
A dying mall near Apple’s headquarters: a fight over Silicon Valley’s soul - jseliger
https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/A-dying-mall-near-Apple-s-headquarters-is-13417634.php
======
protomyth
_“According to the sales pitch, the new housing units would include low-income
high-density housing apartments,” his presentation said. “This would mean that
we would have uneducated people living in Cupertino. A lot of other residents
and I are concerned that this would make the current residents of Cupertino
uncomfortable, and would split our city in half.”_

Wow, I guess the individual believes its fine for these people to clean and
cook for them, but they should really be bused in from somewhere else so they
don't scare the children. What a friggin depraved understanding of the lives
of people just trying to get by or pull themselves up by what means are
available.

~~~
masonic
That was one random school student's comments.

Meanwhile, keep reading:

"Its recent plan doesn’t include more than $35 million in city fees compared
with an alternative project. It doesn’t have a traffic mitigation plan and
calls for taller buildings, up to 240 feet, close to the height of San Jose’s
tallest towers."

So, _no_ traffic mitigation plan (essentially all traffic being dumped onto
Wolfe Road there, with the rest dumped onto Stevens Creek Blvd) and _no_
standard development fees (where are those low-income kids going to _go to
school?_ ).

and

"Vallco’s SB35 affordable housing plan includes low- and very-low-income
units, but _not moderate-income units that are typically available for
teachers_."

 _Zero_ moderate-income units and only enough below-moderate income units to
qualify for SB35 exemptions.

~~~
protomyth
I really don't care about the rest. This person got away with saying something
as asinine as that. The fact I got down-voted and you defended that comment
just makes me a bit sick.

~~~
masonic

      you defended that comment
    

No, I _dismissed_ it. No one ranting youth sets policy.

Fortunately, neither does someone who doesn't care about the critical facts of
an issue.

~~~
protomyth
You backed up the comment with a bunch of points from the rest of the article.
Why bother replying to me with that when my point was about the attitude shown
by one person that seems to have gone unchallenged? In the context of my post,
I really don't care about the "critical facts" because I was commenting on the
attitude of someone testifying. "I dismiss his comment but he's actually right
and here is why" isn't really interesting.

