What a joke...meeting after meeting...nothing is don. The only thing being built on any patch of land are apt/condo's that are so very expensive...geared to those Googlers..no accommodations for parking. Pertaining to traffic congestion those stupid Apple and Google buses, which by the way are more than half empty are NOT of any help except to create more traffic congestion. Just keep kicking out all the people that work retail, restaurants,teachers, it's already completely out of the pay scale to even get a crappy apartment in Mountain View. Soon there will be a tough time to employ the retail and food service in Mountain View. Good luck with all that.

@Old Mountain Viewan
You lost me. Even if a corporate shuttle bus is carrying only 10 people (about 20% capacity), how would putting those 10 people in individual cars reduce traffic congestion?

@Darin: Agreed. 1st time I have heard someone claim that the shuttles don't reduce traffic at all. Not to say that there isn't any downside to shuttle busses at all but they offer benefits to everyone involved, IMHO. The company gets a larger pool of employees to choose from, employees have a far better commute and the rest of us have less traffic. Traffic is no doubt worse with the growth of Google and others but imagine what it would be like if every one of those people on those buses was in a car instead.

@Darin: Agreed. 1st time I have heard someone claim that the shuttles don't reduce traffic at all. Not to say that there isn't any downside to shuttle busses at all but they offer benefits to everyone involved, IMHO. The company gets a larger pool of employees to choose from, employees have a far better commute and the rest of us have less traffic. Traffic is no doubt worse with the growth of Google and others but imagine what it would be like if every one of those people on those buses was in a car instead.

Imagine what it would be like if our city council had set reasonable limits on office development, at least until there was more housing and better infrastructure in place. Or, how about approving office development proposals with more realistic estimates of how many employees there actually are per square foot of office space these days. Hint, that number is way denser then what those estimates were just a few short years ago, and how most of the recent office development proposals were approved.

Quality of life matters, and our city council has done a pretty good job of "disrupting" what once was would have been considered a pretty good quality of life here in Mountain View.

And now the city is considering a program that would raise our city services rate (trash pickup) and only pick up trash every other week? More fees for less service. No thanks.

I think the quality of life today in Mountain View is terrific. Sure there is some serious growth going on, but you can't expect things to remain static. We live in a dynamic area and it will continue to be so. We have wonderful services that are provided and, of course, you can't expect those to remain priced based upon yesterday and today. Costs continue to go up. Increases are never going to stop. In addition, we live in one of the best restaurant cities on the Peninsula which is a wonderful amenity to have and enjoy. I love it here!

No one said anything about expecting things to remain static, at least I didn't.

I said, "Imagine what it would be like if our city council had set reasonable limits on office development, at least until there was more housing and better infrastructure in place. Or, how about approving office development proposals with more realistic estimates of how many employees there actually are per square foot of office space these days. Hint, that number is way denser then what those estimates were just a few short years ago, and how most of the recent office development proposals were approved." -- Not remotely close to expressing a desire for things to remain static.

With respect to your comment saying that we have wonderful services, and costs are going to continue to go up...and increases are never going to stop. (I am paraphrasing)

I expect fees for services to increase over time, but what I do not expect is fees for services to increase, whiles the services received for those fess, in fact, is cut in half, which is in essence what the city is proposing to do with it's new trash pickup program. Hence, my comment, "And now the city is considering a program that would raise our city services rate (trash pickup) and only pick up trash every other week? More fees for less service. No thanks."

And, I agree with you about the restaurants. I enjoy them, too. However, the quality of life of a city is composed of so much more than simply some good restaurants.

@ Imagine

I agree. It seems that our city plan is really just a plan to increase revenue without regard for the effect on the citizens who are already here. Growth is fine, but unbridled growth hurts us all.

The garbage issue is a small part of what we face. Are we getting more police and fire services for all these new people? Where are the children of these new residents going to attend school? Are those schools large enough? Do we have water enough to supply the thousands of people they are making apartment space to house? How are these people supposed to get around? How will they park at their new jobs?

I wish that the "City Plan" included more than a way for the council to stuff in more people. I read that we have an excess of revenue in the city this year. While the rest of the council were busy trying to find ways to spend that money, only one (John Inks) considered returning the money to the people in the form of lower rates on city-provided services. We need that level of concern for the citizens in ALL the council members.

I don't object to change that is reasonable and well planned. I DO object when the change seems to be motivated by something other than the good of the residents. Just because you CAN change something, it doesn't mean you SHOULD.

People in this area have sorted themselves into "pro-growth" and "anti-growth" camps. Pro-growthers want more development, of course. Anti-growthers complain that this causes congestion and erodes affordability. They treat these two issues as a single problem with a single solution, which is actually quite false.

Congestion is what happens when an area adds residents and jobs. (@Imagine is quite right to point out that office development causes more congestion than housing, btw, because of its higher density.) Housing prices rise when housing supply doesn't keep up with job growth. The only way to reduce congestion and increase affordability at the same time is to drive away a few large employers, bring about a local recession, and cause residents to move away.

The idea that housing development increases prices is a cruel myth. New housing does cost more than old housing (I work in tech and I can't afford those fancy apartments either), but it sucks up the high rollers and lets prices drop everywhere else. Much as some of its members might like to, the MV city council cannot repeal the law of supply and demand.

If you don't believe my theoretical argument, just look around the peninsula. Some cities have been growing very quickly (Redwood City is the best example). Palo Alto, EPA, and Los Altos have built very little. Prices have risen everywhere. It's one big, interconnected real estate market.

P.S: "Quality of life" is one of those wonderfully nebulous political terms, like "family values", that are impossible to oppose until you ask what actually stands behind them. If by "qualify of life" you mean "being able to drive wherever you want without sitting in traffic", then yes, all the development is definitely hurting quality of life here in Mountain View. But I'd say that's a pretty impoverished definition. (The traffic isn't really that bad, though, and yes, I commute on Shoreline.)

Sigh. Less " Smoke and Mirrors " and more proven facts. I knew that I couldn't find affordable housing in the SFBA FORTY YEARS AGO! My fellow workers were already pooling their wages to have a house near ECR and their work.
The VTA Light Rail system is broken. Adding a wye at Ellis Street at Moffett Field and going north East of HWY 101 and figuring out how to do away with those tight curves west of Ellis Street would help.
Since we are already talking about grade separation on Castro/Moffett for a Caltrain overpass, just add the grade separation to the VTA crossing of Central Expressway and have a raised station platform for both.

If you need working examples of this type of station, Denver RTD Light Rail has plenty of examples. And fuller Light Rail passenger cars, too

Life here in Mountain View as most of Silicon Valley is squeezing everyone out that doesn't make 100K+ a year. By the time anyone actually tries to do something about it, it'll be too late. All services will have to be done online because nobody can work at Safeway or Whole Foods and live here. What fun! Lol I'm purchasing a house in Missouri. Will be moving there within 2 years. I love California, I was born at el Camino hospital but it's way beyond out of control. Everyone wants too big a piece of the action. At least I won't be here to witness the crash and burn.

What's the point of this panel? Nice makeup. No homeonwers. And it appears (could be wrong) that only 1 of the 4 even live in MV. How can that group really talk about "metamorphisis"?

Panel Makeup, reread the description of the people on the panel: "The guest speakers scheduled to participate are: Mountain View Whisman School District Superintendent Ayinde Rudolph, who will discuss how local schools are accommodating with this transition; Liron Shapira, co-founder of Quixey, will talk about the perspective of tech start-ups and why Mountain View became a hotbed for innovation; local resident John Keen will talk about his own experiences as both a tech worker and as a tenant struggling to stay in Mountain View; and William Armaline, director of San Jose State University's Human Rights Program, will provide context for how other communities have navigated high-level changes."

All of them have something to contribute of relevance to Mountain View issues: our schools, tech start-ups, residents/tenants, and the experience of other communities.

Keep in mind, this is a gathering to have an open discussion of all those who attend, it is not a city council meeting. The purpose of the panelists is to start the discussion with their perspectives, followed by small groups afterward.

Our Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian is an excellent moderator and will assure that voices are heard. I hope Old Mountain Viewan will come, and not just post comments that nothing is being done. We have to make the changes we want to see.

@Phil

I don't post without reading.

By Definition: Metamorphisis = a major change in the appearance or character of someone or something

Without representation of longtime residents and residents from all walks of life, we can hardly fully understand the "metamorphisis". Ayinde Rudolph has been in town for 8 months. Mountain View was a hotbed for innovation prior to Shapira (he graduated college in 2009). Yes, Simitian is great to have. But this panel lacks full perspective for the topic they're addressing.

Even if "metamorphisis" was the word chosen by The Voice, this promises Past, Present, and Future.

The announcement flyer I received on this roundtable does not use the term "metamorphosis." It says the following:

A Civility Roundtable
The Changing Face of Mountain View: A City in Transition
Join Your Friends and Neighbors to Discuss These and Other Questions

Is growth worth it?
Is Mountain View welcoming to newcomers?
How can we save what is best of Mountain View?
Can we maintain our sense of community?
etc.