The San Mateo City Council has approved plans for an eight-story apartment complex at 668 East Third Avenue, just two blocks from the Caltrain tracks and Downtown San Mateo. The project will replace a single-story strip mall along South Delaware Street with over a hundred units, including twenty affordable apartments. Prometheus Real Estate Group is the project developer.
668 East 3rd Avenue pedestrian view showcasing the arched ground-floor windows, rendering by Jones Architecture
The 85-foot-tall structure is expected to yield around 196,000 square feet, including 111,700 square feet of housing, 23,400 square feet for parking, and 5,950 square feet of residential amenities. Once complete, the building will include 128 apartments for rent, including one studio, 89 one-bedrooms, 33 two-bedrooms, a three-bedroom penthouse unit, and four ground-floor townhome-style units. Parking will be included for 73 cars and 148 bicycles.
The developer was assisted by several key state laws, including Senate Bill 330, which streamlines approval, and Assembly Bill 1287, which stacks benefits under the State Density Bonus law. The project secured a 100% density bonus by including 10 units for very-low-income households and 10 units for moderate-income households.
668 East 3rd Avenue overlooking Delaware Street, rendering by Jones Architecture
668 East 3rd Avenue sidewalk view, rendering by Jones Architecture
Some of the waivers afforded to Prometheus relate to the building height, setbacks, residential entrances, and even facade design. This allows for the design by Jones Architecture to avoid the collage-style approach to exterior design plaguing many other projects. Illustrations show that the overall massing will be interrupted by protruding balconies and a third-floor setback, adding amenity space above the ground-floor apartments. Landscape architecture is by Place, a Seattle-based firm.
The 0.65-acre site is located along East 3rd Avenue between Delaware Street and El Dorado Street. Future residents are expected to live across from the Block 21 development at 500 East 3rd Avenue, a mixed-use development by Windy Hill Property Ventures that will consume an entire city block with offices and 68 apartments. Demolition has already occurred in 2023, leaving the entire 1.5-acre lot vacant.
668 East 3rd Avenue site plan, illustration by Jones Architecture
668 East 3rd Avenue outlined approximately by YIMBY, image via Google Satellite
The project received final approval earlier this week. The estimated cost and timeline for construction have not been announced, though a typical podium-style complex can take around 18 months to two and a half years to complete once construction starts.
Subscribe to YIMBY’s daily e-mail
Follow YIMBYgram for real-time photo updates
Like YIMBY on Facebook
Follow YIMBY’s Twitter for the latest in YIMBYnews
San Mateo is doing very well. But why not more? Look at that totally empty lot across the street.
San Mateo has easy access to Caltrain to reach both SF and Palo Alto.
It’s zoned for office… So unless San Mateo were to change course there, we’re stuck with an office market slump.
The best course of action is to get that massive lot up-zoned, throw in some mixed-use to expand the downtown experience, and focus on proper TOD residential. That site easily should be 10+ stories.
OK. Then it should be an 18-story office tower.
If nothing else, that enables consolidation and replacement of low-slung office space over a 1-mile radius, which can be replaced by housing.
Can we talk about “…waivers afforded to Prometheus… This allows for the design by Jones Architecture to avoid the collage-style approach to exterior design plaguing many other projects.”
I had no idea that there are requirements that force architects to build the jigsaw puzzle style buildings that no one seems to like. Does anyone have any clarity on what that requirement would be and how it affects design?
I assume it’s in reference to breaking up the massing, but maybe there’s something more tasteless that architects are supposed to comply with??
I don’t know specifically, but many cities have very specific design guidelines beyond breaking up massing. They vary widely but it can be as specific as a list of allowable facade materials and colors, how many feet of material or pain color can be used before you have to switch, how often a window has to be placed along a wall, etc. The idea is to try and make buildings fit in with the “Style” of surrounding buildings but often the outcome in a world of global supply chains, changing tariffs, and labor shortages is an algorithm approach that meets the requirements on paper but not in spirit, thus the cement panel collage look that many lower end market rate buildings end up with. They find a way to tick all the boxes as cheaply as possible. It would be way better to let architects to use their creativity to design whatever they want given the budget. Cities should limit design guidelines to things like “we prefer non-glass facades” or general things like that instead of micro-managing the design process.
Interesting, thanks for the insight. I do think the render for this design looks better than a lot of the slop we see for lower-end 5-over-1s.