[{"_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",6464261,"mediaKeyId","5784106-555a9989233f9a352d9ab44e28b11cd7","parentId",5784106,"title","EPC backs code amendments to implement Council Policy G‑9 gatekeeper process, keeping Council authorization role","audioSeconds",1641,"startMs",6538000,"endMs",8179000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5784106-555a9989233f9a352d9ab44e28b11cd7&start=6538&end=8179","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5784106-555a9989233f9a352d9ab44e28b11cd7/thumbnail_6538000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6464261/Mountain-View/Santa-Clara-County/California/EPC-backs-code-amendments-to-implement-Council-Policy-G9-gatekeeper-process-keeping-Council-authorization-role","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6464261-fc12dfe81d6ecd5a235a204b41580323/orig.mp4?Expires=1774712001&Signature=OEUjf2u9g5flkYnJlAYGtGGRdZmnjbvzXhhjBZE54rhKlyWD33U1QdlvBo0PuaCWRujCOgNQwmPeTgo7IO-R6Ej2KY-e1Jax2jfd4NnsYr2oADpPw2296g27kYs6B6E3a4RbzJJHs7noq5AivFEAi06fZWlkfd8OlCeA4ZzJl2yc3-Z~o4ITlzIL9y5vgPY4PGSDj9V-tbNV~deJflPcqHWhgLcDXbLYIfKuiKfdnuT5MYHuebfAlLtO1SFwk6J0Gt56Xm8aCuLanpIA-xMkwc-Dg5AR0fKvf718WjqYwBjKr7Ajl21bGgX4w-hpGVODa5hD8iVyy21OhrlQ2qs4aA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Coty of Mountain View","date","2025-09-18T16:42:45Z","article","The Environmental Planning Commission on Sept. 17 recommended that City Council adopt ordinance amendments to Chapter 36 of the Mountain View City Code to implement Council Policy G‑9, the city’s updated gatekeeper process for applications that require legislative amendments (for example, changes to the general plan or zoning map).

Community Development Director Christian Murdoch, joined by Assistant Director Amber Brzezinski, summarized the adopted G‑9 policy and described why code changes are needed to remove conflicting provisions in Chapter 36 and reference the council policy where it now governs substantive gatekeeper criteria. The EPC recommendation is required because the changes are to zoning code provisions.

The policy creates two pathways for gatekeeper applications: a streamlined gatekeeper track for qualifying projects (including 100% affordable housing projects and certain small projects that provide mandatory and selective performance criteria such as affordable housing contributions, parks, trails, plazas or community facilities) and a regular gatekeeper track that requires an initial application and a council authorization hearing before a formal planning application can be filed. The regular gatekeeper criteria include eight broad categories applicants may address to demonstrate project quality or community benefit—affordable housing, business retention/expansion, parks and open space, community facilities, transportation, trees and biodiversity, historic preservation, and sustainability—but applicants may come forward with many, few, or none of those criteria; council retains discretion at the authorization hearing.

Murdoch told the commission that the policy includes administrative provisions to standardize processing, and that it requires gatekeeper applicants to enter development agreements if they offer community benefits as part of the justification for a legislative amendment. The policy also establishes a two‑year waiting period before a substantially similar application that was not authorized can resubmit; staff said the two‑year interval is intended to push applicants to bring a more complete package to authorization rather than repeatedly submitting incremental proposals, and staff said it did not benchmark that waiting period with other jurisdictions.

Peter Katz, CEO of the Mountain View Chamber of Commerce, testified in support of the updated gatekeeper policy and urged against a two‑year re‑submission limit, saying it increases cost and delay for developers who are refining projects.

Commissioner Cranston moved and Commissioner Pham seconded a motion recommending that city council adopt ordinance amendments to Chapter 36 to implement the gatekeeper policy G‑9; the motion passed 5‑0 with two commissioners absent. Staff said the City Council public hearing to consider the code amendment is tentatively scheduled for Oct. 14, 2025.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Sept. 17, 2025 Meeting of the Environmental Planning Commission","oneSentenceSummary","The Environmental Planning Commission recommended Sept. 17 that City Council amend Chapter 36 to implement Council Policy G‑9, which formalizes a two‑track gatekeeper process for projects that require legislative amendments.","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},6464266,"EPC recommends City Council adopt revised tenant relocation assistance ordinance, including SB 330 timing, temporary‑displacement rules and expanded benefits",5818,708000,6526000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5784106-555a9989233f9a352d9ab44e28b11cd7&start=708&end=6526","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5784106-555a9989233f9a352d9ab44e28b11cd7/thumbnail_708000.jpg","/articles/6464266/Mountain-View/Santa-Clara-County/California/EPC-recommends-City-Council-adopt-revised-tenant-relocation-assistance-ordinance-including-SB-330-timing-temporarydisplacement-rules-and-expanded-benefits","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6464266-974dc450012a10913b720f4ce1ef24fa/orig.mp4?Expires=1774712001&Signature=ODE7rpSSEIP1Jr3QEgjMty5DOmwxr1Lq66zgZMa9zxmLMSvrrchmCxoTdpFIo2C3rn7za454Dz5p8O3KPCIg-hQjHMoQj2IWfr9YvRWqqVBq7oL-KFJuYvxATvNVRygBJ5GLY7gXpLwoTtkJxBdqvU4WybS1aAt469gMzW-~3b5o5D~~En~y~jAfpKlIURzP3d8Psf19Y4NRmqYBukaPIc2ZEi9t4uYe~BY7nz9IoIExHZAbI5NTBsJfQ1bx~1MdYsChcLlFYIqHlWpkbxi-66t-f1aDLHLyLlgb5oQSFmLh8wgfMbvwW~GABVECFWRK1kjy9YiGmWUxOfD8m2ub8w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Environmental Planning Commission on Sept. 17 voted to recommend that the City Council adopt a package of amendments to Mountain View’s tenant relocation assistance ordinance as part of Housing Element Program 3.2.

Staff recommended repealing the existing tenant relocation assistance ordinance in Chapter 36, amending Chapter 46 to change its title and add a new tenant relocation assistance article, and adopting six principal amendments to increase the ordinance’s alignment with state law (SB 330) and to strengthen tenant protections. Commissioners voted to forward the ordinance to council with additional guidance from the commission; the motion passed 5‑0 with two commissioners absent.

Key elements of the staff recommendations, explained by Housing Director Wayne Chen and Rent Stabilization Division Manager Anki Van Dorsen, include:

• Vacate date tied to SB 330 timing: The proposal adds an explicit vacate date provision aligned with SB 330 so that the developer’s vacate date is linked to the estimated construction start rather than set immediately after project approval. Staff said this change can extend the time tenants can remain on site and reduce unnecessary early moves.

• Later city informational notice and adjusted developer notice timing: Staff proposed moving the developer’s notice of intent (NOI) from 30 days after permit application to a later point—generally one year before the vacate date—and adding a city‑issued informational notice earlier in the process to reduce tenant confusion and rumor‑driven moves.

• Temporary displacement section: The draft ordinance would add a temporary‑displacement category defined as 90 days or less for renovation projects that do not amount to permanent displacement. The provision includes options such as temporary relocation, moving and storage costs, and a right to return to the original unit where feasible. If displacement exceeds 90 days, tenants would be able to opt for permanent relocation benefits.

• Removal of an exemption for city enforcement actions: The draft would eliminate a current exemption that disqualifies relocation benefits where the city issues an enforcement order (for example, for unpermitted units). Staff recommended keeping an exception where the unit has been red‑tagged for habitability concerns not caused by the landlord.

• SB 330 first right of refusal: The proposal adds a first right of refusal for low‑income tenants (constructed to be consistent with SB 330) when protected units are replaced in demolition‑redevelopment projects. Staff also recommended that required unit inventories and tenant income information be submitted with development applications so the city can evaluate compliance early.

• Expanded benefits and moving cost structure: Council had directed consideration of expanded benefits for households up to 80% area median income (AMI). Staff recommended treating households at or below 80% AMI as part of the special‑circumstance definition so they may receive enhanced payments. The ordinance would also require moving and storage reimbursement and set a common reimbursement cap for moving costs within 50 miles, a standard staff said is common among peer cities.

Staff outlined outreach done since 2019, including tenant stakeholder meetings, rental housing committee review (which unanimously supported the framework), and a council study session. Staff said data from prior projects shows 43% of displaced tenants relocated within Mountain View and 41% relocated elsewhere within the Bay Area; the commission discussed whether changes could increase the percentage of tenants who stay in Mountain View.

During deliberations commissioners asked for several additions and clarifications that the commission recommended staff include in the report to council: explicit guidance and documentation for evaluating alternative mitigation proposals (an equivalency analysis that demonstrates an alternate mitigation provides equivalent value to standard benefits), development of updatable, accessible public notices or a status page for tenants to track key project milestones and updates, and consideration of how differential cost savings could be used to incentivize temporary or permanent relocation closer to Mountain View. Staff indicated those items are procedural or guideline‑level changes that could be brought forward with the council packet.

The commission’s formal motion recommended that City Council adopt an ordinance repealing Chapter 36 Article 13 (Tenant Relocation Assistance), add a new article in Chapter 46, and find the ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; the motion also recorded commission support for enhanced noticing, an explicit equivalency analysis as part of alternate mitigation, and consideration of differential payout approaches for relocation costs. The City Council first reading on the ordinance is tentatively scheduled for Oct. 28, 2025, with a second reading expected in early December given holiday schedules.","The Environmental Planning Commission on Sept. 17 recommended that City Council adopt a revised tenant relocation assistance ordinance that aligns with state timing rules, adds a 90‑day temporary‑displacement category, codifies SB 330 first‑right‑of‑refusal requirements, and expands certain benefits to lower‑income households.",{"_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},6464272,"EPC continues 749 West El Camino Real mixed‑use item to Oct. 15; commenter warns of delivery‑vehicle parking",274,389000,663000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5784106-555a9989233f9a352d9ab44e28b11cd7&start=389&end=663","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5784106-555a9989233f9a352d9ab44e28b11cd7/thumbnail_389000.jpg","/articles/6464272/Mountain-View/Santa-Clara-County/California/EPC-continues-749-West-El-Camino-Real-mixeduse-item-to-Oct-15-commenter-warns-of-deliveryvehicle-parking","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6464272-40bfcb7931cd2a16d73698ef22d62999/orig.mp4?Expires=1774712001&Signature=ANHryKgLJvWErOXqOLPe7kgXl6oQtoxMh0rLYunnxruW3Og8WZlTPjgNib7ozOu103wlLZWPqZgD~KYGr6sFXCMnI-q1mF8bAJ~15xC8mUxzxt5Ews76MlPotf~pIgZghWag0jPvTNvgUziwQIFhNcB3irZTEebcKjL~1XU31M-IDQ7ZK4kYLk65nMbHzRY-DRGM7nTxhlXlHkXR8Hn-D3CFhWLzQh~8ps7se0TOtzOMqjoQAupJCXBbyWqgx6Xw-UDkWLlCkKHcJQIZznvQJs5rSyarhLlzcM3FpFoTpDBZ7pSdUMLNWC1cMm50vKmtbkiYuPSHrSaqdpvgHUt1lg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Environmental Planning Commission on Sept. 17 continued consideration of a proposed mixed‑use residential project at 749 West El Camino Real to its Oct. 15 meeting.

The item was noticed as a public hearing but will not be heard at the Sept. 17 meeting; commissioners voted to continue the item to Oct. 15. Commissioner Yin moved to continue the item and Commissioner Pham seconded. The motion passed, 5‑0 with two commissioners absent.

Robert Cox, joining on Zoom, spoke during the item’s public comment period. Cox, who said he was speaking on his own behalf, thanked Greystar representatives for discussing plans to preserve artwork from the former Chase Bank site and for using Richardsonian arches in the new building’s design. Cox also raised a practical concern about loading and delivery: he said the project has no dedicated parking for “Amazon and Amazon‑like delivery vehicles” and warned that delivery trucks parking in travel lanes have on recent occasions blocked traffic for five to ten minutes on nearby El Camino Real after bike lanes removed curbside parking. He urged advance planning for delivery vehicle parking at the new site.

The continuation vote was recorded as five yes votes and two absences. The commission did not take further action on the project at the Sept. 17 meeting; the item remains scheduled for Oct. 15 for further hearing and staff presentation.","The Environmental Planning Commission continued a public‑hearing item for a proposed mixed‑use project at 749 West El Camino Real to Oct. 15. One remote commenter praised preservation of historic artwork and raised safety concerns about delivery vehicles blocking bike lanes and traffic.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

EPC backs code amendments to implement Council Policy G‑9 gatekeeper process, keeping Council authorization role

EPC recommends City Council adopt revised tenant relocation assistance ordinance, including SB 330 timing, temporary‑displacement rules and expanded benefits

EPC continues 749 West El Camino Real mixed‑use item to Oct. 15; commenter warns of delivery‑vehicle parking