Comments on the FY2026-27 EPC Work Plan (Item 5.1)
June 15, 2026
Re: Agenda item 5.1 Dear Environmental Planning Commissioners, We are concerned that the city’s priorities lean towards resisting change rather than encouraging housing. Housing Element programs 1.4 (Religious and Community Assembly Sites for Housing) and 2.6 (Affirmatively Further Fair Housing) were created as the programs to address fair housing concerns under state and federal law by allowing a meaningful amount of affordable housing in areas that don’t see much physical change and have thus locked out those of lower incomes. These programs have been delayed without explanation even after limiting changes to a few lots, and Q4 2027 would be three years from what the city committed to the state.
Re: Agenda item 5.1
Dear Environmental Planning Commissioners,
We are concerned that the city’s priorities lean towards resisting change rather than encouraging housing.
Housing Element programs 1.4 (Religious and Community Assembly Sites for Housing) and 2.6 (Affirmatively Further Fair Housing) were created as the programs to address fair housing concerns under state and federal law by allowing a meaningful amount of affordable housing in areas that don’t see much physical change and have thus locked out those of lower incomes. These programs have been delayed without explanation even after limiting changes to a few lots, and Q4 2027 would be three years from what the city committed to the state.
We also are concerned about how long it would take to enact a fully ministerial approval ordinance. Staff says there are still more regulations to modify to make ministerial, though specific details on what is left are unstated. Affordable housing projects have already gone through ministerial review for years, and more projects may be made ministerial by the start of next year under some state bills.
We recognize a main contributor to recent delays is the city’s reaction to SB 79, a law that shifts the question from whether there should be transit-oriented development next to our largest transit investments to how TOD should work. By scheduling the SB 79 Historic Property Exemptions Ordinance earlier than the aforementioned Housing Element commitments, the city is failing to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing and to meet its Housing Element obligations. Details of historic preservation, especially when no major historic resources in the city are at any meaningful risk, should not take priority over undoing decades of exclusionary zoning.
Separately, we would urge the commission to make use of its recent trend of cancelled meeting time to add work plan items to actively monitor and assist with Housing Element implementation. Given that several Housing Element Programs (including the Gatekeeper program and Low/Middle-Income Homeownership Strategy) have seen little to no public updates in the past 6 months, it would be appropriate for EPC to provide a forum for regular public updates on Housing Element programs.
Thank you for your consideration.
David Watson, on behalf of Mountain View YIMBY
