Mixed feelings on parklet restrictions in Burlingame

These include size limitations, height restrictions and removal of roofs, both designed to benefit non-restaurant retailers that have storefronts being potentially infringed upon or blocked from view. 

Giovanni Cea, Crepevine floor supervisor, remains convinced that any limitations to the restaurant’s parklets will be a detriment to business, which has grown to rely on them after their inception during the COVID-19 pandemic. 

“Since the pandemic, the outdoor seating is the new option for customers, especially the older customers, customers with kids that don’t want to be indoors,” he said. “Of course we don’t want to have less outdoor seating … it’s going to be less tips for the employees and less sales.” 

The restaurant will likely comply with the new regulations rather than remove their parklets altogether, Cea said, but he believes a majority of visitors to the avenue find the outdoor seating to be a positive, not a hindrance. 

The new parklet restrictions might be an adjustment for restaurants at first, Burlingame Community Development Director Kevin Gardiner acknowledged, particularly the stipulation that the structures must be no larger than a businesses frontage. 

“It will be a challenge for some restaurants, particularly given most parklets will be decreased in size, just to correspond to the frontage of each business,” he said. “During COVID, [parklets] were allowed to extend in front of adjacent businesses, provided businesses gave them permission.” 

Suzan Devletian, owner of L’Vian — a women’s clothing store in downtown Burlingame — is particularly excited about the size reduction parklets will undergo. 

“It’s very difficult, it blocks the total view of the stores, and, of course, the parking is another problem,” she said. “It looks horrible, because you don’t see those beautiful buildings. … It changes the elegant look of this avenue. Especially the people on Burlingame Avenue, they pay extra money to have a storefront, and then it’s all blocked.” 

Devletian believes that the sidewalks should accommodate bistro-style tables and chairs, which she finds “cute [and] friendly looking.”

Restaurateurs maintain that the parklets create a friendly and enticing atmosphere for customers and the downtown area at large. 

Craig Sgoll, co-owner of Pizzeria Delfina, said that he’s obliged with parklet restrictions at other business locations, like San Francisco, but Burlingame’s no-roof stipulation might serve as a deterrent to patrons. 

“It wasn’t cheap or easy, but we did it. Every city is different. … In San Francisco, you’re allowed to have roofs,” Sgoll said, noting that roofing makes the parklet space more desirable. “It’s great, it’s really great, to have people outdoors and activate sidewalks. It feels very European.” 

Other issues with the parklets include the parking spaces they take up — currently, 63 of Burlingame’s parking spaces are occupied by the structures. 

“Those are the big ones — the loss of parking and the loss of visibility. And then it morphed into, they’re able to go outside of the front of their stores, so one restaurant might have three parklets,” Don Gross, owner of Burlingame Tobacconist, said. “Lastly, from my perspective, it’s completely unfair because only restaurants are allowed to have a parklet.” 

Burlingame Tobacconist patrons frequently have a challenging time parking in the small spaces between two parklet structures, Gross said, although he’s satisfied with the new restrictions as a compromise. 

But some restaurants with parklets — like The Cakery, a Burlingame bakery, as well as Lotus Falafel and Shawerma — don’t feel that the restrictions will have a terribly negative impact on their business at all. 

“As long as we have the outdoor main seating, I think it would be fine,” Cakery manager Rosa Gonzalez said. “The rooftop sometimes I guess helps in the summertime, but other than that, I don’t think it’ll impact too much, having those restrictions.”