Opinion: Village Matters

Parking Garage: A Phantom Savior

After a tough summer with our town extra impacted by congestion and parking woes, we’ll hear about possible solutions with more emphasis once again.

The upcoming council campaign will rev that up, and the poor candidates will have to come up with something that sounds credible to demanding audiences.

Often, it’s: “Build a parking garage.” This possible garage, which is supposed to save us from all those intruding cars, has many suggested locations—we might hear “Act V (the corporate yard parking lot), “or “behind the Playhouse,” “the village entrance,” or another level on the Glenneyre street structure. Or some undefined location “on the periphery.”

Perhaps it doesn’t sell well to say that a parking garage won’t make a dent in the demand for the parking needs of six million visitors. Or that the last serious proposal to build one was shot down after years of effort in 2013. It was a 500-space structure at the village entrance, as mentioned in Elizabeth Pearson’s Aug. 9 article.

Do you remember the blue signs all over town that said, “$65 million and you want to do what?” That was the estimated cost of the parking garage project at the village entrance, and when all the information was out, an organization called “Let Laguna Vote” was formed, and opposition was organized. Rita Conn led the effort, speaking with other alarmed residents weekly, raising concern after concern. Details about the project were debated for months.

The city lacked the funds to build the project, so a bond was needed. Most bonds require two-thirds voter approval—except for revenue bonds. Financial studies maintained that revenue bonds were not feasible if repayment was based only on parking fees from the garage. It would not pay for itself because there wouldn’t be enough customers for 10 months of the year.

So, the plan relied on income from all the parking meters in town to pay back the bonds. That meant that parking meter fees, the one main source of income from day trippers, would be used to pay off the parking garage and would not be available for anything else.

Aesthetic impacts for the large garage were significant. Congestion and traffic impacts were a concern—during the busy season, the garage would draw more cars downtown. Five hundred cars entering and exiting simultaneously to and from the same driveways could worsen matters rather than improve traffic flow.

This all culminated in a night to remember at city council, on Nov. 12, 2013. The chamber was packed, and nearly all of the attendees opposed going forward with the parking garage plan for the village entrance. A facilitator was hired to manage the discussion. Staff recommended approval.

After all, the council had been working on this project for years. Council member Paul Freeman “jumpstarted” the village entrance plan in 1995 by pushing a parking garage study forward.

There was a design competition. The winner proceeded with design development based on the council criteria at that time—397 total parking spaces. Detailed planning took years, but by 2002, when Freeman left the council, the project was nearly ready to proceed. Elizabeth Pearson took Freeman’s place and then stopped the project in its tracks. Pearson decided that the 397 spaces were not enough. The project should be designed for 500! So, a project – almost ready to go – was sent back to the drawing board.

Some new buildings for city hall were added too. Consultants finished the plans and an Environmental Impact Report was reviewed and approved. Thousands of dollars had been spent on getting the project this far, and much staff, consultant and council time had been devoted to agonizing over the details.

But when the public became aware of the project’s size and expense, they reacted. They said “no” emphatically that night, and in a dramatic turnaround, the council halted the project.

Now, we have a low-key village entrance, parking, planting and pathways. This is the result of a volunteer plan put forward by Village Laguna and the Beautification Council. It was approvable and was built. We moved forward. Perhaps soon, we will have the digester building restored and used to enhance the canyon experience.

Pearson stopped the project in an attempt to get more parking, but she shouldn’t regret that move. It led to a detailed examination by the community of what is actually involved in building a parking garage. The community rose up and made it clear that we don’t want or need an overly ambitious structural parking solution.

Yet the council continues hiring consultants to study parking garages again and again. Have they forgotten? Perhaps they should review the tape of the Nov. 12, 2013 meeting. I don’t think Lagunans have changed that much. There may be more wealthy people now, but they have paid those high prices because they love the environment they are buying into. None of us wants Laguna to become like anywhere else.

I hope our candidates have the vision and courage to say that easily thrown-out “solutions” like parking garages are not how we protect the Laguna we love.

Ann Christoph is a former mayor, city councilmember and current member of the Village Laguna and South Laguna Civic Association boards.