Despite calls from residents to delay the process, the Redwood City Council voted 6-1 on Monday to move forward with an environmental review of Redwood LIFE, a proposed office park redevelopment in Redwood Shores.
The decision allows city staff to study both the original plan by Longfellow Real Estate Partners and a scaled-down alternative, which was introduced in response to community concerns.
Residents opposed to the project urged the council to postpone the vote until more details about the reduced proposal can be discussed in subsequent public forums.
Longfellow’s plan would expand the current site between Belmont Slough and Marine Parkway into a modern office campus for life science companies and research and development facilities. The site currently houses 20 buildings totaling 980,000 square feet.
Under the original proposal, Longfellow would add 15 new buildings and 2.35 million square feet of space. The alternative plan would add 12 buildings and 2.1 million square feet — a reduction of about 13.7%.
The property, originally developed in 1997, was acquired by Longfellow in 2019. The developer filed a pre-application with the city in 2021. Notable current and former tenants of the development include Nintendo of America, Engine Biosciences and Seer Inc., among others.
Full redevelopment would be phased over 20 years. Similar life sciences hubs have emerged in nearby Foster City and South San Francisco.
Several residents and environmental groups voiced opposition to the project during Monday’s meeting, raising concerns about light and noise pollution, wildlife disruption, and possible environmental issues due to the scale of the development.
Gita Dev of the Sierra Club said the alternative proposal fell short of addressing community concerns.
“A vote today would abruptly cut off community feedback on this developer’s alternative,” Dev said. “The alternative was presented as a 20% reduction in project size, but in retrospect, it’s merely a 13.7% reduction. This is extremely minor in response to the magnitude of the concerns that were raised.”
Chris McIntosh of the San Mateo County Bird Alliance said increased lighting from biotech operations could harm the area’s birds and wildlife.
“Biotech has traffic and lighting for much more of the night and day than currently,” McIntosh said. “It reduces safe roosting places for daytime birds and changes the nighttime environment for hunters like barn owls, which help control rodents. Imagine living a quiet life along the slough, only to have that darkness disrupted by hotel lighting and headlights.”
Councilmember Jeff Gee, a former mayor, clarified that the council was not approving the project but simply voting to proceed with the environmental impact report.
“There is no project approval before the council tonight,” said Jeff Schwab, an environmental consultant on the project. “The only decision is what to study as part of the report — both the original Longfellow proposal and the alternative.”
Schwab said the alternative reflects community feedback, including greater setbacks from nearby homes, consolidated amenities, wider buffers along the slough, and a relocated road farther from the closest residential neighborhood.
The city council’s decision to move forward with the environmental impact report for the Redwood Life Project will be followed by a scoping session with the planning commission to identify key environmental issues. The full process is expected to take about two years before it goes back to the city council for final approval.
