Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Williams stated that the first option is a BART parking structure only without parking <br />for the private development, and private development would have its own additional <br />internal parking structure in two places rather than being part of the BART parking <br />structure. With respect to the second scenario, Mr. Williams stated that there would be <br />a multi-use parking structure for both BART and the private development. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank inquired if there was any advantage in completely eliminating the <br />parking on the left side. <br /> <br />Mr. Williams said no, because the development would require a certain amount of <br />parking that is relatively reasonably close to it. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank inquired if rolling the number of parking spaces in the separate <br />structure into the multi-use parking is an option. <br /> <br />Mr. Williams replied that it would be one very big parking structure. He added that the <br />parking structure on the other side is necessary to be able to market the development at <br />that side. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank requested confirmation that 1,250 spaces in the multi-use parking <br />structure would be for BART. <br /> <br />Mr. Williams said yes and added that the rest would be to cover the development on <br />that side. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank noted that there would have to be some mechanism internal to <br />that building to control access to that parking structure, since the parking garage on the <br />left side is an amenity or an attraction so that part of the private development will have <br />its own private parking. <br /> <br />Mr. Williams noted that there would still be the same amount of parking either way. <br /> <br />3. There are two multi-use parking structures; a BART parking structure that also <br />has development parking, and a second structure with a smaller amount of BART <br />parking that also has development parking, possibly on top of it, so as to get <br />additional parking needs for the private development on both sites. What is nice <br />about this is that all of the parking is in two locations similar to the other scheme, <br />but there could be a smaller proportion of BART parking at one location where <br />vehicles would pay a little bit more to be closer to the station, thus balancing out <br />the traffic and circulation on the overall site. It also maximizes the development <br />potential on the site because the greatest amount of overall land can go towards <br />development versus just parking. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank inquired if there would be challenges in internally controlling <br />access, as one part of the structure would be available uniquely for the tenants; if this <br />was solvable. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 25, 2011 Page 7 of 21 <br /> <br />