HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-07-30; Barrio Parking Study Update (District 1); Gomez, PazTo the members of the:
.., Err_~ouNclj.
Date ~CA ✓ CC/
CM ✓ACM~M (3)~
Council Memorandum
July 30, 2026
To:
From:
Via:
Re:
Honorable Mayor Blackburn and Members of the City Council
Paz Gomez, Deputy City Manag~f-[Pu9lic Works
Geoff Patnoe, City Manager 8,-q/
Barrio Parking Study Update ( 'str ct 1)
{city of
Carlsbad
Memo ID# 2026041
This memorandum provides a summary of the Barrio Parking Study, which was conducted to
evaluate opportunities to increase parking on wider streets in the Barrio, such as Pine Avenue,
Palm Avenue and Madison Street, and its findings and staff recommendations.
Background
On December 9, 2025, the City Council adopted a resolution to create a new Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) project named Barrio Parking Improvements Project1
CIP Project No. 6119, to move forward with a study to evaluate parking opportunities on wider
streets in the Barrio.
Staff initiated work with a consultant to conduct the Barrio Parking Study to evaluate
opportun ities to increase parking on Pine Avenue, Palm Avenue and Madison Street, by
converting parallel on-street parking to diagonal parking along the curbs and looking into the
idea of creating a combination of diagonal and parallel parking in the middle of Madison Street.
The study included conducting field reviews of the streets to confirm roadway striping and
dimensions, identifying existing driveways and colored curb locations, analyzing traffic operation
characteristics of the different parking options, identifying the number of parking spaces
potentially gained or lost, and preparing conceptual parking layouts.
Discussion
Staff have been continually evaluating opportunities to increase parking in the Village and Barrio.
One of these efforts includes this parking study in the Barrio to evaluate conversion of parallel
on-street parking to diagonal parking along the curbs of wider streets, including Pine Avenue
from Tyler Street t o Harding Street, Palm Avenue from Madison Street to Harding Street, and
Madison Street from Oak Avenue to Magnolia Avenue.
Preliminary parking concepts were developed for initial screening based on feasibility, traffic
operations and conformance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and city standards.
Public Works Branch
Transportation Department
1635 Faraday Avenue 'i Carlsbad, CA 92008 'i 442-339-5332 t
Council Memo -Barrio Parking Study Update (District 1)
July 30, 2026
Page 2
Due to the limitations posed by street width, concepts with diagonal parking on both sides of the
street were not feasible. Preliminary parking concepts that were developed included:
• diagonal parking on one side of the street (Madison Street, Pine Avenue, and Pa lm
Avenue)
• diagonal and parallel parking in the middle of the street (Madison Street)
• dual-directiona l diagonal parking in the middle ofthe street (Madison Street)
Staff from the Transportation, Fire and Police departments reviewed the preliminary parking
concepts and determined that introducing diagonal parking (with or without parallel parking) in
the middle of the street would not meet the required 24 feet of unobstructed roadway width for
Fire Apparatus access as specified in Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 17.04.060(8).
Moreover, these concepts would require removal of existing bike lanes on Madison Street and
require pedestrians to cross mid-block to access vehicles parked in the middle of the street,
which is of high concern from a safety and operations standpoint. Because of these reasons, staff
do not support advancing the preliminary parking concepts with diagonal parking in the middle
of the street for further evaluation.
Roadway cross-sections for the three preliminary parking concepts on Madison Street are
depicted in Figure 1, shown below:
Figure 1 -Roadway Cross-Sections for Preliminary Parking Concepts on Madison Street
DIAGOMAL PARl~INC,
I RAVLL LAI\JL
IRAV[L LANL
PARALLEL PARl<INL,
l S' ,I, 16' J 13' _J 11' J, 8' ,L5'J
Diagonal parking on one side of Madison Street
Council Memo -Barrio Parking Study Update (District 1)
July 30, 2026
Page 3
TRAVEL LANE
PARALLEL PARKING
DIAGONAL PARKING
TRAVEL LANE
LS' L 10.5' k 8' L 16' I, 13.5' LS' L rl 7 / / /I
Diagonal and parallel parking in the middle of Madison Street
TRAVEL LANE
DIAGONAL PARKING
TRAVEL LANE
.,, -.-~.--.: .... -~ ~-,., ·=· ~ •.-.~,_,.;,. ... ~--,. ........ -• t
LS'L 9' L 15' 1, 15' L 9' LS'L rr r / r r,
Dual-directional diagonal parking in the middle of Madison Street
Parking options advanced for further evaluation with detailed parking layouts prepared and
available parking spaces calculated for the three study streets are:
• Option 1 -No change (existing or baseline conditions)
• Option 2A -Diagonal parking on east/north side of each street
• Option 2B -Diagonal parking on west/south side of each street
Parking Space Analysis
Detailed parking layouts for the three options were prepared, showing the number of existing
parallel parking spaces under Option 1, assuming th e standard 20-foot parallel parking space and
the number of diagonal parking spaces that could be provided under Options 2A and 2B, as
shown in Appendix B of the Barrio Parking Study Memorandum in Attachment A.
Options 2A and 2B, which would convert one side of parallel parking to diagonal parking, would
yield no net increase in parking spaces on any of the three streets based on the analysis
Council Memo -Barrio Parking Study Update (District 1)
July 30, 2026
Page 4
conducted. Diagonal parking requires long, uninterrupted curb segments to provide any
advantage over parallel parking in terms of number of parking spaces.
The high number of existing driveways along these study streets breaks up the diagonal parking
layout resulting in a loss of available parking when compared to the existing or baseline
conditions under Option 1. Table 1 shown below summarizes the number of parking spaces
available for the three parking options considered:
Table 1: Number of Available Parking Spaces
Option 1 Option 2A Option 2B
Street No Change* Diagonal Parking Diagonal Parking on
(Baseline} on East/North Side West/South Side
Madison Street 101 100 (-1) 90 (-11) (Oak Ave. to Magnolia Ave.)
Pine Avenue 60 44 (-16) 44 (-16) (Madison St. to Harding St.)
Palm Avenue 47 47 (0) 43 (-4) (Tyler St. to Harding St.)
XX (YY) = Number of available parking spaces (change from baseline)
*Number of parking spaces calculated based on the standard 20-foot parallel parking space
Parking layouts for Options 1 and 2A for the segment of Pine Avenue between Madison Street
and Jefferson Street are shown below in Figures 2 and 3, respectively, as an example illustrating
how diagonal parking configuration is interrupted by existing driveways and as a result provides
fewer available parking spaces than the existing or baseline conditions with parallel parking,
Figure 2 -Parking Layout for Option 1 (Existing Conditions} with Parallel Parking on Pine
Avenue Between Madison Street and Jefferson Street
PINE AVE
~~ Ii' r~~ ~ 2~• ~ t -
I-I-
V') !I ft!
2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 Vl
z z
0 0
V') Vl Cl'.'. 0 'i w
<( i LL LL 2 .. w t ~1 K-r t.i-1 ~ ~ ~ ....,
I w "• ,., [ 74' JC
Nine available parking spaces on the north side of Pine Avenue
Council Memo -Barrio Parking Study Update (District 1)
July 30, 2026
Page 5
Figure 3 -Parking Layout for Option 2A with Diagonal Parking on the North Side of Pine
Avenue Between Madison Street and Jefferson Street
PINE AVE
j J--
~~ 6 7 8 ~ 2
~ I.LJ u.. u..
~~;E:::r:'.'.-.-!-:rrµ;=t1 ~~~~~~? ~::::::· =t~~;;;;i====~=====J r==;:j=, .=£~;;;~? ~ E;J" 5
Eight available parking spaces on the north side of Pine Avenue
Operational Analysis
Staff identified several operational concerns associated with converting one side of parallel
parking to diagonal parking on the three study streets, as summarized below:
• Pedestrian and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Impacts -Diagonal parking placed
against the curb can result in the front bumpers of parked vehicles encroaching into the
adjacent sidewa lk. With the typical sidewalk width of five feet on the three study streets,
the encroachment by parked vehicles would reduce the pedestrian clear path and
negatively impact pedestrian access and ADA accessibility in the area.
• Bicycle Facility Impacts -Both Options 2A and 28 would require removal of the existing
bike lanes on Madison Street. Traffic counts conducted in January 2026 showed nearly
200 bikes using the existing bike lanes on Madison Street on a weekend day. Removal of
bike lanes on this street would impact bike infrastructure on Madison Street.
• Mixed Parking Configuration -Due to the number of existing driveways, there are areas
where diagonal parking would not fit. This would create a mixed configuration of parallel
and diagonal parking on one side of the street, which is not recommended because it
could cause driver confusion.
Conclusion
Based on the evaluation and findings presented, staff recommend no changes to the existing
parallel parking configuration on the three study streets, Pine Avenue, Palm Avenue and Madison
Street, in the Barrio.
Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission
Staff presented the Barrio Parking Study to the Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission for feedback
on July 6, 2026. The commission received the presentation and offered feedback regarding bike
Council Memo -Barrio Parking Study Update (District 1)
July 30, 2026
Page 6
lanes on Madison Street. No revisions to the draft study memo were suggested. The draft Traffic
Safety & Mobility Commission meeting minutes are included as Attachment B.
Next Steps
There will be no further action on this Barrio Parking Study at this time.
Attachments: A. Barrio Parking Study Conceptual Parking Layout Review Memorandum
B. Draft Minutes of July 6, 2026, Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Meeting
cc: Sheila Cobian, Assistant City Manager
Cindie McMahon, City Attorney
Jeff Murphy, Deputy City Manager, Community Services
Laura Rocha, Deputy City Manager, Administrative Services
Christie Calderwood, Police Chief
Michael Calderwood, Fire Chief
Ryan Opeka, Assistant Police Chief
Nick Ordille, Assistant Fire Chief
Tim Lyons, Assistant City Attorney
Tom Frank, Transportation Director/City Engineer
Mike Strong, Community Development Director
Amy Ventetuolo, Communication & Engagement Director
Darcy Davidson, Fire Marshal
James Willis, Lieutenant
John Kim, City Traffic Engineer
Mariel Cairns, Principal Engineer
Miriam Jim, Senior Engineer
Attachment A
Memo
Date: June 24, 2026
To: Miriam Jim, PE, TE
City of Carlsbad Public Works Traffic & Mobility Division
From: Gabriel Garcia and Spencer Reed, PE
Subject: Barrio Parking Study Conceptual Parking Layout Review
In support of the City of Carlsbad's Barrio Parking Study, this memorandum evaluates the feasibility
and projected parking stall yields of reconfiguring on-street parking layouts across three specific
study segments:
• Madison Street (from Oak Avenue to Magnolia Avenue)
• Pine Avenue (from Tyler Street to Harding Street)
• Palm Avenue (from Madison Street to Harding Street)
As part of a preliminary screening, a total of five parking concepts were developed for Madison
Street, and three concepts were evaluated for Pine Avenue and Palm Avenue.
The five preliminary concepts for Madison Street were as follows:
• Concept 1: Parallel to Diagonal Parking (Bicycle Lane Removal on both sides) -This option
removed the existing bike lanes along Madison Street to maximize curbside vehicle capacity. The
cross-section was reconfigured to feature diagonal parking stalls along one side of the street
(East or West) and standard parallel parking along the opposite side.
• Concept 2: Parallel to Diagonal Parking (Bicycle Lane Removal on one side) -This alternative
converted one side of Madison Street (East or West) to diagonal parking while preserving a
buffered bicycle lane configuration on the opposite side of the roadway.
• Concept 3: Center Diagonal and Parallel Parking -This configuration introduced a center
running diagonal parking module along the centerline of Madison Street, supplemented by
standard curbside parallel parking. Due to right-of-way constraints, this option required the
removal of the existing bicycle lanes.
• Concept 4: Center Diagonal Parking (Dual-Directional) -This option established a dedicated
center-running diagonal parking median serving both northbound and southbound travel
directions along Madison Street. To accommodate the center parking module and necessary
travel lanes, the existing curbside parking and bicycle lanes were eliminated.
• Concept 5: No Change (Baseline) -This baseline concept maintains the existing roadway cross
section and parking alignment along Madison Street. Everything will remain as it is, a standard
length of 20 feet per stall was used to calculate parking capacity.
Fehr&Peers Barrio Parking Study Conceptual Parking Layout Review 11
The three preliminary concepts for Pine Ave and Palm Ave were as follows:
• Concept 1 (Pine Ave and Palm Ave): Parallel to Diagonal Parking -The roadways were
reconfigured to feature diagonal parking stalls along one side of the street (North or South) and
standard parallel parking along the opposite side, excluding the segment of Pine Avenue from
Tyler Street to Madison Street.
• Concept 2 (Pine Ave): Parallel to Diagonal Parking (Constrained Cross-Section) -The roadway
was reconfigured along Pine Avenue to feature diagonal parking stalls along one side of the street
(North or South) without parallel parking on the opposite side to accommodate narrower right
of-way constraints.
• Concept 3 (Pine Ave and Palm Ave): No Change (Baseline) -This baseline concept maintains
the existing roadway cross-section and parking alignment along Pine Avenue and Palm Avenue. A
standard length of 20 feet per stall was used to calculate parking capacity.
The conceptual design options are provided in Appendix A.
Following a preliminary screening by City Transportation Department staff and representatives from
the City Fire and Police Departments, the concepts selected to move forward for further analysis
were identified. The concepts selected met the minimum unobstructed roadway width of 24 feet for
Fire Apparatus access per Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 17.04.0608. The selected concepts were
combined into two packages for all the study segments. Descriptions for both package options are
provided below:
• Option 1: No Change -Maintains parallel parking on both sides of the segment, utilizing a
minimum 20-foot to calculate existing baseline inventory.
• Option 2: 30-Degree Angled Parking (One Side Only) -Converts a single side of the street
to a 30-degree angled configuration. On standard 48-foot-wide right-of-way segments,
standard parallel parking is retained on the opposite side (Hybrid Layout). On narrow 40-
foot-wlde right-of-way segments (identified along portions of Pine Avenue), parallel parking
on the opposite side is eliminated to maintain 24-foot travel lane widths. This option was
evaluated for both sides of the street independently to determine the optimal configuration.
The conceptual design options selected to move forward are provided in Appendix B.
Geometric Design Standards
A field visit determined that no dedicated parking stall striping exists on any of the study segments.
Vehicle parking efficiency varies across each segment with some vehicles parking close together and
others parking with excessive distance between vehicles, but not enough for another vehicle. As a
result, some block segments have vehicles blocking sightlines and encroaching into driveway areas.
To maintain consistency across the study segments, the layout evaluations adhered to the following
geometric dimensions and standards, including a 24' minimum unobstructed roadway width per
Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 17.04.0608:
Fehr&Peers Barrio Parking Study Conceptual Parking Layout Review I 2
Parallel Parking Configuration
Stall width of 8 feet with a minimum of 20 feet in length per stall. A minimum threshold of 20 feet of
continuous, unblocked curb space was required per vehicle. Consequently, any isolated or
fragmented curb pocket measuring less than 40 feet would mathematically only yield one (l) striped
parallel space. A conceptual diagram of the parallel parking stall configuration is shown below.
CURB
L
* MINIMUM LENGTH OF 20•
FOR PARKING STALLS
.J
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
30-Degree Parking Configuration
Each parking stall features a width of 8.5 feet (measured perpendicular to the striping angle) and
requires an angled stripe length of 32 feet. To establish this geometry within the AutoCAD drafting
environment, layout lines were rotated exactly 60 degrees relative to the project baseline,
establishing a true 30-degree striping angle measured directly from the face of the curb. Based on
this geometric profile, these 30-degree stalls require a linear curb length of 17 feet per vehicle. While
the actual painted stripes are 32 feet long, the angled orientation results in an effective stall depth of
16 feet measured perpendicularly from the curb face into the roadway. A conceptual diagram of the
30-degree parking stall configuration is shown below.
CURB 17'
-E-"-------,1/ 1 1
-\..0
-r-
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL
Fehr&Peers Barrio Parking Study Conceptual Parking Layout Review I 3
Parking Inventor y and Capacity Comparison
The tables below establish the comparative analysis matrix, evaluating the standardized baseline
parallel parking layout (Option 1) independently against Option 2A and Option 28. The variance
identifies the difference In parking supply due to the design standards presented above and accounts
for existing conditions such as red curbs, residential driveways, fire hydrants, and localized cross
section width reductions.
Baseline vs. Option 2A
Table 1 identifies the parking supply results for Option 2A when compared to the standardized
baseline. This scenario places angled parking along the east side of Madison Street, the north side of
Palm Avenue, and the north side of Pine Avenue, while keeping parallel parking on the opposite side
where the street is wider than 40 feet. As identified in Table 1, Option 2A has either no change or a
decrease In parking supply for each segment compared to the standardized baseline with a total loss
of 17 parking stalls across all three study segments. This reduction in parking supply is primarily due
to the increased linear curb length required per vehicle for angled configurations compared to
standard parallel stalls. Furthermore, angled layouts are sensitive to fixed street constraints; existing
driveways, utility conflicts, and intersection sight distance clearances create substantial "dead space"
along the curb where angled stalls cannot be physically accommodated, thereby lowering the overall
parking supply yield.
Table 1. Parking Supply Variance -Baseline vs. Option 2A
Segment Baseline Option 2A Variance
Madison Street 101 100 -1
Pine Ave 60 44 -16
Palm Ave 47 47 0
Total 208 191 -17
Source: Fehr & Peers.
Fehr&Peers Barrio Parking Study Conceptual Parking Layout Review I 4
Base Count vs. Scenario 28
Table 2 identifies the parking supply results for Option 28 when compared to the standardized
baseline. Option 28 has the opposite configuration from Option 2A with angled parking on the west
side of Madison Street, the south side of Palm Avenue, and the south side of Pine Avenue, while
keeping parallel parking on the opposite side where the street is wider than 40 feet. As identified in
Table 2, Option 28 has a decrease in parking supply for each segment compared to the standardized
baseline with a total loss of 31 parking stalls across all three study segments. This larger decline in
parking supply underscores how sensitive angled parking configurations are to specific curb-line
geometry. Because angled stalls require a wider, uninterrupted stretch of curb to be efficient, the
high frequency of existing driveways and conflict points on these particular sides of the streets
breaks up the parking layout, resulting in a greater loss of parking stalls compared to the parallel
baseline.
Table 2. Parking Supply Variance -Baseline vs. Option 28
Segment Baseline Option 28 Variance
Madison Street 101 90 -11
Pine Ave 60 44 -16
Palm Ave 47 43 -4
Total 208 177 -31
Source: Fehr & Peers.
Other Considerations
Beyond the loss of parking supply, both Option 2A and Option 28 have additional considerations
which affect the study segments. The first consideration is that any vehicle parked diagonally against
the curb has the potential for the front bumper to encroach on the sidewalk space due to the
distance from the front wheels to the leading edge of the vehicle. This encroachment can limit the
effective width of the sidewalk. While a 30-degree angle will have less encroachment than a 45 or
60-degree angle, some encroachment can still occur and reduce the effective sidewalk width. Given
that the existing sidewalk width across the study segments Is typically 5 feet, this encroachment
directly reduces the available pedestrian clear path, which could negatively impact general mobility
and ADA accessibility. While a 30-degree angle will have less encroachment than a 90-degree angle,
some encroachment can still occur and reduce the effective sidewalk width.
Additionally, both Option 2A and Option 2B remove both existing northbound and southbound bike
lanes on Madison Street. Increasing transportation options and improving connectivity within the city
are core values of the Carlsbad Community Vision (Sustainable Mobility Plan, 2021 and Carlsbad
General Plan Mobility Element, 2015). The removal of the bike lanes would decrease transportation
options and could potentially increase parking demand on the study corridors as opportunities for
traveling by a non-automotive mode would be reduced. Furthermore, diagonal parking does not fit
along shorter curb areas between driveways, resulting in a mixed configuration of parallel and
diagonal parking along the same segment, which could cause driver confusion.
Fehr&Peers Barrio Parking Study Conceptual Parking Layout Review I 5
Summary
The reconfiguration of parking on the study segments to anything other than parallel parking would
result in the loss of parking supply due to the increased linear curb length required per vehicle and
physical constraints like existing driveways. Additionally, secondary effects such as the reduction of
effective sidewalk width and removal of bike lanes on Madison Street could have a negative effect of
non-automotive modes access to the Barrio.
Fehr&Peers Barrio Parking Study Conceptual Parking Layout Review I 6
Appendix A: Conceptual Design Options
Fehr&Peers Barrio Parking Study Conceptual Parking Layout Review I 7
PARALLEL PARKING
TRAVEL LANE
MADISON ST
TRAVEL LANE
LS' L 8' I, 11' 1, 13' 1, r r I I ;
16'
Fehr
&Peers
CROSS-SECTION
CONCEPTUAL· NOT mR CONSTRUCllON. AOOIIIONAL
DHI\JLED ~MALVSIS /\NO ENGINF[RING DESIGN REQUIRED,
DIAGONAL PARKING
i,s· L I ,-
rrg.1,,. 1/1
MADISON ST OPTION 1 A
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
w > -:t w z a:
Fehr
&Peers
MADISON ST
LAME
TRAVEL LANE
PARALLEL PARKING
-rlt
16' ~ 13' J, 11' I, B' LS' L i r I
CROSS-SECTION
CONCEPTUAL· NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. AOOIIIONAL
DtrAILEO >NALVSl5 ANO ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.
F1<11ih! l8
MADISON ST OPTION 1 B
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
w > ct w z
C:
Fehr
&Peers
DIAGONAL PARKING
TRAVEL LANE
CROSS-SECTION
CONCEPTUAL • NOT FOR CONllR\JCTION, ADDITIONAL
DETAILED ANALYSIS ANO ENGINEERING DESIGN REOUIREO,
MADISON ST
f1gur,.. J
MADISON ST OPTION 2
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
WITH BIKE LANES
w > <(
::i,::
<(
0
TRAVEL LANE
PARALLEL PARl(ING
DIAGONAL PARKING
TRAVEL LANE
Ls· L 1 as k a· k r r , , 16' ~ 13.5' J,5'~
Fehr
&Peers
CROSS-SECTION
CONCEPIIJA( • NQT FOR CONSTRUCTION, ADDITIONAL DCTAllED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REOUtR~O
►IJ\1ti!' ~
MADISON ST OPTION 3
CENTER DIAGONAL AND PARALLEL PARKING
IN EACH DIRECTION
I.I.I ~ w z ii:
UJ > ct
:ii=: ct 0
Fehr
&Peers
-TRAVEL LAl,IE
DIAGONAL PARKING
,!, 1 s· J, 1 s· k 9' I. s· L > / >
CROSS-SECTION
CONCEPTUAL• NOT FOR CONSTRUCIION. ADDITIONAL
O[TAILED ANALVSIS ANO ENGINEERING DESIGN REOUIRCO.
LANE
FI\J(ll+:. -1
MADISON ST OPTION 4
CENTER DIAGONAL PARKING
FOR BOTH DIRECTIONS
UJ ~
w z
C.
w > <(
::IC
<(
0
P'J 8' ,k 6' ~ 1 O' J 1 O' ~ 6' J.LJ,_I.J,
CROSS-SECTION
Fehr
&Peers CONCEPTUA\ • NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION, A00IIIONA\
OETAIL6D ANALYSIS AND ENGINtERll<G DESIGN RtOUIR!O,
MADISON ST
F1,1uo ~
MADISON ST OPTION S
NO CHANGE
w ~ w z
1:1.
Fehr
&Peers
PARALLEL PARKING
TRAVEL LANE
TRAVEL
J, 1 O' J, 1 O' ), 20'
CROSS-SECTION
CONCCPTUAL • NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDIIIONAL
OEIAllED ANAlVSIS AND (NGINF(Rlr,G OFSIGN REOU1REO
DIAGONAL PARKING
LS' L r >
F1g'l•rc (1A
MADISON ST OPTION GA
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
w ~ w z
ii:
MADISON ST
' I
DIAGONAL PARl<ING
TRAVEL LANE
TRAVEL LANE PARALLEL PARKING
R~L __ 2_0_· --}J..__1 O.;_' ~,1<--1, .;_1.::...0'---J,.J, _:B:.._' ...J.J,...::5....J,' j,
CROSS-SECTION
Fehr
&Peers CONCEPTUAL-NOTFOR CONS1RUC1ION ADblllONAl
DCTAILCO ANAL VSIS AND ENGINEERING DCSIGN R[OUIRm.
r1gur~ 6l\
MADISON ST OPTION 6B
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
w ~ w z
0:
w > c:(
::ii:: c:(
0
LS' L 14' L 14' L 20' r r r ,
Fehr
&Peers
CROSS-SECTION
CONCEPltlAI • NOT FO~ ~ONSTRLICTION, ADDITIONAL DETAIL[D ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DE~IGN AEOUIAlO
MADISON ST
DIAGONAL PARKING
LS' L > ---,
hgur11;17
MADISON ST OPTION 7
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
WITH REMOVAL OF PARKING ON ONE SIDE
w ~ w z ii:
I-II\ z
0 !a
0 < ::'?!
I )
•,/
Fehr
&Peers
TRAVEL LANE
TRAVEL LANE
PARKING • DIAGONAL -
DIAGONAL PARKING
-TRAVEL LANE
TRAVEL LANE
PARALLEL PARKING
16' ,k 13• ,k 11· ,k a· J 10· i~
CROSS-SECTION
CONCIPliJAL • NOT FOR COr,ISTAIICTIOJ•kAOOITiONA~
DCTAILED ANAlVSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.
...
I 1-V'I
f''JIJII~ II,
PINE & PALM AVE
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
z 0 1Q w I.I.
I.I. w .....
Iii z
0 ~
C c:t :E
Fehr
&Peers
PINE & PLAM AVE
TRAVEL LANE
TRAVEL LANE
~1-VI z
0 :Q
w L&.
L&. w ...
:-=~---:---,,-f---'"~__.;::;....===:,..:.;__=========~·;z=~--'-t::diiif.ii;;::c;::z:~~--~
PARALLEL PARKING
TRAVEL LANE
TRAVEL
J, 11' Jc 13' ,I,
CROSS-SECTION
16'
CONCEPTUAL• NOT FOR CONSTRUCllON. AOOITIONAl
DETAILED ANAlVSIS ANO ENGINEERING DESIGN REOUIRftl,
PARKING
J. 10' j,~
f-stUrl" 1l}
PINE & PALM AVE
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
TRAVEL LANE TRAVCL
LS' L 10.S' L 13.5' k 16' r > r ,
Fehr
&Peers
CROSS-SECTION
CONCE~TUAL -NOT FOIi CONSTRUCTION. ADDIIIONAL D(TAJIED ANALVSIS ANO CNGIN!CRING D!SIGN R!OUIRCD.
PINE AVE
PARKING
IVI z
0 !!! C ct 1,/ :E
frt·Jr .>
PINE AVE
CONSTRAINED CROSS-SECTION
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
Appendix B: Selected Design Concepts for Further
Analysis
Fehr&Peers Barrio Parking Study Conceptual Parking Layout Review I 8
w ~
~ <(
0
l.LJ ~
l.LJ z
ii:
I
~~
F ti"
•
Ill Iii -, ' • M
/-°"
l , .. r--r IS 2l rs 2l
• ,,
~ ~12
' ~r .. ~ ...dl'l
MADISON ST
~
"3' 1 ~~' ?6' 1 A rs ZI J\ . • -Ill Ill m m
Ill Iii -j
t. # \ ~ ''$1~ ~ ~ ~s, .. F:-,1 ~
PARKING INVENTORY PARALLEL
SEGMENT
OAK AVE TO
PINE AVE
PINE AVE TO
WALNUT AVE
TOTAL
Fehr
&Peers
BASELINE
20
18
38 -
CONCEPTUAL • NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION,ADDIHONAL
DETAILED Al<ALVIII ANO ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUlR£0.
k 6' L 1 O' I. 1 O' I, 6' L 8' LS' L
, CROSS-SECTION r r '
.1
0 '~ ZI
5 Q
I,)~ 26' ..
' • w
':....,. '1 ., > <(
b ... w
~ z
-1 ii: ... .
;\
flARt::INCi STAU MARJ(t,IGS ARF SHO'WN
fOA PARKINGff'MNIOffV pu-.,OSES ONLY.
PARl(ING
fr~1,rr41
MADISON STREET OPTION 1
NO CHANGE
I
'/, ~b•
LU z{ > K
<(
5 z ...J ~ ---' Mf -
" ( v '" v I L illL...). l
MADISON ST
~ \: .. _
I-,._
:::) i -
z ·= I-
.. _ ~-Vl -u.J ~-.. _
~ ,, l a9f' .. ~ fs /1 IS
' I
I I Ill I II I I • I I ,
------::t u ·-rt v ~
.
1,______..,y:o...t ->y ¾~ SIZ b,Eil 1 ~•◄•1 r
PARKING INVENTORY PARALLEL
SEGMENT
WALNUT AVE TO
CHESTNUT AVE
CHESTNUT AVE TO
PALM AVE
TOTAL
Fehr
&Peers
BASELINE
25
17
42
CONCEP !UAL " NOT FOR CONS !RUCTION. ADDITIONAL
DHAlltD ANALYSIS AND CNGINHRING DESIGN REQUIRED.
TRAVEL LANE
BIKE LANE • I. PARALLEL PARKING
J, 6' J, 1 O' L 1 O' 1, 6' L 8' 1, s· L
CROSS-SECTION ' I '
) ~ I:) z 1-l::J I u
LU > <(
~ ...J
PAll:l:ING SlALl MAU:INGS Af\E SHOIM'l
rOfl PA.A.U'HilNVEHIORY PlMPOSCSONLY.
r-.g..1rt ~
MADISON STREET OPTION 1
NO CHANGE
Fehr
&Peers
I ~
f ;;,
38'
Ill 1-----.-,.-;::----
I '
PARKING INVENTORY
SEGMENT BASELINE
PALM AVE TO 21 MAGNOLIA AVE
TOTAL 21
CONCEPTUAL· Nor FOR CON~rnl)c;TION, AD01l10NAL
DHAILCO ANALYSIS ANO ENGINCCRING DESIGN REOUIREO
PARALLEL
MADISON ST
~I
31' 6'
~All£1NG fl AU t-.4.AftKtt.fC-jli A.A.€ $t0)WN ro~ ,urlNG 1f.MN10R'I ,uRPQS(S ONLY,
UJ ~
<(
:=i 0 z
I ~
~
PARKING
Jr 6' ,1. 1 O' 1, 1 o· L 6' 1, a· 1, s· L
CROSS-SECTION ' ' I
~l,ll~,!)
MADISON STREET OPTION 1
NO CHANGE
Fehr
&Peers
~1
t-I Vl
0:: LU ..J ~
rf·'
t-~j 70'
V'l
ii I!:
t-..J I.U >
k
I.U Ii V\ i 0 ~
0 ((t J 0:: !Ii'
PARKING INVENTORY
SEGMENT BASELINE
TYLER STTO
ROOSEVELT ST 10
ROOSEVELT ST TO 1~ MAOISON ST
TOTAL 2~
CON<;EPIUAL • NOT mR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONAL
DETAILEO ANALYSIS ANO EN(lll<EERING OE~l(lN REOUIREO
PI NE AVE
;,1 1_)
2 ~ t-Vl ' ~ , ~ ~ 'l
~ Ii LU > LU
II '
V'l
@@Ji , :! 0
» f\ 0 0:: t
PINE AVE
A' ,) M' 'k cur::::rd A ,,. k 1 ...
/I I\ I 21 1 t-Vl z ~, 0 Vl
" • iS
S) e tSi , IZ Si
<(
I L l ~ t<
x~
~
♦3• ' 10' L l .,. .. .... -»'
~ l, (, , ·'
flARi::ING Sf Al L MAltlCING.S Atl.t SHOWN roa ''-lklNG IIMNTORY PURJIOUS ONLY
TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE
PARALLEL .,, -,_, --,.~ -f=l lea ·-· --_, , .. . j'' ,,,
'
·I
P'J, 8' J 12' L 12' L 8' LS' L
CROSS-SECTION I I
PARKING
I l;IU(i? ,I
PINE AVENUE OPTION 1
NO CHANGE
PINE AVE
~ ::';:=.:::.-r:..=--=-· ....... s·-:=:..-:;:::.."t.~-=--=----=..A-1-FF=l~2~~---=:-1--~~~_j-J~~~±~.::::--=-~.::::::±z:::::::t:=.::1I )=-= I-
; !I ~ i
~ i tt :, t 1 • • •• '._· f.~ J· . rc, u 1 1 1 , • r
t:;
z 0 V'I 0::
UJ u.
-
iii
• ..
l ~
f ;
!
~ r~::::::s:~:::'.::::;:::1;;;;;;;.;;;~~;;;;;;;·~~<~b;;~~~::;::;:::::::::~::~;;;;~~;;;;;;;;;;;~;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;J r ,di' j I
u .. .. .~-
fll.R~ )l AIL MA.IIIONGS ARE SH<MIN TRAVEL L-'INE· f()AfA"INOINVCN!OkVP\WOSlSONlV,
PARALLEL PARl<ING
PARKING INVENTORY
SEGMENT BASELINE
MADISON ST TO 17 JEFFERSON ST
JEFFERSON ST TO 19 HARDING ST
TOTAL 36 J,S'J, 10' J, 8' ~ 16' J 16' L 8' L 10· Ls' L r r > ,
I-V'I
l9 z
0 0:: <x: :::c
ri'-fJfr: <
Fehr
&Peers
CROSS-SECTION TitA.1/£1, LAN£S \YIOtH lo I.,. rROM
PINE AVENUE OPTION 1
NO CHANGE
CONt!l'lVAk • )'l()TfOR CONSTAUCTION. AOOITIONAL JCrffASON Sf to """n"'G 1T
OITAILEO ANALYSIS ANO CNGINEtRING DESIGN R!OUl~(O,
\_ Si' ~ 1
~ ZI .
z T
' 0 t V'l
iS ~
<C l
2 • (: 2: ·1::_sJ SJ I
f-V)
~
z
0 V) 0:: w LL LL ' " " ~a " " 11 e2'
PARKING INVENTORY
SEGMENT BASELINE
MADISON ST TO
JEFFERSON ST 19
JEFFERSON ST TO
HARDING ST 28
TOTAL 47
Fehr
&Peers CONCEPTUAL. NOf fOR CONSIRUC1 ION, A00lll0 NAl
DtTAIL(D ANALYSIS AND ENOINCERING DCSIGN REOUIRED.
PALM AVE
aa' 1 I\ ,ZJ
~ • ,,
PARALLEL
. ..
"
• ./ f-
V'l z 0 V'l 0:: LLI LL LL
J
s,!::!
/,
• fl V'l ; c.,
l
jZ
• 'iS l o:: • <C :c !' ,'\'
' PAIOONG STALL MARKINCii ARE SIK>Ym FOR MIUONCi ltMNlOl\'iPWOSES ONlV,
PARKING
J, 16' J, 8' p ·i r.:j.1tf-h
PALM AVENUE OPTION 1
NO CHANGE CROSS-SECTION
~
L.LJ I > < er ::.:: < 0
" ('
~_LJK ~ 21 IS
..
k U,J > < L.LJ z
c.. ,, " ,.
PARKING INVENTORY
SEGMENT BASELINE PROJECTED VARIANCE
OAK AVE TO 20 PINE AVE 19 -1
PINE AVE TO 18 18 WALNUT AVE 0
TOTAL 38 37 ·1 -
Fehr
&Peers CQNC(PT~Al • NOT FQR CON~TRUCTION. AD0ITIONAl
0£TAllED ANALYSIS AND ENGINl!Rlt<G DESIGN R(OUIR(i>,
zl
PARALLEL
MADISON ST
k 21 IS
'''b:::fi
MADISON ST
k 2K
2◄' • t--f I 21 IS
J, 11' ,k 13' ,I, 16' LS' L r ,
CROSS-SECTION
,'~ dJU
Id at
21 -. !!: w
..( ~
!, uJ ...,_ ~ ~ Q. .. ,.
~
..
\
~ 2a· ),7 11 IS 11 L.W >
!!: <
-{ I-:::) !'l z ~ ...I :: ~ --t-.. -'I-
PA.RKHIG lifM,L MAIIKINrui ARlst~
roll ,11u1HG l~NIO.V PUll"OSES ONtY.
t:!Qill;
I. COtMASKJN ro OL',G~.W.
PAAKIHGIS I\UlRl(TEDONl HI: llt.Sl
Sl)l IIIOM PINf A.vtNUl 10
WALN\/1' A,Y(NIA oun 10 00I~ Mt SMC[(ONSTAAINrS.
f1;1111i:i, l
MADISON STREET OPTION 2A
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING (EAST SIDE OF THE STREET)
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
' UJ > r _ <
t-ie -
::i ~= z .. ---t-.i..-t:] .... ---:c .,.._
u .. _ ~('
SEGMENT
WALNUT AVE TO
CHESTNUT AVE
CHESTNUT AVE TO
PALM AVE
TOTAL
Fehr
&Peers
MADISON ST
' ... j 'is
·-· ~ cl~~~~~~¼j ) ~ < ~ t-1 ::i
PARKING INVENTORY
BASELINE PROJECTED VARIANCE
25 26 1
17 16 -1
42 42 0
CONCEPTUAL • NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION, ADDITIONAL
OETAILEO ANALYSIS ANO FNQINFFRING O!SIQN ReOUIREO,
PARALLEL
MADISON ST
.,._._a_· -;) . .__1_1 ·-+,1._1.;;..3•__,,,,_1. _1;..;;6_' --JJ,5~
CROSS-SECTION
PARKING
!, .... --'I ..
\
i..1
z t-Vl 1.1.J :r: u
UJ ~
2 -l < C.
PARKING STALL MARICINCiS A.RESHOWN
r011. PAIOONGltMNIOAV PlMPOSES ONLY.
hJJrt!".!
MADISON STREET OPTION 2A
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING (EAST SIDE OF THE STREET)
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
LU > <(
~ ...J <( 0..
~
L
SEGMENT
PALM AVE TO
MAGNOLIA AVE
TOTAL
Fehr
&Peers
II ... • ••
::,, K ZlS i'I
• ,1 J7
PARKING INVENTORY
BASELINE PROJECTED VARIANCE
21 21 0
21 21 0 _.._ -
CONCEPTUAL· NOT FOR CONSlRUCTION,ADDlllONAL
DETAIi ED ANALVSIS ANO ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED,
IS 2)
f S. 9i
PARALLEL
MADISON ST -
31'
/2
JI'
ts 2) r& is
,.
k ·f ~ ~
LANE TRAVEi
k 11' k 13' 1, 16' > , > LS' L
CROSS-SECTION
, .. 2,• /2 k A -> t I !!I
~
!:)
"' t
PARKING
\ 1
P..\!U:ING S'IA.Ll MAJl~IHGS ARC SHOWN f()JI IIAJl~INGl•M ~lOltV fi'Ufl,POSEJ ONlV.
!:!Qlli;
I COfMRSK)tl 10 OIAGOt-'Al
PA.XING IS A£STRl(H0 ON THt EAST SIOE Of 1Hl~8l0CI( DUE lO UUIIN<i (UMISPAC( CONSIRAINU
r~,,,. 3
MADISON STREET OPTION 2A
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
(EAST SIDE OF THE STREEn
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
<(
<(
:::::i 0 z
1..9 <(
~
SEGMENT
TYLER ST TO
ROOSEVELf ST
ROOS£VELT ST
TO MADISON ST
TOTAL
Fehr
&Peers
I;;
0:::
UJ ....J ~ I G!
I;;
~
~ ,___=-----=--70 tS ~ UJ > UJ V'I 0 0 0:::
PARKING INVENTORY
BASEUNE PROJECTED
10 4
14 s
24 9
' : .. ~'
VARIANCE
-6
.g
·1S
CONC(PTIJAL • NOT fOR CO)"STRIJ(.TION, ADDITIONAL
DETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED
SI !
Jr
PINE AVE
k Ji' rnr:1 t /I I\ ZI
[Z Si ,,~ \) 43' '°' • .c:;
f. ,I'.
TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL
LS' I, 10.5' I, 13.5' L 16' r > / ' CROSS-SECTION
471
Si l
'
LS' L
r '
1-V'I
~
UJ Gi
V'I 0 ~
I ,. J\ t I 21
,)
l I-
V'I z 0 V'I
iii I 0 <(
~
PAAt:ING UAll W-AAINGS AIIO $1i()\,IM rort f>AAXINC INYINTOin' Nfl:~OMS ONLY.
lk)llft ,1
PINE AVENUE OPTION 2A
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
(NORTH SIDE OF THE STREET)
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
~, <'
I-)' V\ ~ z t1 0 ~ V\ ci
<l'. t ~ .. . t ,,
r ,} . t -I-VI z 0 V1
0::
UJ u. u. w
PARKING INVENTORY
SEGMENT
MADISON STTO
JEFFERSON ST
JEFFERSON ST
TO HARDING ST
TOTAL
Fehr &Peers
BASELINE PROJECTED VARIANCE
1? 16 -1
19 19 0
36 3S -1
(ONCEPIIJAl • NOT FOR CONSrRUCTJON ADDIJIONA,
OETA~EO ANALYSIS ANO ENGINEIRING DESIGN REQUIR[O
I":
....;;•'
PINE AVE
oc:r
,,
C ;.
PINE AVE
,,
13' ,k
CROSS-SECTION
Tft.\YE.L. l,I.N£$ wrOCN TO t♦' ANO ll' rR01A
Jl'.rrtRSOl-t Sf fO IVIRONO !.T
16'
A'
! 1-., VI
{" ,; z -!,-~ ,.o ~ 0:: ~~~
'-' ,,UKING S'IALL MA.AKINGS AIU s»o\,1/N LANE:♦ JOR PARt:ING ltMNIORY PURPOSCS OM.v.
DIAGONAL PARKING
J 10· JU
f'k-.N1e S
PINE AVENUE OPTION 2A
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
(NORTH SIDE OF THE STREET)
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
~ &2' I
I-" ~ is;
V1 ~ z { 0 ~ V\ { i5 ~ < 'to ~ q
f 2 Ii 1Z I ,I#, y
1-Vl z 0 V1 a::
UJ LL ~i}
I I
PARKING INVENTORY
SEGMENT BASELINE PROJECTED
MADISON ST TO 19 18 JEFFERSON ST
JEFFERSON STTO 28 29 HARDING ST
TOTAL 47 47
VARIANCE
-1
1
0
1 ZI
SI
I
Fehr
&Peers CONCEPTUAL· NOT FO~ CONS1 RUC IION,.A0D1110NAL
OETAll(O ANALVSIS ANO ENGINtERING DESIGN RCQUIRED,
PALM AVE ... I •• • 1 _.,/
IS dl ~ ~~~~ ~ 0
,, " ..
17 ( 1
PARALLEL
CROSS-SECTION
.. y
LS' L r ,
V\ a::
UJ LL. LL. ,~
Fl9t11£>1J
PALM AVENUE OPTION 2A
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
(NORTH SIDE OF THE STREEn
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
w ~
w z
0:::
~ 21 K
PARKING INVENTORY
SEGMENT BASELINE PROJECTED VARIANCE
OAK AVE TO
PINE AVE
PINE AVE TO
WALNUT AVE
TOTAL
Fehr
&Peers
20 18 -2
18 13 .5
38 31 ·1
CON<:lPltJAL • NOT FOR CON~IRUCllON, AOOlllONAl
0(1AILED ANALYSIS AND E.NGlNEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.
21 s:
MADISON ST
K ' 2f ' c:e K •
~i,_...:..1 =-6' --J} 13' J,_!2~-J~ ~.:..J,
CROSS-SECTION
~
1
k '~ "'
21
I~
~
....
~ w -'\ > -~ .,. w ~ z 1 a:
~
J ~
F'ARl<ING
r,g,;r~ 1
MADISON STREET OPTION 28
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
{WEST SIDE OF THE STREED
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
LU ~
1-::, z ....J ;
SEGMENT
WALNUT AVE TO
CHESTNUT AVE
CHESTNUT AVE TO
PALM AVE
TOTAL
Fehr
&Peers
ls
PARKING INVENTORY
BASELINE PROJECTED VARIANCE
25 24 -1
17 17 0
42 41 -1
CONCEPTU/\l • NOT FOR <ONS1RUCTION, ADDIIIONAL D(T AILED ANALYSIS AND ll>l(;INEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.
'
21'
21
MADISON ST
»7'
M • 11
" »
K \\J v L.1t.....J l H'l2
MADISON ST
~,-A ..., Az•·
,1
TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE
rN
•
~ §v
~
K A
) f ~
~ .. <(
-1, I-!: ::::, -;. z !:, ~ i
le I
Si ~ u
iN' ).
PAR~INGSTAll M.-.!Ui:INGS AP.I: SIIO'WN ron ;AltilN(j lliill(Nl(lftY l'U\~(J ONLY
PARAI LFI PARKING
J, 13' J, 11' ,I, 8' JS'J,
CROSS-SECTION
!::!.Q!!:S:
I, CO~A$I0tJ 10 04,\G(')NAL ,,-11klNQ
ISJIESTRICTEDON ltlEWlSTStOE
fltOMCHLSnnn AVENUE TO PAW A\IENU[ Ol.l TO [X~lltKi Cl.Ill Sf'ACC CON$TIVJNIS.
F•JJr~2
MADISON STREET OPTION 28
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
(WEST SIDE OF THE STREET)
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
SEGMENT
PALM AVE TO
MAGNOLIA AVE
TOTAL
Fehr
&Peers
" '[ilf • ·~ s J7 4') ' '
PARKING INVENTORY
BASELINE PROJECTED VARIANCE
21 18 ·3
21 18 ·3 -
CONCEPfUAL • NOf FOR CONSTRUCIION, AD01110NAL
OEfAIL!O ANALYSIS ANO CNGINCERING DESIGN REQUIRCD
Ls· L , J
TRtlVEL LANE
16' J, 13• ,k 11· ~ 8'_0
CROSS-SECTION
PARXlf'Ki Sf All MAAKINGS ARE SHCM'N rm PA.-Qt.f(i ltMNfOfW PUkPOS{s ONlV.
PARKING
MADISON STREET OPTION 2B
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
(WEST SIDE OF THE STREEl)
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
SEGMENT
TYLER STTO
ROOSEVELT ST
ROOSEVELT ST
TO MADISON ST
TOTAL
Fehr
&Peers
--~·, I-V'l
~ ti ~ w ~ ~
V, )' 0 .; 0
ff 0:::
PARKING INVENTORY
BASELINE PROJECTE0
10 4
14 7
24 11
Iv,
0:::
~ ~
VARIANCE
·6
.7
-13
CONCEPTVAL • NOT FOR CONSIRUC110N, AOOIIIONAl ~TAllEO •NALVSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN R(QUIRED.
K· A'
SI I
3i'
43' = -(
1-V'l
~ w ~
V, 0 0 0:::
PINE AVE
,k
v '
rnn /I [ K 1 21
,, ·1 40!, ?f ,;;
r
.,, -,,,..------, -i ~"-.---,,-,~,
K':i 21 _/ Iv,
z 0 V,
0 <(
. ~
,.-,Al;INOST.\U t.lAIXING$Allf~~ fOA PA.i;ING INvl:NlOAV f'UR,osu ONt.V.
TRAVEL LANE
TRAVEL LANE
I, 13.5' 1, 10.5' LS' L i f r ,
CROSS-SECTION
PINE AVENUE OPTION 2B
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
{SOUTH SIDE OF THE STREE11
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
l;i
z
0
-PINE AVE .. ---
l/1 ffi ~
ttl.U ~--~ ~/ °' ~ "-~~~~~~~~~ ~~t~~ ~ ~r-n---1L,V/X~-~~:~~~~~.~I
l'A,i\:ING $fA~l ►MRICING~ ,O,r SIU)VJN
TRAVEL LAN°t~'">I-OltMNTQltV>U,l'OSISONW
PARKING INVENTORY PARALLEL PARKING
SEGMENT
MADISON STTO
JEFFERSON ST
JEFFERSON ST
TO HARDING ST
TOTAL
Fehr
&Peers
BASELINE PROJECTED VARIANCE
17 16 .,
19 17 ·2
36 33 •3
CON,EPTlJAl. NO[ roR CON$TAUCTION, Al)t)(ll('JNAl
OHAlltD Al<ALVSIS AND (NGINEERlt.JG OCSIGN REOUIRtD.
1, 1 3 ' k 11 • k a· L , D' L 5' ~ > r , r r >
CROSS-SECTION
' 1/rt.\VCl LAHtf. WIOtN 10 1◄' M40 12' r~M .JtfltftSOH S1 ,o ►WH>tNG f>f.
hg.m!'~
PINE AVENUE OPTION 28
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
{SOUTH SIDE OF THE STREEl)
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
I-
~1
~ l/) ~ z ~
0 )
l/) :;
i5 t <( ~ ~ / 2
PARKING INVENTORY
SEGMENT
MADISON ST TO
JEFFERSON ST
JEFFERSON STTO
HARDING ST
TOTAL
Fehr
&Peers
BASELINE PROJECTED VARIANCE
19 17 ·2
28 26 -2
47 43 •4
CON.CEP1U~L • NOT FOR COt-JSlRU<:l ION. AOOITIONA(
DETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING D[SIGN REQUIRED.
PALM AVE
LANE TRAVEL LANE
PARAI LE:L PARKING
J 13' J, 11' ,k 8' J,2'._J,
CROSS-SECTION
F1~ur°' &
PALM AVENUE OPTION 2B
PARALLEL TO DIAGONAL PARKING
(SOUTH SIDE OF THE STREET)
WITH REMOVAL OF BIKE LANES
Parking Inventory and Scenario Comparison
Summary By Segment
MocJ f;On Stroot P,1rk1n(J lnvontory nv S1:1qmont Pino /\vcnuo Pmk1nQ ltwcmory t1y Soqrnont
Seomtnl NoChenQO 0pllon2A Option 2B (Optionll Se9ment NoChv,ge Optlon2A Opolon 2B (Option I)
Oilc Ave to
Pin• Avo 20 19 18 Tylor St to 10 4 4 Roosavall St
Pln•Avo to
Walnut Ava 18 18 13 Roosevc,11 St 10 5 7 to Medlson St
Walt"tl.Jt Avo lO
Cheatnul Ave 25 26 24 Madison St to 17 16 16 JellouonSt
ChHlnutAvo
IQ P,lmAvt 17 16 17 Jellanon St 10 19 19 17 H111dln9 St
P1lmAv• to
Mognolla Ave 21 21 18
Tott1 101 100 90 TOll!I 60 44 ••
Summary By Street
Option?/\ Park1rig Summc1ry and Variance by Street Optrori 28 Parking Summary and Vnriance by Street
Soomtno Na Change Optlon2A V.,-!1n~ (Option I) Seomtnt No Ching■ Optlon28 Vttlence (Opllon 1)
Madison St IOI 100 ·I
Pinl>Avo 60 •• -16
PllmAve 47 47 0
M■dliion St IOI
I
90 ·11
Pin.Ave 60 •• -16
l'elmAvt 47 43 ·• Total 208 191 -17 Total 208 I 177 -31
DltQONI Pi1111lno •lonQ thl p111( Oft t.ltdlson 51
P11lm AvcnllO PorktnCJ hwontory by Sr.()nwnt
Seomtnt No Ch•nQO (Opllon l) Option 2A Option 2B
Madison St to 19
I
18 17 Jollarscn St
Jtllerton St
10 Hardlno SI 28 29 26
I
I
I
To11!11I 47 I 47 43
Attachment B
TRAFFIC SAFETY & MOBILITY COMMISSION Council Chamber
Ml• nutes 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
July 6, 2026, 4 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER: 4:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Coelho, Penseyres, Newlands, l<ohl, Nicholes.
Absent: Proulx, Schuck.
INVOCATION: None.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chair Coelho led the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes of the Regular Meeting held on June 1, 2026.
Motion by Commissioner Nicholes, seconded by Commissioner Koh l, to approve the minutes of
the Regular Meeting held on June 1, 2026, with an amendment to Page 3 of the minutes to clarify
Vice-Chair Penseyres' recommendation of relocating the vehicle travel lanes on eastbound
Bobcat Boulevard against the curb since all bicyclists must turn left to reach the bicycle parking
areas. Motion carried, 5/0/2 (Proulx, Schuck -Absent).
PRESENT A TIO NS:
Presentation in recognition of Police Lieutenant Jason Arnotti.
PUBLIC COMM ENTS:
Matthew Moldovan expressed concern with speeding and lack of sight line on Carlsbad Village
Drive between Highland Drive and Valley Street. He requested a traffic study, enforcement and
that staff look into light timing.
Stephen Stewart expressed concern with the lack of sidewalks on Unmar Lane.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Motion by Commissioner Newlands, seconded by Commissioner Nicholes, to approve Consent
Calendar Items No. 1 through 4. Motion carried, 5/0/2 (Proulx, Schuck-Absent).
1. SEMIANNUAL TRANSPORTATION REPORT: Receive the Semiannual Transportation Report.
(Staff Contact: Tom Frank, Public Works)
2. M AVERICK WAY AND CAMINO DE LOS COCHES TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION. CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT NO. 6332: Support staff's recommendation to
implement the Maverick Way and Camino De Los Coches Traffic Signal Modification, Capital
Improvement Program, or CIP, Project No. 6332. (Staff Contact: Nestor Mangohig, Public
Works)
July 6, 2026 Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Regular Meeting Page 2
3. TRAFFIC SIGNAL CABINET UPGRADES, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT NO.
6637: Support staff's recommendation to implement the Traffic Signal Cabinet Upgrades,
Capital Improvement Program, or CIP, Project No. 6637. (Staff Contact: Nestor Mangohig,
Public Works)
4. FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 -TRAFFIC SAFETY & MOBILITY COMMISSION WORK PLAN: Review and
approve the final fiscal year, or FY, 2026-27 Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Work Plan.
(Staff Contact: John Kim, Public Works)
PUBLIC HEARING: None.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS:
5. RESTRICTING PARKING ON BABILONIA STREET: Support staff's recommendation for Option 1
to restrict parking on both sides of Babilonia Street from the south property line of 7151
Babilonia Street to approximately 450 feet west of El Fuerte Street. (Staff contact: Conrad
Page-DeMorst, Police; Miriam Jim, Public Works)
Recommended Action: Support staff's recommendation.
Sergeant Conrad Page-DeMorst and Senior Engineer Miriam Jim reviewed a PowerPoint
presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk).
The Commission received the presentation.
Fredrick Starr spoke in support of restricting parking on both sides of Babilonia Street. He
expressed safety concerns and spoke of incidents of dangerous activity.
Indra Starr spoke in support of restricting parking on both sides of Babilonia Street. She
spoke about the garbage that is constantly left on the street.
Scott Masters spoke in support of restricting parking on both sides of Babilonia Street. He
recommended expanding the existing hours of no parking and increasing police
enforcement.
Matti Kakkori spoke in opposition of restricting parking on both sides of Babilonia Street.
He spoke about how a full no parking restriction on both sides would negatively impact
people who need to park on the street. He supported expanding the existing hours of no
parking.
In response to Commissioner Nicholes' inquiry regarding the effectiveness of red curbs in
deterring illegal activity in the area, Seargent Page-DeMorst explained that red curbs
would serve as a more visible indicator of an absolute violation and added that offenders
would be less likely to make the argument that they did not see the red curb.
July 6, 2026 Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Regular Meeting Page 3
In response to Commissioner Nicholes' inquiry regarding whether the Police Department
had considered standard policing of the area every night, Seargent Page-DeMorst
explained that the department has a finite number of resources available that are
distributed by level of priority for response.
In response to Commissioner Kohl's inquiry regarding whether the Police Department rely
on calls for enforcement, Seargeant Page-DeMorst explained that there are multiple ways
officers are dispatched, including calls, resident requests for extra patrol and officer
initiated dispatch.
In response to Commissioner Kohl's inquiry regarding the number of residents who voted
for or against restricting parking, Senior Engineer Jim responded that a majority of
residents along restricted parking section of Babilonia Street had voted in support of
restricting parking.
In response to Vice-Chair Penseyres' inquiry regarding cost, Senior Engineer Jim
responded it could range up to $2,000.
Motion by Commissioner Kohl to support staff's recommendation for Option 1 to restrict
parking on both sides of Babilonia Street from the south property line of 7151 Babilonia
Street to approximately 450 feet west of El Fuerte Street. Motion failed due to lack of a
second.
Motion by Commissioner Nicholes, seconded by Vice-Chair Penseyres, to request staff to
consider the option of extending the existing hours of no parking. Motion carried, 3/1/1/2
(Newlands -No; Kohl -Abstain; Proulx, Schuck-Absent).
6. BARRIO PARKING STUDY: Provide feedback on the draft Barrio Parking Study memorandum.
(Staff Contact: John Kim and Miriam Jim, Public Works)
Recommended Action: Receive the presentation and provide input.
City Traffic Engineer John Kim and Senior Engineer Miriam Jim reviewed a PowerPoint
presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk).
The Commission received the presentation.
Gary Nessim spoke about his efforts to identify opportunities to increase parking in the
Barrio area, specifically parking in the middle of the street.
Vice-Chair Penseyres commented that any of the 48-foot-wide streets that have a bike
lane should also have a minimum 2-foot-wide buffer lane against the parked cars and a
5-foot-wide bike lane to the left.
July 6, 2026 Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Regular Meeting Page 4
In response to Chair Coelho recommendation that staff look into developing a long-term
plan to determine a greater number of additional parking spaces, City Traffic Engineer
Kim confirmed that there is a separate study for overall parking availability in the Village
and Barrio areas.
7. CARLSBAD TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
PROJECT NO. 6116: Provide input on the Carlsbad Traffic Safety Improvements Project,
Capital Improvement Program, or CIP, Project No. 6116. (Staff Contact: Miriam Jim and Lindy
Pham, Public Works)
Recommended Action: Support staff's recommendation
City Traffic Engineer John Kim and Senior Engineer Miriam Jim reviewed a PowerPoint
presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk).
The Commission received the presentation.
Commissioner Nicholes recommended staff begin the project at the end of the school
year to minimize impact.
In response to Commissioner Kohl's inquiry regarding funding, Senior Engineer Jim
confirmed the availability of funding to cover the 11.47% local fund match.
Commissioner Newlands spoke in support of the project if funding is available.
Vice-Chair Penseyres recommended maintaining consistency in the street configuration
on Madison Street by adding a 2-foot-wide buffer and reducing the parallel parking lane
to 6 feet.
COMMISSION COMMENTARY AND REQUESTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS:
Commissioner Kohl spoke about the agenda items regarding ordinances to establish all-way stop
control that were presented at the City Council Meeting on June 23, 2026.
Vice-Chair Penseyres spoke about a recent e-bike safety course he attended provided by the
county.
Chair Coelho spoke about an upcoming agenda item regarding traffic signals.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: This section of the Agenda is designated for announcements to advise the
community regarding events that Members of the Commission have been invited to, and may
participate in. No announcements were made.
STAFF COMMENTS: No staff comments were made.
ADJOURNMENT: 5:31 p.m.
July 6, 2026 Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Regular Meeting
Lovelynne Magalued
Secretary
Page 5