×

Hollidaysburg parking rules under review

HOLLIDAYSBURG — Parking rules in Hollidaysburg could soon receive an overhaul, with Borough Council instructing staff to make revisions.

The split decision came earlier this month after council members heard recommendations from Hollidaysburg Planning Commission Chairman Paul Plummer and member Ethan Imhoff.

“We’ve been working for the past year … to review the parking ordinances and make some recommendations to help the borough improve its management of parking,” Imhoff said.

In all, four recommendations were presented at council’s October meeting. Imhoff said they were made unanimously by planning commission members.

“We did a good bit of research and due diligence. … We felt like we got a really good handle on the issue,” he said.

The first suggestion asked council to consider changing parking space requirements for developing businesses and structures.

Under current borough rules, if a developer wants to build a structure, a minimum number of parking spaces is required based on the building’s square footage, Imhoff said.

Sometimes, those minimums greatly exceed what is actually needed, Imhoff said. He gave the example of Thompson Pharmacy near the borough office on Blair Street.

The pharmacy has two lots — divided by an alley — to meet its 40-plus spot requirement, Imhoff said.

“It’s completely excessive,” Imhoff said. “If you drive by here, you can see the spaces south of the alley are almost never used.”

Those 40-plus spots are the minimum required, meaning more spots could have been requested, Imhoff said, noting this model increases land development costs, possibly thwarting growth.

Imhoff said the unused lot could have been another taxable business or residence.

Unused lots also can contribute to stormwater runoff issues, which are now receiving scrutiny from federal and state environmental agencies, he said.

“Thompson’s isn’t unique. This situation exists at other properties around the borough, as well,” Imhoff said.

Within the planning commission’s recommendation, the current minimum number would become the maximum number of spots allowed. Fewer could even be requested, Imhoff said.

Councilwoman Stephanie Wertz questioned the recommendation: “Would there be any minimums, like for anything?”

Imhoff first offered a simple answer, later elaborating.

“No,” he said. “Under our recommendation, there wouldn’t be.”

Still, council would be the final decision-making body.

“You guys could say, ‘You know, that’s not going to fly. We need a reasonable amount of parking spaces,'” Imhoff said of development plans that offer a low number of spots.

Wertz also asked about popular businesses that may require spots in addition to the established maximum number, and officials said that could be made possible via a waiver.

The planning commission’s second recommendation aims to smooth that process.

“If a developer or a landowner or an applicant can’t comply currently with the parking regulations they have to go to the Zoning Hearing Board,” Imhoff said. “That’s a $650 application fee, and it’s meeting the high legal bar of proving a hardship, which is fairly difficult.”

Planning commission members suggested shifting the parking requirements from the zoning ordinance to the subdivision and land development ordinance.

The shift, Imhoff said, would allow for “more flexibility,” as it would move the responsibility of approving waivers from the Zoning Hearing Board to Borough Council.

“This has been done in a lot of places,” Imhoff said, explaining he also discussed the proposed switch with state Department of Community and Economic Development officials.

“They generally agree that most places this has been done, it has been done with much success,” Imhoff continued. “The intent is to promote flexibility within the parking ordinance.”

Plummer elaborated, focusing on vacant buildings hindered by current rules.

“The idea is to make it available for people to develop the buildings so the buildings are occupied and used,” he said. “What we have now is an ordinance that says you can’t do it.”

That was an idea Councilman Joseph Dodson seemed to support.

“Why don’t we just change the ordinance … so these buildings can be used? I don’t think that’s a big deal. Is it?” Dodson said.

The third planning commission recommendation pertained to small businesses, such as the those downtown along Allegheny Street.

Many of the buildings are grandfathered and have no parking restrictions, but, if they sit vacant for too long, they can lose their grandfathered status, Imhoff said.

“There’s just no way that these buildings can provide parking should they lose their grandfathering,” he said. “We don’t want these buildings to go vacant because they can’t provide parking.”

As a solution, planning commission members suggested dropping parking-spot rules for businesses smaller than a certain size, possibly 7,000 square feet.

Buildings that size often have only a few employees and limited customer traffic, which could be accommodated by on-street parking, Imhoff said.

Lastly, Imhoff addressed what he called a “thorny issue” — on-street parking permits.

In some Hollidaysburg neighborhoods, on-street parking permits are given to residents who are landlocked with no off-street parking.

The exception to that rule is near the Blair County Courthouse, where even those with off-street parking can receive permits.

The commission’s recommendation would eliminate that exception, disallowing permits for those near the courthouse who have off-street spots.

Borough Manager James Gehret said that change would affect about nine homes.

Dodson was less enthusiastic about the final proposed change.

“So you want to take those permits away? I don’t agree with that,” he said.

There will be no changes to the borough’s handicap parking permits.

Councilman Patrick Plummer voiced support for the Planning Commission’s work.

“I think it is a very good plan. I give it high praise,” he said.

At the discussion’s conclusion, Gehret said council could instruct borough staff to make revisions to existing rules.

Both Wertz and Dodson said they first wanted to discuss changes with their constituents, but other officials claimed public hearings, which must be held before changes can be made, will give residents ample time to voice their opinions.

“I think the process allows for public input,” Councilman Sean Burke said. “I don’t want to wait another month to get more input.”

Council members voted to move forward with changes to current rules, with Dodson dissenting and Wertz not voting. The changes will have to be voted on at an upcoming meeting.

Mirror Staff Writer Sean Sauro is at 946-7535.

 

NEWSLETTER

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

COMMENTS

Starting at $4.39/week.

Subscribe Today