On busy weekends, zoo visitors often circle Franklin Park only to give up and go home. During major events, cars double- and triple-park. Vehicles spill onto grass along park roads, slowly damaging turf, tree roots, and historic landscapes. Trash accumulates faster than it can be collected. And that is before professional soccer arrives.

Franklin Park is one of Boston’s great civic treasures. Designed by Frederick Law Olmsted, it was meant to be a place of restoration, recreation, and public health — open to everyone. Today, Franklin Park faces a challenge not because it is failing, but because it is succeeding.

More people want to use the park. The zoo draws hundreds of thousands of visitors each year. Cultural festivals, cross-country meets, Juneteenth celebrations, family reunions, and community gatherings continue to grow. Planned improvements through the Franklin Park Action Plan will make the park even more attractive.

And now, a professional soccer venue at White Stadium would add as many as 20 large events per season with concerts and other major gatherings likely to follow.

The problem is simple: Boston has never conducted a comprehensive, park-wide parking and access study for Franklin Park — and the existing plans do not answer the questions we now face.

The Franklin Park Action Plan addresses parking in limited, site-specific ways. It proposes rethinking Peabody Circle, studying traffic flow at key entrances, improving efficiency in existing lots, and relocating some parking to reduce conflicts with pedestrians. These are thoughtful and valuable improvements.

But the Action Plan did not include White Stadium, because the stadium is owned by the Boston Public Schools and was explicitly out of scope. As a result, the plan never assessed the combined impact of stadium events plus existing park uses — the zoo, festivals, markets, golf, and everyday recreation — on parking, traffic, and access.

That gap matters. Because whether or not White Stadium is technically “in” the park plan, its parking and traffic impacts land squarely on Franklin Park and surrounding neighborhoods.

The Boston Legacy FC transportation plan adds another critical piece of the puzzle — and reinforces why a comprehensive study is needed.

The plan proposes no dedicated on-site parking at White Stadium. Instead, it relies on a mix of transit, walking, biking, rideshare, and satellite parking with shuttle buses. But key details — including the locations, size, and routing of those satellite lots — have not been identified.

That means the plan does not eliminate car demand. It displaces it — into neighborhoods, onto park edges, and onto residents and small businesses through new restrictions. Displacement without measurement is not a plan; it is a gamble.

The proposal relies heavily on resident-only parking restrictions within a designated “walk shed.” Residents would need stickers to park on their own streets. Each household would receive only one visitor pass on event nights. If residents want more than one guest — for a family gathering, celebration, or religious event — they are told to apply for a block-party permit.

That raises basic, unanswered questions. Will the City actually issue block-party permits on major streets during stadium events? Will nearby small businesses be limited to customers with resident stickers on game nights? How many additional events — concerts, festivals, special programs — will trigger these same restrictions?

Without a comprehensive study, parking rules become a blunt instrument, shifting the burden onto residents and local businesses without understanding or managing the consequences.

Access becomes unpredictable for everyday park users. Boston confronted a version of this question during the Olympics debate. Many residents opposed using Franklin Park not because they opposed sports, but because the park would have been closed to the public for nearly two weeks.

Now we face something potentially more disruptive: 20 or more large-scale event days every season, year after year, layered on top of existing park uses. What residents rejected as a two-week loss of access is now being proposed as a recurring condition — season after season.

Parks don’t fail because too many people enjoy them. They fail when systems break down — when traffic gridlock blocks buses and emergency vehicles, when overflow parking damages grass and historic landscapes, when sanitation and enforcement are overwhelmed, and when everyday park users lose access. Yet no one has defined what “full” means for Franklin Park — or what happens when we reach that point.

Some argue that Franklin Park’s historic status makes new parking solutions impossible. That simply isn’t true.

Boston Common — also a historic park — includes underground parking for roughly 1,900 cars, added decades ago to balance access with preservation. It did not destroy the Common. It helped protect it by reducing unmanaged surface congestion.

The question is not whether Franklin Park should add parking, but how, where, and under what rules. A comprehensive study should evaluate all options objectively, including underground or structured parking at appropriate edge locations, off-site parking with reliable shuttle service on event days, temporary or pop-up parking for festivals, clear thresholds for when the park is “sold out,” and strict protections against parking on grass and parkland.

We are making major decisions without knowing the full impact.

Who decides when the park is at capacity?

Who activates shuttles and traffic controls?

Who pays for cleanup and enforcement?

Who is accountable when restrictions harm residents, businesses, or the park itself?

The Commonwealth and the City of Boston should jointly commission a comprehensive, park-wide parking and access capacity study — one that includes White Stadium, the zoo, festivals, and everyday park use.

With thoughtful planning, Franklin Park could emerge stronger — healthier, more accessible, and more economically beneficial to surrounding communities. Without planning, we risk a permanent cycle of congestion, conflict, damaged landscapes, and frustrated neighbors.

Ed Gaskin is Executive Director of Greater Grove Hall Main Streets and founder of Sunday Celebrations