SAN MATEO, SANTA CLARA & SAN BENITO COUNTIES
Dec 2, 2025
Redwood City City Council and Planning Department
City of Redwood City
1017 Middlefield Road
Redwood City, CA 94063
Attn: Redwood City City Council <council@redwoodcity.org>,Jeff Schwob <jschwob@redwoodcity.org>, Ryan Kuchenig <rkuchenig@redwoodcity.org>
Re: 1548 Maple Street — Request for Fourth Amendment to Development Agreement and Second Amendment to Subdivision Agreement Location: 1548 Maple Street (APNs: 052-532-040, -050, -060, -070, -080, -099)
Dear Members of the Redwood City City Council, Jeff Schwob and Ryan Kuchenig,
We write regarding the request by 1548 Maple, LLC for a Fourth Amendment to the Development Agreement and a Second Amendment to the Subdivision Agreement for the project at 1548 Maple Street, which would extend the 8-year Initial Term by an additional three years, with provisions for a further two-year extension based on performance conditions.
Since this project was originally proposed and permitted, the regulatory and environmental landscape has changed substantially, particularly for shoreline-adjacent parcels such as this one bordering Redwood Creek. This stretch of Redwood Creek is tidal and already experiences flooding from both storm-driven creek flows and storm drain discharges, as well as Bay storm surges and rising high tides. In addition, rising ground water is of concern.
Newly enacted legislation now places additional responsibilities on both the City and the applicant with respect to sea level rise adaptation. In October 2023, SB 272 was passed, requiring all California cities to develop Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plans that meet BCDC standards. In December 2024, BCDC adopted the Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan, establishing clear guidelines and expectations for all Bay Area jurisdictions. Any extension of entitlements for shoreline developments should reasonably align with these updated requirements.
Site access, even with the developer providing new access, remains a significant concern. Both Blomquist Street and Maple Street are at very low elevations and already show vulnerability during high tide conditions. As sea levels and groundwater rise, access constraints will only worsen. This should be carefully considered, and the developer’s responsibility modified as needed, before granting yet another extension for a project located in such a vulnerable area.
Is there an opportunity to include updated sea level rise protection to the proposed trail along the creek?
Alternative: If the City chooses to approve additional extensions, we respectfully suggest the following alternative protective condition. Any future units built on this site should be limited to rental housing, owned and maintained by a speculative or institutional entity, and prohibited from converting to private homeownership.
When the City grants entitlements in a flood-risk zone, it incurs a responsibility, ethical if not legal, to avoid placing private homeowners in harm’s way. Can the City reasonably guarantee in future decades of rising sea levels and rising groundwater that all necessary public infrastructure (access roads, underground electrical systems, water lines, fire service infrastructure, sewer lines, and potentially gas utilities) serving a small number of homes will maintain safe habitability?
Requiring a long-term rental model ensures that the financial and operational risks of sea level rise fall on sophisticated entities capable of managing them, rather than on individual homeowners who would be left vulnerable.
For these reasons, we urge the City to seriously evaluate the appropriateness of granting further extensions for this project as currently proposed. At a minimum, any extension should safeguard future residents and public resources.
Thank you for your attention to this matter and for your continued service to our community.
Sincerely,
Gita Dev, Chair
Sustainable Land Use Committee
Jennifer Hetterly, Coordinator
Bay Alive Campaign
Cc James Eggers, Chapter Director, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter