Cupertino seeks balance, not bombast, on housing
In my recent State of Cupertino speech, I made a topical joke poking fun at our president’s ludicrous border wall. Everyone laughed. Unfortunately, a few people decided to twist it into a narrative that Cupertino wants to keep people out and hasn’t been allowing new housing.
That twist is false.
How are Bay Area cities doing in achieving sustainable jobs to housing ratios? Each California city has a Regional Housing Needs Allocation that mandates the quantity of housing that they must entitle.
In its current RHNA cycle, Cupertino has entitled developers to build 1,408 homes, 32 percent more than required and including many affordable units. Cupertino’s jobs-housing ratio, according to the Local Agency Formation Commission, is 1.08, the second best of job-rich Santa Clara County cities. Santa Clara is 2.08. Palo Alto is 3.02. California’s goal for cities is around 1.5.
Unfortunately, there’s a difference between housing entitlements and housing construction. Cities don’t build housing, developers do. Developers often request, and receive, housing entitlements but then choose not to build.
In Cupertino, one developer that received an entitlement to add 600 apartments, including 62 affordable units, has not begun construction. Three other entitlements also have not been built.
Recession fears, construction costs and mitigation fees are reasons developers cite for not building, both in Cupertino and in other cities. In Cupertino, where building requirements are comparable to those in other cities, and where developers ensure that their projects pencil out prior to requesting approval. Nonetheless, only 19 of the 1,408 entitled units have been built.
This is unacceptable — we must ensure that entitled housing is constructed in a timely manner, not endlessly delayed.
Market-rate housing costs are driven by unsustainable growth in commercial office space. Balancing job growth and housing growth is important, but some cities approve developments with huge housing deficits or insufficient affordable housing.
For example, San Francisco recently approved an 8,800-home, 32,000-job project (a 3.64 jobshousing ratio, and a 12,500-home deficit). Santa Clara approved a 1,360-home, 28,000-job project (a 20.6 ratio and an 18,000home deficit). San Jose approved a high-density development on Winchester Boulevard with 307 luxury units, zero below-market-rate homes, and insufficient parking — but the developer did promise a bicycle trailer for residents to use to go shopping.
Yes, in 2013 Cupertino approved Apple Park. But, Apple Park wasn’t constructed on an apricot orchard, it replaced an existing Hewlett-Packard campus with 9,800 jobs at its peak.
The narrative “Cupertino added 12,000 new Apple employees but didn’t add any housing” is untrue, but it’s endlessly and erroneously repeated. Nearly 10,000 HP jobs left Cupertino, while most of the 12,000 Apple Park employees migrated from other Apple facilities.
As mayor of Cupertino, I am adamant about balancing commercial and housing growth. The Vallco Specific Plan, which is being challenged, has a deficit of 1,888 homes. The alternate SB-35 Vallco Plan has a deficit of 2,287 homes — and the tiny affordable units it does include are unsuitable for families.
Cupertino has a new progressive council majority advocating for affordable housing. This is unpopular with developers that find that $7,000/month marketrate apartments are more lucrative than $1,500/month belowmarket rate apartments.
Building luxury unaffordable housing doesn’t help families. While commercial office space generates more revenue than housing, adding office space without commensurate housing is extremely irresponsible, especially in areas lacking mass transit.
Cities do the real work promoting affordable housing. Palo Alto’s council approved $14.5 million to save 117 mobile homes, and approved a 59-unit, 100 percent affordable project. Cupertino’s council approved a 100 percent affordable project that’s nearly completed.
Elected officials have a responsibility to advocate for sensible growth that does not worsen the jobs-housing ratio, damage our environment, increase housing insecurity or further overcrowd our schools. Voters elected us to carry out this responsibility; in Cupertino we take it seriously.