After years of controversy over whether or not the village of Garden City would decide to buy houses to knock them down and use the properties as parking lots, the village planning commission, last week, released their parking study report for the Franklin Avenue corridor between Fifth and Eleventh Streets. The village board will make the final determination with regard to the parking situation in Garden City but many residents have been waiting anxiously for this report from the planning commission, following the recommendations released in May by Buckhurst, Fish & Jacquemart, the consultants hired by the village to examine the parking issues around the Franklin Avenue corridor.

The planning commission was directed by the village board of trustees to undertake a study of available parking in the village in June, 1999. Several studies had been done in the past but it was determined that due to economic developments and improvements in the village and further concerns about parking were raised by the business community, a new study was commissioned. It was then that Buckhurst, Fish & Jacquemart were brought on as consultants.

According to the parking study report, the purpose of the study was to ascertain the availability of existing parking spaces in the Franklin Avenue corridor between Fifth and Eleventh Streets, identify the parking needs in the area, and determine if a shortfall did exist. The study examined the east and west sides of Franklin Avenue and considered present and future developments. In addition to on-site study, the consultant also met with the planning commission and held two public meetings to get input from the residents and the business community. The recommendations of the consultant were considered by the planning commission before they released the commission's recommendations to the board.

The planning commission has determined that there is a serious parking shortfall in certain areas of the business district. The determination was that although the overall number of spaces throughout the village are adequate, specific lots experience a parking shortfall at certain times of the day. The lots that the study determined the biggest problems exist in are lots 5,6, and 10.

While the planning commission is not recommending the acquisition of houses for parking at this time, they have recommended that the village retain the policy to acquire any particular residence in the study area when economic, environmental, and planning needs warrant it. This would be used only as a last resort, according to the planning commission.

Among the planning commission's recommendations to avoid the need for the acquisition of houses are improvements in pedestrian circulation and on-street parking. They have also made specific recommendations for lots 5,6, 6E, 7E, 7S, 7N, 8, 9E, 9W, and 10.

With regard to pedestrian circulation, the planning commission has recommended that the village make improvements to the connections between parking fields and the retail streets, including: asking the county to reduce the speed of signal progression along Franklin Avenue, installing signage to direct pedestrians from the parking fields to the commercial areas, directing motorists to free long-term parking in lots 6E and 9E, and installing adequate lighting, sidewalks, and landscaping to improve passages for pedestrians between parking fields and commercial areas. As far as on-street parking goes, the commission has recommended that the village remove short-term parking restrictions in areas away from commercial districts where parking is underutilized and change underutilized one-hour parking on Franklin Avenue to two-hour parking.

Parking Field 5 is the first field that the planning commission has identified as having a shortage of spaces. The recommendation is to expand the existing parking field by purchasing 100 feet of property at 114 Sixth Street immediately adjacent to the existing parking field and extending the current field north from Fifth Street and maintaining the 50 foot buffer strip, thus allowing for 31 more parking spaces.

In Parking Field 6, adjacent to the post office, the planning commission also found that there was a parking shortfall. They have recommended that the lot be expanded towards Sixth Street to the south and the existing layout be revised, to allow for an additional 28 spaces. A 20 foot wide landscaped strip would extend along the entire length of the parking field on the western side.

The planning commission has determined that Parking Field 6E is underutilized and has made recommendations to encourage motorists to use this lot and walk across Franklin Avenue to shop.

In Parking Field 7E the planning commission has recommended that two-hour restrictions be implemented throughout the field except in the parallel spaces along the field's eastern edge, where they have recommended that long-term parking be put into effect. In Parking Field 7S the same recommendations have been made, except the long term parking would be along the southern fence. In Field 7N the commission has recommended the implementation of two-hour restrictions in the first two rows adjacent to the commercial property on Seventh Street and in the parking rows that run perpendicular to Seventh Street near Franklin Avenue. They have also suggested adding signs encouraging shoppers to park in the eight-hour parking areas, changing the loading zone times from 8 a.m.-6 p.m. to 8 a.m.-4 p.m., and negotiating with the owner of residential property on Seventh Street to open passageway between the parking field and Seventh Street.

In Parking Field 8 the recommendation is to change angled parking to perpendicular parking adjacent to village hall to facilitate traffic flow.

No recommendations have been made for 9E. In Field 9W, the recommendation is re-striping which will yield an additional 45 spaces.

Many recommendations have been made for Parking Field 10, which the planning commission cited as the biggest challenge. Among the options are changing 65 of the short-term parking spaces to long-term parking, extending all one-hour parking to two-hour parking, and re-striping the existing lot. Other options deal with the relocation or removal of 115 Tenth Street, the removal of 116 Eleventh Street, or the removal of both houses.

Regarding the relocation of 115 Tenth Street, the Planning Commission states, "In keeping with village policy regarding property acquisition, we recommend that discussions be initiated with the current owners to discuss the possibility of relocating the house at 115 Tenth Street (at village expense) to the village-owned property immediately adjacent to the west." The commission goes on to say, "This parcel has remained vacant for too long and the commission strongly recommends that the parcel be brought into use and provide tax revenue. In addition, a portion of this vacant lot is registered as parkland and legislative approval must be granted for a change in use to residential. By moving the house to this vacant lot, expanding the parking field west, and providing a 20' setback, approximately 246 total spaces, or 48 more than the current layout could be provided."

With regard to the removal of the house at 115 Tenth Street, the commission has recommended that if the current homeowner were interested in selling, the more "aggressive and expeditious approach" of purchasing the house, demolishing it and expanding the current parking lot onto the village owned parcel be considered. This proposal, according to the commission, would follow the 50 foot buffer strip plan and would provide 97 more spaces than the current layout. Because the buffer strip would remain as parkland legislative approval would not be needed.

According to the planning commission, an alternate approach would be to purchase 116 Eleventh Street and expand the parking field west, which also would allow for the 50 foot buffer strip and would allow for 81 more spaces than the current layout.

The most aggressive and expensive concept, according to the planning commission, would be the removal of both houses, allowing the entire parking field to be expanded to the west. This plan would include a 50 foot buffer strip and would yield an additional 192 spaces.

In all of the proposals involving the purchase of an adjacent property, the planning commission has recommended that the ingress and egress points remain where they are and not moved any closer to residential properties. They have also suggested that heavy plantings and other natural screenings be employed within the 50 foot buffer strip and along the areas that front Tenth and Eleventh Streets.

In the Planning Commission Study conclusions, the commission spoke of the village's past willingness to work with the business community to solve problems while considering the needs of the residents. "We believe these recommendations illustrate such a willingness and represents a fair compromise. At the same time, the parking study recognizes the concerns of the residents and will not recommend the expansion of parking fields into residential areas without first utilizing every other option available before considering property acquisition," said the commission. The study concludes that, "The parking shortfall is a legitimate problem in the village and tough choices must be made if the problem is to be solved. The meter on the parking problem has expired and the time to act is at hand. The Planning Commission therefore encourages the board of trustees to act swiftly and decisively upon all the recommendations."