By Sam Cedar
Like many populous and pricey cities in California, Cupertino is reluctant to allow new housing developments. While residents cite many concerns, such as preserving neighborhood character or privacy, two recently approved housing developments have faced fierce opposition and lawsuits for a different reason: traffic.
The first example was related to the Mary Avenue Villas project, a 40-unit two story townhome project replacing the right-of-way along Mary Avenue. There, neighbors told San Jose Spotlight that they are anxious about the loss of on-street parking, which could spill over into the neighboring roads and limit space. One added, “Is this really the right spot to be building into the street because it’s so narrow?” Ultimately, the City Council approved the project amid allegations of ignoring administrative procedure, causing the residents of the Garden Gate neighborhood to sue the City.
The neighborhood pushback around traffic continued with a townhome development replacing five single-family homes on Evulich Ct. The project was approved by the city council, however the city was promptly sued by a concerned resident. The case alleges that if there were an emergency, the roads leading in and out of the area wouldn’t have enough capacity to accommodate emergency vehicles with all of the additional cars the development would bring. This was a concern echoed by many of the nearby residents. One told San Jose Spotlight, “We already are gridlocked here during school hours and commute hours…You add 51 (homes), that’s 100-odd cars and it’s just adding to the safety issues of the neighborhood.” Another added, “during the school time, it’s always very, very busy.”
Residents’ apprehension around new housing in Cupertino because of traffic is not unique to California. According to the Legislators Analyst Office, the problem of traffic is a statewide issue, with residents expressing concerns that “new housing—and the associated new residents—can exacerbate traffic congestion and parking shortages.” Ultimately, this neighborhood pushback can be very effective at stopping new construction. Half of the respondents in a survey sent to developers by USC researchers in 2021 said that “city councils/county boards of supervisors were either ‘a lot’ or ‘a great deal’ persuaded by public opposition arguments”, including arguments related to traffic.
Given the power of local residents to influence city council support/opposition for new developments, it is important to know whether the arguments they make are based in fact. In a recent study, we assembled a dataset of 22 upcoming or approved projects for Cupertino’s current housing cycle, and used the ITE’s Trip Generation Manual to calculate the change in individual trips, or cars on the road, across the entire city from the current developments.
What we found is counterintuitive to the generally accepted notion that more housing equates to more traffic. Rather, traffic is actually expected to decrease from these 22 projects. Specifically, we will see a citywide net reduction of 1,143 trips per day. This reduction in traffic will be especially notable along Cupertino’s major corridors. Stevens Creek Boulevard is projected to have 3,814 fewer trips, and De Anza Boulevard will have a more modest decrease of 124 trips per day. How can it be possible that we are building new housing but reducing traffic?
The answer stems from the fact that a majority of Cupertino’s current housing projects are replacing existing high-traffic office and commercial buildings. such as Apple’s old offices in Stevens Creek Office Center, or United Furniture along Stevens Creek Boulevard. When these commercial or office centers are replaced, customers and workers, both living in and out of the city, no longer have any reason to come to those locations. For visitors, they may never enter the city at all, and residents may exit Cupertino to work or go shopping. In other words, the traffic goes elsewhere, leading to fewer cars on Cupertino’s roads. It is true that these housing developments replacing former commercial and office sites will generate some traffic from the people living there. However, our calculations show that the traffic from these townhome projects is often much less than the existing traffic from these commercial properties.
The loss of commercial spaces, and the traffic that comes with it, is a problem in its own right that the City has acknowledged. However, in order to preserve the larger suburban identity of Cupertino, the City has consistently opted to promote developments in the commercial areas of the City, leading to the retail displacement effect we are seeing now. Insofar as the City must continue to build new housing for California’s housing quota (RHNA), we will continue to see more commercial areas be rezoned for housing, and with it, a subsequent loss in traffic as well.