Historic house redevelopment critiqued

While no binding decision was made, consensus formed around allowing the project to move ahead but perhaps with architectural amendments, as commissioners took issue with the proposed building’s unique look.

“I just don’t buy it. It looks like Disneyland to me, and Burlingame is decidedly not Disneyland,” said Commissioner Will Loftis, according to video of the meeting Tuesday, Oct. 9.

Loftis jeered the southwestern appearance of the building, which aims to offer commercial or retail space on the ground floor with 14 residential units spread across the top two stories.

“I think it needs to crank itself back some. I just can’t see this in Burlingame,” said Loftis, while tempering his perspective by agreeing with the plan to build new workspaces and homes at the space.

Commissioner Brenden Kelly agreed that the design was too ambitious for its location only a short walk from Burlingame Avenue.

“It just seems like it is almost too much,” he said. “It is overbearing.”

Previously the site was occupied by the home constructed in 1900 by the city’s first stationmaster G.W. Gates until it was demolished earlier this year, following a 2013 four-alarm fire.

Gates, also the city’s third postmaster, commissioned to construct the building on Burlingame Avenue around 1900. He then had the house moved to its current location on Donnelly Avenue in 1917. It was deemed to be a historical building, eligible for listing on the local and national registers, around 2008. Officials determined demolition was suitable because the home’s historic status was due to its owner, not the structure, which would have required a higher threshold for deconstruction.

Attorney Mark Hudak, who represents those seeking to redevelop the site, said work is being done with the Burlingame Historical Society to determine a way to recognize the site’s historic significance in the new project.

“We will continue to work with them and come up with an appropriate memorialization,” he said.

Commissioner Audrey Tse pointed to the historical context of the building as the foundation for her concerns regarding architecture.

“I’m not sure and I’m still torn about how it fits here,” she said.

Not all were critical of the project though, as Commissioner Richard Sargent said he appreciated both the proposed use and design.

“I like the architecture. I like the design and I think it is supportable as it is,” he said.

Commission Chair Michael Gaul meanwhile said he liked the effort to expand the boundaries of the downtown commercial corridor by establishing commercial, retail or restaurant space at the site, but he questioned the design as well.

“The thing I’m struggling with the most is the architectural style,” he said.

Those representing the applicants said they will consider the feedback and return before the commission with a project which they hope is more supportable. Senior planner Reuben Hurin said environmental review of the project will continue and it may return for further environmental review, if significant changes are proposed for the development.

Loftis suggested such amendments may be in order, to bring the style of the building closer to a look officials expect for a development in Burlingame.

“It feels like the architecture is trying too hard. There is a little too much of everything,” he said.

austin@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 105