SkyscraperCity Forum banner
42K views 43 replies 10 participants last post by  pesto 
#1 ·
San Mateo County ( /ˌsæn məˈteɪoʊ/ san mə-tay-oh; Spanish for "Saint Matthew") is a county located in the San Francisco Bay Area of the U.S. state of California. It covers most of the San Francisco Peninsula just south of San Francisco, and north of Santa Clara County. San Francisco International Airport is located at the northern end of the county, and Silicon Valley begins at the southern end. As of 2010 the population was 718,451. The county seat is Redwood City. It is among the 20 most affluent counties in the United States, in terms of personal, per capita and household income. It is strongly Democratic and ethnically diverse. The county's built-up areas are mostly suburban with some areas being very urban, and are home to several corporate campuses.
 
#35 · (Edited)
Not sure if this is the right place for it but I didnt see any other news. San Mateo's Hillsdale Mall is receiving a large expansion on the northern parcel to replace Sears and the food court with a new outdoor plaza. The plan calls for a new luxury movie theater, bowling alley, and shops and restaurants. Sears closed in April and demolition has begun.

The San Mateo planning board website has all the pdfs with details of the development. Im not allowed to post links because of my low post count. I live a few blocks away and have been taking assorted pictures of the demolition and will continue to update if anyone is interested.
 
#39 ·
Interesting. The job nodes have spread south to Santa Clara leaving Sunnyvale in between as a large area with relatively more housing. This makes a lot of sense given the demand for housing nearer the more northerly job centers (MV, PA, MP). An alternating pattern is developing, with the San Mateo area likewise having more housing and fewer jobs.

SC seems to be particularly well suited for job growth, given the relatively more available housing in Sunnyvale, East Bay and SJ.
 
#40 ·
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/...od-city-habitat-for-humanity-development.html

Habitat for Humanity is building in downtown Redwood City, and has been approved to build a 20 unit 6 story building. But criminal defense lawyer Geoffrey Carr as he will sue them if they don't downsize to 3 stories.

“They are saying that doesn’t make economic sense [at three stories] but that is not my goddamn problem, is it?” he said in an interview Friday. “If they had come to talk to us before, we would have told them.”
“They are just going to go ahead,” he said. “My answer to them is ‘O.K., we will see you in court,’ and we can fight about it and waste some of Habitat’s money
I guess you can sue for anything in SMCo, and you don't have to pay the other party's legal fees. :eek:hno:
 
#41 ·
https://www.smdailyjournal.com/news...cle_cda84dc6-8c9f-11e8-b02c-e33457167a8e.html


Settlement reached over height of downtown affordable housing
Approved Redwood City development legal battle ends


The owners of a commercial office building in downtown Redwood City have settled with Habitat for Humanity Greater San Francisco after a legal battle over the height of a proposed affordable housing development slated for 612 Jefferson Ave.

The project entails 20 below-market rate condominiums ranging from one to three bedrooms in a six-story building that would sit on what is now a vacant, 5,000-square-foot lot. The condominiums would be available to those making between $63,000 and $85,000 for a family of four, or 80 percent of the county’s median income.

...

Now that Carr and his partners reached a settlement with the affordable housing nonprofit, the development will proceed as approved, six stories and all. Habitat for Humanity did agree to a number of maintenance requirements. For example, the nonprofit will have to conduct a post-construction survey to ensure no damage is done to 605 Middlefield Road, it will wash the exterior of Carr’s office building three times during construction and maintain landscaping along the property line.

Carr said he reluctantly agreed to settle after losing a 2-1 vote with his partners. He said he also settled because of fatigue and the cost of the legal battle, adding that the legal basis for his argument is “thinner” with a nonprofit than with private developers.

...
 
#43 ·
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2...to-tear-down-150-aging-rent-controlled-units/

EAST PALO ALTO (KPIX 5) — A plan to demolish more than 150 rent-controlled apartments and build a massive new mixed-income development in East Palo Alto is being met with a mix of excitement and unease.

“I do need a better place. For as much as I’m paying for, I think they need to remodel everything,” said tenant Gustavo Mendoza.

The owners of Woodland Park Communities announced plans to tear down 160 rent-controlled units in the city’s Westside neighborhood. The owners say the apartments are aging and largely beyond repair.

They have also made the current residents a unique offer that will allow them to eventually move into the new complex.

“Current tenants will be able to return at the same rent-stabilized rates. We are unequivocally committed to no displacement,” Chief Investment Officer Mike Kramer said in a prepared statement from the company.

The apartment owners have pledged to relocate displaced residents to empty apartments during demolition and construction. And once the new complex is complete, the owners say the displaced residents will have a guaranteed “right to return” to a similar apartment in the new building.

The new apartments would be rent-controlled like the old ones were.

Despite those guarantees, many residents said they remain fearful that they will be pushed out by rising rent prices.

“My family’s concerned that they’re going to kick us out and we’re not going to have a place to be,” said tenant Gerardo Zuita.

A spokesperson for East Palo Alto says the city has yet to receive an official application for the project. The apartment owners estimate that the approval process, demolition and construction could take up to five years.
 
#44 ·
Must be a NY developer. That's an old NY ploy: give "guaranteed" housing to really old people while getting it in writing that the rights don't pass to their children.

Btw, those people should NOT be living there. They should be in lower rent areas which pretty much means anywhere in the country other than Manhattan.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top