The Burlingame Voice

What's a Dwelling Unit?

I attended the November 19th City Council meeting to add my two cents to the discussion about the General Plan update that was on the agenda.  I will get into more about my comments about water supply adequacy and security later.  For now, let's just marvel at the sense of confusion about "dwelling units" that was on display that night by several council members.  The Daily Journal Austin Walsh piece about the meeting didn't quite capture it with this mention 

Though they stopped short of determining a suitable unit-per-acre ratio, some councilmembers shared an interest in reducing the amount of parking required in a development to accommodate more housing development.

Constructing parking can be expensive or consume space which could otherwise be used for housing in a development, and builders often seek reduced parking requirements in projects near transit stations to maximize their unit counts.  “I want to use parking to encourage affordability,” said Councilman Ricardo Ortiz.

Watching the discussion live, it was apparent to me that the basic idea that "dwelling unit" is an inadequate measure of the intensity of use of a piece of property was just starting to dawn on several council members.  That's why they "stopped short".  The General Plan update is moving in the direction of allowing 140 DU/acre in the north end of town--a proposed increase from 120 DU/acre.  Yet when presented with some photos of recent, rack-and-stack developments in Redwood City that hover around 70 DU/acre, there was sort of a stunned look on several faces.  Only then did the discussion move to the mix of studio, one-bedroom, two-bedroom, three-bedroom units in a development.  I've been espousing using bedrooms/acre for a long time, including at the Anson Apartments and Residences under construction on Carolan Ave.  Now is the time to dump DU/acre and talk about a real metric that will guide planning in the future.  It ain't DU's.

P.S.  Check out this DJ piece about the Millbrae project near the BART station with its 444 DU's for another example of the lack of transparency.

A Time for Leadership

Last Wednesday's Daily Journal covered the proposed office development on the parking lot next to the Avenue train station.

Burlingame officials offered largely positive reviews to plans for a large office building proposed adjacent to the downtown train station, despite concerns the project may worsen the city’s transportation struggles.  The Burlingame Planning Commission unanimously agreed to push forward the proposed redevelopment of a car lot at 250 California Drive into a four-story office building.

The revealing part of the article and the meeting was in the quotes

Before voting in favor of the proposal and making it clear he supported the developer’s interest, (commission chair Peter) Gum shared development criticism he commonly receives from residents.

“What I hear on the street is please stop building and please stop the traffic congestion,” said Gum, according to video of the Monday, Feb. 12, meeting.

Gum acknowledged though the commission is required to consider projects according to the city’s zoning code, which allows for redevelopment of the property, so he voted in favor. He also made his preference for the site clear.

“I would suggest building nothing there, or keep it significantly smaller,” said Gum.  “It overpowers the most important building we have, which is the downtown train station,” said Gum.

So even Planning commissioners who hear the concerns--and there are lots of them--and seem to agree with them, apparently feel powerless to do anything to rein in over-development.  The public is not happy.  Last weekend I got talking to someone I had never met before and who had no idea who I was nor had she ever heard of the Voice.  The first sentence out of her mouth after hearing that I also lived in Burlingame was "Can you believe that building?"  Of course, she was talking about the monster on California Dr. across from this new proposed office building.

It's time for some leadership from the City Council.  If there are no zoning code terms in place to slow things down then it's time to enact them.  I'm not talking about spot re-zoning targeting an individual project--that is clearly illegal.  We need a general change.  It needs to address height, mass, trees (or lack thereof) and water availability.  We're well into drought conditions but no one seems to think that is a problem until restrictions are imposed.  With the Summerhill project now in progress and several more well along, it's time to take a breath, take stock and slow down.  Here is the Carolan Ave. claw as a visual reminder of what is already approved.

Endangered Burlingame Species

The writing is probably on the wall for every close-in Burlingame bungalow given the economics of tearing down a single-family home and going to condos near the core.  It's really quite sad.  With the monster growing on California Ave. and the number of already-approved projects plus what is in the works, we are on the precipice of a major change in the face of B'game.  That won't come as a surprise to any regular Voice reader, but knowing it's coming and seeing the scraped lot are two different things in my experience.

I was saddened to see this little gem of a very close-in bungalow that, like many others, had been carved into apartments over the years get the death sentence a few weeks back.  It's seriously cute, looks to be fairly well-maintained, and will be replaced by a big box.  I'm too much of a realist to think much can be done about the trend, but I can say I will miss it when it's gone.

Adios 21 Park Ave.  You are about a century old, if not more, and many people have crossed your threshold for the walk downtown and back.  You will be missed.

The location is in the Washington School zone so add the increased density to the Bayswater Ave. proposed project.  I'm not sure where all those kids are going to end up.

Nov 30 Update

An Lo and Behold, driving down Oak Grove yesterday morning I see the remains of two more bungalows.  When I saw the prices of the luxury condos two doors down from here (across from McKinley) a year ago, I knew these two were history--just did not know when.  Now I know....now

The Grand Plan. Part 4. More density

Tonight,at a study session, the City Council will look at plans for two downtown surface parking lots that are slated to be transformed into high density housing and a five story parking garage. The public is welcome. Meeting begins at 5:30 in conference room A at Burlingame City Hall. If you re concerned as I am, you will attend.

Art Deco in B'game and Beyond

The Burlingame Historical Society meeting drew about 75 people to the library last night.  They came to hear local architect and Planning Commissioner Richard Terrones talk about the history and characteristics of the Art Deco style.  Richard delivered a solid hour on the origins of the style punctuated with a zillion photos of buildings' exteriors and interiors, posters, furniture and planes, trains and automobiles!  I found the differentiation between "Hard Deco" and "Soft Deco" particularly enlightening.

As always the Burlingame-specific examples drew a lot of interest.  The Wells Fargo building on the Avenue, Sterling Cleaners, Adeline Market, and early views of Washington School got the crowd fired up about Moderne.  Using his professional knowledge, Richard took Q&A on a variety of related topics like the current "Dwell" movement, Eichlers, the old Post Office and Deco buildings elsewhere in the Bay Area.  If you aren't a member of the Historical Society, getting the newsletter and attending the quarterly meetings, you are missing out.

Apple Wakes Up Too Late

This story in yesterday's SF Chronicle made me really, really sad;

Steve Jobs made Apple into a top American retailer by designing crisp, modern stores with features reminiscent of the company’s products. Glass boxes and aluminum panels abounded.  But as Apple moves to turn its stores into experiences — places for concerts, art exhibitions and photography classes — the tech giant has begun to pursue distinctive yet familiar buildings that its customers might admire as well. 

In Washington, Apple has set its sights squarely on the Carnegie Library in Mount Vernon Square. One of thousands of libraries built nationwide with funds donated by steel tycoon and philanthropist Andrew Carnegie, it opened in 1903 as the first desegregated public building in the city.  Apple officials say they plan to restore the building to its original grandeur and outfit Carnegie as a place to hold free concerts, art exhibitions, workshops for teachers and coding classes for children.

Finding historic buildings with stories rooted in their communities are part and parcel to the experience Apple is trying to create, Siegel said. The company has opened stores in a former restaurant bay in New York’s Grand Central Terminal, in a Depression-era brick storefront in Brooklyn, and in a 130-year-old former bank in Paris.

Rather than plastering the buildings with the familiar logo, Apple’s designers say they will focus on restoring the building’s historic character. It can take a little work to find the store’s signs and logo — which is the point.

Gee.  Some of us tried to get Apple to just that in B'game.  We had a gorgeous, original Bank of Italy -- later BoA-- building and Apple insisted on tearing it down for a glass and stone box even though they had some of the right instincts elsewhere like South Pasadena where the council probably stuck to its guns more.  One might say "better late than never" but in poor Burlingame's case it's not better late than never.  Unless the plan is to recreate the Bank of Italy building.  Don't bet on it happening behind the wall.

Will we learn anything from this to apply to the old Post Office?

The Grand Plan. Part 3. This is what it will look like

I managed to give you a sense of the many projects that are in the pipeline here in Burlingame. Some of which are quite large in scale—a few hundred housing units here and few hundred more there. Totaling an addition of over 10,000 more residents.

To give you a better sense, there is nothing like a picture to tell the story. Here are just a few...(taken from the city's own website.)

And an announcement of an upcoming meeting regarding a large residential development on Myrtle Rd. A meeting many of you may want to attend.

A picture is worth a thousand words. Note: These are just a few projects being discussed or approved. I could not find images of the proposal on the former Post Office Site

Above: 920 Lorton

Above: 225 California Dr at Highland

Above: 556 El Camino Real

Above: 1600 Trousdale

Above: Ariel view: Former Hyatt Cinema site, Bayshore Blvd.

Above: 1491-93 Oak Grove

Above: 988 Howard Ave.

Above: 1433 Floribunda

Above: Douglas Ave.

Above: Next to current Peninsula Hospital

Above and left: High density housing on Lot F with associated 5 story parking garage. Note: This project not yet approved.

Below: Upcoming meeting regarding project on Myrtle Rd and Bayswater

There goes the neighborhood

Back in the late 90’s I helped a candidate run for Burlingame City Council. The slogan for the campaign was, “You’ll miss it when it’s gone.” Referring to how Burlingame was rapidly losing its character. Every candidate for city council since seems to say they care about Burlingame's charm and character and that they want to protect it. With the exception of the candidate who so boldly stood behind the message, (and myself) it seems the message is simply lip service.

Cities don’t change overnight; their character is lost over decades. It’s been 20 years since the “you’ll miss it when it’s gone" phrase was coined and yet today it’s more evident than ever that the pace of the erosion of Burlingame's character has increased.

I watched as the pre fab components were delivered by giant crane yesterday for a home on Trenton Way. The photos illustrate, in part what I am talking about. Decades ago many were concerned about Mediterranean McMansions dominating our neighborhoods. Perhaps they were called that because McDonald’s typical architecture at the time was of Spanish influence. Today, take a look at any number of McDonald’s remodels. They are postmodern in style. Perhaps we just need to look to McDonalds to see what Burlingame is trending toward?

For the record, I like postmodern architecture, but we have to examine whether our neighborhoods can support it. The planning department has a tool called "neighborhood consistency" yet they rarely use it to argue that the architectural style simply does not fit into the character of the neighborhood. I made this argument before the commission suggesting that not everyone has the right to add a second story. Especially if that request is the only house on the block that will have a second story. Approving it sets the stage for changing the consistency of the street.

Some might argue that Burlingame’s charm is its eclectic housing stock. If you use that argument I believe you have to, pardon the pun, dig a little deeper. You have to compare the stock of the street, compare heights, widths, rooflines, etc. On streets the have not yet been disturbed by new construction, a rare fined, you will notice that while the architecture from one house to the next might be different, the mass and bulk, the set backs, the roof heights are similar.

It’s not up to me to decide on who can build what or how it can be built. I have expressed my opinion before the city council and as part of the city council that one simple way to begin is to examine the Floor Area Ratio to determine if houses are being built too large for their respective lot size. In the last 20 years there has been no political will to examine the issue in any real way.

Clearly I have felt that this discussion should have taken place long ago. However it is now that I once again remind our city leaders that it is time to put in place real policies that truly do protect Burlingame’s character or else, we will all miss it when it is gone.

Polishing Apple

I'm a little behind but did want to make note of an insightful piece in Friday's Daily Journal about possible changes to the Apple store.  Here are the high points:

The Burlingame Planning Commission unanimously agreed to postpone approving a proposed renovation of the Apple Store and instead directed architects to draw up plans better respecting the aesthetics of the city’s shopping district, according to video of the Tuesday, Oct. 11, meeting.

Apple is rolling out a new look for its store and is seeking approval to redesign the company’s Burlingame location to reflect the sleek design featured prominently in its brand of phones, computers, tablets and other devices.  Officials gave glowing reviews to the proposed renovated look of the store front facing Burlingame Avenue, but took issue with the rest of the building which featured little more than the company’s trademark silver paint and logo.

“The challenge for us is that this building is architecture as product design. It comes across as a product and I understand that is what you are all about. But a building is not a product. We want buildings to do certain things for the community beyond selling things,” said commission Chair Will Loftis.

There's a bit of lost history with this location.  It was originally the Bank of Italy building which evolved into BofA and then other bank branches.  My wife managed the branch when it was a BayView Federal location (now US Bank).  Back in 2002 Apple insisted that even an original Bank of Italy building wasn't significant enough to restore and repurpose.  It didn't fit the image.  I seem to recall Apple saying they just didn't do that kind of thing, but then five years ago I saw they did just that in Old Pasadena.  Here it is

So my advice to the Planning Commission is stick to your guns and get us the best possible design.

Post Office post mortem

Sorry I am getting to this late in the game. The downtown Burlingame former Post Office site was the subject of an open house meeting Wednesday night. Here's a photo to give you an idea of what it being proposed. I will post some opinions that were posted here on another thread because I think it's important for this discussion to be al in one place for easy reference.

First however, my brief opinion: Two years ago I ran for City Council. I wasn't planning on running, but there were strong rumblings of major housing coming to downtown Burlingame. I thought it was the wrong thing to do two years ago and I still think that today. Downtown is not the place for housing that is this dense—148 units. And that is on top of the other dense housing developments that are being proposed on the fringes of downtown. Hey, I'm not against adding density to Burlingame, but our general plan calls out specific areas of town where density is better suited. Perhaps our downtown plan calls for housing as well, but I wasn't on the council when that particular document was approved and I would't have voted for it. I won't comment on the architectural style here because to me, no matter what the style, it will impact downtown in a negative way. 

If you agree or disagree, post a comment. I will post the other comments from other post directly below.