The Planning Commissions meeting, which consisted of a presentation by the consultants hired to study parking issues and the public's opportunity to comment on the study, was nearly halfway over last Wednesday before the question that was on everybody's mind was asked, "What about the Park Buffer Strip Plan?"

The consultant, Georges Jacquemart, of Buckhurst, Fish & Jacquemart, Inc. reported on his company's process of data collection and the methodology used. In his report, Jacquemart noted that there are several areas where there are parking shortages, by redistributing the flow of parking in the different fields so people would park in a lot not ordinarily considered to be part of a particular building, they were able to lessen the shortages but not eliminate them completely. The worst shortages, according to the consultant, occur in parking field 5 and field 10.

One recommendation that Jacquemart indicated his company was likely to make was making the area around Franklin Avenue more "pedestrian friendly." He stated that to have people walk further distances to the local businesses would be to everyone's benefit. Most notably, increasing pedestrian activity would help the businesses in the area because people would be walking past these stores and restaurants and other businesses and would be more likely to stop into them. It would also help solve the parking issue, because currently the parking that is considered for a particular building is within 300 feet of that building's front door and in some cases there is not enough parking in that range but there may be an empty lot just across the street.

In order to implement this plan to have people willing to walk further distances to get to the business, Jacquemart noted that changes would have to be made on the roads themselves. Possibilities suggested included lowering the speeds on some of these roads, crosswalks for Franklin Avenue and the width reduction of some of the roads. The "Stop for Pedestrian" signs in the middle of 7th St. were mentioned as an example of the difference made in pedestrian safety.

When asked about the possibility of removing some of the trees in the parking lots, in addition to the re-striping of the lots to create more spaces, Jacquemart stressed the importance of the trees in the village and added that loss of mature trees was a price not worthy of the few spaces that would be gained from their removal. In answer to another question, regarding parking structures Jacquemart said that he was not in favor of parking structures for an area such as Garden City unless there was a place where it could be well hidden.

Many residents expressed concern that in the parking study, field 11 was not addressed. Those residents felt that the study of the parking in the village could not be complete without the inclusion of this field, which they felt could help alleviate the parking problems in field 10. Dr. Russell Miller stated that field 11 only has a 12 percent occupancy rate and if the egress on 10th Street were changed to be both an ingress and egress it would make that field more "user friendly" and "pedestrian friendly."

Jacquemart said that he does have many figures for field 11 and could include that in the study without too much trouble.

The feel of the meeting changed once the lingering question of the Park Buffer Strip was raised. Mark Durand, a resident of 10th Street asked the planning commission to make two definitive statements. The first statement he said he wanted was for the village to, "state definitively and permanently that it is not in the business of acquiring or condemning residential property to convert it to parking fields, that it is not in the long-term issues of the village, it doesn't represent a fair balance of commercial interest and residential interest in the community." The second statement Durand sought was that the village would not "consider solutions that involve other than all of the streets, private, residential streets between 5th and 11th if it considers narrowing streets, closing streets, that its policy will not be to redistribute traffic in favor of one street and against another street as a part of solving the parking problem."

Durand's comments opened the discussion to include the Park Buffer Strip, which was a plan established in 1959 to acquire 11 houses, clear the lots and use them as parking lots, with a 50 foot "Park Buffer Strip" separating the parking lots from any surrounding homes. Although eight of these lots have been acquired since the original plan, the process of the village acquiring these properties was forestalled in the 1980s when many residents objected to this practice. The issue has been raised each time one of the three remaining properties has come up for sale. The Albanese Development Corporation, which is a strong proponent of the Buffer Strip Plan bought one of these properties in hopes that the village would buy it from the corporation and implement the plan.

Mrs. Costello, of 11th Street told the consultant, "As important as it is to keep trees, it is also important to keep houses."

On the other side of the issue, Bert Donley, president of the chamber of commerce, stated, "The macro-issue involved here is the village controls the parking." He noted that in this, the village controls the economic sustainability of the village, adding, "We created a situation where the village encouraged development based upon its laws and its parking codes. What we come into conflict with here is that when 10th Street, between 9th and 10th was developed, we created a situation where parking didn't exist based upon a plan that was in place, saying that parking would be created when it was possible to do it. Hopefully, the direction the recommendation will go will solve the problem, be it the acquisition of property, be it structured parking, be it underground parking, whatever it is that gets done." He then went on to question when the recommendations were going to be given.

Anthony Albanese also spoke out about the need for the Park Buffer Strip, but noted that he was not in favor of structured parking. He stated, "The Parking Buffer Strip Plan will not give us what would be the ideal, at the same time it's reasonable. The question is, you, being the consultant, and you don't like structures and you don't like underground, and re-striping will only be minimal, the only thing we have is to do the Park Buffer Strip...This has been going on for many years. I would hope the planning commission recognizes that we're trying to work together to do what's right and what's right is to make the retail area on Franklin Ave. what it once was, the 5th Avenue of Garden City."

Jacquemart noted that he has heard all the issues involved with the Buffer Strip Plan and will, in the final report, be making a recommendation to the village regarding the plan.

Russell Matthews, of the Albanese Development Corporation also stressed that the implementation of the Park Buffer Strip Plan affected the revitalization of Franklin Avenue because many companies are not interested in occupying a building that does not have enough parking.

Maureen Valente questioned whether the village wanted more blacktop, and the affect that would have on the aesthetics of the village. "I hope you consider the integrity of the residents, not just the business owners. There are people here who have invested their lives in their homes." She went on to question what A.T. Stewart would think of the plan to knock down houses for parking.

Jack DeFranza, chairman of the planning commission, noted that Stewart moved many houses in developing Garden City and that might be a consideration in this instance.

Throughout the evening, the question of when the final report would be completed was never fully settled. DeFranza did note that the planning commission would be willing to hold other meetings in order to gather more public input before the final report was issued.