Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Park And Ride Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Three Oak Grove park-and-ride concepts offered; burying parking raises cost to $28M extra
Summary
City planners presented three options for the Oak Grove Station parking configuration that trade off visibility, developable land and cost; Metro Transit would fund a baseline park-and-ride (248 stalls), while expanded or underground options would require substantial city or developer contributions.
City planners and the Blue Line project office presented three concept layouts for the Oak Grove Station park-and-ride and adjacent development block — a rear‑of‑block garage (option 1), a block‑center garage fronting station access (option 2), and a largely subterranean garage (option 3) — and outlined the development, pedestrian and budget tradeoffs for each.
Baseline transit funding and the city’s potential contribution Project staff described a Metro Transit baseline of about 248 stalls that the FTA/project funding currently covers; staff said that structure is roughly a $9.3 million line-item in the project budget. Any additional stalls or developer-facing parking beyond that baseline would likely be a city contribution or supported by development partnerships. Staff provided per-stall construction cost assumptions of roughly $37,000 per above-grade stall and about $65,000+ per underground stall and noted that those figures drive large differences in the city’s extra contribution under each concept.
Concept tradeoffs and estimated city contributions - Option 1 (garage at west end, more hidden): Keeps the garage out of immediate view from the platform, allows a public plaza, and hides the structure behind development. Staff estimated the city contribution beyond Metro’s baseline at roughly $16 million for additional stalls in this option.
- Option 2 (centered garage with platform frontage): Places the garage near the platform and makes drop-off and wayfinding more intuitive for riders. Staff also estimated an incremental city contribution in the $16 million range for the increased parking and integration with development.
- Option 3 (subterranean/underground): Substantially hides parking and frees surface land for development, but drives cost sharply higher; staff estimated the city contribution for the largely underground option could be on the order of $28 million beyond the Metro baseline.
Urban design and development considerations Staff said the three options differ in developable square footage above the garage and in how the garage would present to surrounding streets. Option 1 provides better station‑plaza relationships but places the garage farther from the platform; option 2 provides closer, more intuitive access for riders and drop‑off while exposing the garage edge; option 3 maximizes developable ground-floor area but has the highest upfront cost and increases uncertainty because of the extra engineering work required.
Timeline and federal milestones Nick Landward of the project team and city staff outlined the remaining schedule: the FTA supplemental environmental document comment period and record of decision are imminent (staff expected an FTA record of decision by early August), a final federal grant application is expected next spring, and if federal funding proceeds the project anticipates major construction in 2027. Staff said 60% design comment rounds were underway and a 90% design review is expected later in the year.
Council reaction and next steps Councilors expressed concern about the large incremental city cost in all options and asked for additional work to model developer behavior, expected retail and residential yields, and realistic parking demand post-pandemic. Staff said they will seek development-market feedback, refine cost estimates and return with additional analysis; no formal commitment was made to any option during the session.
