« County Budget Not Holding Much Water | Main | Four Thoughts for the Fourth »

July 03, 2018



The councilman who let his kids decide which style he should like best should just throw in the towel and go home. Really?


Joe: Thank you for the update, I missed the meeting.
@Mom: who is councilman that let his kids decide?

Bruce Dickinson

Guys, this may surprise you, but Bruce Dickinson really doesn't have a lotta bones to pick with the Pavilions decision and the reasons for each council members decision were well thought out and effectively articulated from numerous perspectives. And you know, coming from me, that means a lot!

Yours truly, however, does think that architectural comparisons to the Farnsworth House, the Glass House, and Frank Lloyd Wright were a BIG stretch, I'm really not sure this building has the architectural gravitas to be a classic in 50 years. I also found it humorous that Brownrigg referred to the Eichler homes as revered "At this point". Point being (no pun intended), that the modern vernacular goes through fads and Eichlers seem to be caught at the tail end of the mid-century modern fad that was culturally reinforced by "Mad Men" so to speak, but that ship has pretty much sailed.

The interaction with the outdoors is the strongest argument for the Pavilions and agree that someone using the Rec Center would appreciate that interaction, which doesn't really show that well "on the boards" especially from the perspective of the inside out. Personally, I think this design will be fine for 20-25 years, maybe longer if they improve it a bit.

Bruce Dickinson is heartened that most feel that the final Pavilions design still needs some flushing out, which it obviously does, and I think even those supporting the Mission design should really provide valuable feedback to soften the look of the modern design. Great to see The Legends of the community representing in the audience and absolutely they should be leaned on for further wisdom and guidance.

Nice work, Burlingame! You make this Dickinson proud!


Thanks, Bruce. I think we are mostly in agreement. Having lived in New Canaan, CT for awhile and knowing the use Philip Johnson made of the Glass House (as well as the brick house he had built as a guest house for the more modest.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_House) and how shielded the whole property is from the public, the comparison ran a bit thin for me too.

In the end I'm sure it will be fine, but I am betting it will take more maintenance and fine tuning of the mechanicals than a well-designed Mission-style building would have taken. We'll never know though, will we?

Bruce Dickinson

Dynamite points, Joe. First of all Bruce Dickinson still thinks the Pavilions design should have been cheaper given it looks a little generic-ish and modern building designs tend to be cheaper as why do builders keep proposing them? Let's face it, it's not due to their generosity!

Secondly, a mission style building is 1 power-wash and 2 window washes max per year. With the glass walls, the Pavilions design is going to have to be cleaned all the time to preserve the sanctity of the indoor/outdoor environmental interaction, if you will. A bunch of dirty windows may end up being more of an eyesore and ruin the whole experience. It's fine if properly maintained, but again an already over-priced Rec center is going to become more overpriced with the cleaning costs, and as you mention, potentially higher cooling and heating costs.

Just ask Apple if their new glass-centric store designs are cheaper to maintain!? But alas, I think everyone already knows the answer to that.


Everything looks great when it's shiny and new right? I keep looking at all the modern structures going up and find myself thinking what will this building look like in 20 or 30 years? But hell why should I worry about it..may not be around in 30 years to look at the results!


Today's paper had this letter


Regarding the story, “Burlingame selects modern rec center” in the July 4 edition of the Daily Journal, the Burlingame City Council embraces new over old. Perhaps the voters should adopt the same sentiment when elections start.

Tim Donnelly



"Critical Thinking."
"Common Sense."
"Environmental Impact."
"Finical Responsibility."
With the debt the City of Burlingame has accrued for employee benefits, our "Fair City" is only able to "Service" the account.
Can we just "pay down" one multi million dollar debt before we get in to another?


From the city newsletter:

One of the first steps in the Burlingame Community Center development project will be to relocate the existing playground in Washington Park. The goal is to have the new playground in place before breaking ground on the new Community Center in early 2020. For more information about the new Burlingame Community Center, click here.

The Parks & Recreation Department is forming the Washington Park Playground Committee to help develop the new playground plan, which will include equipment options for the Park. The Department will select three community members to be part of the Committee.

Committee members will be asked to attend several evening meetings, and a final presentation at a Parks & Recreation Commission meeting. The process is expected to take several months.


Didn't the Recreation and Park Dept. spend a $100,000.00 plus, on developing a Park on the Bayside that never happened?
-What happened to that project?
-What happened to the money and plans?-What was the result of the information and work put into the development?
-What was the Bid processing procedure?
-Where is that information available?

The same thing could happen again.

Especially if the same "People,"
-City Manager
-City Attorney
- Recreation/Park Director
-every single City of Burlingame Elder that were allowed to waste City of Burlingame Monies at the Bayfront are in charge, again, of this Recreation and Park Dept. "Debacle."
There should be a "place" on the City of Burlingame Web Site to provide "transparency" for anyone who wants to look into major City of Burlingame infrastructure investments, Bidding process, and who signs off on these "Humdingers" too.
At the very minimum, it would be a "Start" to be able to address City of Burlingame Elders in this forum.
Questions and response.

Bless Senator John McCain's family.
Thank you for your services, and sacrifices you made for us all.
Senator John McCain might very well be "The Last American Hero."


Holly, not too sure what you are talking about, but that's not unusual. The only park being discussed on the bay side is the one on States Land near Kincaids. The State makes the decision what goes out there, with the Cities input. They've held meetings and haven't decided as far as I know. Lots of options which may include a hotel.


When the 7th or 8th City of Burlingame Recreation/ Park Dept. Director was hired, (7 or 8th Director hired within 4 years) the New Director, I believe Margaret is her name, pushed for a Multi Million Dollar City of Burlingame Park out at the Bayside.

I appreciate comments regarding the information I have Posted.
However, if you looked into the facts, that are available by request(I believe a personal audience with Margaret is doable too.) You would discover that you have, Laura, zero information regarding facts and are only repeating what someone else told you.
Be a responsible Community Member.
Read the Prospectus.

Look into this issue Laura, and apologize to me.
Fire all the sycophants you have gathered. They are just dragging you down.
I am looking forward to your "investigation."
See you soon at the Burlingame Country Club.


Regarding my quote-"$100,000.00."
I may have been thinking Turkish lira instead of US Dollars...


Not really worth a response, but 1st, only three directors. One, Randy went to another city. 2nd Jim, retired. Then Margaret was the third. Far cry from 7 or 8 so check your own facts! The rest isn't even worth responding too.


The total estimated cost for the new rec center project has now increased to over $50 million, per pages 6 & 7 of this staff report being discussed at tomorrow evening’s city council meeting:


You can compare these current cost estimates with those in the staff report below from 2015 (with 2014 estimates); see last page/last paragraph. The building cost itself has more than doubled since then - estimated now at $34 million versus $15 million. I doubt labor & materials inflation alone accounts for the increase:


Finally, I have yet to see any estimates of how much it will cost to operate/maintain the new building on an ongoing basis, nor how much additional fee revenue is projected to help cover these costs.


Thanks, Lorne. That find is worthy of its own post which folks can find here:


The comments to this entry are closed.

About the Voice

  • The Burlingame Voice is dedicated to informing and empowering the Burlingame community. Our blog is a public forum for the discussion of issues that relate to Burlingame, California. On it you can read and comment on important city issues.

    Note: Opinions posted on the Burlingame Voice Blog are those of the poster and not necessarily the opinion of the editorial board of the Burlingame Voice. See Terms of Use

Contributing to the Voice

  • If you would like more information on the Burlingame Voice, send an email to editor@burlingamevoice.com with your request or question. We appreciate your interest.

    Authors may login here.

    For help posting to the Voice, see our tutorial.