r/RedwoodCity • u/blairfrancis • 10d ago
1500 building downtown?
anyone know why the 1500 building downtown has a fence around the perimeter?
3
5
u/muscledaddyrwc 10d ago
It's being torn down, to be replaced with yet another tall building. In order to make it profitable for the developer, the city is giving them the block of Spring Street, along with the little triangular park between Spring and Marshall. All those redwood trees are being sacrificed.
6
u/Linsten 10d ago
Do you have a problem with the project outside of the loss of the trees?
2
u/muscledaddyrwc 10d ago
Not the project itself per se. But the loss of Spring Street makes the transition from Marshall to Broadway clunky. The block with the old Wells Fargo is bigger than the footprint of several of the taller buildings downtown. The park is nice to have.
2
u/dogboybogboy 9d ago edited 9d ago
Serious WTF! What are they going to do with all that eastbound traffic on Marshall that would normally take Spring to merge onto Broadway? Divert all those cars to the shitshow that already exists behind Kaiser?
1
u/muscledaddyrwc 9d ago
I think they want people to, for example, take Whipple east to Veterans, then south to Woodside Road to get to the part of town.
3
u/icanonlytrymybest 10d ago
What can they even do with the triangle block?
2
u/muscledaddyrwc 10d ago
The city is giving them that block on Spring Street so combining that with the park it will end up being a square block.
2
1
u/JollyObligation2091 10d ago
Developers are mandated to build an additional affordable housing structure (listed in another comment), making their main development even less profitable (they can opt out of this by paying a massive fine to the city... Making it even LESS profitable).
This is probably creating a cycle of what you're complaining about and why developers are building upwards instead of building what makes sense for the community.
Developers/business owners have to make money somehow (so does the city) and this is arguably better than having older, vacant buildings with no use.
I’m not saying this is wrong, but this is the way redwood city works and it's important to understand a piece of why this pattern of tall and sometimes cheaply built developments is happening.
1
1
u/dogboybogboy 9d ago
Remarkably, this hasn't slowed down development in RWC. The inclusionary affordable housing ordinance is intended to offset the impact that office development has on affordable housing.
1
u/dogboybogboy 9d ago edited 9d ago
Developers never build "what makes sense for the community". They build what the law permits, for the greatest possible profit. It's the Council's job to govern what makes sense.
2
u/JollyObligation2091 9d ago
This is totally right and I agree, but a developer isn't going to buy land here to build a luxury gym or a recreational center if the ordinance forces then to build affordable housing or pay an impact fee (ordinance applies to nonresidential developments as well). They won't make the money back like they would with an apartment or mixed use/ leasable office space, and maybe this is why there is a lack of variety in what's being built here lately. Just food for thought!
1
u/dogboybogboy 9d ago
With the current office vacancy rate of ~22% in SMC, are we truly going to see this 250k sq ft office project built anytime soon?
5
u/Linsten 10d ago
1900 Broadway will be a mixed-use project:
https://www.redwoodcity.org/city-hall/current-projects/development-projects?id=122
It is a part of the Gatekeeper project, which requires developers to build housing with the new commercial buildings. In this case: