Letter to the Editor: Village Should Not Include Parking Structure in Master Plan Print

alt

 

To the Editor:

Jun. 26, 2019:  I believe one statement in Mayor Marvin’s recent column on the village’s comprehensive plan requires clarification. Her column stated that the recent opinion survey by the village shows that “A parking structure was favored by 55 % of the survey takers while 25% did not support a structure. The most favored location was in the Kraft Avenue lot on the undulated land near Saint Joseph’s Church.”

In fact, 253 people answering the survey favored a parking structure on Parkway Road on the site of the Avalon parking lot while only 134 people approved of a structure at the south end of the Kraft Avenue lot. Unfortunately, the survey did not ask a direct question comparing all possible locations for a parking structure in the central business district.

Question 53 asked whether respondents would support a parking structure at any one of three locations east of the train tracks. A structure west of the tracks was not offered as an option. A total of 471 people answered this question.

The largest support by far, at over 42 percent, was for “Other,” the only alternative offered to the three east-side locations. Although respondents were asked to specify what they meant by "Other," individual answers aren’t posted on the village website.

None of the three east-side locations received anything like majority support. Only about 28.5 percent of people responding, or 134 individuals, were in favor of a structure over the south end of the Kraft Avenue lot. About 20 percent answered that they would support a parking structure over the Garden Avenue lot, while only about 9 percent favored a structure over the Cedar Street lot.

In contrast, Question 18 addressed the possibility of a parking structure on the west side of the central business district, although in a roundabout way. This question asked what use respondents would “like to see” in addition to surface parking at the Parkway Road (Avalon) parking lot. Six hundred fifty people answered this question.

The largest number of respondents, almost 39 percent, or 253 individuals, answered “parking structure.” Almost 25 percent, 161 individuals, answered “mixed-use,” which presumably could include some additional parking.

The survey allowed “stakeholders” who do not live in the village to respond to the survey. About 10 percent of responses came from non-residents. Although the survey does not show answers broken down by resident or non-resident status, it seems fair to assume that business owners, landlords, and non-residents would be more in favor of a parking structure.

My conclusion from all this is that the village should not include a parking structure in the master plan for any of the three east-side locations in the central business district. An overwhelming 79 percent of people responding to the survey felt that “additional urbanization and crowding threaten the character of the village in the long term.” The lack of enthusiasm for an east-side parking structure certainly reflects that sentiment.

Betsy Harding 

Editor's note:  MyhometownBronxville does not fact-check statements in letters to the editor, and the opinions do not necessarily reflect the thinking of its staff. Its objective in publishing letters to the editor is to give air to diverse thoughts and opinions of residents in the community.