HOUSING SOLUTIONS IN DEVELOPMENT
Leading a city with a booming economy has its challenges, sometimes self-inflicted
CUPERTINO >> Most mayors would happily bang the gavel in a city that hosts one of the world’s wealthiest companies, boasts top-rated schools, and has watched its home values soar from $900,000 to $2.3 million in the last two election cycles.
Cupertino Mayor Darcy Paul has an enviable position, but the city is not without its challenges. Some, Paul admits, are self-inflicted.
In February, he agitated housing advocates when he said in a state of the city address that the lack of housing in Cupertino was “not dire.” Since then, he said, he’s thought more about addressing housing and transit needs.
Cupertino also has become a test case for a new state initiative designed to wrest control over development from local planners. The measure, know as SB 35, allows developers to win approval for certain projects if the proposal meets planning guidelines and includes affordable housing.
Sand Hill Property Company used SB 35 to submit a plan for 2,400 homes and apartments, including 1,200 units of affordable housing for low income residents, at the site of Vallco Mall. Plans also call for 1.8 million square feet of office space, a 30-acre rooftop park, community spaces and recreation.
Well-organized Cupertino residents have fought earlier Vallco redevelopment projects — from a plan to build a few hundred condos on the site, to a 2016 referendum against Sand Hill’s multi-billion dollar mixed use project.
On Tuesday, Paul and a city council majority voted to postpone an effort to impose an employee tax on major businesses, similar to a measure being considered by Mountain View. Some of the funds could have been earmarked for transit and housing.
Paul felt the city had not had enough discussions with the business community and other stakeholders. “It was too hasty of a timetable,” he said. The interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length.
Q
You said this about the housing crisis: “It’s not at a point where anyone can justifiably say that we’re at a critical level where drastic measures must be taken ... the circumstances are not dire. We have good options.” What were you trying to convey?
A
We’re looking at it from the perspective of our city. That context was within a conversation of whether we were delivering a balance between our jobs and our housing.
I have had a chance to reflect on it, and I don’t think I said anything technically wrong. In fact, what I said probably engendered more endearment in my own electorate, frankly, than anything else.
(After the criticism), I started thinking about things like transit. What do we need to be doing in terms of investing significant amounts of resources to really solve this problem?
It is a problem. It is absolutely a problem.
Q
How would you describe the housing situation in Cupertino and in Silicon Valley, both for homeowners and renters?
A
I would describe it as a situation that is very serious, and is going to require a lot of dollars to fix. But I don’t think that it’s going to be solved by exclusively adding more housing stock.
I do have a lot of concerns regarding the pressures that are being placed upon people throughout the entire spectrum, but especially the lower income spectrum.
Our conversation right now, even at 2,400 (units) at Vallco, or (the city’s proposed) 3,300 (units) at Vallco, that doesn’t get anywhere near the numbers that would be needed exclusively for housing. We need to add to the stock … but if you’re looking to a real and longterm fix, you have to pay attention to transit.
Q
One of the criticisms of the Apple Spaceship is that it is a 1970s style development. People drive their cars to the office, park, work, then drive home. There’s little substantial transit going to that hub. Is it something Cupertino could address with Apple?
A
That segues really nicely to the idea of encouraging, asking, and possibly even requiring monetary contribution from Apple to help us with the transit issue. You can ask nicely, but of course, then, any time you ask nicely, people can ignore you.
If you move along the spectrum to more compulsion, the most important thing to do is make sure you’re having an open, reasonable and well-considered conversation. I think our conversation has been all those things at this point. There’s no denying the congestion.
Q
Is SB 35 the appropriate process to redevelop Vallco?
A
No. I think that taking away local control tends to be less democratic than more democratic. But at the same time, when there’s more of an incentive from the outside, that does tend to get your population thinking more about the broader issues. We’re coming from a dozen years ago, essentially rejecting 200 condo units to right now.
Q
Did previous councils use up the leverage that future councils would need to control development? It’s situations like turning down 200 condos at Vallco which made Sacramento mad.
A
I don’t put the antipathy to build on the head of the prior council or any of the prior councils. I think the antipathy to build really does come from within the community. There are immediate residents (next to developments) and then as you go outward from the location of a specific development, there tends to be more antipathy.
Q
What do you think should go at Vallco?
A
I think we can put anything there we want to, frankly. Because, in the last six years, our home values have gone from under $900,000 to about $2.3 million.
I think if this community really had a good consolidated collective will, we could pretty much build anything there. We could make 50 acres of open space, if we wanted to and it would be the most amazing open space anywhere in the world.
Q
Is that practical?
A
No, it’s not practical … That’s the economic extreme.
If we could put any of the viable and likely options on the table right now and inject a very healthy amount of encouragement into the clean energy and clean transit space, then I would be happy.