Citizens group fears new laws could open door for Vallco developer
As Cupertino begins a new planning round for the 58-acre Vallco Shopping Mall site, some residents are warning that the state’s recently enacted housing legislation could allow companies to skirt city reviews and pave the way for “massive development.”
A Change.org petition by citizen advocacy group Better Cupertino, which has collected more than 1,000 signatures, calls on the city to examine the consequences of the new laws and create “clearer objective standards” for the city’s General Plan.
The new laws aim to tackle the state’s housing crisis, in part by limiting the ability of local governments to reject housing development applications — including projects that are mixed with non-residential uses — that comply with all “objective” local standards, according to a legal analysis prepared for the city by attorneys from Goldfarb & Lipman LLP.
The Better Cupertino petition singles out the Vallco project as a particular point of concern. “The ambiguities in our General Plan will allow unwarranted increase of office and residential density at Vallco Shopping Mall site, since our city development standards will be vulnerable to misinterpretation and legal challenges,” it reads.
In October, mall owner Sand Hill Property Company sent a letter to the city asking to “restart the community planning process” to help it decide what to do with the nearly vacant shopping center. The letter came less than a year after a local ballot measure to create the $3 billion Hills at Vallco project was defeated by voters.
In response to Sand Hill’s request, the City Council in November decided to hire three firms to help craft a specific plan for the site that will establish a framework of standards and guidelines for future development proposals. Sand Hill is covering the consultant fee expenses.
At the time, city staff said the mix of residential, retail and office space allowed in development proposals has not yet been determined and the planning process would include community input.
However, in a prepared statement given to this newspaper, members of Better Cupertino say that they are concerned that Sand Hill could skip the city process and instead pursue a fasttrack option under the recently passed state laws.
If the developer’s plan meets state standards, the statement warns, it could “move forward with or without support from the community or approval from the City Council.”
At the Nov. 21 City Council meeting, staff acknowledged the possibility that Sand Hill might pursue an alternative development process.
“We can’t speak for another party on whether or not they will continue that path,” said Senior Planner Catarina Kidd, adding that “when an owner comes forward and says ‘let’s collaborate,’ and they’ve made a deposit on that collaboration, I think the planning department’s response is we will do that.”
In a letter to this newspaper, Sand Hill Managing Director Reed Moulds characterized Better Cupertino’s petition as a “scare tactic” and said it “creates a false sense of urgency.”
“This was concocted after we submitted a nearly $3 million payment to allow the City and community to run their ideal planning process — one in which we are standing aside — where citizens discuss their goals and the City can weigh its priorities,” Moulds’ letter states.
“We are very concerned that the community planning process can succeed amid these sorts of bad-faith tactics,” he said.
Better Cupertino also remains skeptical of the current planning process, stating it is “concerned that the resident community had no voice in selecting the consultants who will draft the Vallco Specific Plan.” The group also worries that a desire by many residents to include retail stores in the development will be ignored.
Meanwhile, other residents and advocates have spoken in favor of the planning process at two recent City Council meetings.
“Vallco presents a unique opportunity for Cupertino to manage and respond to its own affordable housing needs,” said Josh Barousse, a political manager for housing advocacy group Silicon Valley at Home.
“We’re excited about the collaborative design process, and strongly suggest a broader definition of community,” he said, adding “we urge you now to move forward with the specific plan in a timely manner.”
The specific plan will be drafted through the late spring and summer, and the final draft is expected to be ready for review in the fall, according to staff.