Category: Design Review

  • Natural Gas: Follow the science?

    We must take note of the national kerfuffle about gas stoves that has been boiling over this week.  It's totally pertinent to B'game because our last city council bought into the climate hype and instituted a "reach code" such that new construction can't have any natural gas–not just stoves, but water heaters, furnaces, and barbeques.  No gas for you!  Now the Feds are making similar noises and then backtracking as the WSJ notes

    A Biden appointee on the Consumer Product Safety Commission explicitly threatened to ban gas stoves based on dubious evidence of public-health harm. “This is a hidden hazard,” said commissioner Richard Trumka Jr. “Any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.”  After withering public criticism, including by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, the CPSC Chairman denied any plan to ban, and the White House said President Biden also doesn’t want to ban gas stoves. But that’s cold comfort given that the climate left does want to ban them, and progressive cities and states are doing it.

    One might ask what is the science behind gas phobia?  Well, today the SF Chronicle actually let a letter to the editor slip through that is pretty clear on the science:

    There has lately been a lot of concern about gas ranges and how they can harm indoor air quality, but some of this is too fast and too furious.  As an active researcher in indoor air quality, there can be no doubt that gas cooking produces nitrogen dioxide and that this is bad for respiratory health but the level of concern is far higher than the data show the situation actually warrants. 

    Cooking is likely the most polluting thing done in homes. It produces lots of contaminants, regardless of the heat source. Switching to electric may not make the sum total significantly better.  The solution that works regardless of the type of cooking is using your range hood when cooking. Range hoods have been required in California for a long time. Studies have not shown that there would be any significant difference in net harm between gas and electric cooking if you actually use range hoods when cooking.

    Max Sherman, retired senior scientist, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

    I'll bet if you were one of the 2.4 million PG&E customers that lost power over the last two weeks you were thankful you had a gas stove and some matches even if your range hood or downdraft vent didn't work.  Open a window and enjoy a cup of tea or a bowl of soup.

  • Bayfront: And the beat goes on, and the beat goes on

    I didn't have the heart to post on the 1.5 million square foot development on Old Bayshore that is moving ahead.  I think it's centered at the old Gulliver's location.  That's a lot of development pressure on our infrastructure and traffic, but it's not alone.  Here is the Red Roof Inn redevelopment being discussed in the DJ

    A proposed bioscience building on the Burlingame Bayfront can be reduced in height from 226 feet, which would be the tallest in the city, but by how much and when is still being decided, the developer told the Planning Commission.

    The building is being proposed at the site of the current Red Roof Inn, at 777 Airport Blvd., and commissioners previously had issues with not only its height, but its massing and public amenities.  “Again, we are trading this height limit for public benefit,” Michael Gaul, chair of the Planning Commission, said.

    The developing architect, M. Arthur Gensler & Associates Inc. responded to the commission’s height concerns with a 32-foot reduction if their building is approved by January 2023 for a concrete structure, totaling its height to 194 feet. If the developers do not get it approved by this January they will revert to a steel structured building, thus only reducing the building by 14 feet. It would then reach 212 feet making it the second tallest building on the Bayfront by a foot.

    This one is also near the wastewater plant and will contribute mightily.  It will be all-electric so expect the grid to be impacted.  And of course, I would be remiss if I did not mention our water situation as shown in the latest Urban Water Management Plan.  What could go wrong?

    Table 7_6 crop

  • Nice House: I’m gonna miss this one

    I was taken by surprise on my dog walk this week.  I usually go a bit further than Costa Rica Ave., but with the rain and all we cut it short.  I saw the dumpster first and thought it might be a clean up.  But alas, this delightful house got scraped.  I'm gonna miss this one.  Luckily Google Maps still had a street view photo of it, but it will live on here at the Voice much, much longer than on Google…………..

    112 Costa Rica_1221 gone1

     

     

  • The CA exodus is real, so why do we need SB 10?

    There are plenty of people who foolishly believe we can build our way out of the so-called "housing crisis".  Dense development hasn't caused lower housing costs anywhere in the world–in fact, many of the densest locations are also the costliest.  And when the other quality of life components and job prospects are as good as the Bay Area, one would have to be extra foolish to try to out-build the demand and further diminish the quality of life.  But Sacramento has foisted SB 9 and SB 10 on us anyway.  Most of them couldn't get through Econ 101, but that is where we are at.

    The Burlingame City Council will discuss what to do about SB 10 tomorrow night.  The Staff Report is super thin on SB 10:

    SB 10. California Senate Bill (SB) 10 allows (but does not require) local agencies to adopt an ordinance to allow up to 10 dwelling units on any parcel if the parcel is within a transit-rich area or urban infill site. (Ed:  pretty much all of B'game).

    The General Plan Update has already provided a range of multiunit residential and mixed use land use districts with a wide range of residential densities, and the Zoning Ordinance Update underway will provide refined development standards for the corresponding zoning districts.

    Staff requests direction from the City Council on whether to pursue zoning allowed by SB 10.  Whereas SB 9-compliant zoning is required, municipalities may choose to adopt (or not adopt) SB 10-compliant zoning.

    And the report claims that neither SB 9 or SB 10 will have any fiscal impact!  It might be time to double-check the thinking on that since residential property taxes never cover the cost of providing city services–never mind the costs to the school district that is pretty much out of real estate.

    But let's look a little deeper courtesy of last Sunday's Mercury News piece with the sub-head "In an area noted for its booming economy, stunning weather and natural beauty, a majority feel their quality of life is in decline".  The Silicon Valley Leadership Group and the Bay Area News Group commissioned a survey by Embold Research to dig into this and it's not pretty.

    In a foreboding breakthrough, for the first time since the poll began posing the question in 2018 a solid majority — 56% — said they expect to leave the Bay Area in the next few years…a similar majority said the region is headed in the wrong direction.  In the survey of 1,610 registered voters, 71% said the Bay Area's quality of life has declined in the last five years.

    Two problems topped the list of increased concern being "serious or very serious"?  Drought (+41%) and Water Supply (+32%).  I'm glad to know I'm not alone on this.  The cost of housing was still the highest overall at 92% but only up 6%.  What if even half of the half of people that are considering leaving do so?  Even if it is only 10% that would be significant.   B'game has a huge amount of new housing already approved, in design and "in-the-dirt".  Maybe we should see how that all plays out?  I hope the council's direction to staff on SB 10 is a brisk, clear "forgetaboutit" so they can get back to ensuring our public safety, water supply, small business vitality, economic health and quality of life.

  • “Welcome Carpetbaggers”

    I'm not sure there is much more to say about SB9 and SB10 than was said in the May post titled SB 9 and YIMBY Carpetbaggers except to note that Newsom only waited two days post-recall to sign them.  You can also go to the Comical's donation tracker and see that the CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (CREPAC) – CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS was Newsom's seventh largest donor for the recall race at $1.5 million.  Can you say "For Sale By Owner"? 

    Design review?  Psshawh.  Street parking?  Nah, everyone will have an e-scooter and take Lyft.  Water?  Don't get me started. The last line of the Daily Post article says "Many cities have organized against SB9, including Palo Alto, Los Altos and San Carlos."  We shall see if any real organized opposition appears.  In the meantime, mark Sept. 16th as the day we said "Goodbye single-family zoning".

    Goodby SFR3

     

  • Saving History One Building at a Time

    The city is slowly working its way towards more protections and incentives for preserving local buildings and homes that add to the amazing character of our neighborhoods.  Recently I was talking to a PG&E guy from Menlo Park who came to fix the outage on our street.  He looked up and down the street and was amazed that it was so nice since "they're tearing everything down in Menlo Park".  I said "Yep" and left it at that while feeling sorry for him.  The Draft "Chapter 25.35 – Historic Resources" is winding its way through the process and would represent an upgrade to the existing, limited code just for the central downtown Ave area found on the City website here.

    We definitely need this–now more than ever as various local and state-wide forces seek to shred local character with the mistaken idea that it would help "affordability" and would come with no unintended consequences.  Wrong.

    The Historic Register has eleven criteria for inclusion and "shall only occur upon request of the property owner" and if officially designated "are eligible for incentives detailed in Section 25.35.080 Preservation Incentives."  Those are the "carrots".  The Planning Commission study session last week focused on the "sticks" as described by the Daily Journal

    The Burlingame Planning Commission weighed Monday, June 14, proposals which would punish any homeowner who destroyed a structure identified on the city’s historic registry.  Forcing a property owner to rebuild a replica of the destroyed historic structure or feature then ban any further construction at the site for 20 years was among the repercussions considered. No decision was made at the meeting and the issue will return for more deliberation later.

    While the Planning Commission and ultimately the City Council will weigh the sticks, I like to focus on the carrots; like more flexible parking requirements when adding floor space and an extra 25% lot coverage allowance.  In addition, the 1972 Mills Act, named for former state senator James Mills of San Diego who passed away in March, offers the real carrot for regular homeowners looking to save a bit of property tax.  Realty Times notes that it "provides a way whereby owners of designated historic properties may receive significant property tax relief in return for restoring and maintaining their property."  You can click through for some of the details, but the bottom line is it is an incentive that the draft B'game code says "is often a benefit to the community as a whole and the owners of surrounding properties".  We've been in short supply of that kind of thinking lately with the onslaught of ADUs, SB 9, short-term rentals, etc. 

  • Drought 2021: Here We Go Again

    I'm still bothered by state Sen. Scott Weiner's naïve response to a water question he got during his visit to B'game almost two years ago.  When asked "where will the water come from to support all the new housing (and people) you are demanding?" his response landed squarely between "I don't know", "We should look at that" and "It's not my concern".  Two years have passed–both drought years — and we are no closer to a state-wide plan than we were then.  There's always something "more important" getting in the way and yet the development addicts seem able to press on with their demands.

    Here in B'game, the every five-year update to our Urban Water Management Plan is behind schedule.  Public works has been swamped (no pun intended) with parklets, paving projects, going green and adding traffic lights and signage.  The next update will be the first to comply with a new state mandate that it examine a five-year drought instead of only a three-year episode.  That should make for interesting reading when the first draft comes out–hopefully soon.

    In the meantime, here we go again according to the Comicle

    The state’s monthly snow survey on Tuesday will show only about 60% of average snowpack for this point in the year, the latest indication that water supplies are tightening. With the end of the stormy season approaching, forecasters don’t expect much more buildup of snow, a key component of the statewide supply that provides up to a third of California’s water.

    Urban water agencies, meanwhile, are asking customers to think twice about long showers and outdoor watering. The calls for austerity will feel familiar to many Californians who less than five years ago faced mandatory water restrictions during the 2012-2016 drought.  More importantly, the northern Sierra’s 8-Station Index, which tracks rain in the region where California gets the bulk of its water, measured only 45% of average precipitation.  While March and April could still bring rain, the heart of the wet season is over. Much of the state is now poised to have a top-10 dry year.

    As an avid skier, I can recall several Miracle Marches and even an Amazing April or two, but let's face it, the people who are trying to overbuild the Bay Area just don't care.  It's time some other leaders stepped in and called for a reset, a review, a plan and compliance.

    IMG_0802

    Update:  Yesterday a huge branch fell off a street tree at Vernon and Clarendon hitting the nearby house.  The drought is stressing trees throughout the state, so expect more of this until we prioritize trees over condos and offices.

    Fallen tree branch1

    Update:  March 24.  In today's Comicle:  "It would have to be biblical to adjust a water allocation at this point," (Karla) Nemeth (director CDWR) said, referring to the end of the winter season.

    Drought 2021

  • If You Like Your House, You Can Keep It…..

    I have been mulling over this post for a couple of months.  That is because it is so distressing.  But some things just need to be said.  When Paloma Ave. made a comment on the natural gas ban post today, it was the match that lit the fire.  Here is his/her/their comment:

    I just read in the SF Comicle that Berkeley is now discussing banning single family neighborhoods.  Didn't Berkeley start the trend to ban natural gas, which our City Council decided they should also ban?  Question to the City Council: Will you also try to ban Single Family Homes in Burlingame? After all, wouldn't that be the woke thing to do?

    I'm struck by the follow-the-lemming aspect of it all.  Jon Mays at the Daily Journal had an editorial about the follower mindset among city councils here.  Jon let these councils off easy by noting "To be clear, the following is not a judgment, but rather an observation."  Another observation, mine, would be that city councils need to stand up for their communities even if it means slinging a stone at Goliath.  Nowhere is that more important than in the protection of the neighborhoods.  Let's face it.  The housing thugs in Sacramento are Goliath and they have it in for single family housing.  It has been in the works for awhile as I noted here.  Personally, I think it is an unhealthy sign of envy, but that is a topic for another day.

    What they have already done is today's topic–Accessory Dwelling Units, or ADUs are coming to a lot near you.  The first one in my neighborhood just got into the planning queue.  But it's not a restrictive queue.  I have it from multiple informed sources that the city has minimal control over ADUs.  Sure they can dither over whether 16' or 20" height limits should be imposed, but the bottom line is Sacramento has turned the whole state into R2 zoning with no input from the public.

    Some predictions have a very high probability.  Here's one.  If your residential street has a parking problem now, expect it to get worse in five years.  City councils will have to get very smart quickly.  Maybe the ADU "granny unit", as they used to be called, really is for granny.  Maybe it's a perfect Work From Home office.  But maybe it's the AirBnB ticket that helps pay the mortgage and has no effect on local affordability.  Maybe your kid will live in it.  Maybe all of the above.  Anyway you look at it, it's more density and that has ramifications that will reveal themselves as we go.

    ADU RC DJ

      

     

  • A Chat With the New Mayor

    I had a chance to sit down with our new mayor for 2021, Ann O'Brien (Keighran) to discuss her priorities for the year.  In a normal year, City Hall would fill with people on the evening when the mayorship and vice-mayorship rotate, everyone would hear from the outgoing and incoming mayors and adjourn for cake and champagne in the lobby; where the politically active in B'game would catch-up.  I felt bad that Ann Zoomed it instead of having the live event and the cable TV broadcast, hence the socially-distanced, outdoor chat.  That's just me–she noted that this is her fourth time as mayor, so her excitement would have been muted regardless.

    O'Brien's long tenure on the council, preceded by her long tenure on the Planning Commission, and buttressed by her day job as a staffer for a County supervisor shows in her grasp of a wide range of issues.  Whether it be city finances, local business conditions, edicts coming down from Sacramento, or her main priority this year– what's happening on our own backyard — she's fluent and sensible in my opinion.  It can be enticing for any local politician to grapple with state or national issues, but when push comes to shove the job is about the local community.  Issues like our very own minimum wage, banning natural gas in new construction, or forcing rent control take a back seat to relief for our business owners, our hospitality sector and helping residents back to work.

    On the bright side, the council has recently approved funding of $500K for small business grants, purchased the parklet barriers, leveled the playing field for our hotels by implementing a TOT for short-term rentals and developed CARES debit cards to help businesses and low-income families.  These all need continuing care, feeding and tweaking.  Village Burlingame, the downtown parking garage, Top Golf and other Bayfront improvements like a park on state land speak to a stronger B'game economy.

    On the not so bright side, the housing edict from Sacramento to create a free-for-all on Accessory Dwelling Units leaves the council with little room to moderate the effects–mainly parking and backyard privacy.  Anyone who served as a Planning Commissioner would know what the effect on street parking will be from an onslaught of ADUs–and it's not like street parking has been great in town to date.  I'll bet there are very few former planning commissioners in the Assembly or State Senate.

    Similarly, the current state election laws give a lot of cover for a single private attorney to force cities to go to district elections.  I think it's misguided, counter to good government and probably detrimental to the people it is supposed to help, but that's just me.  As the census data comes available, this council will have to determine district boundaries and a new election process.  There are about 20 applicants for the city attorney position and the new hire will definitely be busy with this change.

    Kudos to Ann on her fourth turn holding the rudder to the city government.  Here's hoping it is a productive year focused squarely on local issues. 

  • San Mateo: Dodged a bullet by 43 votes

    Let's just take a moment to thank the 23,038 voters in San Mateo that put Measure Y over the top.  The details are here if you haven't been watching, but in essence it keeps the rules in place that put limits on over-development in the 105,000 resident city that is our southern neighbor.  We are intimately tied to Millbrae, H'borough and San Mateo.  This was a squeaker which is scary since it should have been a no-brainer for people who care about the quality of life on the mid-Peninsula, but at least it passed–by 43 votes.

     
     
      Candidate Name   Total Votes Percentage  
     
    		   23,038 50.05%
     
    		   22,995 49.95%

    This is reminder number 4,246 that your vote matters.

The Burlingame Voice

Dedicated to Empowering and Informing the Burlingame Community

RECENT COMMENTS

RECENT POSTS

CATEGORIES

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.  Opinions posted on the Burlingame Voice are those of the poster and commenter and not necessarily the opinion of the Editorial Board.  Comments are subject to the Terms of Use.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

All content subject to Copyright 2003-2026