Opinion

First, columnist Scott Herhold (Page 1B, Aug. 20) asserts that people who question condo developments at Vallco Fashion Park and elsewhere must also be opposed to job creation, home construction and helping the poor. And then Cupertino Mayor Richard Lowenthal (Letters, Aug. 23) asserts that these people are also responsible for congested freeways and an undesirable work environment.

The recent article "(Courier, July 26)":http://www.cupertinocares.org/node/57 on the referendums is notable by the absence of questions which should be obvious to even the most casual observer, including your reporter. For example, why did Ms. Stow, who has repeatedly supported development, sign the petitions against development? Did she and the other parties to the lawsuit do so as part of a preconceived plan to file the lawsuit? Who financially supported the lawsuit by Stow, et al.? Later in the article, city attorney Charles Killian states: "It's up to [Toll Brothers and Vallco attorneys] to appeal or not." Does he have knowledge that Toll Brothers and Vallco owners funded the lawsuit using citizens as pawns?

Because some bean counter sitting behind a desk in Sacramento has decided that Cupertino, along with most other California cities, rates an "F" in meeting new housing starts, we should all cringe. The mantra from those in politics seems to be, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."

I'm writing in regard to a continuing concern I have and believe many of the citizens of Cupertino have. This concern is the construction of high-density housing and other structures, in particular poorly designed, aesthetically unpleasing developments that appear to be downgrading our city.

Last week my son and I rode our bicycles to Eaton Elementary, where he enjoys playing handball. Half of the handball court was gone, covered by another portable classroom. Lawson, our newest middle school, just got two portables; Kennedy and Miller each has 10. Collins lacks room for more portables, and they're transferring students to Eaton. District-wide, more than 10 more portables are coming.

Thank you for your editorial about development (Courier, Carol Bogart column, June 28), and the description of your bucolic farmland. Development is inevitable.

The problem in Cupertino is smoke and mirrors are used to further the efforts of greedy developers. Catch phrases like "affordable housing" are used to describe below market rate, available only to a select few--that can't be re-sold at prevailing rates--and senior rental apartments, rather than "for sale" units.

Both are extremely restrictive, and usually bestowed by county-wide lotteries.

Thank you for Hugh Biggar's article on Toll Brothers/Vallco development referendums in the June 14 issue. The number of condos actually proposed along the quarter-mile Stevens Creek corridor, including the 137 multi-story variety the city council approved for Macy's back parking lot, is actually 1,000, not 100.

The Godzilla-quashes-Bambi lawsuit brought by Toll Brothers and Vallco against two young moms--one with a toddler--apparently is meant to stop the groundswell grassroots movement against haphazard rezoning from retail/commercial to very lucrative housing in Cupertino.

All these young women did to deserve this hellacious treatment is exercise their rights in a democracy by signing off on petitions signed by 20 percent of the registered voters in Cupertino--10,000 in all, as they were handed off to the city clerk.

Marty Miller is quoted in a recent article stating that he would like Cupertino to be like San Francisco [San Jose Metro, "Welcome to Condotino," April 26, 2006]. And how does he propose to do that? Bring in trolley cars down De Anza Boulevard?

Over the years, Steve Piasecki is on record stating that Stevens Creek Boulevard will become like the Champs d'Elysées in Paris. With the current undermining of very useable commercial space into large housing structures, one can only wonder how their words could even come close to any kind of reality.

Both San Francisco and Paris have vibrant commercial districts full of restaurants, bars, coffee houses, shopping and viable public transportation. With the current vision of our city planners and council members (except for Kris Wang), Cupertino will indeed become Condotino--a city with many high-rises but no soul.

Councilman Orrin Mahoney has stated that Vallco's 135 condos would make "the flywheel go up." I totally disagree with his statement.

Housing is not the key element to make a mall successful. Look at Valley Fair and Stanford Shopping Center. Without housing, these two shopping malls are still successful. The key element for a successful mall is retail stores. All the city council members admit that they don't know what retail stores Vallco will bring in. Without the retail stores' commitment, how can Mahoney say condos make "flywheel go up?"

Look at the Vallco project's management. Everything is always in a rush, from overnight construction to the garage and now condos. Vallco always brings in new requests at the last minute. If Vallco owners managed the project well, they wouldn't need to bring in these piecemeal requests.

So-called "affordable housing" is a bad deal for all, and particularly for those who buy it.

Assume an "affordable house" in Condotino for $500,000. The buyer puts down $50,000 and takes a 30-year $450,000 mortgage at current rates. Monthly payments are $2,850, taxes $700, insurance $100, totaling $3,650 minimum. At the end of 10 years the buyer has paid $267,000 in interest and has $66,000 in equity because the buyer cannot participate in the market-based housing appreciation.

After 30 years the buyer has paid $574,000 in interest and gets $500,000 in equity when the property is sold back to the housing authority. Because of inflation even at 3 percent, the $500,000 equity has lost more than half of its purchasing power. They lose big money.