It's a very bad business move to build and invest in a new property only to have some arbitrary number of units marked as below market value (aka. affordable to the very low income levels). It's no wonder that developers are hesitant to build in MV. How about instead we let the developers and the market decide on how many and what types of units are developed? People will select the housing that they can afford, be it new or an older development. No special rules or regulations necessary. Look up "planned economy" in Google and try to find an example of a success.

In response to Waylonis you wrote:

“It's a very bad business move to build and invest in a new property only to have some arbitrary number of units marked as below market value (aka. affordable to the very low income levels).”

However it is also very bad planning to NOT build proportional housing grades in the region. And in fact the ABAG RHNA and the state land laws as they become more strict will eventually force good business plans. In fact this is related to what you wrote here:

“It's no wonder that developers are hesitant to build in MV.”

The STATE laws are applicable EVERYWHERE. Mountain View is not any different to any other city. So your point to single out Mountain View makes no sense at all. You went on to write:

“How about instead we let the developers and the market decide on how many and what types of units are developed?”

When they do not build proportionally, they set the area up for a major downfall. Again lets look at the current rents in Mountain View from Zumper here (Web Link The year over year rent for a studio apartment is -12% and is lower than it was in 2014. A One Bedroom apartment is down 36% year over year and is below the same rate in 2015. The 2 bedroom apartment is down year over year 29% and is at the same rate as 2015. A 3 Bedroom apartment year over year is down 16% and below the rate it was in 2015.

The reality is that many projects are being put on hold or even canceled because COVID and AB5 still hasn’t finished with the valley yet. You wrote:

“People will select the housing that they can afford, be it new or an older development. No special rules or regulations necessary. Look up "planned economy" in Google and try to find an example of a success.”

The concept of INCLUSIONARY housing is not based on a “planned economy” but is a plan to prevent disparate impact housing discrimination. Which appears to be what you are in favor of. Remember you don’t need to intend to be discriminating against anyone, but in your business practices you in fact do discriminate, you are just as guilty.

Does this goal come with a grant for say $800,000 per apartment unit x 13,000 units = ~$10B? At $3M per house in Waverly Park you could build and sell 3,333 market rate single family homes but where to put them? Where to educate the kids that will live in them? The neighborhood went ballistic over a plan to put a dozen on school district property next to Cooper Park and that's just 1/10th or 1% of the goal. Isn't it time to admit that people don't want more housing around them (note Sally Lieber's massive fail in the Assembly election as the only candidate favoring 4-plexes in single family zoned areas). I think we have to bite the bullet and say Mountain View is closed to new office buildings, we can't house workers we have and can't educate the kids of the people we've got. Tell Google to keep the workers remote and build somewhere else.

Uh - Didn't Lieber come in third? The souvergenty of the State of California allows the state to let cities exist and allows them to pass zoning laws. THESE LAWS ARE RESTRICTIONS ON PRIVATELY OWNED LAND. You cannot build a gasoline storage/distribution site in the middle of a residential area. (like the one near BMW and the Stevens Creek Trail/bridge). Or a market. In Texas/Houston it's a Wild West open season on whatever-the-owerner-wants!

I support the State exercising it's power through this sub-agency. Those who understand task forces/commissions etc. might recognize a study/majority consensus model (not unanimity). Like the Commission on Redistricting independent commission for political seat boundaries.

A good commission, a sound process of choosing among staff presented alternatives (Options) and a reasonable HOUSE THOSE WORKERS YOU Allowed "boot to the backside" from the state to cities! Close down new job-site creation or else. And this is the "else" from past actions. Jobs-Housing Imbalance.

Thanks TBM, this is pretty simple economics meshed with state-wide mandates.