After seven years of negotiations, a new 750,000-square-foot commercial office campus will claim the vacant site once home to Redwood City’s Malibu Grand Prix amusement park following a 5-2 vote in favor of the project by the City Council Monday.
“We’ve finally gotten to a place where we can move forward,” Councilmember Jeff Gee said during Monday’s City Council meeting. “Redwood City has earned the right to ask for community benefits in exchange for development and that’s what is before us tonight, a pretty damn good robust set of community benefits that we can look at that will help many parts of our Redwood City community.”
In its current iteration, the project at 320-350 Blomquist St. would include 765,150 square feet of total office space spread across four buildings, a parking structure and surface parking with 2,591 stalls and a 35,000-square-foot employee amenities building. And about 42% of the site will be used as public open space.
Jay Paul Company, the team behind the project, is also offering roughly $65 million in additional community benefits in exchange for a zoning map and General Plan amendments, which would allow the office space to be built on a property currently zoned for industrial use.
Community benefits would include 64 deed-restricted units at exactly low-income levels that would be donated to the St. Francis Center, $13 million for park and athletic field improvements, $6.5 million for the city’s Blomquist Bridge extension project, $4.7 million for pedestrian and bike improvements along Blomquist Street and Old Seaport Boulevard, another $2.5 million in affordable housing financial contributions and $1 million for the Highway 101 and Woodside Road interchange project.
But Councilmember Diane Howard and Vice Mayor Diana Reddy argued the proposal would do more harm than good. Both asserted the new project would bring in thousands of new employees who would add more strain on the city’s housing and traffic systems than they’re offering to support.
And the commercial project would not be a right fit for the industrial area that should complement uses at the Port of Redwood City, an area of business that has historically continued to see success despite periods of recession known to hurt office uses, they argued.
“It’s apparent, I’m in the minority here but it’s difficult to be enthusiastic about such a large project on the east side of 101 that will have so many negative impacts on our community and the biggest one for me is housing,” Reddy said.
The team had initially sought to build a commercial campus of more than a million square feet on the site but has greatly whittled down the project size since first submitting plans in 2015. Meanwhile, contributions to community benefits continued to increase over the years including another $9 million since July’s meeting when developers initially said their previous $54 million offer was their last.
Ultimately, a majority of councilmembers and public speakers agreed the proposal and its community benefits package would be a better asset to the city than if a light industrial project were to be proposed in the area. The $65 million community benefits package is being offered in addition to more than $20 million in required city fees and other improvements like hardening the area to sea-level rise and building all-electric structures, Mayor Giselle Hale noted.
If a project were to meet current city zoning, staff has argued the city would experience similar impacts on the environment and traffic with about the same number of employees coming to the area, but the additional community benefits wouldn’t be part of the conversation.
“We still have a lot of community benefits in this package so I’m thinking it’s something worth voting for because otherwise we’d have something with much less community benefits potentially,” Councilmember Lissette Espinoza-Garnica said. “Any other project would be probably just as impactful, if not just a little less, so that’s why I think it’s good enough for Redwood City.”
(1) comment
Thanks, Sierra, for covering this story.
The Harbor View project will cause a huge traffic problem. Check Greg Wilson's "Interchange impact" column in the Nov. 5 edition of the DJ. Blomquist Street and Seaport Boulevard will become gridlocked. Traffic will spill over to East Bayshore Road blocking residents well south of Harbor View from entering and leaving their homes. Traffic will also turn Maple Street, east of Highway 101, into a parking lot. What kind of community "amenity" is gridlocked traffic that could last for years?
It would not be surprising to see the City block Blomquist traffic from turning onto Maple Street. Why? Gridlocked traffic on the Maple Street over-crossing could impede or block police vehicles from exiting the police station. Just yesterday, at least five officers responded to a late afternoon 9-1-1 call involving an armed man threatening to shoot a woman and possibly her three children in the area of Maple Street and ECR. No one wants first responders penned in by commuter traffic when they are needed for an emergency.
The Harbor View developer is going to provide 64 low income housing units somewhere in Redwood City. How will that "amenity" ease Redwood City's housing situation in a meaningful way?
The new office park will be all electric. As our state moves away from fossil fuel generated electricity, where will the Harbor View businesses get the electricity they need? The needs of those businesses will compete with the needs of local residents. When something becomes scarce, its price goes up. How is paying more for electricity an "amenity" for the Redwood City community?
About 40% of the Harbor View site will become public open space. The project is located in an industrial zone. Residents will not be walking over to Harbor View from nearby neighborhoods because there aren't any nearby residential neighborhoods. No one is going to drive over to Harbor View open space if they have to sit in traffic to get there. What kind of "amenity" is open space that cannot be easily used?
City Council members Diana Reddy and Diane Howard voted against this project. They got it right.
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.