Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, January 12, 2011, 10:11 AM
Town Square
Beltramo townhomes approved
Original post made on Jan 12, 2011
Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, January 12, 2011, 10:11 AM
Comments (6)
Posted by Downtowner
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Jan 12, 2011 at 2:21 pm
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Jan 12, 2011 at 2:21 pm
Re Beltramo's exemption from BMR regs-
Mayor Cline is wrong. The "low-density...townhomes" at the end of Menlo Ave had 4 BMR units. When did Cline check out the history of BMRs in Menlo? Obviously never.
Bill McClure is right. This sets a precedent which will probably kill any future BMRs.
Why give Beltramo the big exemption? This is favoritism at its worst.
Posted by Bob
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Jan 12, 2011 at 3:24 pm
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Jan 12, 2011 at 3:24 pm
Hey Downtowner don't begrudge the Beltramos their profits. They have to make up for the upcoming loss of business at the liquor store since they weren't able to keep BevMo out of town.
Menlo Park gov't keeps rolling along ignoring the needs of the residents.
Posted by tom haid
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Jan 12, 2011 at 3:46 pm
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Jan 12, 2011 at 3:46 pm
it's about time!
the city has made it as hard as possible to get this done.
their project is no different all the others in the area.
Happy for you Dan and John!
hope it all pans out for you.
Posted by what rules?
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Jan 12, 2011 at 5:57 pm
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Jan 12, 2011 at 5:57 pm
so the city continues its habit of approving special requests just because a developer asks. So what about rules that others have to follow? So what that in lieu fees aren't resulting in BMR units?
why bother having rules if they aren't followed?
Posted by locl observer
a resident of Portola Valley: Central Portola Valley
on Jan 13, 2011 at 7:23 am
a resident of Portola Valley: Central Portola Valley
on Jan 13, 2011 at 7:23 am
while we will all be glad to see the land developed - how would the Beltramos have felt if they had opposition along the way like BevMo did to delay the project. Just makes for extra costs & I still won't go into Beltramos anymore even tho I would never have gone into BevMo anyway.
Posted by looking on
a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Jan 13, 2011 at 9:58 pm
a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Jan 13, 2011 at 9:58 pm
Apparently the writers here don't know anything about the project.
Brundage writes this article like this was a first approval. Hardly. Project was approved over 4 years ago and had been awarded two 2 year extensions to get started. Now Beltramo crying that what he proposed was no longer possible, comes back to the City for a better deal.
In point of fact, the Beltramo family can't agree on what they want to do. I don't see any guarantee that the project will even now be built any time soon. BTW, I don't have much sympathy for the whole BMR program and as far as I am concerned they should not have to pay even a fee or produce any BMR units., but the bleeding hearts locally and at the State level certainly don't see it that way.
The Menlo Square project had 3 BMR units, and they couldn't sell them.
If the Derry project could be built if their obligation for BMR units was released, that would be fine with me.
Don't miss out
on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.
Post a comment
Stay informed.
Get the day's top headlines from Almanac Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.
