Project 2023

This week’s main walk was a long one — 13.2 miles — and I did it all while staying almost entirely within Redwood City’s borders (I did step into North Fair Oaks a bit, but only for a couple of blocks). I think that is a record for me. In any case, while I cruised by most of the usual suspects (ELCO Yards, Broadway Plaza and the associated CVS Pharmacy), this week I went by a couple of things I haven’t reported on in quite a while, and I managed to go down a residential street I’d never walked before — one that turned out to be a hotbed of activity. Plus, I checked in on Docktown Marina, which is close to where Redwood City’s newest project proposal — which may turn out to be the only one proposed in 2023 — would be located.

I began, though, by checking out the “parklet” at the corner of Hopkins Avenue and Alameda de las Pulgas, which is now fully landscaped. I like all the trees that the city added, and am interested to see how the plants develop: those have been planted around the perimeter of the parklet, leaving the center essentially un-planted (but covered in mulch). I was particularly intrigued by the signs that the city has installed, marking this parklet as “wildlife habitat”:

From there, I wandered up behind Sequoia Hospital and dropped down onto Cordilleras Road. Next, I walked up to and along Canyon Road, which I followed out towards Jefferson Avenue. Rather than go all the way, however, I headed up Harding Avenue, and then walked down Hillcrest Drive. Hillcrest Drive goes both north and south off Harding Avenue, and I’ve walked the northern segment — which is very short, and dead-ends at a house — before, when I was trying to determine if there was a way to get to Upland Road (I had an old map that showed a connection, but I’ve looked from above, along Upland Road, and from below, at the end of Hillcrest Drive, and there isn’t). I’m not sure I’ve ever followed Hillcrest Drive to the south, however. That is a short walk: only one block long, curving to the east and dead-ending into Lancaster Way.

That section of Hillcrest Drive may be short, but I found myself wondering: what are they putting in the water here? I observed no less than four construction or remodeling projects going on along that one-block-long section. The largest, surprise, surprise, is a Thomas James Homes project that is well underway at 518 Hillcrest Dr.:

Pretty much directly across the street, at 517 Hillcrest Dr., concrete was being pumped to the rear of an existing single-family home:

That home is receiving a two-story, 935-square-foot addition that will consist of a family room and a master suite, all apparently at the rear of the home that stands there today.

Two doors down from the home receiving the addition, what appears to be mostly cosmetic work was being done on the front of an attractive little house at 447 Hillcrest Dr.:

And then, crossing back over the street and heading just a couple of doors down towards Lancaster Way, I came to this parcel, at 430 Hillcrest Dr.:

From the look of the property I thought this might be another Thomas James Homes project, but no: it is being done by a different contractor. It is a project to build an all new, 2,535-square-foot, two-story home on the property. The home will have three bedrooms, plus an attached two-car garage and, in the front, an attached ADU (Accessory Dwelling Unit).

I ultimately made my way out to Jefferson Avenue, where I looked in on our old friend, Dug the Dinosaur. These day’s he’s playing Barbie:

Next, I took a quick peek at the Veterans Memorial Building/Senior Center project (which appears little changed from last week), after which I walked down Vera Avenue towards El Camino Real. Along the way, I looked in on the five-unit townhouse project planned for 239 Vera Ave. I was pleased to see that at long last work has gotten underway. Not a lot of work, mind you: after the single-family home that used to stand on this lot was demolished, the lot mostly sat, untouched, for months. But now the piles of dirt and rubble on the lot have been mostly cleared away, and work to install the underground utilities that will run to and from the five units has commenced:

As you can see, this is a particularly deep lot (as in 154 feet deep). The five three-story townhouses will all be located side-by-side in a single building that will sit end on to the street. The front entrances to the three middle units will be close to where that trench you can see in the above photograph is located (the entrance to the two end units will be on the ends of the building), while the five two-car garages will all face the other way, towards that left-hand fence. The project’s main (and only) driveway will run along that fence.

Eventually, I reached the ELCO Yards project. I got there right when something slightly curious was underway: one of the tower cranes was being used to relocate a flatbed trailer from one side of the property to the near side, where a semi with an attached flatbed trailer was waiting on the street. The trailer that was being lofted by the crane ended up being stacked onto the waiting semi trailer, presumably so it could be returned to wherever it came from.

It was strange, though, to see the trailer flying through the air like that.

While I was there I peeked into the pit where that particular crane is anchored. The hole, which will soon be a two-level subterranean garage, is getting an absolutely massive amount of rebar (all of which will of course soon be embedded in the garage’s concrete floor):

This particular site, in case you are curious, is at the corner of Main and Cedar streets.

From here I walked down Chestnut Street to check up on the Broadway Plaza project. There is not much to report this week: the old CVS is still in operation, the new one is not yet open for business, and steady progress continues to be made on the parking garage at the Chestnut Street end of the main site. I did, however, notice that from Broadway I could take a single photograph that shows both the old and the new stores:

A large part of my walk this week took me down Bay Road (behind the old CVS Pharmacy, and then by the new) all the way down to Fifth Avenue. Along the way I took a slight detour through Stanford’s Redwood City campus; their landscaping makes that campus a really beautiful place to walk. As I first entered the campus, however, I saw three new-looking motorhomes parked in Stanford’s parking lot, up against Bay Road, with people getting out of one of them with suitcases. And then I noticed more of them tucked into a driveway just across the street:

All of these motorhomes are from an outfit called Indie Campers, which rents campers in North America, Oceania and Europe. Although they constantly refer to their local rental location being in San Francisco, it is in fact located at 2618 Bay Road. Which technically isn’t in Redwood City — it’s in North Fair Oaks — but I took the above photo from the sidewalk along Stanford’s Redwood City campus, which is in Redwood City. (There, Bay Road is the border between the two.) In any case, if you or someone you know is interested in renting an RV, either here or somewhere else within their service areas, Indie Campers seems worth investigating.

One of the reasons I was heading down Bay Road was to get some updated photos of the project replacing the old Nazareth Ice Oasis, at 3150 Bay Rd. This project, which is intended to turn what was an ice rink into a building with life science laboratory and office space, appears to be nearing completion, at least from the exterior:

(For those not familiar with the site, that tower is not part of the project but is part of a separate building located on the opposite side of the block.)

Eventually, I headed back towards the heart of Redwood City, and then made my way over to the east side of the freeway. I wanted to check on the progress of demolishing the old Maple Street Shelter building, at 1580 Maple Street. I was disappointed to see that after some initial work on the building’s interior, nothing has happened for several weeks now. The building still stands, with some interior debris piled up alongside:

Recently, though, MidPen Housing formally submitted plans for the long-term affordable housing project it wants to put on the site (which is owned by the city of Redwood City, but for which the county has a right to lease). The city refers to it by address — 1580 Maple — but I’m calling it “Project 2023” since it likely will have the singular distinction of being the only project of significance to be submitted to Redwood City’s Planning department after several years of many, many projects being submitted each year.

MidPen has designed their project to fit within SB-35 guidelines, which should streamline the approval process and get it underway sooner than normal. Their plans call for a 53,000-square-foot, three- and four-story residential building containing 108 affordable housing units (all studios) and two two-bedroom managers’ units. In addition there would be a pair of two-story amenity buildings. Both to save costs and to further streamline the development process, MidPen intends to use modular construction in this development. Unlike the adjacent Navigation Center, which was also built using modular construction and still shows some evidence of that fact, this project apparently would do a better job of hiding the fact that it is composed of modules:

MidPen hopes for this project to serve extremely-low-income, formerly homeless households. The kind of people served by the Navigation Center, in fact. But whereas the Navigation Center is a transitional shelter intended to get people off the streets for a limited amount of time, during which they are assisted with finding a more permanent form of housing, this would be one possible next step for at least some of those folks. And because there would be no time limit on how long one could live in this new development, it would be a place where residents could theoretically live out their days.

Each of this development’s studio apartments would be 295 square feet in size: 14’ 10” x 20’. From that, a bathroom (about 6’ 11” x 10’ 8”) would be carved out, leaving an L-shaped space that would serve as kitchen and combination living room and bedroom. Laundry facilities for the entire building would be located on the ground floor, along with a mail room, a bike storage room, management offices, and small offices offices for both on-site and outside service providers. Open space around the buildings will include a central courtyard, a dog run, barbecue and sitting areas, and space for some to do a bit of gardening.

Technically, because this is an SB-35 project located within 1/2 mile of transit (there is a bus stop less than 1/4 mile away), the project is not required to include any parking. However, MidPen intends to provide 77 parking spaces, 52 of which would be for residents, two of which would be allocated to the manager units, and 23 of which would be reserved for visitors and staff. 10% of the parking spaces would be Level 2 EV ready, while all of the remaining ones would be Level 1 EV ready. All of that parking would be behind the building shown in the earlier rendering, between this project and the adjacent 131-unit townhouse project. The building’s lobby would also be on that other side.

Here is what the project would look like when viewed from above the townhouse project (note the “ghost townhouses” in the foreground):

The project site currently sits well below the built-up site where the townhouses are to go, and below where the Navigation Center is now located (also on a built-up site). My understanding is that MidPen’s project will be built up as well. Which may explain the large piles of dirt that have appeared on the adjacent townhouse project property:

That property was used as a staging site for soil when the Navigation Center site was being raised, and for equipment when the center was being built. It may again serve as a staging site, this time for MidPen’s housing project. At a minimum, I’m pretty sure that the extra dirt now piled up on the townhouse project site is intended to be used to raise up the two-acre parcel where both this project and another portion of the extended Blomquist Street will one day be.


Redwood City’s “Haunt Your Home” contest has concluded, and the winners have been announced! Be sure to check out the event web page to find out who won this year, and where all of the winners (and indeed, all of the entrants) are located. A video showing the winners will be posted to that page soon; be sure to periodically check back for that. But if you enjoy seeing some great Halloween displays, I recommend getting out and checking out as many of them as you can in person. I happened to be out in Redwood Shores earlier today, and went by the two entries that are located out there. I’m pleased to see that one of them won first place for “Best Effects.” This house:

I should note that the above doesn’t show the entirety of the property, and that of course it was taken during the day; it surely looks even more impressive after dark. As do all of the displays, of course. I do want to give a shout-out to the folks at 6 Brigantine Ln. (the other contest entry from Redwood Shores); it isn’t easy to “go overboard” on a Halloween display when you live in a townhouse, but they did a terrific job.

Theirs is well worth checking out, too. If I had been on the jury, I’d have given them a prize…

3 thoughts on “Project 2023

  1. Pingback: Back on Campus | Walking Redwood City

  2. Hi Greg. 2 questions.
    1) do you know anything more than was reported in the Pulse about the Native American remains found at Elco Yard which is apparently on a shell mound burial ground?
    2) do you know if new construction with parking is required to have any EV chargers?

    • > 1) do you know anything more than was reported in the Pulse about the Native American remains found at Elco Yard which is apparently on a shell mound burial ground?

      I do not, unfortunately. Although I believe I read that the remains were turned over to the tribe that was predominant in the area back then, and so are no longer an issue.

      > 2) do you know if new construction with parking is required to have any EV chargers?

      I do not (at least as far as Redwood City goes; San Carlos does appear to have specific rules), but this is already on my list of things to investigate as I am interested in the answer, too.

Leave a comment