17 responses to “Post Office – Part 1 Adding Security”

1. Peter Garrison

   March 9, 2015

   Classy.
   A preview of a lack of community-sense of place.

2. Bruce Dickinson

   March 9, 2015

   Is this chain link fence really see-through?
   Is history fenced off from us, or are we fenced off from history?
   Are the sale of a building and the rental of a fence both, in essence, similar transactions?
   A few things to ponder, from your resident barstool philosopher, Bruce Dickinson.
   Cheers Holy-baby!

3. Joanne

   March 11, 2015

   It’s sad and it’s ugly!

4. Who are they and what do they want?

   March 16, 2015

   Can we at least get an update from the new owners? Who are they and what do they want?

5. resident

   April 6, 2015

   This fencing is ridiculous. Why aren’t Nagel or Brownrigg doing something about this already? I do not want to live with this for the foreseeable future so please get some discussions going with the owners.

6. Joe

   August 21, 2015

   I’m feeling a little like “chopped liver” today here in B’game as I read this:
   A San Mateo landmark may get a makeover as the U.S. Post Office is seeking to rehabilitate part of its downtown building ripe with history dating back to the 1930s.
   Known as the Saint Matthew’s Station, the post office located at 210 S. Ellsworth Ave. earned a spot on the National Register of Historic Places in 1988 and could receive some tender loving care in the coming months. Repairs to the historic doors, some of the nearly 37 windows garnishing the building, the exterior stucco and dock canopy, as well as repainting the exterior wrought iron elements will be undertaken in accordance with rules governing historic buildings, according to the U.S. Postal Service.
   Fashioned in the Mission Revival style of architecture, the government building maintains historic murals painted under the auspices of the Treasury Relief Art Project in 1937 — a federal program that aided Depression-stricken artists funded by the Works Progress Administration, according to U.S. Post Office’s registry application. Entitled “Life in Early California,” artist Tom Laman’s murals as well as a carved wooden sculpture produced by WPA-sponsored artist Zygmund Sazevich that hangs above the front door, will remain preserved for the public to appreciate.
   http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articles/lnews/2015-08-21/preserving-san-mateos-history-post-office-considered-for-repairs/1776425148853

7. Linda Lees Dwyer

   August 21, 2015

   In the “old days” the city really kept an eye on front yards. My neighbor actually received a notice, telling her to get rid of the weeds (she had a lot of weeds). So it would seem that the city could require the current owner to maintain the lawns in a way that would be less local prison like and more fitting with the history of the building and the neighborhood that it is located in. The feds really let it go and it is very sad that our city is just continuing to let it go too.

8. Let it be known…and the fences will be removed.

   August 22, 2015

   The bottom line is that the city council needs to make it known that the temporary use will be approved without undue delays, and then it will get leased up and occupied and the fences will come down.
   Any property that is vacant will get tagged and vandalized.
   The former city manager told me that it actually took the city 20 years to approve the Safeway remodel…so how long will it take for a completely new development…3,5,10,30?
   Burlingame has a reputation in the developer/investor world for being unreasonable, and delivering surprise delays and difficulties. Perhaps you see that as good, but “20 years”?!?
   Let’s face it. The Burlingame Post Office is not a National Historic Monument. It’s a utilitarian government building – different from San Mateo’s, Palo Alto’s, etc. Did the hocus-pocus city council covenant get put on the sale deed that would force the new owner to preserve the lobby and the west façade? Part of the problem with this is that then you can’t feasibly do as much underground parking, which could have provided a lot of public parking and thus fuel the positive vibrancy of a downtown retail shopping area (which pays the bills for the city, schools, services, etc).
   It’s my understanding that apartment developers like to use preserved areas like the lobby for the lobby of a new development. Perhaps the new apartment dwellers will even use the PO boxes.
   In the meantime, let’s let the new owners move forward with a temporary use that can help to take down the fences, create jobs and property taxes (the property didn’t yield property taxes previously) and sales taxes and get that part of downtown moving again.
   What do you think?

9. Joe

   August 22, 2015

   As the closest citizen watcher of the Safeway project (check out the 74 posts at http://www.burlingamevoice.com/safeway/) I can tell you “20 years” is a total head fake. First, about half of that time was Safeway doing absolutely nothing all on its own. The other half was Safeway failing to listen to constructive comments (pun intended). When Safeway finally came to the table with a project that fit the location and the feel of downtown, it went very quickly.
   Having said that, I agree with your main point–except that the city cannot and should not telegraph any reduced intent to approve. Just come to the table with something reasonable.

10. Joe

    January 7, 2016

    I wish Gov. Brown would just send along a little sliver of that $55 Billion to help the city buy the “old Post Office”:
    In response to a report on the state’s crumbling office inventory, Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday proposed seeding a new fund with $1.5 billion to construct two office downtown facilities and remodel a portion of the Capitol.
    Brown’s 2016-17 budget would transfer the money from the state’s general fund to a new State Office Infrastructure Fund. The money would pay to renovate or replace facilities in the Sacramento region as part of a five-year plan to improve state facilities. Over the next five years, the state would spend $55 billion on such “investments,” according to the administration’s plan.
    http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/the-state-worker/article53574295#storylink=cpy

11. Jennifer

    January 31, 2016

    A first look at what the USPO on Park Rd. may become will be studied at City Hall, Monday, Feb. 1 at 6pm, prior to the regular council meeting.
    http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articles/lnews/2016-01-30/post-office-plans-under-review-housing-retail-parking-proposed-for-downtown-burlingame-redevelopment/1776425157647

12. Not Going to Let My Lawn Die for This

    January 31, 2016

    ……or this either. Only 128 condos. Where are they getting the water for these.

13. Jennifer

    February 3, 2016

    This is a very good and accurate synopsis by the SM Daily Journal, Austin Walsh
    http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articles/lnews/2016-02-03/city-response-tepid-to-post-office-plans-burlingame-council-unimpressed-with-housing-retail-project-design/1776425157861

14. Peter Garrison

    February 3, 2016

    Glad to hear clear council statements about preserving a sense of place in Burlingame.

15. resident

    February 3, 2016

    Lo, however, felt the project included an adequate amount of parking, as he said he rarely struggles to find a place to park his car in downtown Burlingame.
    He must have his own space somewhere!!!!!!!

16. Sir Paul

    February 3, 2016

    It’s a shame our city couldn’t take down the happy holiday banners on Burlingame Ave an welcome our visitors to Super Bowl 50…..

17. Jennifer

    February 3, 2016

    The constant flow of helicopters flying back and forth aren’t enough, Paul!?! Yikes!!