",4968,10227000,15195000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2906755-53490b08acf9daf2bf3cd195217dfad3&start=10227&end=15195","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2906755-53490b08acf9daf2bf3cd195217dfad3/thumbnail_10227000.jpg","/articles/6609695/Mountain-View/Santa-Clara-County/California/Mountain-View-staff-present-balanced-preliminary-FY-202526-general-fund-plan-council-asks-staff-to-explore-library-hours-AI-translation-and-funding-shifts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6609695-c4e6d2dac4f1715e5f580f0529d4fd08/orig.mp4?Expires=1770979018&Signature=HprNZE1NRxVr7Zv8We35urMadq2odaVZ3Jwkk-4DJcJupTTBs75g0iGNOZn~BlTj8xetAJdSq2IBHy3taL3J4yv00xa5bM5R1ms5~Iasv4iNtB37CP55kZzQOV-dB8BcOt7-WKF~FK9D8bJuVSMdgDNREb2gGcQluax31LASGDgbiWwlmdnESyUhQPnDwvFjkhZIyVaAYCaKwJ3rf2BBbzLGYPf9LLDrNZ0yqCwTawTBxlxGx7E-7GtHrcYb9IC0WqBHZnqUjBsNcZqRhMFwNhH4ERauDGWGwfrHyQOUQl~Pag7dJxCvUGtIq9BgB9b0CsCYeTBnnNzmETtONwOdzw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City staff presented a preliminary general fund budget for fiscal year 2025–26 showing a modest projected operating balance for next year but structural deficits in following years unless revenues or expenditure plans change. Finance staff described the city’s long history of conservative fiscal management, current reserve levels, and an updated economic outlook noting recent market volatility and potential federal actions that could affect municipal borrowing costs.

Finance director and staff highlighted Measure G (a new higher property transfer tax tier for transactions over $6 million) as a recently authorized local revenue source expected to produce new receipts but noted receipts are transaction‑driven and timing is uncertain. Staff also warned that market declines and potential shortfalls in CalPERS investment returns could increase the city’s pension contribution obligations and that proposed federal changes to tax treatment of municipal bonds could raise borrowing costs for capital projects such as the planned Public Safety Administration building.

The recommended FY 2025–26 general fund budget as presented by staff would include limited new ongoing positions (two new ongoing and two conversions from limited‑term positions) and a mix of one‑time, limited period allocations. Staff recommended using a portion of estimated year‑end operating balances to fund some limited‑period expenditures; projected carryforward available balances were also shown. The draft budget includes about $500,000 proposed as a capital/pavement reserve, limited‑period funds for prioritized programs and four staffing additions. Staff estimated a small operating balance for 25–26 (about $96,000) and projected deficits in subsequent years ($2M–$3.7M range) absent revenue or expenditure changes.

Council discussion focused on risk management and priorities under economic uncertainty. Councilmembers asked staff to explore several ideas for follow‑up analysis: expanding weekend library hours (and associated costs), piloting or procuring live AI translation/real‑time translation tools for council meetings, targeting pavement funding to active transportation/complete streets where possible, and evaluating whether a portion of the equipment replacement fund could be temporarily shifted toward the Public Safety Administration building financing gap. Several members stressed the need for clearer community‑facing budget summaries; staff had already prepared a “budget in brief” and a short video for public outreach. Ramirez moved to accept staff’s preliminary recommendations with direction to explore the follow‑up items; the motion passed unanimously.

Staff will return with the recommended budget in May and a final adopted operating and CIP budget in June after council feedback and updated revenue forecasts.","City staff presented a preliminary, balanced general fund forecast for FY2025–26 that shows a small operating surplus next year but projects deficits afterward; the council unanimously accepted the recommendations and asked staff to explore a set of follow‑up items.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6609698,"Council approves 136‑sq‑ft addition to Tudor‑style home at 415 Bush Street after finding project complies with Secretary of the Interior standards",946,949000,1895000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2906755-53490b08acf9daf2bf3cd195217dfad3&start=949&end=1895","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2906755-53490b08acf9daf2bf3cd195217dfad3/thumbnail_949000.jpg","/articles/6609698/Mountain-View/Santa-Clara-County/California/Council-approves-136sqft-addition-to-Tudorstyle-home-at-415-Bush-Street-after-finding-project-complies-with-Secretary-of-the-Interior-standards","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6609698-bda647430874bab5cf078f76de11f005/orig.mp4?Expires=1770979018&Signature=B60q7ejUPtDkve-JAxI928WFJ6DKbzKFri-ANKZmhYlTV2oqtV4nkXMRqVMVc94k6UD8EvEYa2PZdV6ElaTFQQbB3Xgpe7mvWY2wAKDDbAhWmljUOT9BrKnVW~NJ9rKXZvk50vJCPE7ClnM2Hrtv51PTZfCzVbPYABOsy1eAqyMF-8mEF3mfOwbKtAVb89E04737--gXf8tmjaSluABrOrzUaADCYMTI7cByXED0W4TT1eyuZjDKvBc6AyuxWex6~176zzpf64Yx0vbeOZ96m2tRHTkF9GmMYFAb6CW6TMkeMCHmfucklhUIPdDSJxbriYvYXEKgbxp3sZTL6EPm9g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Mountain View City Council unanimously approved a historic preservation permit to allow a 136‑square‑foot ground‑floor addition to an existing two‑story historic single‑family residence at 415 Bush Street. Staff told the council the property had been evaluated by consultant Page & Turnbull and found eligible for the state and national registers under Criterion C as a local example of Tudor Revival architecture.

Principal planner Diana Pancholi presented the application and a Secretary of the Interior Standards (SOIS) compliance analysis prepared for the project. Staff said the addition would be located on the Velarde Street side to expand the kitchen, would use complementary materials (stucco, horizontal wood siding at the gable, window frame detailing) and would be differentiated by a standing seam metal roof so the addition remains visually distinct. Staff concluded the design would retain defining Tudor Revival features and the project qualifies for a categorical CEQA exemption under Guidelines §15331 (historic resource restoration/rehabilitation).

Property owner Brad Bettman told the council he and his wife had lived in Mountain View 45 years and had lived in the house 35 years; the addition would allow them to consolidate laundry and storage on the main floor and reduce trips to the basement. Several council members praised the project as an example of preservation that can support housing goals — Councilmember Hicks noted the addition is all‑electric, which furthers city decarbonization aims.

Councilmember Schwalter moved approval, Councilmember Hicks seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. The city will record the standard conditions of approval attached to staff’s report and proceed with required ministerial permits.","The Mountain View City Council unanimously approved a historic preservation permit for a 136‑square‑foot kitchen addition at 415 Bush Street, finding the work consistent with the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation and exempt under CEQA §15331.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Mountain View council approves 7‑story, 80‑unit Tirella Avenue development under builder’s remedy amid neighborhood protests

Mountain View staff present balanced preliminary FY 2025–26 general fund plan; council asks staff to explore library hours, AI translation and funding shifts

Council approves 136‑sq‑ft addition to Tudor‑style home at 415 Bush Street after finding project complies with Secretary of the Interior standards