Mountain View Voice: Letters to the Editor (August 4, 2006)
More parkland, less housing

Editor:

I agree with Chuck Shih when he points out the need to “put the brakes on housing” in Mountain View (”Where have you been, Voice?,” July 21). The Mountain View Voice claimed to support this in its July 7 editorial, yet spoke up too late to prevent over 500 condo units being approved at the Mayfield site.

Arguments for high-density housing near transportation only make sense if housing is approved in the first place. The question is not whether housing should be in the foothills or the city, but rather whether it should be approved at all.

How many times do we need to remind our city council and local paper that the quality of life decreases in direct proportion to overcrowding?

Martha Elderon

Dell Avenue

More housing means more problems

Editor:

Although the former Mayfield Mall is not in my neighborhood, I have listened to the debate regarding its development for months. My reaction to 500-plus more houses is, “Oh my, 1,000 more cars to deal with.”

I’m wondering if the council members realize that every development calls for more police, firemen, and schools? And more water, which is finite, and the rates of which have been raised two years in a row.

Councilman Perry, where is it written that Mountain View has to provide housing for everyone in the Central Valley? I really feel sorry for the residents of Monta Loma.

Betty Lucke

Lilac Lane

I’m surprised no one used the “Think of the children!” argument. Does this smell like “Please stop building houses to keep house prices up” to anyone else? That said, they do have a point: Mountain View (and the Bay Area) is so poorly planned that every additional resident adds an amazing impact on the community due to the amount of driving that eveyone needs to do. I predict a double decked El Camino in 2150.