Author Archives: Calley Wang

What We’re Reading – October 24

Five articles curated by the Wagner Planner staff: Here’s what the Wagner Planner staff is reading. This week: tech billionaires’ plans for a new city, the Adams administration’s request to suspend the right to shelter is paused, and a potential land value tax in Detroit.

“New” Cities? An Old Idea Corner Side Yard “Americans are drawn to the newest places and will happily ditch the old places they came from. And honestly, I view this as a flaw. More people are identifying as urbanists today because walkability, mixed use and transit accessibility have been rediscovered after nearly a century of suburban sprawl. Suburbs are struggling to adapt because they haven’t adapted to the changing lifestyles, work environments and household types that characterize modern living. Americans prefer to shed the old and embrace the new. But in my mind, places aren’t disposable. There’s something to be learned from every type of place, something that’s worth saving – and building on – nearly every place ever built. I’d much rather see more people working on making existing places better than creating more new ones.”

NYC Mayor’s Latest Bid to Suspend Adult Shelter Rights Cools in Court (City Limits) “Mayor Eric Adams’ administration is not proceeding with a formal request to suspend the right to a shelter bed for single adults in New York City—at least for now. In a Manhattan courtroom on Thursday, following 90 minutes of closed-door discussions, New York State Supreme Court Judge Gerald Lebovits said attorneys for the city, state and homeless advocates will instead continue meeting in private, with an eye toward a possible settlement.”

Detroit could be the largest U.S. city with land value tax, if the state legislature allows it (Niskanen Center) “Passing this law would make Detroit the largest American city to enact a split-rate land value tax – a type of property tax where the tax rate for land and structures are different, often with the tax on structures lower than the one on land. Still, it hit a roadblock in the Michigan state legislature recently as legislators moved to delay the resolution before final passage.”

How 100,000 Apartments in New York City Disappeared (NYTimes)
“The trend, which has continued since then, is among the reasons some neighborhoods have so little new housing — a troubling outcome when city officials have spoken in dire terms about the need to add housing to improve affordability and fight segregation. For example, while 3,000 units of new housing were added in the community district that includes the Upper East Side between 2010 and 2021, about 2,000 units were lost through the consolidation of apartments, according to the research. Another 1,000 or so were lost in demolition.” 

Hochul veto throws Long Island offshore wind project in doubt (Gothamist) “The veto drew recrimination from clean energy supporters who have long been waiting for New York’s offshore wind projects to get underway. The downstate region’s energy sector has become increasingly reliant on natural gas and other fossil fuels in recent years to power one of the world’s most densely populated regions.”

WHAT WE’RE READING – SEPTEMBER 26

Five articles curated by the Wagner Planner staff: Here’s what the Wagner Planner staff is reading. This week: the continued survival of Chinatown, highway expansions across America, Detroit’s half-baked freeway removal, our inequitable cities, and the decline of walking, biking, and the school bus.

Saving Chinatown, While Also Making It Their Own (NYT Style Magazine) “To be in Chinatown — whether as a descendant of multiple generations or as one in an influx of hundreds of newcomers each year, both immigrants and those born in the United States — means being part of Chinatown, on the ground, committed to its continuing.”

Why Democrats and Republicans Alike Keep Expanding Highways (Streetsblog)“ Attempts at equity-washing have rung particularly hollow in Maryland, where advocates say adding lanes is unlikely to “eliminate employment barriers” for under-served residents as the Moore administration suggests — particularly for families who are too poor to drive. And even for those who do, many of those advocates have been questioning whose congestion, exactly, would be cut.” 

Michigan Department Of Transportation: “An I-375 With Fewer Than Ten Lanes Would Take Away People’s Right To Get Around” (The Handbuilt City) “Interstate 375 was built in 1964…Half a century later, we’re getting rid of it. …After much ado about the road engineering agency’s emphasis on sustainability and community engagement, the MDOT representative proceeded to show…the exact opposite of what the engaged community requested. People want narrower, safer streets. But this presentation includes…a ten-lane boulevard.”

In Search of Equitable Cities (Corner Side Yard) “The exclusion of Blacks, immigrants and other people of color in American cities has never been resolved. It prevents cities from reaching their fullest potential. It’s been tempered over the years, but it still exists. I’ve yet to see any urbanist movement directly take on what I view as the most critical long-term challenge facing cities: their inequity. Until there is, it will always be with us.”

The Agony of the School Car Line (The Atlantic) “A few generations ago, in 1969, nearly one in two kids walked or biked to school. Now only about one in 10 kids gets to school those ways. And only about a third of children who live within just one mile of school walk or bike there. School buses—a onetime right of passage for American children—have been supplanted as the leading vehicle for getting kids to school. According to the most recent national data, a solid majority of kids—54 percent—are driven to school.”

Labor Issues are Holding Up Transit Improvements in Metro Detroit

Amid staffing challenges, Detroit is reimagining its beleaguered bus system while its suburbs risk allowing transit to languish

A Detroit Department of Transportation bus in Downtown Detroit. The city’s bus system carried over 100,000 riders daily before the COVID pandemic. Photo by author.

The city of Detroit and its surrounding suburbs are headed in opposite directions on bus transit. At the root of the issue: labor and leadership. Despite persistent staffing challenges, leaders in Detroit are showing increased willingness to support transit service improvements. In the suburbs, new transit leaders are instead stalling at the bargaining table with workers. In both city and suburbs, elected officials must lead by working with agency managers while demanding good transit service.

Public transit continues to face serious challenges and an uncertain future in the Detroit metropolitan area, including a shortage of drivers, unreliable service, and a lack of funding. Although nearly a quarter of Detroit’s 632,464 residents do not own cars and most of the region’s jobs lie in the suburbs, the region spends only about $80 per person per year on transit – among the lowest in the nation.

Bus service in particular is fraught. The Detroit Department of Transportation (DDOT) provides bus service within the city of Detroit and some inner suburbs while the Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation (SMART) serves the sprawling suburbs. That bus service has become far less frequent and reliable in recent years as DDOT and SMART drastically cut bus service due to the COVID pandemic, which never returned to original levels. In the city and suburbs, transit agencies provide an essential service to a mostly Black and working class ridership.

Low DDOT Wages Fail to Attract Needed Drivers
Transit advocates consistently identify the main cause: a shortage of bus drivers. The pay and working conditions are not competitive with other jobs that require commercial driver’s licenses. A bus driver at DDOT starts at a wage of $14.70 an hour. Meanwhile, neighboring Ann Arbor, which has fully restored its bus service to pre-pandemic levels, starts its bus drivers at $28 an hour. As long as wages remain low, DDOT will struggle to attract and retain bus drivers.

A full bus on the streets of Detroit shows that slow and infrequent service can’t keep up with demand. Photo by author.

Without enough drivers, metro Detroit transit is in crisis. Bus riders consistently report delays or canceled trips. Riders sometimes see multiple missed runs, leaving them waiting two or three hours for a bus. Faced with unreliable bus service, low-income riders are sometimes forced to call expensive Uber rides to get to work on time – or lose out on job opportunities. The agencies’ crisis responses show that although much work remains to be done, the city of Detroit at least has a glimmer of hope for transit recovery.

The city of Detroit, which directly administers DDOT, has begun to address the bus driver shortage. Detroit closed out 2022 with a controversy over the selection of a contractor for DDOT’s troubled paratransit system, which led the federal government to threaten to withdraw funding. As service deteriorated and scandals piled up, Mayor Mike Duggan has devoted more attention to transit. In his 2023 budget proposal, Duggan asked for a $15 million increase for DDOT. Although transit advocates welcomed the increase, they argue that it’s not enough. Instead, they are asking for an additional $80 million, bringing Detroit’s transit funding close to its pre-bankruptcy levels in 2013.

DDOT service remains far below pre-pandemic levels. Riders have stayed away because they cannot rely on the service for commuting. (transitrecovery.com using data from the National Transit Database)

For its part, DDOT has been relatively transparent about its bad service. It publishes a monthly performance dashboard, which shows that while only 66% of its buses were on time, it has been able to run most of its scheduled service. It has begun restoring frequent service on its busiest routes by rearranging work schedules and offering more overtime. But DDOT can barely hire enough to keep up with driver attrition.

That hasn’t stopped it from dreaming big. In late April DDOT announced an ambitious plan to modernize its bus network and greatly expand service. The “DDOT Reimagined” proposal would increase frequency on routes across the city and speed up buses through measures like signal priority and bus lanes. DDOT would also expand its reach to inner suburban factories, warehouses, and shopping centers, much to the chagrin of some of some suburban leaders.

DDOT Reimagined is a solid vision that increases bus service, adjusts routes to match Detroit’s population trends, and improves access to suburban jobs. However, it lacks key details like operating cost and time frame. The plan’s scope and ambition is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it could inspire elected leaders to rally around a clear vision and raise funding. The new Democratic majority in Lansing is reportedly considering increasing transit operating funds in the upcoming state budget. On the other hand, DDOT could erode confidence by overpromising while failing to provide basic service. To move forward, DDOT needs to expand its public outreach and set clear expectations. DDOT Reimagined will require new funding and time to hire drivers, buy buses, and build infrastructure.

Detroit’s elected leaders finally agree that DDOT needs more support. DDOT, in turn, must use this chance to prove that it can run competently and carry out its ambitious expansion plan. Although DDOT’s drivers are in the middle of a labor contract, it doesn’t prevent the agency from offering a raise to attract and retain workers. The Detroit City Council, which approves the mayor’s budget, has proposed a competitive driver wage of $29 an hour. After decades of decline, residents could slowly be trickling back into Detroit. The city needs fast, frequent, and reliable transit to meet residents’ transportation needs and sustain its fragile recovery.

Labor Battles Hold Up Progress on Suburban Bus Service
While Detroit offers a glimmer of hope, the path forward appears far more difficult for suburban transit. SMART bus service remains unreliable and infrequent, but no clear solutions have emerged. New management at SMART has a questionable track record with labor, and there’s little sign of progress.

Suburban bus ridership remains far below pandemic levels as well. (transitrecovery.com)

SMART drivers have been working without a contract since February. Yet there has been no public word about contract negotiations or a much-needed wage increase – SMART drivers start at only $16.50 an hour. Perversely, transit advocates celebrated when SMART finally acknowledged the severity of its staffing issues and slashed its schedules in April to match the level of service it could realistically deliver. Although riders report that reliability has improved, the bad service means that SMART remains unviable even for many low-income commuters.

SMART’s public communications in response to the crisis have been poor. Unlike DDOT, SMART does not publish a performance dashboard. After a large group of advocates made public comments at a SMART board meeting in February demanding a new contract, SMART removed the option to attend meetings via teleconference. It abruptly canceled what was to be its first in-person only board meeting in late April. In response to public pressure, SMART management seems to be missing in action.

It’s unclear whether it can resolve this crisis alone. General Manager Dwight Ferrell, who joined in 2021, has a poor record in labor negotiations. Before joining SMART, he served as manager of Cininnati’s bus system. His tenure was plagued by poor relations with the bus drivers’ union amid attempts to replace bus routes with vans driven by lower-wage workers, leading to a vote of no confidence and threats of a strike. Previously, he was fired as manager of Fulton County, Georgia in 2014 due to conflicts with the county employees’ union. To survive, SMART must skillfully negotiate, offer competitive wages, and fully commit to providing reliable bus service. Instead, Ferrell prefers to talk about expansions of SMART’s Flex rideshare program, which uses vans driven by non-union gig workers.

There’s no question that SMART operates in difficult territory for transit. The suburbs of Detroit are typically low-density and car oriented. Conservative suburban officials have long been hostile to public transportation or any closer links with majority-Black Detroit. SMART was born out of multiple failed attempts to fund a regionwide transit system, derailed by the political, economic, and racial chasm between Detroit and the majority-white suburbs. It was not set up for success – municipalities were allowed to freely opt out of SMART, which many did upon its creation. Even with a liberal political shift, an increasingly diverse electorate, and a growing interest in high-density housing, SMART remains ill-equipped to take advantage of these positive trends.

But SMART does have a fresh wave of support. Voters in suburban Oakland County ratified the system’s expansion in November 2022 into populous and job-rich suburbs that once opted out. However, it’s unclear how SMART will add new routes by this summer as planned if it struggles to run its current service. Little public engagement has occurred since the election. If SMART does not solve the driver shortage soon, it could burn through the support that voters demonstrated. It needs to take drastic action by focusing on the basics: provide high quality transit and actively engage with the public.

Just as with DDOT, elected officials choose the leaders, control the funding, and bear the ultimate responsibility for SMART. The executives of each suburban county appoint SMART’s board members. Oakland County Executive David Coulter and other county officials approved and campaigned for last year’s transit expansion, an explicit repudiation of the county’s longtime hostility to transit. If suburban politicians are serious about making progress, they need to continue their support beyond the election by taking an active role in solving the driver shortage and implementing the service expansion.

The history of transit in southeast Michigan unfolds as a decades-long tragedy. The region failed time and time again to raise funding, doubling down on urban decay and white flight. Michigan’s transportation policy has long favored automobiles and highways to the exclusion of all else. But in the Motor City, people need public transit and will ride a service that is useful. Opportunities abound for improving service and providing critical transportation to those who rely on it. By increasing funding, increasing driver pay, and engaging with the public, elected officials and agency managers must work together to improve transit and ensure that riders have access to the opportunities they need to thrive.

Suburban Skylines: One tech suburb’s struggle to grow and keep its character

The fight over housing affordability and density in Cupertino captures the struggle for the soul of suburban America.

Apple’s new headquarters rises above neighborhoods in Cupertino, California. (Source: Getty Images)

Cupertino, California is in some sense, not special at all. It’s a classic postwar suburb with leafy subdivisions of single-family homes connected by arterial roads and freeways and a population of  60,000 people. An hour south of San Francisco, it embodies all of the historical trends that characterize American suburbia.

But Cupertino also is special, forever transformed by the growing tech industry, which has forced a reconciliation with how a suburb can accommodate rapid growth. Known for the world headquarters of the technology giant Apple, it is a major job center in its own right within Silicon Valley. It also experienced America’s growing diversity. Beginning in the 1980s, it saw a rapid growth in its Asian American population, drawn by high-performing public schools and proximity to the tech industry – first Taiwanese and Hong Kongers followed by Indians and mainland Chinese. 

As Cupertino has grown to accommodate that diversity, it’s experienced a clash of modern urban form – high density on boulevards with largely single-family neighborhoods. With potentially better transit and denser housing on arterial roads coming, the challenge of Cupertino is managing growth in a city with mostly single-family zoning and limited desire to change that. But for some suburbs like Cupertino, this isn’t as dramatic of a shift as it sounds. In the midst of a national housing crisis, suburbs will have to change, and the battle for the soul of these suburbs may pioneer a new type of urban form.

Lawns and encampments
Cupertino is also ground zero for California’s housing crisis. A poignant symbol of the housing crisis emerged in Cupertino: a homeless encampment in the shadow of Apple’s gleaming headquarters.

A homeless encampment on Apple’s property. Photo by Richard Scott via Vice

The battle over affordable housing offers a glimpse of what could be possible and what challenges lie ahead. Redfin estimates that homes in Cupertino sold for an average of $2.4 million in December 2022, among the most expensive in the Bay Area. Its growth has leveled off in recent years, with population increasing only 1.6% between 2010 and 2020, compared to a growth rate of 8.6% for the San Francisco Bay Area as a whole. The housing stock has only grown 0.1% in this period despite high demand for access to education, jobs, and other resources in Cupertino.

This slow growth has not kept up with the rapid growth of the tech industry. The state of California calculates how much new housing cities should build based on existing need and projected growth through a process called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). California then requires each city to plan for this amount of housing and document feasible sites in the state-mandated Housing Element. Cupertino has fallen far below its RHNA targets, having issued permits for only 13.5% of its target for 356 low-income housing units. In total, the city issued permits for only 418 total units between 2015 and 2022, out of a target of 1064 units. 

The lack of housing, particularly affordable housing, has hurt Cupertino and the greater Bay Area. The renowned Cupertino Union School District closed two elementary schools in October 2021 due to a 17% collapse in enrollment. Nonprofit Silicon Valley Community Foundation attributes these closures to demographic changes and high housing costs– young families with children simply can’t afford to live here.

The sprawling Santa Clara Valley looks unimpressive but it houses some of the world’s most valuable technology companies. (Source: Calley Wang)

Impacts have been especially severe for low-income workers and community college students. Local housing advocacy group Cupertino For All links high housing costs and exclusionary policies to increasing rates of homelessness and displacement of working-class Bay Area residents. It points to the extremely low ratio of low wage jobs to affordable housing available to those income levels. Besides homelessness, the crisis also manifests quietly in early-morning commuters driving daily from far beyond the Bay Area, young students sleeping in cars, and seniors stuck in single-family homes they can no longer maintain.

Suburban retrofitting
And yet Cupertino contains the historical seeds of a very different vision: of densification, mixed-use growth, and alternative transportation. The Heart of the City specific plan, which found its genesis in the 1990s, prescribes a walkable commercial corridor on Stevens Creek Boulevard with a strong sense of identity. Stevens Creek, a six-lane road of shopping centers, office parks, and the dead Vallco Mall, runs through Cupertino and connects it to Downtown San Jose. Because it never had a pre-war downtown like its neighbors, Cupertino has long sought a more attractive and cohesive commercial center. As a result, street-facing shops, mixed-use developments and dense housing already coexist with strip malls and parking lots on Stevens Creek. Families, students, seniors and Apple employees walk along the road’s buffered and landscaped sidewalks. Cupertino’s current bicycle infrastructure plan calls for a citywide network of dedicated trails and protected bike lanes along the whole Stevens Creek corridor. The first mile-long stretch opened in early 2021, separating bicyclists from fast-moving traffic with concrete barriers. Originally a streetcar corridor until the 1930s, Stevens Creek already hosts one of the county’s busiest bus routes, sped up by a transit signal priority system. Political controversy aside, Cupertino’s commercial core already seems primed for urban growth.

Left: A protected bike lane ending abruptly next to the site of the demolished Vallco mall symbolizes the halting and reluctant evolution of Cupertino. Right: Apartments on top of shops a mile from Apple’s headquarters. (Source: Calley Wang)

To gain more historical background, I spoke with Richard Lowenthal, who served on the Cupertino City Council from 1999 to 2007. A former tech entrepreneur, he sold off a startup and devoted his attention to non-profit work and public service. Lowenthal described his early attempts to promote pedestrian-friendly development on Stevens Creek Boulevard in the early 2000s. For example, he insisted that a proposed cafe face the street and leave the parking in the back. This would encourage customers to not only walk to the cafe but also walk to nearby shops afterward. “We shouldn’t be a highway town. Good design is ‘park once, shop twice,’” he says. Such design conformed with the Heart of the City plan, which aimed to improve pedestrian connections. Still, the proposal attracted opposition from residents who feared that there would be inadequate and inconvenient parking.

We met inside that very same cafe, almost twenty years after it was built. Visitors of all ages filled the establishment, from high school students to parents and seniors. On a sunny California winter day, even the sidewalk tables were packed. It’s hard to imagine that this could have ever been controversial. Lowenthal points to an empty strip mall across from Stevens Creek tucked behind a sea of parking lots to contrast with the street-facing cafe. Although the Heart of the City plan allows some housing as a supportive use for commercial developments, it has strict three-story height limits and does not envision Stevens Creek as a true mixed-use district. Visitors are still expected to drive. Shifting from a well-landscaped shopping area to an urban neighborhood will require further improvements in walking, biking, and public transportation options.

In addition to Cupertino’s growing bike network, transit will be an essential ingredient to developing an urban center. The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) operates local bus and light rail service. Most of Cupertino’s arterial roads are covered by buses but they are slow and lightly patronized, serving mainly as a safety net for students, senior citizens, and low-income commuters. Although Stevens Creek Boulevard is one of VTA’s busiest corridors and boasts buses running up to every eight minutes, transit remains underutilized in Cupertino and across Santa Clara County.

Despite these flaws, VTA emerged from COVID in better financial shape than its Bay Area peers. It has restored almost all of its pre-pandemic service and over three-quarters of its ridership. The agency is now turning its attention to future expansion, launching the Visionary Network initiative to plan a major increase in transit service.

Stevens Creek’s strategic location has also been eyed for a rapid transit corridor study led by the city of San Jose. The cities on the corridor, including Cupertino, hope to greatly improve transit connections with Downtown San Jose and the San Jose International Airport.

Monica Mallon, who writes about transportation issues in the Bay Area and heads the local transit advocacy campaign Turnout4Transit, sees emerging opportunities to boost transit service in Cupertino. She supports the Stevens Creek rapid transit study and believes that cooperation between Cupertino and San Jose will be vital in securing funding for such a capital-intensive project. In the near-term, the city could modernize its transit signal priority and street design to further increase bus speeds. Cupertino could also explore direct partnerships with VTA – contracting with the agency to run special routes. “It’s not an option that many people know about,” says Mallon. She cites the example of the Santa Clara Valley Medical Center Shuttle, a new service connecting the county’s public hospital with San Jose’s main railway station. By seeking regional partnerships and collaborating on VTA’s Visionary Network plan, Cupertino can offer useful and credible alternatives to driving.

Crabgrass frontlines
Despite the city’s prosperity, the main shopping mall in Cupertino, Vallco Fashion Park, has long been plagued by empty storefronts and joins the nationwide ranks of dying malls. A controversial attempt to redevelop the declining Vallco mall and build affordable housing illustrates the barriers to housing development in Cupertino.

In 2014 Sand Hill Properties, the owner of the Vallco site, proposed a new mixed-use town center with over two thousand housing units, retail spaces, and offices. Cupertino created a Vallco Specific Plan and negotiated a host of community benefits with the developer, based on community feedback. However, the Vallco proposal proved to be divisive and sparked strong opposition to housing development on the site. A community group named Better Cupertino emerged as the face of the opposition, suing the city and running its own candidates for city council. Better Cupertino-endorsed candidates won control of the council in 2018 and overturned the Vallco Specific Plan.

An affordable housing project on the Vallco site drew intense controversy due to its high density, buildings up to 26 stories tall, and potential traffic impacts. (Source: Rafael Viñoly Architects)

Ending the Vallco Specific Plan did not end Vallco, however. Sand Hill Properties had put up an alternative project with 2,402 housing units, of which 50% were reserved for low-income residents. This allowed them to take advantage of SB35, a 2018 state law requiring approval of developments with a certain amount of affordable housing. With the Vallco Specific Plan off the table, the SB35 plan moved forward with no public process or community benefits. Despite this state-mandated approval, progress on Vallco remains glacial. Most of the mall has been demolished but construction has not yet begun, leaving a fenced-off empty lot in the middle of the affluent city.

Beyond socioeconomic disparities and alleged impacts on property values, former councilmember Lowenthal also attributes the opposition to housing to the deep-seeded fears that change can invoke. “I think NIMBYism is a very primal problem. It’s a 20,000 year old problem of people protecting their cave,” says Lowenthal. Beginning with early redevelopment attempts in the mid 2000s, Vallco and development in general became increasingly controversial, with raucous city council meetings continuing well after midnight and elections characterized by vicious mudslinging.

Alon Levy, a fellow at the NYU Marron Institute of Urban Management notes, “Individual rich people can be virtuous. Rich communities never are.” Those who would benefit most from affordable housing in Cupertino aren’t able to vote for it because they simply can’t afford to live there. Without any consequences, municipal leaders including those in Cupertino, have long sidestepped housing targets and blocked development, contributing to the statewide crisis.

Cupertino’s leadership navigates a complicated landscape of state housing requirements. While the RHNA process has existed since the 1970s, enforcement of housing targets had been hands-off until the late 2010s. Municipal leaders often lobbied Sacramento to reduce their RHNA targets, selected sites in their Housing Elements that they knew would not be feasibly built, or refused to select sites that would be ripe for development. This complex process is typical of California’s well-intentioned but byzantine regulations. As a result, state housing officials lacked the capacity and political will to do much more than rubber-stamp these Housing Elements.

As the housing crisis worsens, however, California is now demanding more affordable housing in cities that have long resisted. SB35 was just one of many state laws designed to compel municipalities to approve affordable housing. Cupertino councilmember JR Fruen points to recent legislation that strengthened existing housing laws, simplified the RHNA needs calculation, increased penalties for non-compliance, expedited approvals, and upzoned commercial and residential areas. Statewide elected leaders have stepped up involvement, with Governor Gavin Newsom sweeping into office on promises to tackle the housing crisis and Attorney General Rob Bonta signaling his readiness to enforce housing laws against scofflaw cities. In the worst case scenario, Fruen argues, the courts would be able and willing to enforce the law by drafting a compliant Housing Element for Cupertino – this time with no local control. Suddenly, the Housing Element has gone from a paper-pushing exercise to a vital plan for every city’s future.

Cupertino, like most Bay Area cities, missed the January 31st deadline for adopting a state-approved Housing Element. Besides exposing it to fines and withdrawal of state infrastructure funding, the lack of a compliant Housing Element means that the so-called Builder’s Remedy goes into effect. This provision of California law means that any development with a certain amount of below market rate housing must be automatically approved, regardless of what the city’s zoning code allows. Although legally untested, there is good reason to believe the Builder’s Remedy has teeth. Wealthy Southern California suburbs and beach towns have seen a spate of dense affordable housing proposals under the auspices of the Builder’s Remedy. Such projects have begun to trickle into other Bay Area cities as well. Councilmember Fruen believes that the provision will survive any legal challenges to reshape Cupertino’s landscape. Developers will be more likely to propose new housing, knowing that they can get something built no matter what thanks to the Builder’s Remedy

A vision for the future
Change seems to be on the way, however. The 2022 midterm elections ended Better Cupertino’s control of the city council. Newly elected councilmembers JR Fruen and Sheila Mohan joined Councilmember Hung Wei in forming a 3-2 majority endorsed by Cupertino For All and amenable to dense affordable housing. The new council proceeded to elect Councilmember Wei as mayor. In her first speech as mayor, she promised to take a broad view of her constituents: not only existing residents but also future residents and the city’s tens of thousands of daytime commuters. 

Hung Wei, a former school board trustee, got her political start supporting teachers, custodians, and other school employees who could not afford to live in the community they served. As a longtime resident and community volunteer, she hopes to build consensus around creating more affordable housing and thinking long term. “We need to think about what we can do for future residents and serve those who work in the city. We cannot plan Cupertino just for the current residents. We need courageous leadership to look for the future,” she said in an interview. A cornerstone of her 2020 election campaign was to create a variety of housing options beyond expensive single family homes.

I also spoke with JR Fruen to understand the freshman councilmember’s perspective. At 43, he is positively young compared to the Baby Boomers who typically dominate local government. He speaks animatedly about the intricacies of California housing laws the way only an attorney could. A third-generation Cupertino resident, Fruen became interested in local politics when he graduated college into the dot-com bust economy of 2002 and encountered the lack of affordable housing options even for young professionals. At the height of the Vallco controversy, he founded Cupertino For All to advocate for more housing growth and tenant protections. The organization quickly grew and consolidated support from like-minded residents and local leaders.

In small local elections with limited public information and low turnout, Fruen cautions against reading too much into the results. But he believes that a worsening housing crisis and Cupertino For All’s advocacy have shifted public opinion on housing. “Now it’s no longer ‘those people’ and now it’s someone I know,” he says of changing attitudes. “New housing could be occupied by my kid or my parent who’s downsizing.”

Between market demand, state regulations, and pressure from affordable housing activists, it is harder to sustain blanket resistance to growth. Wei, the new mayor, says that residents have seen new housing sprout in neighboring communities. Residents would prefer to move past the dysfunctional brawls over the ruins of Vallco to at least manage development on their terms. Crediting these shifts with the new council’s victory, she hopes to meet and exceed Cupertino’s affordable housing targets through better planning and negotiations with developers.

All the public officials and advocates I spoke with agreed that the council needed to ratify a good-faith Housing Element, not only to satisfy state law but also promote a more dynamic, affordable, and sustainable city. The Cupertino For All-backed council has converged on a vision of building high-density housing in the city’s main commercial center on Stevens Creek Boulevard. By mixing housing and commercial amenities in walking distance and building near transit, housing advocates believe that Cupertino can create more affordable housing options and an attractive business district while reducing its longtime dependency on the automobile.

To Mayor Wei, the housing and transportation issues are inseparable. She is an enthusiastic supporter of the rapid transit study, even if it could mean removing a car lane from Stevens Creek. “Don’t we want people to shift from driving alone?” Fast and frequent transit is not simply a competitive amenity, but essential to unlocking more housing development and meeting the city’s affordable housing goals.

She points to multiple examples of past affordable housing developments on the corridor where builders did not take advantage of density bonuses allowed by state law, citing onerous minimum parking requirements as the culprit. A general plan amendment, she says, will be necessary to reduce parking requirements and rezone Stevens Creek for more housing. “It’s going to be controversial.” In May 2023, the state is expected to respond to Cupertino’s proposed Housing Element. With state approval looking unlikely, Cupertino’s leadership must take this chance to revise the Housing Element, implement new policies, and lay the foundation for a positive vision for the city.

The city in the suburb
The question remains on how the housing crisis will affect Cupertino’s single-family neighborhoods, which make up most of the city’s area. California’s SB9 bill, which allowed up to four units on lots zoned for single-family housing, was a lightning rod of controversy when Governor Newsom signed it in 2021. Despite the sound and fury, SB9 has not catalyzed the housing development that both supporters and critics expected. One of the culprits: strict municipal ordinances that make SB9 as hard as possible to use. Single-family zoning, long enshrined in zoning codes across the country, is politically and economically tough to crack. Instead, vast strip malls and parking lots can be developed much more cost effectively and with less controversy.

Single-family areas are expected to play a small role in Cupertino’s housing plans. Fruen believes that with or without SB9, Cupertino could still encourage neighborhood growth by offering pre-approved design templates and by allowing separate ownership of units on the same parcel of land. He envisions that Cupertino’s multi-generational families could grow and stay by building multiple small houses on the same lot. Wei discussed a few neighborhood sites in the Housing Element where property owners have expressed interest in small townhomes and apartment buildings, as well as working with faith leaders to build housing on oversized church parking lots. She also believes that the city should encourage the construction of accessory dwelling units and even explore a home-sharing program connecting empty-nested homeowners with young people hoping to live in Cupertino. Finally, she wants to loosen regulations like parking and setback requirements that discourage infill development: “Do you want to have two more feet of space or for your neighbors to be able to stay in Cupertino?”

Still, the focus remains on redeveloping commercial areas while handling single-family neighborhoods with a light touch. Sixty percent of Cupertino’s residents are homeowners, and they tend to be older, wealthier, and more politically active. Despite Cupertino For All’s recent victory, continued success is far from certain. Politically-connected homeowners could revolt once they start feeling the impact of increased development. “We are still a divided city,” says Wei. She hopes to build consensus around adding more affordable housing through negotiation with developers, rather than reflexively opposing new projects or leaning on state mandates. “I think people have a right to be mad when the state mandates a lot of things. And state laws are harder and more expensive for developers to use.” A well-considered plan focusing development away from single-family neighborhoods and with the goal of negotiating community benefits from developers could defuse opposition and bring community members, even former hardliners, together to support housing growth.

Another challenge will come from integrating the “new” and the “old” Cupertino: dense transit-oriented apartments in the core surrounded by car-dependent subdivisions with minor tweaks. For instance, it’s an open question as to how pedestrian-friendly a 120 foot roadway can really be. Stevens Creek Boulevard was designed to move high traffic volumes through Cupertino. It has very few intersections with neighborhood streets, which keeps traffic flowing and away from single-family residences. But it greatly limits walking and biking paths from sprawling subdivisions to the transit stations and urban neighborhoods that would lie on the corridor.

The above satellite image shows Stevens Creek Boulevard in the heart of Cupertino, with north at the top. All access to the shops on Stevens Creek from the south is funneled through other roads. There is no way to walk there without detouring onto busy and traffic-choked arterial roads, which encourages driving even for short trips. (Source: Google Earth)

Although the suburban pattern enshrined in Cupertino’s general plan is designed to “protect” single-family neighborhoods from commercial areas, this goal is fundamentally incompatible with the vision of a truly walkable and mixed-use community. Future leaders will have to navigate this contradiction and find the balance between creating an inclusive and accessible city while placating wealthy and influential homeowners.

Cupertino has many advantages over other American suburbs due to its affluence and position in the high-demand and strategically important Bay Area. It can attract housing development and secure funding for capital-intensive transit projects, making it a unique laboratory for exploring the future of suburban growth. Although development struggles in major cities dominate the headlines, America remains a stubbornly suburban nation. What happens here can offer lessons for the suburbs in which a majority of Americans live.

The haunted house of California’s housing planning process also serves as a valuable lesson for other expensive states hoping to make a dent in the housing crisis. New York governor Kathy Hochul seems to have taken the right cues. Rather than play with complex needs calculations, her recently-announced housing compact simply calls for a flat 3% housing growth target every three years in New York City’s community districts and suburbs – with incentives for permitting below market rate units. After years of dawdling, the scale of the housing crisis has finally thrown state legislators around the country into action. A comprehensive process that offers incentives for cooperation and wields punishments for non-compliance could make the most expensive metro areas more affordable for poor and working class families. But these are still the early stages. Progress will depend not only on overcoming resistance from wealthy homeowners but also on offering an affirmative vision for a cleaner, friendlier, and more integrated future for all.

Is Detroit a food desert?

Detroiters have more access to grocery stores per capita than its suburbs.

Mainstream media often refers to Detroit as a “food desert,” an urban area where it is difficult to buy affordable or high quality food. There just aren’t enough grocery stores, reports say, as chain supermarkets refuse to open locations in the city. This lack of healthy options accounts for the food insecurity and obesity many Detroiters experience. But my experience and the data reveal a more complicated picture, that Detroit has a large selection of full-service grocery stores within city limits. Moreover, the language of the “food desert” and the focus on large chain stores fail to help us understand and improve nutritional access in the city.

Detroit’s Eastern Market serves as a fresh produce, meat, and brewery hub for both consumers and wholesale businesses. (source: littleguidedetroit.com)

Living in the neighborhoods away from the glittering downtown condos, I may not have had access to the big chain grocers but I was still never more than a mile’s walk away from multiple full-service grocery stores . If I got in my car, my options expanded even more — including full service-groceries, limited assortment stores, farmer’s markets, and community gardens,  all within city limits. My experience could not represent that of every Detroiter, but despite the serious problems discussed in the news, I saw a thriving urban food scene encompassing residents of all income levels.

The sparkling water section at Detroit’s Honey Bee Market. Also available but not pictured: affordable meat selections, an embarrassment of fresh produce, and a high quality Mexican deli counter.

Using data on grocery store locations from the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) and population data from the census, I compared Detroit’s grocery access to that of its suburbs to see if it really is a food desert.

Grocery stores in Southeast Michigan. The city of Detroit is at the center of the map, within Wayne County. (SEMCOG)

My analysis went against the common media portrayal of food deserts in Detroit. In fact, Detroit has more grocery stores for its population compared to the suburbs. The tri-county metro area a whole has about 0.113 grocery stores per 1,000 residents. The city itself has 0.134 grocery stores per 1,000 residents.

Source: SEMCOG, US Census Bureau

But this might not tell the whole story. With high rates of obesity and poverty in Detroit, the quality, price, and diversity of food are key considerations. SEMCOG categorizes grocery stores as supermarkets or limited assortment stores. A supermarket is your typical large grocery store with a full line of fresh produce, meat and other essentials. A limited assortment store is smaller and has fewer fresh or perishable offerings — think a dollar store or discount market.

Breaking down the stores within each community by category, we find that Detroit actually has more supermarkets than limited assortment stores compared to the suburbs. 88% of Detroit’s grocery stores are full-service supermarkets, compared to 83% in affluent Oakland County.

Source: SEMCOG

Despite the conception of Detroit as a blighted food desert where residents must leave the city to buy basic necessities, we found that the city is abundantly served by large grocery stores offering fresh foods. This confirms the intuition and lived experience of myself and my fellow residents.

It’s still clear that this abundance is not benefitting all Detroiters. With 48% of households experiencing food insecurity and 38% of residents obese, much more work needs to be done for food justice. Yet my analysis suggests that simply adding more grocery stores may not be the solution. Grocery stores need to be accessible within the city and serve the needs of residents.

Food deserts could still be occurring in some areas of the city — a geospatial analysis could identify specific poorly-served neighborhoods. Indeed, the US Department of Agriculture finds that fewer than 10% of census tracts in Detroit meet its definition of a “food desert.”  We also have limited information on costs and quality within grocery stores. If stores don’t meet the cost and health needs of residents, they could be contributing to high food insecurity and obesity.

Local advocates support solutions that acknowledge complexities of food systems and retail in Detroit. For example, the Detroit Food Policy Council takes a more nuanced approach, emphasizing the need for better transportation and specifically the need for neighborhood retail that residents can easily access and afford. It also studies the impact of farmer’s markets and community gardens, which discussions of food deserts often omit in favor of large supermarkets. Finally, it suggest the term “food apartheid” to replace “food desert” as a recognition that Detroit’s food issues are not natural – they result from redlining and racial discrimination.

Let’s continue to take a data-driven, not a myth-driven, approach to food justice in Detroit.

You can reach the author of this piece, Calley Wang, at: csw9856@nyu.edu

You can reach the editor of this piece, Patrick Spauster, at: ps4375@nyu.edu