Construction is almost complete for a mixed-use development in Belmont dubbed “The Ashton” that includes 74 market-rate condos for sale and nearly 5,000 square feet of retail space.
It’s one of the largest developments Belmont has seen in years. It encompasses two four-story residential buildings plus a separate, one-story building for retail on a nearly 2-acre site previously occupied by a 7-Eleven, bank building, several smaller commercial tenants and a large parking lot at 400 El Camino Real. The site is zoned corridor mixed-use.
Developer Sares Regis will begin selling some of the condominiums by mid- to late-October, but the development won’t be entirely complete until the beginning of 2019, Community Development Director Carlos de Melo said. Sares Regis is actively seeking tenants for the retail space, but the type and number of businesses to move in has yet to be determined. Jeff Smith, senior vice president for Sares Regis, said there’s “a lot of interest” in the retail space, which will likely house two to four tenants. There have been discussions so far with a restaurant, bank and lifestyle/fitness business.
The project entailed 73 units when it was approved in 2016, but Sares Regis has since asked to convert a sales and leasing office on the ground floor of the residential building into a condominium. The City Council approved that request at a meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 11, raising the total number of units to 74, which also means an extra $64,700 in affordable housing in-lieu fees for the city, de Melo said.
That money is in addition to $1.6 million in affordable housing in-lieu fees plus $1.94 million in park impact fees that Sares Regis is already paying for the development.
De Melo confirmed that converting the sales and leasing office into a one-bedroom unit will not otherwise change the development.
“One would not know a difference in this space other than it’ll be occupied by a residential user rather than a sales and leasing office. ... There will be no changes to building height, massing, footprint, site layout, parking and site access and circulation,” he said.
Councilmembers also suggested the modest change was contemplated since the beginning of the negotiating process, and de Melo said the sales and leasing office can be accommodated elsewhere in the development.
The residential buildings include 29 one-bedroom units, some with dens; 28 two-bedroom units, 13 three-bedroom units and four live/work townhomes.
Recommended for you
“[The development offers] a wide variety of floor plans,” Smith said.
Parking for the entire development totals 167 spaces, with a 138-stall underground parking structure equipped with parking lifts, and about 30 spots adjacent to the commercial and residential buildings.
Residents will have access to a state-of-the-art fitness center, outdoor patio with a barbecue, electric vehicle charging station and bike storage, said Sares Regis spokesman Gary Pike.
During the approval process, there was some discontent that no affordable units would be constructed on site. De Melo noted the project was approved before the adoption of the general plan in 2017 when a community benefits structure was put in place.
“That said, they’re still providing affordable housing and park fees,” he said. “We are hopeful that affordable housing projects in terms of production on site will become more common in Belmont. The city is actively working on the creation of mixed-use developments including residential on city-owned property and trying to forge relationships with affordable housing developers.”
A website has launched for the project at theashtonbelmont.com and more details will be publicized in the coming weeks.
Egads, not a single unit of Inclusionary Affordable Housing? Let's temper our enthusiasm for impact fees, please. Impact fees never cover the complete cost of the impact and every project is REQUIRED to pay impact fees. It is not a differentiator! $1.7m of affordable housing impacts fees would cover the cost of 3 units if the City could find a way of producing units. In this day and age, there is no reason why the affordable units could not have been on-site. Redwood City just passed a ordinance that requires 20% affordable. Why couldn't Belmont get something similar from the developer?
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(2) comments
Any idea how much they plan to sell the units for?
Egads, not a single unit of Inclusionary Affordable Housing? Let's temper our enthusiasm for impact fees, please. Impact fees never cover the complete cost of the impact and every project is REQUIRED to pay impact fees. It is not a differentiator! $1.7m of affordable housing impacts fees would cover the cost of 3 units if the City could find a way of producing units. In this day and age, there is no reason why the affordable units could not have been on-site. Redwood City just passed a ordinance that requires 20% affordable. Why couldn't Belmont get something similar from the developer?
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.