The Third Avenue block between South Delaware Street and South Claremont Street that is part of the complete block to Fourth Avenue that a developer aims to place a five-story mixed-use office and housing development.
A proposed office and residential building project that would demolish a block of 13 downtown San Mateo structures containing various businesses and restaurants is currently under city consideration.
An artist’s rendering of the development proposed for the block of Third and Fourth avenues and south Delaware and Claremont streets.
The proposal, called Block 21, would put a mixed-use building on the block bounded by East Third Avenue, South Delaware Street, East Fourth Avenue and South Claremont Street. It would require the leveling of all existing on-site structures that include the locations for businesses as varied as a longtime Chinese restaurant, an adult book store, an Arco gas station, taquerias, a slot machine repair business and a tire shop. Michael Field of Windy Hill Property Ventures, the real estate agency developer proposing the development, said the company has given notice to the affected property owners over the past two years and would work with businesses at the property on solutions.
“We try our best to give them as much notice as possible so they find a place that will work well for them,” Field said.
Windy Hill is in contract to buy the properties, meaning it has agreed to buy the buildings from the various owners on condition Windy Hill gets city approval. Many of the individual owners had inherited the property or had family who had bought them. The purchasing process took two and a half years and involved negotiations with 40 owners for 11 parcels, Field said.
“We really need to try and create a community feel, as opposed to a chopped-up feel,” Field said.
The five-story building would consist of approximately 180,000 square feet of offices, 68 residential units, with 15% devoted to very-low-income level, and two levels of below-grade parking, according to the planning application. The building would have 389 parking spaces, with two levels below ground, with offices getting 186 spaces on level one and 169 elsewhere, for 355 total. Residents would get 34 spaces, according to submitted design plans. A pre-application was submitted Feb. 26 and is currently under review. Following the city’s complete review of the application, Windy Hill will host a neighborhood meeting, followed by a study session with the Planning Commission.
The community meeting would be important to get feedback from the surrounding buildings about the project. Field said redevelopment has to make sense for the community, like adding to the downtown, better pedestrian safety, sidewalk improvements and making the area a safer and better place to live.
“Is it time to breathe new life into the downtown. That’s the conversation we will have at the community level,” Field said.
Jamal Hemeidan, owner of The Zone Smoke Shop and Vapor at 516 E. Third Ave., said his business location would need to be destroyed. He has worked at the store since 1995 and bought the business in 2015. Hemeidan said he has a six-year lease agreement to stay in the building, but said its owner wants him to accept a one-year lease and money for a shorter lease to leave, which he does not want. Field said individual owners are responsible for bringing lease issues to resolution. Hemeidan has never had to think about finding a new place and did not have a location in mind if he had to leave. Locating elsewhere would be difficult given that licenses for a smoke business can’t be transferred to a new location, he said.
“If they want me out, they have to talk to me and negotiate,” Hemeidan said.
Recommended for you
David Medrano, general manager of AMA Tires at 525 E. Fourth Ave., has heard about the possibility of the building being sold, but said his landlord has not given him details. He was not too worried about the possibility of changes or moving, given that employees could move to the Redwood City location.
“Right now, we are just working day by day. We also have another location,” Medrano said.
He hopes if the business moved, customers would follow them to a new location. Neighboring businesses have given Medrano a heads up about the possibility of moving, and he said they are in a different situation because some don’t have another place to go.
“They are smaller businesses; that’s the only building they have,” Medrano said.
Field said a timeline for starting the project depends on the city and feedback from the community but often takes a year and a half for other buildings, while the construction process will take 21 months.
Windy Hill also developed similar mixed-use projects nearby, at 405 E. Fourth Ave. and 406 E. Third Ave., and this will be the fourth project in the last five years in San Mateo. The nearby downtown development at 405 E. Fourth Ave. is 65,625 square feet with 23 housing units and office space. The 406 E. Third Ave. development next to it is currently under construction with 101,000 square feet of office space in addition to 16 studios and seven one-bedroom units. Both are four stories.
Windy Hill wants the proposed project to have more residence units by percentage with bigger one-bedroom apartments. Residents would live on the top floors and be segregated from the offices with separate elevators and entrances. Rents would possibly be similar to other Windy Hill San Mateo projects, which are around $2,800 for a studio and $3,200 for a one-bedroom.
Rendell Bustos, a senior planner with the city, said the pre-application is still under review with city staff and must go through an environmental review, a formal application, design review and community meetings before a Planning Commission decision. The city’s historical review consultant is also currently evaluating all buildings affected. No date is set for a neighborhood meeting or Planning Commission study session.
“An integral part of a planning entitlement process is community outreach, which includes outreach to the existing businesses on the site,” Bustos said by email.
I'd prefer more housing than office space. Seems like this could increase San Mateo housing demand more than supply - it'd be great to have that flipped
355 parking spaces for 180K sf offices, 34 parking spots for 68 housing units, all within walking distance to the train, I count five? Residential buildings with unknown people living in them... 311 S Claremont St, 312 S Delaware St, 314 S Delaware St, 318 S Delaware St, 320 S Delaware St. How many people live there and how many of those people are included with a right to return in the proposed 10 units of BMR Studio/1bd units? I count at least 13 cars meaning probably more like 20+ people live there. Was picking up food at New Wing Fat this weekend and those homes have a lot of people living in them. Q: 180Ksf of office + 68housing is all that will fit under measure P limits? LOTS of questions.
I would rather have continued access to Las Palomas, as I have since the 80s. Of course, if Las Palomas wants to leave it is their decision. I can't imagine what it would be like to have the afternoon August-October sun in your window in the top floor of that building. Perhaps air conditioning and modern, filtering glass would help.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(3) comments
I'd prefer more housing than office space. Seems like this could increase San Mateo housing demand more than supply - it'd be great to have that flipped
355 parking spaces for 180K sf offices, 34 parking spots for 68 housing units, all within walking distance to the train, I count five? Residential buildings with unknown people living in them... 311 S Claremont St, 312 S Delaware St, 314 S Delaware St, 318 S Delaware St, 320 S Delaware St. How many people live there and how many of those people are included with a right to return in the proposed 10 units of BMR Studio/1bd units? I count at least 13 cars meaning probably more like 20+ people live there. Was picking up food at New Wing Fat this weekend and those homes have a lot of people living in them. Q: 180Ksf of office + 68housing is all that will fit under measure P limits? LOTS of questions.
I would rather have continued access to Las Palomas, as I have since the 80s. Of course, if Las Palomas wants to leave it is their decision. I can't imagine what it would be like to have the afternoon August-October sun in your window in the top floor of that building. Perhaps air conditioning and modern, filtering glass would help.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.