Contra Costa County Seal

Contra Costa County
Community Development Department
Redevelopment Division
The Pleasant Hill BART
Station Design Charrette


 

Pleasant Hill BART Charrette
Summary of Key Issues - Tensions and Tradeoffs
Presented at Community Workshop 2/27/01  

Project Parameters
Financially Sound

Project Boundaries

Parking Requirements

            - BART and New Uses

Iron Horse Trail and Utilities

Create a Great Place

Long-term Lease Only--No For-Sale

 

Uses and Benefits
Real Village

Useful Public Open Spaces

Night Safety

Walk to Shops

Better Bus, Bike, Walk Access

Managed Parking

Community Place

What We Need

BART:  Replace parking, generate operating revenue, improve access by all modes, increase reverse-peak ridership.

COUNTY: Alternative to sprawl, stronger tax base, mix of housing

SWIM CLUB: Save the Pool!

WALDEN NEIGHBORS: Minimize traffic, create a village, local retail only, maximize housing (especially for-sale), concern about scale of bridge

 

Tensions and Trade-Offs

Why here?

- No Growth = No Affordable Housing, Longer Commutes to Delta, more Congestion

- Sprawl Growth = More Auto Trips and Longer Auto Trips = More Congestion

- Smart Growth/TOD = Fewer Auto Trips and Shorter Distances. Some Congestion, But Less than Sprawl and More Confined

 

Tensions and Trade-Offs

Housing/Office/Retail Mix

-Housing:  Less Traffic, Better Nighttime Safety, Less Revenue, More Transit Use

-Office:  More Traffic, More Revenue, Daytime Activity, Reverse Peak Transit

-Retail:  Needs Both to Survive if Locally Serving

-Mix:  Critical to Make a Great Place

 

Tensions and Trade-Offs

Public vs. Private Ownership

-Neighbors favor for-sale Homes

-BART wants control of Land, revenue Stream + Capture of Increased Value

 

Tensions and Trade-Offs

Transparent Process

-Previous Plans did not fully meet Community Desires

-Risk:  Process can be messy

-Critical to success of project like this

 

Tensions and Trade-Offs

Parking

-Must Replace Original BART Parking

-Must Accommodate New Uses

-Mixed Opinions about 851 Trail Spaces

-Tension:  More Parking = More Traffic

-Our Goal: Space Available at all times for shoppers, visitors and BART riders

-Parking Management

-Construction Phasing

 

Tensions and Trade-Offs

Congestion

- Treat  Blvd is Route of Regional SignificanceSome Congestion Expected, but Limit to Maintain Quality of Life and Economic Vitality

 

Tensions and Trade-Offs

Swim Club

-Treasured Community Resource in Need of Reinvestment

- Opportunity for more Intensive Use

 

Tensions and Trade-Offs

Financial Reality

- Great Public Benefits Cost Money

 

Tensions and Trade-Offs

Regional Transit                          vs.                    Neighborhood Retail

Jobs/Housing Balance                                    vs.                    Housing will stress systems

Pay for Parking                                     vs.                    BART free parking

Economics (Retail)

Massive Parking Structure                      vs.                    Smaller Parking Structure

Simplicity (tax, operations)/Efficiency               Character

Groundlease Friendly Uses               vs.                    Uses that Stakeholders want to see on site (office, rental housing, retail)                           (Sale housing)

Financial/Functional                              vs.                    “Placemaking”                                   

Demands of site

Uses that complement                              vs.                    Uses that Pencil: Office

Peak parking/traffic  

Uses that compliment BART service             vs.                    Residential (Worst ???)

 

Horizontal Separator Bar