HomeMy WebLinkAboutSS 16-01; CARLSBAD VILLAGE, BARRIO, AND BEACH AREA PARKING STUDY; PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN; 2017-09-14
Table of Contents | Page i
Carlsbad Village,
Barrio, and Beach Area
Parking Study
FINAL • September 14, 2017
PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN
Table of Contents | Page ii
Table of Contents
Glossary ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 4
Parking Management Plan Goals ............................................................................................................................ 4
Parking Study ......................................................................................................................................................... 4
Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................................... 6
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 14
Study Overview .................................................................................................................................................... 15
A Successful Parking System ................................................................................................................................. 15
Existing Parking Behaviors .......................................................................................................................... 18
Parking System Data Collection ............................................................................................................................. 18
Public Outreach .................................................................................................................................................... 25
Current City Of Carlsbad Parking Management Practices ............................................................................. 31
Best Management Practices – Peer City Review .......................................................................................... 48
Future Parking Conditions ........................................................................................................................... 59
Park+ Model ......................................................................................................................................................... 59
Scenario Analysis .................................................................................................................................................. 63
Parking Management Strategies ................................................................................................................. 71
On-Street Parking Reconfiguration And Curb Lane Management ........................................................................... 71
Parking Time Limits .............................................................................................................................................. 79
Enforcement And Ambassadors ............................................................................................................................ 83
Shared And Leased Parking ................................................................................................................................... 87
In-Lieu Fees .......................................................................................................................................................... 93
Reduced Parking Requirements ............................................................................................................................ 98
Residential Parking Program ............................................................................................................................... 101
Paid Parking ....................................................................................................................................................... 103
Parking Wayfinding ............................................................................................................................................ 106
Curb Cafes .......................................................................................................................................................... 108
Table of Contents | Page iii
Transportation Demand Management ...................................................................................................... 109
Evaluation Of TDM Impacts In The Study Area ..................................................................................................... 109
Tdm Strategies That Support The Parking Program .............................................................................................. 110
Parking Program Administration ............................................................................................................... 114
Parking Program Structure .................................................................................................................................. 114
Ongoing Data Collection And Analysis ................................................................................................................. 115
Technology Needs And Management .................................................................................................................. 120
Financial Assumptions ........................................................................................................................................ 123
Phasing Of Parking Management Strategies .............................................................................................. 126
Appendix A – Technical Memorandum #1 .............................................. PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER
TM1-A: On-Site Survey .............................................................................................................................................
TM1-B: On-Site Survey Responses and Graphs ..........................................................................................................
TM1-C: Online Survey Questions ...............................................................................................................................
TM1-D: Online Survey Responses ..............................................................................................................................
TM1-E: Parking Data Collection .................................................................................................................................
TM1-F: Community Workshop #1 Responses .............................................................................................................
Appendix B – Technical Memorandum #2 .............................................. PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER
Appendix C – Technical Memorandum #3 .............................................. PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER
TM3-A: Peer Reviews ...............................................................................................................................................
Table of Contents | Page iv
List of Figures
Figure 1: Study Area ................................................................................................................................... 16
Figure 2: Existing Parking Inventory ............................................................................................................ 19
Figure 3: Summary Of Parking Occupancy By Facility Type ........................................................................... 20
Figure 4: July Peak Existing Conditions (2016) – All Study Area Parking (7 P.M.) ........................................... 21
Figure 5: July Peak Existing Conditions (2016) – Public Only (7 P.M.) ............................................................ 22
Figure 6: July Peak Existing Conditions (2016) – Private Only (7 P.M.) .......................................................... 23
Figure 7: May And July Average Length Of Stay By Neighborhood For On-Street Facilities ........................... 24
Figure 8: Summary Of On-Site Survey Responses......................................................................................... 26
Figure 9: Existing Study Area Parking Restrictions (As Noted In The Municipal Code) ................................... 34
Figure 10: Time Limit Regulations In Relation To Commercial Land Uses ...................................................... 35
Figure 11: Overnight Restrictions In Relation To Residential Land Uses ........................................................ 36
Figure 12: Peer City Locations Map ............................................................................................................. 49
Figure 13: Comparison Of In-Lieu Fees With Peer Cities ............................................................................... 58
Figure 14: Scenario 1 (2035): Parcels Identified For Future Growth For Master Plan Buildout ....................... 62
Figure 15: Example Of Curb Lane Structure ................................................................................................. 76
Figure 16: Example Of Curb Lane Signage .................................................................................................... 77
Figure 17: Time Limit Expansion Opportunity Area ...................................................................................... 82
Figure 18: Lease And Shared Parking Opportunity Areas ............................................................................. 92
Figure 19: In-Lieu Fee Program Expansion Area ........................................................................................... 97
Table of Contents | Page v
List of Tables
Table E-1: Summary Of Parking Management Strategies .............................................................................. 7
Table 1: Summary Of Online Survey Responses ........................................................................................... 27
Table 2: Public Comments And Relevant Areas In The Pmp ......................................................................... 29
Table 3: Typical Parking Regulation Guidelines By Land Use ........................................................................ 32
Table 4: Parking Requirements1 .................................................................................................................. 38
Table 5: In-Lieu Parking Zone Participation Requirements ........................................................................... 45
Table 6: Parking Best Management Practices .............................................................................................. 50
Table 7: Parking Requirement Rates Comparison With Peer Cities ............................................................... 55
Table 8: Future Scenario Analysis (2035): Parking Occupancy By Neighborhood At Peak (7 P.M.) ................. 66
Table 9: Future Scenario Analysis (2035): Parking Occupancy By Type Of Facility At Peak (7 P.M.) ............... 67
Table 10: Parking Rates ............................................................................................................................... 99
Table 11: Data To Be Collected Annually ................................................................................................... 117
Table 12: Summary Of Parking Management Strategies ............................................................................ 126
Glossary | Page 1
Glossary
The following terms and concepts are used throughout this Draft Parking Management Plan to describe the
performance of the parking system or individual components of the parking system. When used in the
document, the term is shown in blue text and links back to this section for reference.
Context-sensitive strategies
Context-sensitive strategies tailor recommended policy or infrastructure improvements to the needs and
desires of the community for which they are proposed.
Curb Lane Management
A curb lane management program provides structure for managing the various competing curb lane uses
(i.e., on-street parking, commercial loading, curb cafes, traffic flow, loading, bicycle and pedestrian
mobility). The program prioritizes these uses based on the goals of the community (e.g., greater
emphasis may be placed on encouraging alternative modes) and the needs of the surrounding land uses
(access to business for customers and commercial loading). The program allows for making consistent
decisions regarding curb lane uses so that there is structure and consistent reasoning behind the
decision-making process.
Effective Capacity
Effective capacity is an industry-accepted occupancy threshold for parking facilities that indicates the
efficiency of the facility or system. Based on industry standards, the primary threshold is 85percent of
the total capacity of the parking system and/or certain areas within the system. This is the threshold that
indicates whether the parking system is operating effectively. For example, when observed or projected
occupancies are under this threshold, users can typically locate spaces easily. When observed or
projected occupancies are at or above this threshold, users cannot typically find available parking easily.1
In-lieu Fee
In-lieu fee, as provided for in the existing Village Master Plan and Design Manual, is a cash payment
made by a developer to the city instead of providing the total number of minimum parking space or
spaces required by the code. These payments are typically calculated on a per space basis to reduce a
portion or all a development’s parking requirement. Fees are collected and used in a defined area to
provide additional parking supply, or parking-related infrastructure and services. Under the existing
program, the in-lieu fee program is available only to non-residential projects.
1 “Parking 101: A parking Primer: A Publication of the International Parking Institute”, International Parking Institute, 2015; “Shared Parking, Second
Edition”, Urban Land Institute
Glossary | Page 2
Leased Parking
Leased parking is an arrangement among two or more parties, whereby a lessee(s) provides some form
of compensation in exchange for use of a lessor’s parking space(s) to satisfy the lessee’s off-street
parking requirement.
License Plate Recognition Technology (LPR)
License plate recognition technology is a computer-based optical system that can sense the presence of
a license plate from its reflective material. Once a license plate is detected, the plate number may be
recorded in addition to state of origin. This technology can be used for data collection to better
understand parking behaviors and/or perform parking enforcement activities.
Met Demand
Met demand is the number of occupied parking spaces in a facility during an observed or projected
period or of time.
Park+
Park+ is a computer model used to estimate future parking conditions. Primary inputs include existing
parking conditions, future development patterns, and anticipated future activity in and around a
study area.
Parking Ambassador
A parking ambassador is an employee of a parking management entity who acts as a resource for users
to learn how to use the parking system. An ambassador will also assist in enforcement activities.
Ambassadors are typically dressed in approachable, clearly identifiable, and non-enforcement-type
clothing.
Parking Demand
Parking demand is the metric representing the projected quantity of parking generated by employees,
patrons, residents, visitors, and others associated with a business or land use within the parking system.
Each business or land use generates a certain quantity of demand for parking spaces to accommodate
their users. The total number of spaces generated by business or land use patrons at a given time is the
parking demand for that business or land use. This demand is based on the land use intensity (building
square footage or number of units) and the land use type (restaurant, office space, retail, single and
multi-family residential, etc.). Parking demand may differ from the actual parking supply or standard
parking requirements.
Parking Duration
Parking duration is a measure of how long vehicles are parked in a parking space. This metric is analyzed
through data collection efforts and is used to help define policies such as parking time limits.
Parking Facility
A parking facility refers to any on- or off-street location designated for parking.
Glossary | Page 3
Parking Occupancy
Parking occupancy is the percentage of occupied spaces in a parking facility at a given time. Parking
occupancy is calculated by dividing the number of observed or projected vehicles parked in a facility by
the number of total spaces in the facility.
Parking System
Parking system refers to the entire collection of parking spaces, parking facilities, technologies,
equipment, policies, regulations, and personnel that work together to provide the parking needs of
employees, patrons, residents, visitors, and other users in a study area.
RSMeans
RSMeans is a web-based service that provides current unit price cost information to assist contractors
with providing accurate project estimates and making cost projections on construction projects. The
service is available at www.rsmeans.com and is used by construction professionals in numerous sectors
ranging from healthcare to education to commercial development.
Shared and leased parking
Shared and leased parking is a voluntary situation in which two or more land uses share a set of parking
spaces because their peak demands vary throughout the day. For example, an office and a restaurant
could share a set of spaces because the office demand occurs during late morning and afternoon
periods, while the restaurant demand occurs in evening periods.
Transportation Demand Management Program (TDM)
A Transportation Demand Management, or TDM, program is a set of policies, economic, programmatic,
and other measures that seeks to reduce vehicle miles traveled, traffic congestion, and parking demand,
to gain resulting environmental, conservation, and sustainability benefits. TDM programs include
measures that work to reduce single occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips, increase vehicle occupancy, and shift
travel to other modes or to non-peak travel periods. This is achieved through employer actions, financial
incentives, alternative work arrangements, or local infrastructure and land use policy that constrains
parking supply, densifies uses, and provides a convenient suite of transportation options including
walking, bicycling, transit, and rideshare.
Unmet Demand
Unmet demand is parking demand generated by land uses within a parking system that cannot be
accommodated by the nearby available parking supply. This can be due to specific parking restrictions,
lack of available parking, lack of travel alternatives, or parking being unavailable within acceptable
walking thresholds.
Executive Summary | Page 4
Executive Summary
Carlsbad Village (Village) and the adjacent
residential neighborhood known as the
Barrio were the City of Carlsbad’s (city) first
neighborhoods and remain the center of
civic life for the city. Located adjacent to
the beach, these communities draw
residents and visitors. In support of the
proposed Village and Barrio Master Plan
vision and parking standards and strategies,
the city conducted a comprehensive
parking study and developed a Parking
Management Plan for the Village, Barrio,
and adjacent beach area. The adjacent
beach area has been included to provide
the full picture of parking along the coast
and its potential impact on the Village.
The Parking Management Plan provides
implementable short-term (by year 2020), medium-term (by year 2025), and long-term (by year 2035) strategies
to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the parking system. These strategies focus on the Village and
Barrio and, in turn, the proposed Village and Barrio Master Plan.
Parking Study
The Parking Management Plan began with a comprehensive study capturing the existing parking conditions in
the study area. Parking occupancy and parking duration data were captured, and an updated inventory of on-
and off-street parking spaces was created. Further analysis included public outreach, peer city review, and
scenario planning as described in the full report and summarized in this section.
Parking Management Plan Goals
•Make parking more convenient for community
members, employees and visitors
•Promote more efficient use of existing parking
•Support future parking needs and mobility options
•Explore options to make the project area more
inviting for pedestrians, bicyclists, and people who
use public transportation
•Support the vision outlined in the Draft Village and
Barrio Master Plan (April 2016)
Executive Summary | Page 5
Public Outreach
• 2,139 on-site surveys and 825 online surveys provided in English and Spanish
• Public workshop, Planning Commission Meeting and 11 stakeholder and community outreach
events to various neighborhood groups
• Website and e-newsletter announcements
• Social media
• Postcard mailings
• Local media
Parking Demand Scenario Planning
Future parking conditions and needs were evaluated based on the anticipated development of the study area
as defined in the various city documents, including the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, and as
determined by staff. A parking demand scenario planning tool, called Park+, was used to
evaluate future parking demand based on the full buildout of the study area by
the year 2035.
The detailed methodology and results of the data collection and analysis, peer
city reviews and best practices, and the Park+ scenarios were thoroughly
documented in three Technical Memorandums that informed this Draft Parking
Management Plan and are included as appendices to the full report.
Executive Summary | Page 6
Key Findings
The study produced an inventory of all available public and
private (privately-owned and dedicated to a specific property)
parking spaces in the study area which totaled 11,657 parking
spaces, excluding parking associated with single-family homes
and properties with controlled access.
Additionally, the study analyzed the availability and use of the
parking system during the peak and off-peak seasons. Results
determined that demand for parking collectively peaked at 7
p.m. on a weekend in July 2016.
There are pockets of high demand where parking occupancy
has reached effective capacity, leading to difficulty finding
parking in those areas. High-demand areas include on-street
facilities west of the railroad tracks, Village Faire parking lot, and on-street facilities in the Village center on
Grand Avenue, Carlsbad Village Drive, and State Street. However, the study did reveal that the current and
future parking supply is adequate to meet demand if the parking system, as part of the larger transportation
system, is actively managed.
Given the adequate supply of parking within the parking system to meet current and future projected parking
demand, it is not recommended that the city invest in construction of additional parking supply at this time.
Rather, to address the observed parking demand imbalance and maximize the efficient use of the parking
system, the draft Parking Management Plan recommends that the city implement a comprehensive Parking
Management Program that consists of the following strategies summarized in Table E-1 and discussed in
greater detail in the full report. Each strategy listed in the table below is described in detail in the full report
with recommendations for phasing and implementation. These recommendations should not preclude private
business owners and developers in providing or expanding private supply of parking to meet their individual
needs, as they may see fit.
5,445
511
4,971
730
Parking
Spaces
by
Type
Private Off-Street NCTD Transit Lot
Public On-Street Public Off-Street
Executive Summary | Page 7
Table E-1: Summary of Parking Management Strategies
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
On-Street
Parking
Reconfiguration
and Curb Lane
Management
The city has curb lane markings
and signage that indicate where
and when on-street parking is
permitted
Review red curbs and
driveway closures to identify
potential opportunities to
create additional parking
Consider angled parking
where conditions allow
Develop a curb lane
management policy and
program
Implement curb lane
management policy and
program
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Evaluate effectiveness of
curb lane management
policy and adjust as
needed
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Parking Time
Limits
2- and 3-hour time limits on-
street in select areas
(See Figure 7)
In some areas parking is not
allowed between
2 a.m.—5 a.m.
3 a.m.—5 a.m.
Enforce existing time limits
Reduce time limit to 24-hours
for RVs
Revise the Oversized Vehicles
Ordinance to continue to allow
RV access to the beach while
restricting long-term parking
on surrounding city streets
Revise overnight parking
restrictions in residential areas
Provide time limit
information on the city
website
Extend parking time limits
after 5 p.m. to 4-hours
Consider reducing time limits
to 1-hour to encourage more
turnover in high demand
areas
Evaluate extending time
limits to new areas based on
collected data
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Executive Summary | Page 8
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
Enforcement and
Ambassadors
Enforcement Hours:
7 a.m. – 6 p.m. Mon-Sat.
Enforcement is handled by the
city’s Police Department on a
complaint response basis
Implement proactive
enforcement on a more
regular basis in areas with
the highest parking demand
Implement first offense
warnings
Evaluate cost-effective
options for administering
enforcement
Provide enforcement
regulation information, such
as fines and how to contest a
citation, on the city website
for simplified public access
Expand enforcement if data
demonstrates that parking
duration is an issue.
Extend enforcement hours to
8 p.m. to cover the peak
period
Consider implementing an
ambassador approach to
parking enforcement
Implement a graduated fine
structure
Re-evaluate enforcement
needs and adjust
enforcement levels as
necessary.
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Shared and
Leased Parking
The city allows property owners
to enter into shared and leased
parking agreements where they
can share a common off-street
and/or off-site parking resource
to meet their parking needs, if
the shared or leased parking
facility is within 300 feet (within
the Village) or 150 feet (outside
the Village) of the subject land
uses.
Document inventory of
shared and leased parking
opportunities
Within the Village, allow the
walking distance to be 1,320
feet and allow varying shared
and leased parking
agreements
Develop shared and leased
parking agreement templates
Evaluate shared and leased
parking opportunities for
employee parking
Evaluate shared and leased
parking opportunities for
valet parking locations
Continue leasing NCTD
spaces
Coordinate with NCTD to
enter a lease agreement to
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Executive Summary | Page 9
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
and resources, including a
standard city liability policy
Define development/
business incentives for
participating
Broker shared and leased
parking agreements with
property owners
use railroad right-of-way,
between Oak Avenue and
Tamarack Avenue, on the
east and west sides of the
railroad tracks, for public
parking. Work with NCTD to
investigate opportunities to
incorporate public parking
into future non-rail
development on NCTD
property.
In-Lieu Fees The city allows developers of
properties east of the railroad
tracks in the Village to pay a fee
of $11,420 per space in-lieu of
providing the parking required
by the adopted Village Master
Plan and Design Manual (2013).
Maintain existing in-lieu fee
rate
Use development regulations
to encourage participation in
the program
Use funds to support shared
and leased parking
Make program transparent
by posting information on
program utilization on the
city website
Evaluate program
performance and
review fees annually.
Adjust fees if the program is
underutilized or if the fee
falls below 60 percent of the
cost to construct a parking
space (based on RSMeans).
Consider expanding program
west of the tracks if
commercial development
increases in this area
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Executive Summary | Page 10
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
Reduced Parking
Requirements
Existing parking requirements
may be reduced in the Village
area. Requirements may vary
depending if the development is
located within or outside of the
Coastal Zone. Barrio parking
requirements are generally the
same as the rest of the city.
Adopt the proposed parking
requirements in the Draft
Village and Barrio Master
Plan based on observed
parking ratios
Monitor implementation and
demand
Evaluate the effectiveness of
the TDM Ordinance to
determine if the timing for
the parking reductions is in
alignment with first mile and
last mile transportation
opportunities
Monitor development
demands and adjust ratios
accordingly
Consider implementing
parking maximums
Residential
Parking Program
(RPP)
None Monitor parking occupancies
annually. If occupancies
consistently reach 85 percent
in residential areas, evaluate
whether a RPP would be
appropriate.
Define the locations and
criteria for implementation
Implement RPP if
neighborhood meets
program criteria
Evaluate RPP on an
ongoing basis
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Paid Parking On-street and off-street parking
is free with exception of the
Determine threshold for
implementing paid parking
If data dictates, then:
Implement paid parking
If data dictates, then:
Define locations to
implement paid parking
Executive Summary | Page 11
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
Tamarack State Beach and two
private businesses.
Evaluate parking system
annually
Create an ordinance that
defines the parameters for
implementing paid parking in
the future
Define technology to manage
parking system
Establish a Parking Benefit
District
Evaluate parking system
annually and adjust fees as
needed to manage demand
Establish a Parking
Benefit District
Evaluate parking system
annually adjust fees as
needed to manage
demand
Parking
Wayfinding
Themed wayfinding signage to
public off-street parking
Develop additional signage
for new public parking
facilities created through
shared and leased parking
Evaluate and select a
smartphone application that
provides real-time parking
information
Create a map of public
parking facilities (location
and number of spaces) and
post to the city website
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Curb Cafes Pilot program permitting curb
cafes expired; several cafes
previously approved remain in
use; Property owners are
currently allowed to pay a fee to
Subject to curb café program
approval, continue to allow
existing curb cafes and
review parking occupancies
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Executive Summary | Page 12
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
the city for use of on-street
space(s) to operate a Curb Cafe
prior to approval of new
facilities
Monitor occupancies
annually. Restrict the use of
curb cafes when parking
occupancies reach 85 percent
in areas around and serving
the location(s) of the curb
café(s) in consideration
Parking Management Plan | Page 13
PARKING MANAGEMENT
PLAN
Parking Management Plan | Page 14
Introduction
The city is currently in the process of developing a Village and Barrio Master Plan (proposed Master Plan)
which establishes a vision for future development and land uses in these two historic neighborhoods. The
proposed Master Plan would replace the existing Village Master Plan and Design Manual (existing Master Plan)
and encompass the Barrio area, which currently is outside the existing Master Plan and is subject to the
regulations of the city-wide Zoning Ordinance, Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC). The boundaries
of the proposed Master Plan are shown on Figure 1. Note that the proposed Master Plan includes portions of
all three neighborhoods in the study area – the Village, Barrio, and Beach Area. Figure 1 also shows the
Coastal Zone boundary, which is part of the city’s Local Coastal Program. As noted throughout, properties
within the Coastal Zone often are subject to different parking standards than those outside.
During the master planning process, it was determined that a more thorough analysis of existing parking conditions
was needed to provide community-specific recommendations for the management and operation of existing and
future parking assets. Therefore, an in-depth analysis of parking within the study area was conducted to inform this
Parking Management Plan, which recommends near-, medium-, and long-term strategies that maximize parking
efficiency and improve mobility within and around the study area. The DRAFT Carlsbad Village, Barrio, and Beach
Area Parking Management Plan was developed with the following goals in mind:
• Make parking more convenient for community members, employees, and visitors
• Promote more efficient use of existing parking
• Support future parking needs and mobility options
• Explore options to make the project area more inviting for pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit
riders.
• Support the vision outlined in the proposed Master Plan
The driving force behind the parking study was to obtain accurate data to better understand current parking
conditions – particularly parking occupancy, demand, and behavioral data – and to estimate how future
community growth would impact the need for parking infrastructure and management in the area.
Because parking is integral to transportation, economic development, and community character, the parking
strategies discussed in this plan are provided within the context of several other city-wide initiatives, including:
• City Community Vision (Envision Carlsbad)
• General Plan (including the Mobility Element)
• Climate Action Plan (CAP)
• Carlsbad Municipal Code (including the zoning ordinance)
• Local Coastal Program
• Coastal Mobility Readiness Plan
• Village Master Plan and Design Manual, 2013 (existing Master Plan)
• Draft Village and Barrio Master Plan (proposed Master Plan)
Parking Management Plan | Page 15
• Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance (under development)
Study Overview
The intent of the parking study was to evaluate
existing parking regulations, policies, and
practices and analyze parking inventory and
behaviors (occupancy and duration) in the
study area to project future parking conditions.
The parking study included the following
elements:
1. Existing Parking Behaviors – A
combination of field-collected data and
public outreach results were used to
define a baseline of existing conditions
and perceptions within the study area.
2. Peer City Review – Research and
interviews with comparable California
coastal cities that have faced similar
parking challenges and implemented unique solutions applicable to the city.
3. Existing and Future Parking Demand Modeling – The Park+ model was used to predict future parking
impacts based on growth within the study area. TDM strategies were also analyzed to understand the
impact on parking demand.
4. Recommended Strategies and Implementation Plan – Use field data collected and stakeholder input,
best management practices from peer cities, and Park+ modeling results to develop context-sensitive
strategies that support the community’s vision.
The study area is shown in Figure 1 on the following page.
A Successful Parking System
Supports connectivity to transportation, land use,
and economic development
Provides access to businesses and other
destinations, linking it to the economic vitality of
the community
Serves as a transition point where drivers
become pedestrians, or transition to transit,
linking to larger mobility options in the area
Plays a role in sustainability measures by
reducing traffic, congestion, and greenhouse gas
emissions
Parking Management Plan | Page 16
Figure 1: Study Area
Parking Management Plan | Page 17
EXISTING PARKING
BEHAVIORS
Parking Management Plan | Page 18
Existing Parking Behaviors
The impetus for this study was to develop a deeper understanding of the parking system and how it operates.
To fully understand the parking behaviors unique to the study area, a comprehensive data collection process
was conducted, including evaluation of inventory, field observations for occupancy and durations in the
various areas within the study area, and robust community outreach to document perceptions related to
parking behaviors. Together, this multifaceted approach shed light not only on how the system was operating
from a technical standpoint, but also how the system was working from the perspective of the community.
Two rounds of weekday and weekend data collection efforts were conducted in 2016 to capture the existing
parking conditions in the study area. Parking occupancy and duration data was captured and an updated
inventory of on- and off-street parking spaces was tabulated. Community participation and feedback was also
a crucial component of this study. Stakeholder feedback was captured through on-site surveys, online surveys,
and community meetings.
Parking System Data Collection
Parking inventory and behavioral data (occupancy and duration) was collected to determine weekday,
weekend, and seasonal parking demands throughout the study area.
Parking Inventory and Data Collection Methodology
Parking occupancy data was collected during the off-peak season (May 2016) and peak season (July 2016)
using License Plate Recognition (LPR) technology. This technology automatically processes parking occupancy
and duration within the study area during the morning, mid-day, and evening peaks. Data was collected from
all off-street and on-street parking facilities. Figure 2 illustrates those parking facilities where data was
collected for the study.
Off-peak (May) and peak season (July) data was
collected at the same locations using the same data
collection methods. Peak season data collection
hours were extended based on feedback from
citizens raising concerns about adequately capturing
the residential demand. Therefore, another
observation period occurred at 11 p.m. in
July 2016 for the on-street parking only.
Parking Management Plan | Page 19
Figure 2: Existing Parking Inventory
Parking Management Plan | Page 20
Parking Occupancy
The observed parking facility occupancy within the study area peaked at 7 p.m. during the July weekend
collection period. However, different facilities of the parking system peaked at various times throughout the
day due to the differences in how and when those facilities are used. During this 7 p.m. peak hour, the entire
system experienced an average occupancy of 54 percent (including both public and private parking facilities).
Technical Memorandum #1 provides a more detailed analysis of the parking demands and community parking
behaviors. For more information regarding various peak periods throughout the study area, refer to Appendix
A for Technical Memorandum #1. A parking system is considered at capacity when it is 85 percent occupied
during the peak time of day. When occupancies reach 85 percent, it becomes difficult to find the remaining
open parking spaces. At this level of occupancy, those looking for parking will have to “circle” to find available
spaces which adds to traffic congestion, greenhouse gas emissions, and general frustration at the lack of
readily available parking.
With an average occupancy of 54 percent, the system was generally considered underutilized. However, even
with the overall surplus, areas of imbalance exist within the system. On-street and isolated private off-street
facilities near the beach and around the center of the Village reached much higher occupancies, some
exceeding 90 percent occupancy, indicating high-demand areas where parking conditions would have been
difficult. The following data shown in Figure 3 summarizes the results for the on-street, public off-street, and
private off-street facilities during the system-wide peak (July, weekend at 7 p.m.).
Figure 3: Summary of Parking Occupancy by Facility Type
Figure 4 on the following page displays the results during the July peak for the entire study area. High-demand
areas include on-street facilities west of the railroad tracks, Village Faire parking lot, and on-street facilities in
the Village center on Grand Avenue, Carlsbad Village Drive, and State Street. Most private lots were utilized
less than 50 percent, however. Figure 5 illustrates the same results, but highlights the public and NCTD parking
facilities only. Figure 6 also shows the same results but for the private facilities only.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
On-Street
(4,971 total spaces)
Public Off-Street
(730 total spaces)
Private Off-Street
(5,445 total spaces)
NCTD Lots
(511 total spaces)
Parking Management Plan | Page 21
Figure 4: July Peak Existing Conditions (2016) – All Study Area Parking (7 p.m.)
Parking Management Plan | Page 22
Figure 5: July Peak Existing Conditions (2016) – Public Only (7 p.m.)
Parking Management Plan | Page 23
Figure 6: July Peak Existing Conditions (2016) – Private Only (7 p.m.)
Parking Management Plan | Page 24
Parking Duration
In addition to occupancy data, the LPR technology was used to analyze parking duration, or length of stay, for
on-street parking facilities. Higher rates of turnover are typically encouraged for on-street parking to improve
access to businesses, whereas long-term parkers (such as employees of the business district and commuters)
are encouraged to use off-street facilities.
May and July presented similar duration trends, indicating that most users (average of 63 percent) park on the
street for two hours or less. In the Barrio neighborhood, nearly half (49 percent) of people park on the street
for periods longer than two hours. This is indicative of the residential development in that neighborhood. This
parking behavior varies greatly from that experienced in the Village, where 73 percent of people park for two
hours or less which is commensurate with a more mixed-use neighborhood. The beach has a similar land use
mix to the Barrio that is mostly residential but experiences higher turnover (64 percent). This higher turnover
is likely due to beach goers utilizing on-street spaces in the residential areas. Where these neighborhoods
intersect, strategies may be sought to balance the competing parking behaviors. Length of stay data for on-
street facilities is shown in Figure 7.
Figure 7: May and July Average Length of Stay by Neighborhood for On-Street Facilities
*Categorized times represent ranges. For instance, “0-2 hours” represents vehicles that were observed in the study area for 120 minutes or less,
whereas “2-4 hours” includes vehicles observed in the study area at least 121 minutes but not more than 240 minutes, and so on.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0-2 hours 2-4 hours 4-6 hours 6-8 hours 8-10 hours 10-12 hours 12+ hours
Village
Barrio
Beach
Study Area
Average
Parking Management Plan | Page 25
Public Outreach
Public involvement and community input was an important component of the study. Public outreach related
to this study included on-site surveys, an online survey, a
community workshop, Planning Commission meeting and 13
community outreach and stakeholder meetings. The city sent
4,420 postcard mailings regarding the study to residents,
businesses, and associations; posted information regarding the
study via newsletters, social media, and local media; attended
meetings with neighborhood groups, community organizations,
and various City Commissions and Committees; hosted a public
workshop in August 2016 to solicit feedback; and presented
initial findings to the city’s Planning Commission in September
2016. This section describes each of these efforts and
summarizes the responses from the community.
On-Site Surveys
As part of the parking study, on-site surveys were collected to solicit input and gather information from
community residents and visitors about their parking behaviors within the study area. Questions included
where and why people parked and how they traveled to the area. The surveys were conducted in May and
June, with the intent of identifying parking behaviors on typical weekdays and weekends for those traveling
within the study area. Surveys were conducted in both months to capture responses during both the off-peak
season (May) and peak season (June).
Professional, bilingual surveyors asking questions
in both English and Spanish were stationed at
several of the Barrio Neighborhood survey
locations.
Figure 8 summarizes all responses received during
the on-site surveys conducted in May and June.
Detailed on-site survey results can be found in
Appendix A – Technical Memorandum #1.
Parking Management Plan | Page 26
Figure 8: Summary of On-Site Survey Responses
Online Surveys
An online survey was created, in both English and Spanish, to capture opinions and feedback from a broader
range of users than those who participated in the on-site survey. The purpose of the online survey was to
determine general parking behaviors and identify issues within the parking system from the perspective of
residents, visitors, employees, and business owners.
The survey was posted on the city’s website and was available from May 12, 2016 to August 31, 2016. To
promote the website and encourage participation, bilingual business cards with the survey’s web address
were distributed during the on-site surveys and were provided to businesses and other popular destinations in
the study area. Additionally, 4,420 postcards were also mailed to residents within the study area. At the time
the survey was closed, 825 responses were collected.
Unlike a scientific study, the online survey samples may not be representative of all project stakeholders and
the responses cannot be generalized to the larger population with a known margin of error. Input from this
survey was considered in a similar way to input received during public comment at a City Council meeting,
remarks at a public workshop, or comments provided via email to city staff.
Table 1 provides a summary of the online survey responses by user type. Additional online survey results,
including responses to all questions, can be found in Appendix A - Technical Memorandum #1.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Drove Car Alone Parked On-Street Less Than 2 Minutes to Park Parked 2 Blocks or Less from
Destination
Parking Management Plan | Page 27
Table 1: Summary of Online Survey Responses
USER RESPONSES
Residents
Residents are those who live within the boundaries of the study area. Parking needs for
this group typically focus on availability of spaces near their residence for themselves
and guests. Summary of responses:
296 participants identified themselves as “Residents”
71 percent noted they have designated parking at their homes
Business Owners
Business owners are those who own or manage a business in the study area. Parking
needs for this group focus on available parking for their customers within what
respondents deemed to be an appropriate distance of their business. Summary of
responses:
70 participants identified themselves as “Business Owners”
54 percent said they don’t provide employee parking
98 percent said their customers typically park two blocks away or less
Employees
Employees are those that work within the study area. Parking needs for this group focus
on the ability to park near their place of employment (typically within one to two
blocks) but also being able to park long-term. Summary of responses:
104 participants identified themselves as “Employees”
53 percent noted they can find parking in less than two minutes
52 percent noted they usually park in a parking lot close to their workplace
63 percent reported they park directly adjacent to where they work
Visitors
Visitors are those who live outside of the study area and can be from a nearby city,
another part of the City of Carlsbad, or outside of the state or country. These users may
not be as familiar with the parking system as those who reside or work in the study
area. They provide a different perspective on the parking system. Summary of
responses:
355 participants identified themselves as “Visitors” in the survey
75 percent of visitors noted they can find parking in five minutes or less
59 percent of visitors noted they could park within one block of their destination
Parking Management Plan | Page 28
Common themes among the general comments provided by
respondents from all user groups include the following:
• The parking situation in the study area is adequate
• Paid parking is not desirable
• Off-street parking that is centralized between the
Village and beach areas was recommended
• Enforcing time limits is recommended
Meetings (Community Meetings and Workshop)
On August 24, 2016, the city held a parking study community workshop during which the study team
presented the data and findings from the surveys and data collection. The workshop was designed to provide
a forum for community attendees to express their concerns, provide potential ideas, and point out specific
locations where they saw issues or opportunities for parking within the study area.
Approximately 90 workshop attendees provided 83 comments written on maps and 20 comment cards. These
comments are summarized below in Table 2. Table 2 also summarizes comments received from Planning
Commission, City Council, and a second round of public comments. A complete transcription of all written
comments made during the workshop is provided in Appendix A -Technical Memorandum #1.
When asked about the greatest challenge
with parking in the study area, most
respondents considered consistently
finding an available space close to their
destination to be the greatest challenge.
Parking Management Plan | Page 29
Table 2: Public Comments and Relevant Areas in the PMP
COMMENT THEME WHERE PMP ADDRESSES THE THEME
Opposition to parking garage due to
concerns about location and fit within
community
Parking garage not proposed due to study showing it’s not needed, very
costly, and not in support of community aesthetics. Evidence showing lack
of data to support need for a parking garage:
Future Parking Conditions, Scenario 3 Parking Garage
The Plan recommends that the city should not invest in a parking garage;
however, if a private property owner wishes to construct a parking garage,
they are able to do so. Assuming proper approvals are obtained, a private
developer may construct any type of parking.
Opposition to paid parking
Paid parking not recommended at current time.
Discussion of if, and when, to implement paid parking:
Best Management Practices
Parking Management Strategies
Concern about too many cars in study
area
Plan incorporates ways to reduce cars on road. Discussion of how
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) can reduce traffic is in the
TDM section
Long-term RV parking on public streets
taking up valuable spaces
Plan recommends reducing time RVs can park on street, using permits and
proactive enforcement.
Discussion of RV best practices is provided in the Parking
Management Strategies section (Parking Time Limits)
Utilizing parking permits in residential
neighborhoods where residents have
difficulty finding parking due to
community parking for business,
events, etc.
Residential permits are not recommended at this time. However, Plan
suggests considerations to monitor parking occupancies annually. If
occupancies in residential areas consistently reach 85 percent, then
evaluate whether a RPP would be appropriate. Discussion of how and
where, when warranted, to consider residential parking programs:
Best Management Practices
Parking Management Strategies (Residential Parking Program)
Support to enhance enforcement of
existing time limits to encourage more
turnover of parking and reduce
employees parking for long periods in
front of businesses
Plan recommends enhanced enforcement as a top priority. Discussions on
time limits and enforcement:
Best Management Practices
Parking Management Strategies (Time Limits and Enforcement)
Parking Management Plan | Page 30
COMMENT THEME WHERE PMP ADDRESSES THE THEME
Why is a plan needed; there are no
parking problems
For planning purposes, this parking plan addresses future as well as current
needs. The plan’s data shows that while the overall parking system provides
sufficient parking, there is lack of public parking primarily in highest
demand areas during peak hours.
Discussion of where existing parking issues are located and an assessment
of existing parking policies is located:
Existing Parking Behaviors, Observations of Parking Conditions and
Current City Parking Management Practices
Safety of pedestrians and bicyclists
Plan considers pedestrian safety and bicycle safety throughout as an
underlying theme. Discussions on pedestrian and bicycle safety specifically
are located in:
Parking Management Strategies (On-Street Parking Reconfiguration
and Curb Lane Management; TDM Strategies that Support the Parking
Program)
Meeting the needs of persons with
disabilities
Discussions on ADA accessibility are located in:
Parking Management Strategies (On-Street Parking Reconfiguration
and Curb Lane Management)
Concerns about the in-lieu fee amount
Plan recommends that the in-lieu fee should remain unchanged for now,
but should increase in the future based on a number of variables outlined in
the Plan. The reason for keeping it unchanged is to encourage more
participation in the program. Discussions on in-lieu fees are located in:
Parking Management Strategies (In-Lieu Fees)
Mention trolley to improve circulation
Plan supports the use of a circulator service, such as a trolley to reduce
vehicular traffic and parking demand. Discussions on the trolley or other
circulator are located in:
Parking Management Strategies (In-Lieu Fees)
Desire that the Plan be adaptable
Plan is designed to be adaptable and to adjust as changes occur in the
community. Decisions on how and when to implement parking
management strategies should be based on data, which is collected and
analyzed annually, and determined by the parking manager. Discussions on
the trolley are located in:
Parking Management Strategies (Parking Program Administration)
Confusion over what shared parking is
and how it works
Shared parking is intended to be an option that two or more private
property owners or incoming developers can participate in to meet their
parking needs and optimize the use of parking supplies. The city’s role is to
administer and monitor the program and to communicate and provide
Parking Management Plan | Page 31
COMMENT THEME WHERE PMP ADDRESSES THE THEME
information to interested parties. The can also participate in shared parking
through lease of parking spaces for public use.
Public Outreach Key Findings
The importance of public outreach is to provide context to the data obtained through field observations. Data
can provide numbers and patterns; however, hearing from the public provides a greater level of
understanding of how people use parking in the study area, where common obstacles to finding parking may
exist, and how parking can be improved.
From the input gathered in the on-site surveys, the online survey, and the workshop, there are areas where
parking is difficult to find, which creates frustration; however, overall, a parking space can be found in less
than five minutes and within two blocks of a destination. This indicates that parking is not scarce in the study
area, but that parking needs to be proactively managed to balance supply and demand.
Current City of Carlsbad Parking Management Practices
To identify appropriate recommendations for improving parking management, the city’s current parking
policies and practices were evaluated. The following summarizes the city’s current parking management
strategies:
• On-Street Parking Regulations – Currently, public on-street parking in the study area is free and
managed with time limit restrictions on certain streets using posted signs indicating the time limits.
The intent of time limits is to encourage turnover in high-demand areas so that more spaces
become available and access to businesses and other destinations are maintained. The City
currently has two-hour and three-hour time limit restrictions in the Village. Figure 9 illustrates the
time limit regulations in relation to adjacent commercial land uses. Shorter time limits (two- and
three-hours) are more appropriate in locations dominated by commercial businesses that
experience a high level of customer turnover. Examples of such businesses include retail, grocery,
or convenient stores, and uses with drop-off services such as banks, laundromats, or some offices.
Other businesses benefit from longer parking periods, such as restaurants and theaters, as their
patrons stay for periods longer than three hours. Table 3 provides general guidelines for
appropriate parking regulations by land use. Disabled Parking, both for on-street and off-street
public parking has historically been provided on a request basis, handled through the City’s ADA
Compliance Process (http://www.carlsbadca.gov/ada.asp). Parking for private lots is regulated.
Parking Management Plan | Page 32
Table 3: Typical Parking Regulation Guidelines by Land Use
Based on the data collected, most visitors to the Village are not parking for more than two hours
suggesting that the current time limits adequately support the surrounding land uses. The location
of existing time restrictions and the concentration of commercial land uses within the study area,
as shown in Figure 10, also support the current time limits.
Even though time limit restrictions are in place, the online survey revealed that employees park in
on-street spaces adjacent to their employer for their work shift. This is likely due to a lack of
proactive parking enforcement. As a result, those who know the parking system well, and know
that they likely will not receive a citation, are not incentivized to conform to the regulations. This
causes the system to operate less efficiently than it could, contributes to frustrations for those
trying to find available parking near their destinations, and reduces access to surrounding
businesses. In summation, the length of the existing parking time limits and location of the time
limits are appropriate for the study area. It is the enforcement of the time limits that is inadequate
and allows people to cheat the parking system, thus making it difficult for people to park near their
destinations, which was noted as the greatest challenge by the public in the survey.
In addition to time limits, the city also has overnight parking restrictions to prevent people from
camping in their vehicles overnight and facilitate street sweeping. Parking is restricted between
3 a.m. and 5 a.m. on select streets in the Village, Barrio, and on a couple of streets in the beach
LAND USE
TYPOLOGY HIGH PARKING DEMAND AREAS LOW PARKING DEMAND AREAS
Residential
Limit spillover from other uses
Residential parking programs
Must move vehicle every 24 hours
Limit vehicle storage on street
Must move vehicle every 48 to 72 hours
Commercial
Encourage high turnover to
accommodate as many customers as
possible
Limit employee parking
Restrictions from 15 minutes to
2 hours
Limit vehicle storage on street
Time restrictions during peak periods
from 30 minutes to 3 hours
Must move vehicle every 24 hours
Office
Encourage moderate turnover to
accommodate visitors and guests
Prevent employees from moving
vehicle during lunch to avoid
violation
Restrictions from 30 minutes to
3 hours
Limit vehicle storage on street
Time restrictions during peak periods
from 1 to 4 hours
Must move vehicle every 24 hours
Parking Management Plan | Page 33
area. Additionally, in the southern portion of the beach area on-street parking along the west side
of Carlsbad Boulevard is restricted between 2 a.m. and 5 a.m. An issue faced by residents is that
these overnight restrictions can prevent residents or their guests from parking on the street,
limiting their available parking, particularly along the north end of State Street where residential
development is occurring and planned. As more residential development occurs along State Street,
the overnight restrictions on this street could make parking difficult for the residents or their guests
along this street. While parking requirements provide for on-site resident parking, properties along
State Street and in the rest of the Village outside of the Coastal Zone, have no guest parking
requirement. Figure 11 illustrates the residential land uses in the area in conjunction with the
overnight parking restrictions.
• Enforcement – The enforcement hours stated in CMC Chapter 10.40 are currently from 7 a.m. to 6
p.m., Monday through Saturday (except for holidays). Depending on the street and area, parking is
not allowed between 2 a.m. and 5 a.m., and 3 a.m. and
5 a.m. Signs are posted indicating parking restrictions and hours of
enforcement. Time restrictions are discussed further in the
next section. Parking Violation Enforcement is regulated under CMC
10.42.010, including special enforcement unit for disabled parking
violations under 10.42.020.
While the time restrictions are posted, enforcement by the police
department is reactive and driven by community complaints. This
reactive approach leads to policies and regulations that are easily
violated with little risk of recourse. The lack of consistent
enforcement impacts the ability for parking spaces to turnover and
for patrons to find available parking near commercial destinations.
• Off-street (public) parking regulations – There are a few lots within
the study area that are restricted by time limits and enforcement
hours. The enforcement hours are 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. and the time limits
are three hours. Overnight parking is prohibited in public lots for oversized vehicles. Additionally,
the NCTD lots, although not public, are restricted for transit users only.
Parking Management Plan | Page 34
Figure 9: Existing Study Area Parking Restrictions (as noted in the Municipal Code)
Parking Management Plan | Page 35
Figure 10: Time Limit Regulations in Relation to Commercial Land Uses
Parking Management Plan | Page 36
Figure 11: Overnight Restrictions in Relation to Residential Land Uses
Parking Management Plan | Page 37
• Off-Street Parking Requirements – Developers in the Village area are required to build on-site
parking per the existing Master Plan. Developers in the Barrio outside the existing Master Plan and
in the Beach Area are required to build on-site parking per Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance) of the CMC.
These standards are in place to ensure the generated parking demands associated with the
respective type of development are satisfied. It should be noted that the parking requirements in
the current, April 2016 draft of the proposed Master Plan are not final and may be modified based
on this study’s findings. The current draft of the proposed Master Plan is available at
www.carlsbadca.gov/villagebarrio. For the purposes of this study, both the existing and proposed
master plans are used.
Both the CMC and the existing Master Plan allow for waivers, modifications, and reductions to off-
street parking requirements. Parking waivers and modifications may be permitted for uses with
minimal numbers of employees/occupants, or when needed to accomplish a specific objective,
such as to encourage affordable housing. Reductions in parking standards may be realized for uses
that share a parking lot or to encourage reuse of existing buildings.
Table 4 summarizes the parking requirements for different types of land uses present in the city and study
area. Chapters 21.44 and 21.45 of the CMC provide parking regulations in the portions of the Barrio not within
the boundaries of the existing Master Plan. Chapter 21.44, 21.45, and 21.82 of the CMC provide regulations
for those parts of the Beach Area not within the boundaries of the existing Master Plan. As noted in the table,
existing Master Plan regulations are different inside and outside the Coastal Zone. See Figure 1 for proposed
Master Plan boundary information. For the detailed parking regulations, refer to the documents listed under
“Requirement Source” in the table.
Parking Management Plan | Page 38
Table 4: Parking Requirements1
REQUIREMENT
SOURCE
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT OFFICE HOTEL SINGLE
FAMILY
MULIT-
FAMILY GUEST
Carlsbad Municipal
Code (CMC 21.44)
2 spaces/
unit
1.5-2
spaces/unit
0.3 spaces/unit (up
to 10 units);
0.25 spaces/unit
(more than 10 units)
3.3-5 spaces/
1,000 sf3
1 space/100 sf if
< 4,000 sf; if
4,000 sf or more,
40 spaces plus 1
space/ 50 sf in
excess of
4,000 sf
4-5 spaces/
1,000 sf
1.2
spaces/room
CMC 21.45 (Planned
Developments)
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC 21.44,
except guest parking
may be permitted
on-street
n/a n/a n/a n/a
CMC 21.82 (Beach
Area Overlay Zone)
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44 Same as CMC 21.44 n/a n/a
n/a n/a
Existing Master Plan –
inside the Coastal Zone
(Chapter 6)
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44
0.5 spaces/unit (up
to 10 units);
0.25-0.3 spaces/unit
(more than 10 units)
3.3
spaces/1,000 sf
Same as CMC
21.44
3.3 spaces/
1,000 sf
Same as CMC
21.44
Parking Management Plan | Page 39
REQUIREMENT
SOURCE
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT OFFICE HOTEL SINGLE
FAMILY
MULIT-
FAMILY GUEST
Existing Master Plan –
outside the Coastal
Zone (Chapter 6)
Same as CMC
21.44
1-2
spaces/unit None 3.3 spaces/
1,000 sf 1 space/125 sf 2.9 spaces/
1,000 sf
Same as CMC
21.44
Proposed Master Plan
(Section 6.4, 2016
Draft)
Same as CMC
21.44
1-1.5
spaces/unit
“ND” and “ED”
Districts: 0.3
spaces/unit (up to 10
units);
0.25 spaces/unit
(more than 10 units)
All other districts:
None
2.8
spaces/1,000 sf 1 space/125 sf 2.8 spaces/
1,000 sf
1 space/
room
1This table is a representative list of parking requirements for common uses. Please refer to the respective document for a complete list of all parking
standards.
2The Planned Developments and Beach Area Overlay Zone chapters apply to residential properties only outside the existing Master Plan; they also would not
apply to the proposed Master Plan.
3“sf” stands for “square feet.”
4Parking requirements inside the existing Master Plan are based on net square footage. Parking requirements outside the existing Master Plan are based on
gross square footage.
Parking Management Plan | Page 40
Compared to the rest of Carlsbad, there are unique attributes in the Village that are reflective of its mixed use
and walkable nature and affect parking, including:
• Converting Uses in Redevelopment – Oftentimes, the conversion of a developed tenant or building
space to another use can drastically alter the parking demand associated with the use. For
example, a retail space converted to restaurant space could increase parking demands tenfold2.
The city requires no additional spaces if the new use has the same parking requirement as the
former use. If the new use has a higher requirement, then additional parking is required. For areas
outside the Coastal Zone, the city does not currently require reuse of existing buildings in the
Village to meet parking requirements from use conversion beyond that achievable on the property,
even if the proposed use has a greater parking requirement. The Draft Village and Barrio Master
Plan proposes that this practice extend to areas inside the Coastal Zone. This practice is consistent
with mixed-use environments found in both the peer cities and throughout the country and is a
good business development incentive to promote small business growth in the community.
• Parking In-Lieu Fee Program - The city allows non-residential uses east of the railroad tracks that
are also within the existing Master Plan boundary to pay a fee per space in-lieu of providing some
or all of the required parking on-site.
• Curb cafes - In specific areas of the Village with on-street parking supply, five restaurants have
replaced one to two parking spaces with temporary outdoor dining decks as part of a now-expired
pilot program, which was limited to 11 total curb cafes. Curb cafes can enhance the vibrancy of the
community.
The city has taken strides in recent years to provide parking requirements in the Village that are consistent
with a mixed use and walkable community. Accordingly, these requirements are in some cases reduced in
comparison to the city-wide parking standards contained in the CMC. Further, they provide greater flexibility
for developers to create a business that supports the community’s vision, while also providing flexible options
for developers to realize business potential and mitigate parking demands. As Table 4 indicates, the proposed
Master Plan considers additional reductions and would provide CMC parking standards for the Barrio.
• Shared, Leased, and Off-Site Parking – The city allows property owners to enter into lease
agreements to share a common off-street and/or off-site parking resource to meet their parking
needs. Shared, leased, and off-site parking are available to non-residential uses only.
Shared Parking – Land uses can share parking if their operating hours do not conflict
with one another. Current CMC and existing Master Plan regulations provide for the
following:
2 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Parking Management Plan | Page 41
o Up to 50 percent of parking required for a use with daytime demands can be
accommodated by the parking facility for a use with nighttime parking demands,
and vice versa
o Up to 100 percent of required parking can be satisfied for a church by facilities
that primarily have weekday, daytime parking demands
o Up to 50 percent of required parking for churches can also be utilized by on-site
day care use, so long as the operating hours for the church and day care do not
conflict with one another
o Outside the Village, properties sharing off-street parking must be within 150 feet
of the parking facility
o Inside the Village, properties sharing off-street parking must be within 300 feet
of the parking facility
o Interested participants must apply to the city and demonstrate that the uses do
not have conflicting operating hours
The shared parking provisions defined by the city largely allow for business-to-business sharing and
place the responsibility of entering and maintaining agreements with the participating businesses.
This typically leads to limited shared parking that is only initiated out of need but still restricts that
parking to limited businesses. Additionally, the 300-foot distance listed in the ordinance is very
short for a walkable environment and likely restricts the ability for businesses to mitigate parking
demands through shared parking agreements.
Parking Management Plan | Page 42
Underutilized private parking
Off-Site Parking – One or more developers can separately or jointly locate required
parking off-site-in and out of the Village.
o Inside the Village, existing properties looking to fulfill their parking requirements
off-site must be within 300 feet of the parking facility. Outside the Village, the
distance is 150 feet.
o Property owners have two options for off-site parking: 1) lease spaces from an
existing facility, or 2) purchase land and build parking for their needs. The
property owners can collectively fund new parking and share the spaces if
desired. In either situation, the off-site parking must satisfy the parking
requirements for the combined, standalone uses. If the parking facility is 5,000
square feet or larger, each of the businesses or properties that share the parking
facility can reduce their respective requirements up to 15 percent.
Parking Management Plan | Page 43
Underutilized private parking
In the city, shared and leased parking is primarily an agreement between private businesses. Its
application is more common outside the Village and includes business parks with on-site parking.
Within the Village, shared parking, whether on-site or off-site, is less common with only two such
arrangements in place. Low participation in the shared-use program could stem from a variety of
factors:
A history of high parking minimums for a walkable community has left the study area with a
more than adequate supply of parking that is not effectively utilized as demonstrated by the
data collected.
The requirement that shared parking must be within 150-300 feet of the uses it serves
severely limits the possible arrangements to share parking. The distance visitors are willing
to walk from a parking space to their destination is likely higher than these thresholds,
especially as the Village continues to intensify and become more walkable. The Draft Village
and Barrio Master Plan proposes an increase in the maximum distance between properties
to 1,320 feet.
The city does not actively engage property owners to broker shared or leased parking
agreements.
Parking Management Plan | Page 44
Generally, lower-density development does not have on-site space constraints that would
cause a developer to be interested in a shared or leased parking arrangement.
The city can, and does, participate in leased parking opportunities with other public entities at a
per space rate. The city currently leases 102 parking spaces from NCTD to provide public parking in
lots on the east and west sides of the railroad tracks between Washington Street and State Street.
The lease rate is approximately $44,000 annually, or $431 per space. However, the city does not
have a standard liability insurance policy that would allow it to easily lease parking spaces from
private landowners, which hinders the ability for private property owners to open their parking
facilities to the public in evening hours are at other times of the day when their property has little
use of their parking lot, such as banks at night and on weekends. The provision of liability insurance
for participating owners could reduce the risk associated with providing shared public parking.
Thus, freeing up more private parking spaces for public use.
Underutilized NCTD Lot
• Parking In-Lieu Fee Program – The city allows non-residential uses east of the railroad tracks that
are also within the existing Master Plan boundary to pay a fee per space in-lieu of providing
required parking Master Plan. The in-lieu fee program area is split into two “zones” with Zone 1
centered around the core of the Village and Zone 2 on the surrounding periphery. Participation
requirements differ whether a property is inside or outside the Coastal Zone.
Parking Management Plan | Page 45
In the Coastal Zone, and because of its more centralized location and proximity to public parking
resources, Zone 1 allows participants to offset a greater portion of the required parking than Zone
2. Zone-based options for participants are shown in Table 5. Actual amount of offset for any given
project is subject to approval by the appropriate decision-making authority (City Planner, Planning
Commission, or City Council).
Table 5: In-Lieu Parking Zone Participation Requirements
CONDITION ZONE 1 ZONE 2
Property is outside of Coastal
Zone
Up to 100 percent of required
parking may be offset by in-lieu fee
Up to 100 percent of required
parking may be offset by in-lieu fee
Property is within Coastal Zone
and there is/will be public
parking within 600 feet in the
next three years
Up to 100 percent of required
parking may be offset by in-lieu fee
Up to 50 percent of required
parking may be offset by in-lieu fee
Property is within Coastal Zone
and there is not/will not be public
parking within 600 feet in the
next three years
Up to 50 percent of required
parking may be offset by in-lieu fee
Up to 25 percent of required
parking may be offset by in-lieu fee
In both zones, the property owner or developer can participate in the program and pay a fee-per-
space instead of providing the required on-site parking. Currently, the city’s in-lieu fee program
does not apply to residential developments. Residential developments must provide the required
parking on site.
Since the start of the program in 2000, 13 development projects have participated in this program,
totaling 168 spaces, or approximately $1,877,000, that has been paid for through the program.
Since 2000, there have been seven years where no one participated in the program, five years
where fewer than ten spaces were paid for using in-lieu fees for an individual development, and
four years where an individual development paid for more than ten spaces through the program.
Since 2013, there have been spaces paid for by the in-lieu fee program each year, for a total of 49
spaces. This indicates historically, relatively low and inconsistent participation in the program.
Technical Memorandum # 3 presents a more in-depth review of the in-lieu fee program
participation. The city uses this revenue to purchase and maintain existing parking. In 2009, the city
purchased property for a public parking lot that provides 50 public spaces at 3045 State Street for
Parking Management Plan | Page 46
$1.15 million. In 1976 and 1989, the city began leasing two NCTD-owned lots, located east and
west of the railroad tracks between Washington Street and State Street. These provide an
additional 102 spaces with total expenditure to date of approximately $1.4 million (since 2009).
The inconsistent participation in the program is likely indicative of the ease of building on-site
surface parking for development within the community. As the area continues to intensify, this
ease to build on-site parking will likely lessen and there could be a need for better participation in
the program. More participation is encouraged so that the existing parking supply is used more
efficiently (e.g., shared or leased parking rather than constructing new parking when the existing
parking is underutilized). Recommendations later in this plan outline strategies to enhance the in-
lieu fee program to provide more services and offerings for participants. The other contributing
factor to low participation in the program is that some recent projects are residential
developments, and therefore not part of the in-lieu fee program.
• Curb Lane Management – The city has curb
lane markings related to traffic safety and time
restrictions. The following summarizes these
curb lane restrictions:
Red zones – No stopping, standing,
or parking at any time, except for
buses if the zone is marked for
buses.
Yellow zones – No stopping,
standing, or parking between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. unless loading or unloading passengers
and materials. Loading and unloading procedures cannot exceed 20 minutes.
White zones – No stopping, standing, or parking except for loading and unloading
passengers and materials for no more than three minutes, between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m.
(except in front of hotels and theaters, where the zone always applies).
Green zones – No standing or parking for longer than 20 minutes for any reason
between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m.
Curb Lane Signage
Parking Management Plan | Page 47
Blue zones – Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible parking only.
Decisions regarding the placement and type of curb markings are made on a case-by-case basis by
the City Traffic Engineer. Curb lane markings are reevaluated as part of new development
proposals and by community request. Much like time-restrictive areas, curb lane restrictions are
generally enforced through community complaints and are not actively enforced.
• Messaging and Wayfinding – The city has installed eight
monument signs to identify off-street parking facilities and
approximately 30 wayfinding signs that direct people to the
public parking facilities. In addition, the city installed
approximately 50 pedestrian and bicycle wayfinding signs to
direct people to local destinations. These signs have
successfully served to help patrons navigate throughout the
study area, and recommendations later in this report aim to
continue this practice and strengthen wayfinding
opportunities.
• Oversized Vehicle Parking – Oversized vehicles, including
RVs, are restricted from parking on any street between 2 a.m.
and 5 a.m. without a valid permit, per CMC Section 10.40.180.
Permits are
available at no cost for any city resident and allow RVs
to park up to 72 consecutive hours, four times per
month. Permits do not allow sleeping or camping in the
RV. The vehicle must be parked at the street curb
immediately adjacent to the residence, or within 400
feet of that person’s residence if there are parking
restrictions in that area. City residents can apply for a
temporary guest permit. This free permit, which can be
renewed annually, allows residents to have guests with
a RV park at or within 400 feet of their residence for up
to 72 consecutive hours, six times a year. Since the
Example of the City’s wayfinding signs
Oversized vehicle parking restriction
Parking Management Plan | Page 48
adoption of the Ordinance in 2013, approximately 300 permits have been issued annually. This
number is increasing: as of May 2017, 337 permits have been issued.
Even though restrictions are in place, enforcement by the Police Department is largely complaint-based due to
other law enforcement priorities. Therefore, RVs often park for longer periods than allowed, creating
frustration for residents who use on-street parking to access their homes. The penalty for violating the
Oversized Vehicle Ordinance is $50 per incident, regardless whether it is the first violation or tenth. The city
has received feedback that the fine amount is too low to discourage some from exceeding the parking
regulations. Later in this report, recommendations are presented to curb this practice and dissuade habitual
offenders.
Best Management Practices – Peer City Review
As part of this study, eight California coastal communities were identified as peer cities. The intent of
conducting peer city reviews was to: (1) identify strategies that similar cities are using; (2) determine whether
they are appropriate for the city; and (3) if they are appropriate, decide how they can potentially be adapted
to meet the needs of the Village, Barrio, and beach areas. The eight peer cities selected are listed below and
mapped in Figure 12 to illustrate the location of these cities in relation to the city.
• Santa Monica
• San Luis Obispo
• Monterey
• Laguna Beach
• Dana Point
• Encinitas
• San Clemente
• Huntington Beach
As part of this study, Best Management Practices (BMPs) from each city were evaluated. Table 6 presents a
summary of the in-depth review that was conducted for each of the eight cities and the BMPs considered. For
each BMP, a description and key components to consider when implementing the BMP are provided.
Additionally, the table highlights examples from the peer cities where the BMP was used and how it could be
applicable and beneficial to the city. For an extensive discussion on each peer city and the strategies they are
currently using, refer to Appendix C - Technical Memorandum #3.
Parking Management Plan | Page 49
Figure 12: Peer City Locations Map
Parking Management Plan | Page 50
Table 6: Parking Best Management Practices
BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES DESCRIPTION IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS FEATURED PEER CITY IMPORTANCE TO CARLSBAD
Enforcement Practices
Consistent enforcement ensures that users comply with the
parking regulations. This allows the parking system to function
more efficiently by promoting the turnover of parking spaces to
increase availability and provide greater access to the
surrounding businesses. Having enforcement practices and
regulations that promote turnover can have a beneficial
economic impact to surrounding businesses.
Enforcement officers as ambassadors
Warnings for first offenders
Graduated fine structure for repeat
offenders
Advanced technology reduces staff
needed for enforcement
Monterey – uses License Plate Recognition
(LPR) technology to monitor their system
San Luis Obispo – ambassador program
provides enhanced customer service
The City currently does not have the
resources to proactively enforce parking time
limit regulations. Lack of enforcement
promotes abuse of the time limit regulations,
which in turn restricts access to businesses
and contributes to customer frustrations.
Improving enforcement practices in the city
ensures people comply with the parking
regulations, resulting in more available
parking. By enhancing policy, practice, and
technology associated with enforcement, the
city could achieve better usage of the system,
which should support businesses, residents,
and guests in the community.
Use of Time Limits to
Encourage Turnover
Time limits regulate how long vehicles can park in spaces, with
appropriate times set to support adjacent uses. The intent is to
encourage the turnover of spaces so more parking is available for
customers, thereby providing better access to businesses.
The use of time limits also encourages short-term parkers to use
on-street parking and directs people who will park for longer
periods of time (e.g., employees, beach-goers, etc.) to off-street
parking facilities. The intent is to create more parking availability
in the prime spaces and make more efficient use of the entire
system.
Use different time limits to support the
different uses
Review the time limits annually
San Luis Obispo – uses different time limits in
different parts of the downtown area based on
parking demands (longer time limits in areas
with less demand and shorter time limits in
high-demand areas).
Most time limit regulations present in the
study area are durations that sufficiently
accommodate customer needs (2-and 3-
hours) and are effectively placed (i.e. near
commercial businesses). On the other hand,
time limits in residential areas, such as the
overnight restrictions at the north end of
State Street, may be problematic for
residents. Consistent enforcement of the
time limits in the study area can encourage
turnover and create more access for
customers of neighborhood businesses by
encouraging employees to utilize off-street
facilities.
Reduced Minimum Parking
Requirements
Parking requirements dictate how much parking a new
development should provide. However, many times the
requirements for parking are not based on actual data or need,
but rather a prediction of how much parking that development
may need in a standalone environment. Aligning the number of
spaces required ensures residences and businesses have
adequate parking supply to meet demand. Aligning parking
requirements with actual market demand supports the transition
to a shared and leased parking supply.
Establish parking requirements
appropriate for the use and based on
actual parking demand, which is
determined by evaluating actual data
collected to represent that development
Monitor the parking occupancy and
duration annually
Revise parking requirements as necessary
based on monitoring
San Luis Obispo and Dana Point – parking
requirements in the downtown areas of both
cities are half of what is required in the greater
portions of the cities, which results in a more
walkable and pedestrian-oriented downtown.
Table 7, which follows this table, provides a
comparison of the parking requirements for the
City as well as each of the peer cities.
Parking requirements should align with the
parking demands for land uses in the study
area. While the Draft Village and Barrio
Master Plan proposes reduced requirements,
this strategy aims to maintain alignment with
the parking demands so that an
overabundance of parking isn’t created in the
study area.
Parking Management Plan | Page 51
BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES DESCRIPTION IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS FEATURED PEER CITY IMPORTANCE TO CARLSBAD
Shared, Leased, and Off-
Site Parking
Shared and leased parking allows two or more land uses to utilize
the same parking facility provided their operating hours do not
conflict. The intent is to optimize the use of the parking facility.
The off-site parking site must be within a reasonable walking
distance of the development.
Maintain and broker shared and leased
parking arrangements to encourage
development
Utilize shared and leased parking
opportunities to create employee parking
Utilize shared and leased parking
opportunities for valet parking
Allow participants to lease parking spaces
in the shared facility, adding monetary
value to the spaces (city with private
businesses, business to business)
Monitor the parking system annually with
reports prepared by the Parking Manager
and shared publicly to inform property
owners of their options as new
developments and expansions occur.
Laguna Beach – leases spaces from
underutilized private parking facilities located
on the periphery of the downtown. During the
week, the spaces are for city employees, but in
the evenings (after 5 p.m.) and on the
weekends, the spaces are available to the
public.
San Clemente – transit station parking is
shared with the public. Posted signs notify
users that prior to 9 a.m. the spaces are for
transit users only. After this time, the public
can park in the lot.
The city’s current standards restrict shared
parking to a small distance around a
participating business. The standards should
allow the leasing of private spaces for public
use, allow for greater flexibility for sharing
private spaces between businesses, allow for
longer walking distances between business
and parking, and allow for creative
opportunities to encourage more shared and
leased parking (e.g., public parking after 5
p.m. as in Laguna Beach). Furthermore,
increased public use of NCTD facilities, such
as existing transit station parking, should be
explored (see also “Preferential Transit
Commuter Parking” in this table below).
Parking In-Lieu Fee
Program
A parking in-lieu fee program allows developers to build less
parking than is required by the code by paying the City a fee for
each space that they are not providing on-site. The fee is then
used to construct or lease parking spaces, or to implement
transportation improvements that reduce parking demands.
Adjust fees annually based on an index
such as the Consumer Price Index
Allow the program to expand into new
areas as developments change and
commercial areas grow over time
Allow funds to pay for other
transportation related community
improvements that support an effective
parking system in the plan area
Provide transparency of in-lieu fee
information (how the fee is derived, fee
boundaries, etc.).
All the peer cities, except for Encinitas, have a
parking in-lieu fee program.
Santa Monica and Monterey – adjust fees
annually based on the consumer price index.
Figure 11 provides a comparison of the in-lieu
fees for each peer city.
While the City has an existing in-lieu fee
program, implementing incremental
adjustments based on parking demand,
program demand, and cost of effective
parking management strategies would
improve developer participation in the in-lieu
fee program by aligning the price of the fee
with the benefits of the program, which
would result in increased funds for the City,
better use of the existing parking supply, and
encourage economic growth in the study
area.
Residential Parking
Program
A residential parking permit allows permit holders to utilize the
restricted areas of participating residential streets during certain
times. The program should be reserved for high-demand areas
where the spillover impacts of parking becomes a nuisance for
residents.
Establish only with neighborhood support
Establish consistent management
strategies for the residential areas
Collaborate with other City departments
to establish evaluation criteria for
neighborhood participation
Evaluate the need for residential parking
opportunities
Utilize shared and leased parking
opportunities for valet parking
Allow participants to lease parking spaces
in the shared facility
Santa Monica – established a program to
accommodate the needs of the residents and
their guests by allowing those with a valid
permit to be exempt from the parking
restrictions on the street within a two-block
radius of their registered address.
A residential parking permit program will
allow residents to have on-street parking
access by restricting non-residential users
(area employees, beach goers, etc.) from
clogging the on-street parking spaces. The
program needs to only be implemented when
all other considerations, including the
implementation of TDM, a curb lane
management program, validation of time
restrictions, and other parking management
strategies, are exhausted and data clearly
Parking Management Plan | Page 52
BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES DESCRIPTION IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS FEATURED PEER CITY IMPORTANCE TO CARLSBAD
indicates there is a parking problem within
the community.
TDM TDM strategies are implemented in a community to influence
travel behavior and reduce parking demand related to the
traditional single-occupancy vehicle (SOV) trip. TDM strategies
promote walking, biking, transit, carpooling, vanpooling, and
shared mobility services (Uber, Lyft) through policy, incentives,
regulations, and management practices such as parking pricing.
• Coordinate the parking and TDM
programs
• Transparency of information
• Implement multiple TDM strategies to
realize compounded benefits
• Evaluate TDM annually and recalibrate as
needed every five years based on a
comprehensive survey and data collection
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
(SLOCOG) – takes a very active role in TDM and
provides a single website that consolidates
information on many TDM programs and offers
resources and incentives to commuters that do
not drive alone.
Santa Monica – has a TDM ordinance that
requires businesses to implement a trip
reduction program as part of an Emission
Reduction Plan. A trip reduction program
identifies several strategies that would reduce
the number of commute trips by a personal
vehicle.
Huntington Beach, Laguna Beach, and San
Clemente – require at least 15percent of their
employee parking spaces be designated as
carpool only.
The city is currently developing a TDM
ordinance that will identify specific TDM
strategies to support mobility and access in
the study area. The TDM program will be
intimately tied and coordinated with the
parking efforts as they both influence and
support one another.
Curb Lane Management A curb lane management program provides structure for
managing the various competing curb lane uses (on-street
parking, commercial and passenger loading, curb cafes, traffic
flow, EV parking, rideshare/carshare parking, bicycle and
pedestrian mobility, and safety concerns). The program prioritizes
these uses based on the goals of the community (e.g., greater
emphasis may be placed on encouraging alternative modes) and
the needs of the surrounding land uses (access to business for
customers and commercial loading). The program allows for
making consistent decisions regarding curb lane uses so that
there is structure and consistent reasoning behind the decision-
making process.
• Prioritize competing uses along the curb
• Create standardized block faces
• Develop a consistent process for
identifying and converting new on-street
parking supply created by restriping to
angled parking
• Dedicated disabled parking
• Enforcement of spaces
• Flexible curb space so that the curb
transitions from one use to another by
time of day (e.g., commercial loading
during the day and passenger loading at
night)
Huntington Beach – is identifying curb space
for rideshare drop-off and pick-up (Uber and
Lyft) to reduce traffic congestion and improve
safety for those unloading and loading from
vehicles.
The city should implement a consistent curb
lane management approach that supports
the City’s investment in multimodal
infrastructure and livability.
A management program would help define
the curb lane uses including when, where,
and how to implement curb changes.
Parking Management Plan | Page 53
BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES DESCRIPTION IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS FEATURED PEER CITY IMPORTANCE TO CARLSBAD
Paid Parking
Paid parking encourages people to choose between the priced
transaction or making alternative decisions such as parking
further away or in a lower priced facility, or using an alternative
transportation option to reach their destination. This can create
more available spaces in high-demand areas, which in turn
increases access to businesses.
• Decision to implement paid parking
should be driven by parking behavioral
data
• Transparency of information
• Use technology efficiently
Dana Point – does not currently have paid
parking; however, the City of Dana Point
adopted an ordinance that outlines the details
of the paid parking program, so if/when they
do implement paid parking, the code supports
the change.
Although paid parking is not recommended
now, it is something to consider as a future
strategy when the demands of the study area
dictate that it is necessary to help balance
and manage the system.
Parking Program
Administration
The parking program administration refers to how the parking
program is housed and managed within the city’s administrative
structure. There are many options to consider, but the primary
approach is to bring coherence to and streamline the
implementation and administration of parking management
strategies. The program should align with the overall goals of the
community.
• Initiate communication between city
departments
• Form a parking program unit or
department
• Plan for growth
San Luis Obispo –parking system follows a
Vertically Integrated model, which consolidates
the roles and responsibilities of the parking
program under a single department, Parking
Services.
Currently, parking management is dispersed
through several departments with little
coordination. Policies are set by one
department, enforcement is handled by the
police, and any data collection and analysis in
relation to the parking are handled
separately. Combining all parking functions
under one manager will consolidate efforts
and provide comprehensive management of
the parking system.
Messaging and Wayfinding
Consistently themed signage allows the city to communicate
parking and destination locations and helps users easily navigate
the entire system.
• Develop a plan for wayfinding needs
• Develop a consistent theme and brand
• Include shared and leased private
facilities
Dana Point – recently implemented new
wayfinding signage with the goal of distributing
the demands in the few highly-utilized facilities
to those on the periphery.
The city’s current wayfinding system should
evolve as the parking program evolves to
help users navigate the system efficiently.
Wayfinding improvements will allow people
to find parking easily and plan for where they
are going to park before they start their trip.
Parking Benefit District
This district is created, with community consensus, where funds
that are earned in excess of operating costs (funds through
permits, paid parking, citations, etc.) are reinvested back into the
district and used for transportation-related improvements in the
community.
• Involve community and local stakeholders
• Amend the Municipal Code
• Establish a fund
• Use revenues to fund the parking
program and for community
improvements
Dana Point – implemented this strategy as a
policy to allow the City of Dana Point to
reinvest any revenues from the parking system
back into the District to fund the program and
to enhance TDM strategies or other parking
improvements.
Although it is not recommended now, this
strategy should be considered when/if paid
parking is implemented to ensure that the
revenues generated from paid parking are
invested back into the community.
Trolley or Shuttle
Circulator
Trolley or shuttle services are beneficial for connecting people to
multiple destinations in a community, moving people throughout
an area without requiring them to move their vehicles. This works
well with promotion of a “Park Once” philosophy, where vehicle
trips within the study area are minimized as people use a variety
of transportation options to access multiple destinations.
• Evaluate service annually
• Seek funding so that the service can be
offered for little or no charge
The cities of Santa Monica, San Luis Obispo,
Monterey, Laguna Beach, Dana Point, and
Huntington Beach have a trolley system that is
used to move people throughout the
community. The City of San Clemente is
currently in the planning process for their
trolley. In these cities, the trolley circulator
connects or will connect popular destinations
The city is currently evaluating the feasibility
of a trolley circulator to promote the “Park
Once” concept and encourage the use of
multimodal transportation. The intent is to
help disperse demand by allowing users to
park in a single location (preferably an
underutilized lot or street on the periphery of
the study area) and use the trolley to access
Parking Management Plan | Page 54
BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES DESCRIPTION IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS FEATURED PEER CITY IMPORTANCE TO CARLSBAD
(hotels, restaurants, tourist destinations, and
beach access points) within the downtown
areas.
businesses and popular destinations in the
high-demand areas.
Shared Mobility Options
As part of a TDM program, rideshare services reduce parking
demands since users are delivered to their destination rather
than driving and requiring a dedicated parking space.
• Establish rideshare loading zones or areas
as part of curb lane management
• Consider other shared mobility options
• Education, incentives, and promotion
Huntington Beach – identifies curb space for
rideshare drop-off and pick-up (Uber and Lyft)
to reduce traffic congestion and improve safety
for those unloading and loading from vehicles.
Dana Point – works with Lyft to promote the
use of rideshare options as an alternative to
driving into town. The City of Dana Point
reimburses new Lyft users with a $20 credit by
using a code posted on the city website and has
also designated curb space for rideshare drop-
off and pick-up.
Shared mobility options are currently
available in the City of Carlsbad; however,
they should be strengthened and encouraged
as viable forms of transportation to reduce
overall parking demand. The benefit of
promoting shared rides is a reduction in
parking demand within the community.
Designated curb space should be provided to
safely accommodate these services.
Recreational Vehicle (RV)
Parking
Establishing RV-specific parking regulations helps to protect
residential areas and parking facilities from becoming camping
areas. A good policy should balance the competing uses along the
curb while allocating available space to meet the needs of RV
users. In the Coastal Zone, a well-crafted policy will ensure that
adequate visitor and public access to the coast is protected.
• Reduce the amount of time RVs can park
on the street, while maintaining public
access to the coast
• Use date stamped permits to manage the
system
• Constant and consistent enforcement
• Implement a graduated fee for repeat
offenders
Huntington Beach – has implemented RV
parking restrictions to manage and help
balance the competing curb space users.
Additionally, the City of Huntington Beach
restricted the length of time that RVs can park,
providing 24 hours for loading and unloading
purposes.
The lack of enforcement and the 72-hour
regulation create an environment where RVs
can abuse the parking system and park on the
street for long periods of time, causing
frustration with residents who also compete
for on-street parking spaces.
Preferential Transit
Commuter Parking
Transit lots that are not being used to their full capacity provide
an opportunity for shared and leased parking. Preferential
parking during a dedicated timeframe can be provided to
commuters. After that time, the parking becomes open to the
public and commuters.
• Coordinate with NCTD
• Establish appropriate regulations
• Provide consistent enforcement
• Provide transparency of information to
reduce confusion and frustration
San Clemente – posted signs notifying the
public that prior to 9 a.m. the spaces are for
transit users only. As a result, the transit lot
gets more usage while still maintaining space
for the commuters.
Currently, the NCTD lot is underutilized.
Sharing this lot optimizes its use by
accommodating the NCTD transit users while
also making the remaining spaces that are
not in use available for the public. The City
should continue working with NCTD to
identify opportunities to incorporate public
parking into future non-rail development on
NCTD property.
Parking Management Plan | Page 55
Table 7 provides a summary comparison of the parking requirements for the City of Carlsbad, peer cities, and
Park+ rates, which are based on the parking occupancy data collected as part of this study. Park+ was used to
identify current parking rates within the study area based on actual data (parking occupancy and the unique
mixture of land uses in the study area). Whereas the other rates are derived from assumptions and other
calculations, the Park+ rates are based on community data unique to the study area. Park+ is explained in
greater detail in the Future Parking Conditions section.
The table below shows that the parking requirements for residential and hotel developments in the City of
Carlsbad are comparable to the other peer cities. However, the City of Carlsbad requires more parking for
commercial and office land uses than some peer cities do. Additionally, the table compares the various
existing rates that are present within the study area and compares them to the proposed rates in the Village
and Barrio Master Plan and the Park+ rates. The table indicates that the proposed rates are appropriate for
meeting projected demands.
Table 7: Parking Requirement Rates Comparison with Peer Cities
CITY
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT OFFICE HOTEL SINGLE
FAMILY
MULTI-
FAMILY GUEST
Carlsbad
Municipal Code
(CMC 21.44)
2 spaces/ unit 1.5-2 spaces/
unit
0.3 spaces/ unit
(up to 10 units);
0.25 spaces/
unit (more than
10 units)
3.3-5 spaces/
1,000 sf
10 spaces/1,000 sf
if < 4,000 sf; if
4,000 sf or more,
40 spaces plus 20
spaces/1,000 sf in
excess of 4,000 sf
4-5 spaces/
1,000 sf
1.2
spaces/
room
CMC 21.45
(Planned
Developments)
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as 21.44,
except guest
parking may be
permitted on-
street
n/a n/a n/a n/a
CMC 21.82
(Beach Area
Overlay Zone)
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Existing Master
Plan – inside the
Coastal Zone
(Chapter 6)
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44
0.5 spaces/ unit
(up to 10 units);
0.25-0.3 spaces/
unit (more than
10 units)
3.3
spaces/ 1,000 sf
Same as CMC
21.44
3.3 spaces/
1,000 sf
Same as
CMC 21.44
Existing Master
Plan – outside
the Coastal Zone
(Chapter 6)
Same as CMC
21.44
1-2 spaces/
unit None 3.3 spaces/ 1,000
sf 8 spaces/1,000 sf 2.9 spaces/
1,000 sf
Same as
CMC 21.44
Parking Management Plan | Page 56
CITY
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT OFFICE HOTEL SINGLE
FAMILY
MULTI-
FAMILY GUEST
Proposed
Master Plan
(Section 6.4,
2016 Draft)
Same as CMC
21.44
1-1.5 spaces/
unit
“ND” and “ED”
Districts: 0.3
spaces/ unit (up
to 10 units);
0.25 spaces/
unit (more than
10 units) All
other districts:
None
2.8
spaces/ 1,000 sf 8 spaces/1,000 sf 2.8 spaces/
1,000 sf
1
space/
room
Study Area
(Park+
Results**)
1.5 spaces/ unit 1.04 spaces/
unit - 2.7 spaces/ 1,000
sf 13 spaces/1,000 sf 2.4 spaces/
1,000 sf
0.69
spaces/
room
Santa Monica 1.5 spaces/ unit - - 2-3.3 spaces/
1,000 sf 5 spaces/1,000 sf 2 spaces/
1,000 sf
0.5 spaces/
room
San Luis Obispo 2 spaces/ unit
0.5-1-1.5
spaces + 0.5
spaces for each
additional
bedroom/ unit;
0.5/ 5 units
(more than 5
units)
- 3.3 spaces/ 1,000
sf
17 spaces/1,000 sf
+ 10 spaces/1,000
sf of food prep
areas
3.3 spaces/
1,000 sf
1 space/
room
Monterey 2 spaces/ unit 1-2.2 spaces/
units 1 space/ 4 units 2 spaces/
1,000 sf
1 space/4 seats or
20 spaces/1,000 sf
3.6 spaces/
1,000 sf
1 space/
room
Laguna Beach 2 spaces/ unit 1.5-2 spaces/
unit
1 space/ 4 units
end every 4
thereafter
4 spaces/
1,000 sf
10 spaces/1,000 sf
or 1 space/3 seats
(whichever is
greater)
4 spaces/
1,000 sf
1 space/
room
Dana Point 1 space/1,000 sf 0.5-2 spaces/
unit 0.2 spaces/ unit 2 spaces/
1,000 sf* 10 spaces/1,000 sf 2 spaces/
1,000 sf*
2 spaces/
1,000 sf*
Encinitas 2 spaces/ unit 1-2.5 spaces/
units
0.25 spaces/
unit
4-5 spaces/ 1,000
sf 10 spaces/1,000 sf 4 spaces/
1,000 sf
1.25
spaces/
room
San Clemente 1 spaces/ unit or
bedroom
1.5-3 spaces/
unit
.333 spaces/
unit
2.5 spaces/
1,000 sf
1 space/4 seats;
single destination
over 3,000 sf: 8.3
spaces/1,000 sf
5 spaces/
1,000 sf
1 space/
room
Huntington
Beach
(District 1)
- - - 3 spaces/
1,000 sf - 2 spaces/
1,000 sf -
Parking Management Plan | Page 57
In addition to parking requirements, the peer cities were reviewed specifically for comparison of their in-lieu
fee programs. The peer cities represent a comparable market for the city based both on size and character.
Figure 13 compares the in-lieu fees for each of the peer cities to the city’s existing fees. The table illustrates
the wide range of fees between each of the communities. Of the peer cities that have an in-lieu fee program,
two of the peer cities have fees that are lower than the City of Carlsbad’s, while the others are nearly double
or more than double the City of Carlsbad’s fee.
Full details for each of the best management practices provided above are provided in Appendix C - Technical
Memorandum #3.
3 “Residential and office rates from ITE Parking Generation, Retail rate from ULI Shared Parking
4 Parking Strategies for Smart Growth” SANDAG (June 2010)
Huntington
Beach
(All Other
Districts)
- 1-2.5 spaces/
unit 0.5 spaces/ unit 5 spaces/
1,000 sf
<12 seats: 5
spaces/200 sf; >12
seats: 17
spaces/1,000 sf or
10 spaces/1,000 sf
when on a site
with 3 or more
uses
4 spaces/
1,000 sf -
National Parking
Standards3
1-1.2 spaces/
unit
0.59-1.52
spaces/ unit - 3.6-4.5 spaces/
1,000 sf -
2.4-2.84
spaces/
1,000 sf
-
San Diego
Region4 - 1.75-2.5
spaces/unit - 4 spaces/1,000 sf - 3.6 spaces/
1,000 sf -
*If parking is not made available to the public, then the citywide zoning requirements for parking apply
**Park+ and the generation of these rates is discussed in Technical Memorandum #2
This table is a representative list of parking requirements for common uses. Please refer to the respective document for a complete
list of all parking standards.
***The Planned Developments and Beach Area Overlay Zone chapters apply to residential properties only outside the existing
Master Plan; they also would not apply to the proposed Master Plan.
****“sf” stands for “square feet.”
*****Parking requirements inside the existing Master Plan are based on net square footage. Parking requirements outside the
existing Master Plan are based on gross square footage.
Parking Management Plan | Page 58
Figure 13: Comparison of In-Lieu Fees with Peer Cities
*San Luis Obispo has a fee of $4,660 per space fee for a change in the occupant. The higher fee of $18,641 is the per space fee for new construction.
$0
$5,873
$10,000
$11,240
$18,641
$20,000
$20,000
$26,383
$40,000
$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000
Encinitas
Monterey
San Clemente
Carlsbad
San Luis Obispo*
Santa Monica
Laguna Beach
Huntington Beach
Dana Point
Parking Management Plan | Page 59
Future Parking Conditions
Three parking management scenarios were evaluated and are summarized below. Each scenario evaluated the
parking system based on full build out of the study area in 2035. The projections included in full build-out are
intended to provide a basis on which to guide decision-making as it relates to parking demand generation and
allow the parking system to operate more efficiently. These projections may change over time and should be
regularly considered along with the review of implemented parking strategies. The Park+ model is meant to
display aggregate changes to the system based on behaviors and preferences of the majority of the study area
population. It is not intended to capture every change and nuance in the area. A full analysis of the scenarios is
provided in Appendix B – Technical Memorandum #2.
• Scenario 1 – Evaluates impacts to the parking system in the study area if no parking management
or demand management strategies are implemented.
• Scenario 2 – Evaluates the impacts of shared and leased parking to distribute and reduce the
parking demand in the study area.
• Scenario 3 – Evaluates primarily the Village portion of the study area and the impact of
constructing a new public parking garage facility.
Park+ Model
The Park+ modeling software program was used to evaluate three future scenarios in terms of how they
impacted the parking facilities in the study area. The model was based on existing land use types and
intensities and existing parking occupancy data. The data collected in May 2016 and July 2016 was used to
establish baseline conditions for the model.
The model also accounted for the different parking relationships present in the study area. For instance, if
parking on-site of a specific business was restricted to only those going to that business (patrons and
employees), then that relationship was built into the model as restricted parking. Similarly, publicly available
parking (off-street and on-street) was left unrestricted indicating anyone could use that parking.
Walking tolerance was another component that was factored into the model. A quarter mile was established
(based on the draft Village and Barrio Master Plan) as a comfortable or reasonable walking distance within the
study area. This distance was used to determine how far people were willing to walk from a parking space to
their destination in the study area. It is based on an urban planning principle that recognizes if streets are
safe, comfortable, and interesting, most people will walk a distance of about a quarter mile (about two to
three blocks in the Village) or approximately five minutes.
Parking Management Plan | Page 60
Once the baseline conditions were established, new developments and parking programmatic changes (such
as shared and leased parking) were added into the model to predict future parking demands and parking
behaviors. The future scenarios were selected for two reasons:
1. To determine the full buildout impact of the study area on the parking facilities
2. To evaluate different approaches to mitigate the effects of the future development. The results of the
scenario evaluation informed the selection of parking management strategies that could improve the
parking conditions in the study area.
The concept of effective capacity was used throughout the following scenarios to display the efficiency and
effectiveness of the parking system in the study area.
Park+ Model Assumptions
The model was based on the peak conditions established during the existing parking conditions analysis. The
peak period was July (peak tourist time of year), on a weekend at 7 p.m. All the scenarios were evaluated
under these same peak conditions.
The development intensities, type, and locations included in each scenario were provided by the city and
based on four sources:
• The estimated new commercial and hotel development (to buildout) from the General Plan
Environmental Impact Report5.
• The distribution of commercial development in the Village and Barrio based on potential
“opportunity” sites identified for the city’s Envision Carlsbad process in 2012 and updated by staff6.
• The distribution of hotel development based on proposed, approved, or under construction
projects and potential hotel locations identified by staff.
• The estimated residential dwelling unit buildout projections prepared as part of the city’s Housing
Element, updated in 20177.
These estimates call for the following, and are shown in Figure 14:
5 General Plan Environmental Impact Report, Section 2.0, available at http://www.carlsbadca.gov/services/depts/planning/update/documents.asp.
6 Envision Carlsbad “Land Use Concepts” report, Section 3.2, prepared January 2012 and available at
http://www.carlsbadca.gov/search/default.asp?q=envision+carlsbad+working+papers
7 City of Carlsbad General Plan Housing Element, available at http://www.carlsbadca.gov/services/depts/planning/general.asp.
Parking Management Plan | Page 61
• 137,400 square feet of commercial development
• 1,280 residential units
• 260 hotel rooms
A growth factor was also applied to the model to account for increased parking demands due to population
growth (as opposed to new parking demands generated by new developments) in the study area. SANDAG
provided growth projections specifically for the study area between 2012 and 2035. The annual average
growth rate between this time was 1.4 percent8.
Parking associated with the future development in the buildout condition was not included in this scenario for
several reasons. First is that it is likely that some of the existing parking will be replaced with either new
parking or new development. However, the location and extent of parking space removal is not known and
therefore arbitrarily removing and adding spaces to the system would reduce the effectiveness of the Park+
planning tool.
Secondly, it can be assumed that participation in the in-lieu fee program will continue. Based on the historical
participation data provided by the city, approximately 10 spaces per year will not be constructed due to
participation in the program. Understanding the parking conditions without assumptions made for additional
private parking supply allows the city to change the stipulations of the program or suspend or terminate it to
help the parking system as a whole function more effectively.
Third, and for reasons similar to the in-lieu fee program, it is also assumed that the current Village Master Plan
and Design Manual provision that permits conversion of non-residential space from one approved use to
another without the requirement to add parking beyond what a site can accommodate will continue and may
be expanded into the Coastal Zone. This provision contributes to building reuse and Village vibrancy.
Lastly, the existing conditions analysis, discussed in Appendix A - Technical Memorandum #1, showed a
surplus of total parking spaces system wide. However, these parking spaces are private and not accessible to
the public. Therefore, users experienced frustrations finding available parking that was not private parking.
The intent of using the Park+ model is to determine the impacts of implementing various parking management
strategies so that the system operates more efficiently and investments to increase supply in the system are
based on data. This could include new parking supply, and/or a more efficient use of existing supply within the
system.
8 SANDAG Series 13 Regional Growth Forecast
Parking Management Plan | Page 62
Figure 14: Scenario 1 (2035): Parcels Identified for Future Growth for Master Plan Buildout
Parking Management Plan | Page 63
Scenario Analysis
Scenario 1 – Master Plan Buildout (2035)
Scenario 1 includes the growth assumptions described
previously and evaluates the impacts on the parking
facilities within the study area if a build out to the expected
capacity allowed by current development standards occurs.
This estimates the greatest increase in demand or a reasonable “worst case scenario.” This scenario assumed
that current parking management approaches remain the same and no other changes were made. For
instance, NCTD parking facilities are currently restricted to transit users. In this scenario, that restriction
remained intact. The only difference between this scenario and the existing parking conditions was the
inclusion of new development and growth in the study area.
Scenario 2 – Shared and Leased Parking (2035)
Scenario 2 includes the buildout growth assumptions
described in Scenario 1, but also incorporated the use of
shared and leased parking. Under this scenario, private
facilities in the Village and northern beach area that had
occupancies of 0-50 percent were changed in the model so
that the parking was unrestricted, allowing the public to park in those underutilized facilities. Areas in the
Village and northern beach observed as underutilized (50 percent occupancies or lower) were categorized to
unrestricted (available to the public) facilities in the model. The model projected underutilized facilities, as
observed under existing conditions, to meet their current demands as well as accommodate demands from
surrounding businesses. This scenario assumed that current parking management approaches remain the
same, with the only change being the underutilized private facilities absorbing more of the parking demand.
Scenario 3 – New Public Parking Garage (2035)
Scenario 3 includes the buildout growth assumptions
previously included in scenarios 1 and 2, along with current
parking management strategies in place. However, this
scenario evaluated the impacts of constructing a new parking
facility in the study area that would provide an additional 500
public parking spaces. These spaces were added to the model
to help mitigate the demands generated by the businesses
Scenario 1 assumes complete future
buildout and maintaining current
parking management approaches.
Scenario 2 assumes maximum future
buildout with shared and leased parking
facilities and maintaining current
parking management approaches.
Scenario 3 assumes maximum future
buildout and a new public parking
facility adding 500 spaces to the public
parking system while maintaining
current parking management
approaches.
Parking Management Plan | Page 64
and various area land uses. New parking facilities are most effective in serving the greatest quantity and types
of users when the facility is placed in high-demand areas. For the city, this would be in the Village and the
beach area north of Oak Avenue.
Scenario Evaluation Observations:
While there are isolated areas of concern in the existing conditions, at future buildout (2035) some of the
parking in the study area (particularly in the Village and the on-street parking in all areas) is of concern
because they are projected to be over capacity. The following are specific observations made from projecting
the future demands and evaluating the parking in the study area.
• The occupancy in the study area during the peak conditions (July weekend at 7 p.m.) was
approximately 60 percent across all three scenarios. This indicates that the parking in the overall
study area was underutilized and has the capacity to absorb the projected demands. However,
certain parking facilities throughout the study area have reached effective capacity (85 percent
occupied), such as the beach area and on-street facilities throughout the Village Neighborhood,
making parking difficult in these areas.
• Parking demands in the study area increase by 8 percent when factoring in future growth and
development.
• For the existing conditions, the on-street parking occupancy is at or below 50 percent occupied.
However, on-street occupancy increases in the Village and northern beach area where parking is
predicted to be above effective capacity (85 percent occupied) at full buildout.
• Private off-street parking facilities remained generally underutilized (37 to 46 percent occupied
between the three scenarios), compared with on-street parking at effective capacity. This suggests
that parking management strategies should be implemented to encourage people to park in off-
street facilities to balance demand and increase on-street parking availability.
• Public off-street parking experienced greater occupancies than private off-street parking. This
presents an opportunity to share and lease parking resources to balance the demands between the
public and private facilities.
• Parking demands were widespread throughout the study area and not concentrated to a single
location. This makes constructing new parking difficult because a single facility, or even two
facilities, would struggle to absorb the unmet demands throughout the entire study area. As stated
previously, a quarter-mile walking tolerance was used as the acceptable norm for the study’s
Parking Management Plan | Page 65
population. Therefore, the impact of a new garage would be limited to the area within that
quarter-mile walking distance. While a garage centrally located at Carlsbad Village Drive and
Roosevelt Street, for example, would be within walking distance of much of the Village, it would
not effectively serve much of State Street north of Beech Avenue and properties west of Carlsbad
Boulevard. Shared and leased parking combined with TDM strategies, as discussed in greater detail
below, could have a wider ranging impact throughout the study area.
• The model analysis concludes that parking issues in the study area are not related to a lack of
parking supply, but rather the inefficient use of available parking between the parking facilities
types (public off-street, on-street, and private off-street parking). Scenario 2 (Shared and Leased
Parking) had the biggest impact on reducing the demand for on-street parking spaces. Under
Scenario 3 (New Garage), the private parking and NCTD parking facilities remained underutilized
because they remained restricted to customers or transit users. However, parking facilities
throughout the study area remain at or above effective capacity (85percent occupied), making
parking difficult in these areas. Notably, this included the on-street facilities throughout much of
the study area, as well as the off-street facilities in the northern section of the beach area and the
west side of the Village, among others.
Table 8 summarizes the parking supply, met demand, and occupancy for the entire study area as well as
results from the Village, Barrio, and beach areas under each parking management scenario described above
per the future conditions listed, projected to 2035. Met demand is the number of occupied parking spaces in a
facility during an observed or projected period or of time.
Parking Management Plan | Page 66
Table 8: Future Scenario Analysis (2035): Parking Occupancy by Neighborhood at Peak (7 p.m.)
SCENARIO NEIGHBORHOOD PARKING
SUPPLY
MET
DEMAND
AVERAGE PEAK
OCCUPANCY
CHANGE IN
OCCUPANCY
FROM
SCENARIO 1
1. Master
Plan Buildout
(2035)
Village 5,251 2,920 56 percent -
Barrio 2,952 1,561 53 percent -
Beach 3,454 2,622 76 percent -
Study Area Total 11,657 7,103 61 percent -
2. Shared and
Leased
Parking
(2035)
Village 5,251 3,332 63 percent + 7 percent
Barrio 2,952 1,511 51 percent - 2 percent
Beach 3,454 2,369 69 percent - 7 percent
Study Area Total 11,657 7,212 62 percent + 1 percent
3. New 500-
Space Parking
Garage
(2035)
Village 5,501 2,812 51 percent - 4 percent
Barrio 2,952 1,562 53 percent No Change
Beach 3,704 2,719 73 percent - 3 percent
Study Area Total 12,157 7,093 58 percent - 3 percent
Parking Management Plan | Page 67
Table 9 provides the met demand and occupancy by parking facility type, including data for on-street, public
off-street, private off-street, and NCTD facilities.
Table 9: Future Scenario Analysis (2035): Parking Occupancy by Type of Facility at Peak (7 p.m.)
SCENARIO FACILITY TYPE PARKING
SUPPLY
MET
DEMAND
AVERAGE PEAK
OCCUPANCY
CHANGE IN
OCCUPANCY
FROM SCENARIO 1
1. Master Plan
Buildout
(2035)
On-Street 4,971 4,288 86 percent -
Public Off-Street 730 442 61 percent -
NCTD 511 50 10 percent -
Private Off-Street 5,445 2,323 43 percent -
Study Area Total 11,657 7,103 61 percent -
2. Shared and
Leased
Parking (2035)
On-Street 4,971 3,826 77 percent - 9 percent
Public Off-Street 730 420 58 percent - 3 percent
NCTD 511 486 95 percent + 85 percent
Private Off-Street 5,445 2,480 46 percent + 3 percent
Study Area Total 11,657 7,212 62 percent + 1percent
3. New 500-
Space Parking
Garage (2035)
On-Street 4,971 4,073 82 percent - 4 percent
Public Off-Street 730 440 60 percent 0 percent
New Garage 500 500 100 percent Not Applicable
NCTD 511 50 10 percent No Change
Private Off-Street 5,445 2,030 37 percent - 5 percent
Study Area Total 12, 157 7,093 58 percent - 3 percent
NOTE: The table represents the parking conditions during the system-wide peak period. Individual facilities may peak at different times of the day.
Appendix B – Technical Memorandum #2 provides greater detail on the analysis for each scenario.
Although the future development is going to further constrain the parking facilities, there is still ample parking
supply within the study area. With proper management, the existing parking can be utilized more efficiently so
Parking Management Plan | Page 68
that parking remains available throughout the study area. The Parking Management Strategies section
discusses in greater detail how this can be achieved.
Recommendations for Implementation
The evaluation of the future parking conditions in the study area concluded that while there are certain areas
of the parking system that experience constraints, overall the parking system in the study area was
underutilized. This suggests that the city’s parking system is not balanced. With proper management, the
system could be more efficient and can create greater availability of existing parking in high-demand areas.
The evaluation, using the Park+ model, showed that the use of shared and leased parking could more
efficiently distribute and absorb demand. Also, using
the results from the model, coupled with the case
study research, the evaluation determined that the
shared and leased parking strategy could be more
effective at improving the parking conditions in the
study area than construction of a new garage. Based
on the results of the analysis, it is recommended that
the city move forward with the shared and leased
parking approach under Scenario 2 and implement TDM and other parking management strategies to manage
the parking system more effectively prior to constructing a new public parking garage. The following
summarizes the reasoning for the recommendation of Scenario 2.
Scenario 2 can produce similar, if not better, results than constructing new parking without the substantial
economic investment.
The frustrations with parking in the study area do not stem from a lack of parking supply, but rather how much
of that supply is available for the public to use. Therefore, the investment in new parking is not necessary
when a more cost-effective and beneficial solution is to manage the existing and planned parking supply.
Scenario 2 evaluates the impacts of one parking management strategy, shared and leased parking.
Sharing existing parking facilities is a management solution that could benefit the entire community by making
better use of the existing parking supply, creating availability of more spaces, and relieving frustrations from
those using the parking facilities. Shared and leased parking could be encouraged in private, underutilized lots
throughout the study area. These lots can meet their business demands and have available spaces for other
users. Those extra spaces could be opened to the public. Specific recommendations regarding shared and
leased parking can be found in the Parking Management Strategies section.
Based on the results of the analysis, it is
recommended that the City move forward with
the shared and leased parking approach and
implement TDM and other parking
management strategies to manage the parking
system more effectively and create greater
parking availability in high-demand areas.
Parking Management Plan | Page 69
The city should actively promote shared and leased parking to move towards the creation of an integrated
network of parking offerings that provides a benefit to private landowners as well as the parking users. Often,
municipalities provide incentives to private parking facilities to open their lots to employees or visitors
dependent on complementing each user group’s peak demand hours or available supply. Incentives used in
other communities include providing annual striping or other maintenance services for the facility, providing
direct financial payment funded through in-lieu fees or revenues from the parking system, or provide
marketing and advertising platforms that network participating businesses to promote cross-patronage.
This is a more cost-effective solution to balancing the parking demands in the study area than building new
parking. For cost purposes in this study, it was assumed that these spaces would be constructed in an above-
ground parking garage based on cost estimates for underground facilities that vary greatly dependent on the
site. Since a specific site is not identified for this study, generalizations had to be made to consider the cost
estimates. The city can explore the option of underground parking; however, it is more expensive than above-
ground parking.
It is estimated that the cost of constructing an above-ground parking garage is $20,000 per space9. Therefore,
a facility with 500 spaces would cost approximately $10 million for construction only. This excludes costs
associated with land acquisition and other associated costs for surveying, design, etc. The cost to build the 500
spaces is independent of the footprint or number of facilities, as it is based on a per space average cost. In
addition to this cost, operation and maintenance costs range between $500 and $800 per space annually
(approximately $250,000 to $400,000 per year for the facility). From a land perspective, a three-level facility
with 500 spaces would require approximately 1.6 acres of land. The cost for construction, operation, and
maintenance is discussed in greater detail in Appendix B – Technical Memorandum #2.
Furthermore, the future of vehicle ownership over the next 10 to 30 years is in question due to the rise of
participation in rideshare options (Uber and Lyft) as well as the anticipated introduction of the autonomous
vehicle. Many garage developers are considering adaptive design of garages. If the garage is no longer
necessary in the future it can easily be converted to another use10, 11. The change to a car-light society will be
gradual and there is no way of knowing when the impacts will affect the city. However, it should be
considered as the parking program progresses because the way we park over the next 10 to 30 years will
change and an investment in a garage, when it is not needed, may not be the best use of public funds.
9 “Parking Structure Cost Outlook for 2016”, Carl Walker
10 LA Times, When Car Ownership Fades, This Parking Garage Will Be Ready for its Next Life, April 16, 2017
11 Road and Track, A Big Makeover Is Coming to the Parking Garage of the Future Thanks to Autonomy, July 16, 2016
Parking Management Plan | Page 70
Scenario 2 improves mobility and access throughout the entire study area.
A goal of the city is to provide greater mobility options in the study area and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. Construction of new parking may improve mobility for vehicles in the area where the parking
facility is constructed, but does little to improve mobility for other types of transportation such as walking,
bicycling, and transit. Scenario 2 focuses on parking management through shared and leased parking. As a
result, congestion and mobility in the area will improve because drivers won’t have to circle to find available
parking.
Scenario 2 supports the city’s initiatives to become more sustainable.
Construction of a new parking facility does not support the city’s sustainability goal. A new parking facility
reinforces and encourages the use of personal vehicles. It is not sustainable to invest long-term in auto-centric
strategies, but rather to improve mobility across all modes of transportation.
For these reasons, it is recommended that the city not construct a new parking garage at this time, but rather
strengthen and improve shared and leased parking in the study area and implement other parking
management and TDM strategies to create a more balanced and efficient parking system.
Parking Management Plan | Page 71
Parking Management Strategies
Parking management strategies consist of policies
and practices working together to improve parking
efficiency. The data analyses described in previous
sections indicate that frustrations with parking stem
from inefficiencies and imbalances in the system, not
a lack of parking spaces. To address the demand
imbalance and maximize the use of available spaces,
it is recommended that parking management
strategies be implemented prior to construction of a
new parking garage.
Parking management strategies improve access to
businesses, balance the entire system, reduce occupancies by guiding people to appropriate places to park,
and relieve user frustrations. Additionally, when coupled with TDM strategies, parking management supports
the mobility, access, and sustainability goals of the city.
A number of the parking management strategies will be proposed, funded, and implemented through the
annual Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which is developed through a collaborative process involving
different city departments and ultimately adopted by the City Council. CIPs related to parking management
include reconstructing curb returns to provide additional on street parking; reconfiguring streets to designate
space for walking, biking and parking; and for curb lane management projects. Other parking management
strategies are programmatic in nature (such as parking enforcement, shared and leased parking, paid parking,
etc.) and will be implemented through annual budget appropriations and/or through public/private and
interagency agreements.
The following sections describe parking management strategies recommended for the city.
On-Street Parking Reconfiguration and Curb Lane Management
There are currently 4,971 on-street parking spaces in the study area which are most visible to visitors and
business patrons. This section discusses strategies for possible reconfiguration of on-street spaces. This
section also addresses curb lane management strategies to balance user needs including commercial and
passenger loading, on-street parking, safety restrictions, ADA access, etc.
Parking Management Plan | Page 72
On-Street Parking Reconfigurations
Reconfiguring existing parking can add spaces to the system. The following methods can result in new spaces.
Red curb to parking spaces
Red curb areas restrict parking and past installation practices have been inconsistent and seemingly
haphazard; however, as development and land use changes, these red curbs may no longer be necessary
allowing them to be converted into parallel and angled parking. Thoughtful consideration into the application,
periodic review, and maintenance of red curbs should be given to ensure that they are appropriate and their
intended use is fulfilled.
Red curbs exist for safety, including providing safe sight-lines near intersections and driveways and safe access
for parked vehicles, transit stops, and fire hydrant access and often for bicycle parking ‘corrals’. As land use
and infrastructure conditions change, the need for a portion or the entire red curb may no longer be required.
To assess the need for a red curb to remain when land use changes occur, a technical review and analysis
should be conducted. This analysis must include traffic safety best practices, the city’s street design manual,
and surrounding context along the curb to determine whether a red curb area could be converted into parking
spaces or other public use. These reviews should be conducted on a case-by-case basis as developments
change or if questioned by the public, developer, or city.
If deemed unnecessary, the curb area can be converted to vehicle parking if contiguous 24-foot for parallel
spaces or 12-foot sections for diagonal spaces of curb are available. An additional 5 feet of buffer on either
end of an angled parking area or space is also necessary. While this strategy may only yield a limited number
of new parking spaces, it is a highly cost-effective method for delivering new parking and should be pursued
when applicable and appropriate.
Curb cuts and driveways to parking spaces
Unnecessary curb cuts can limit on-street parking supply. The city should carefully analyze curb cuts to define
areas where closures can occur and additional on-street parking can be implemented.
Curb cuts and driveways provide access to properties and facilitate efficient movement between the property
and the roadway. Regulated by city code and development agreements, some curb cuts and driveways may no
longer be necessary as land uses and access needs change over time. To convert a curb cut or driveway into
new parking, a study must be conducted to determine if access remains necessary. If determined to be
unnecessary, the curb cut or driveway is chained off or new curb is installed. Red curb related to the driveway
also may be removed. If there is enough space for parked vehicles along the new curb, additional spaces could
be added into the parking system for each contiguous 22-foot for parallel spaces or 12-foot for angled spaces
Parking Management Plan | Page 73
segment of conversion. An additional 5 foot of buffer on either end of an angled parking area or space is also
necessary. Even though the amount of curb cut and driveway removal is likely limited in the study area and
any new spaces are likely to be limited, this method for providing additional on-street parking should be
pursued.
Parallel parking spaces to angled parking spaces
Some roadways have large amounts of right-of-way dedicated to vehicular travel. In certain instances, this
right-of-way can be minimized to reconfigure parallel parking spaces into angled parking spaces, providing
additional parking capacity and the added benefit of traffic calming. Additionally, restriping parallel parking to
angled parking is a relatively low cost option for providing more on-street parking supply. This conversion type
requires several factors:
• At least 49 feet of right-of-way for angled parking along both curbs
• At least 44 feet of right-of-way for angled parking along one curb
• Low traffic volumes and low vehicular speeds
• Recommended on roads with two lanes of travel – Roads with four lanes could be acceptable in
certain conditions as determined by the city, however, four lane roads typically have higher traffic
volumes and higher speeds. Providing angled parking on four lane roadways increases the
likelihood of crashes and conflicts with other motorists and bicyclists.
If these conditions are met, further analysis of safety conditions and street design standards will help
determine the feasibility of creating additional parking spaces. A new angled parking space may be created for
each 12 feet of contiguous curb space and 5 feet of buffer on either end of the angled parking area. Because
multiple roadways meet the criteria for parallel to angled parking conversion, a significant number of new
spaces might be created pending site-specific analysis.
There are two types of angled parking spaces:
Parking Management Plan | Page 74
• Front-In Angled Parking – This type of angled
parking requires the user to pull into a parking space
with the front of their vehicle in the direction of
travel on the roadway. Front-in angled parking is the
most common form of angled parking and is easy for
users to enter the space. It is, however, difficult to
back out of parking spaces with this configuration,
since visibility is nearly often obscured and drivers
back into the street ‘blind’, making this
configuration less safe than back-in angled parking
(see below) for bicyclists.
• Back-In Angled Parking – This type of parking requires the user to back into a parking space with
the rear of the vehicle in the opposite direction of travel. The back-in angled parking strategy has
been adopted because of the safety enhancements realized for users leaving a parking space. A
user can easily see oncoming traffic (and bicyclists) and exit the parking space in a much safer
manner.
Angled parking uses more right-of-way than
parallel parking and may preclude additional
bicycle enhancements along the roadway. If a
bikeway is planned adjacent to an area with angled
parking, back-in angled parking is recommended to
enhance sight lines between drivers and bicyclists.
Back-in angle parking is safer for bicyclists, and as
noted above, is usually safer for drivers as well.
Many drivers initially feel uncomfortable with back-
in angle parking because it is uncommon and
requires a backing movement within an active
travel lane. This, however, is a less complicated
Front-in angle parking in Carlsbad
Back-in angled parking in Oceanside (Image: Google Street View)
Parking Management Plan | Page 75
movement than the typical parallel parking maneuver that drivers are well accustomed to.
Intentional consideration of on-street parking and development of a consistent policy that incorporates the
process for on-street parking configurations while balancing other curb lane uses is provided through Curb
Lane Management, which is discussed in greater detail below.
Curb Lane Management
The city should consider the implementation of a curb lane program that helps define a more prioritized and
dynamic use of the curb lane as the community evolves. A curb lane management program defines practices,
policies, and tools to better utilize curb space in an urban setting.
Establishing a curb lane management program creates a cohesive and consistent curb structure that is easy to
understand, use, and manage, which helps the city achieve its larger community goals. A curb lane
management program prioritizes and organizes curb lane uses in a manner that:
• Supports business vitality, without compromising the character and vitality of residential
neighborhoods
• Creates a clear and consistent messaging and management system that reduces confusion and
promotes use of transit and other modes of transportation
• Helps manage expectations when parking and will therefore improve the parking experience
Additionally, the curb lane management program is adaptable to changing conditions as the city grows over
time. Curb lane management helps guide management and implementation decisions for new developments,
thus maintaining the established structure of curb lane uses over time. Curb lane uses are consolidated along
each block, in accordance with the surrounding land uses, to provide a standard structure. A standard
structure with supportive policies creates predictability, which decreases the amount of confusion on knowing
where to park. Curb lanes can also be made flexible to accommodate different user during different times of
the day (e.g. commercial loading zones in the morning and general public use for passenger pick-up and drop-
off in the evening).
Figure 15 illustrates the concept of curb lane management. The image on the left provides an example of
unstructured curb lane uses. The space along the curb is inefficiently used, with most of the curb along the
north (top) dedicated to passenger loading and the southern curb not used to its full potential. The image on
the right demonstrates structured curb uses in which the same curb uses are consolidated to use available
curb space more efficiently.
Parking Management Plan | Page 76
Figure 15: Example of Curb Lane Structure
Example of Unstructured Curb Lane Uses Example of Structured Curb Lane Uses
The strategies of a curb lane management program are intended to improve overall mobility throughout the
study area. People can easily navigate to appropriately designated curb space, thus reducing the number of
conflicts and parking violations and improving access to businesses. Signage associated with curb lane
management should have the same theme, branding, and messaging style as the wayfinding signage already
implemented in the study area. Figure 16 compares images of existing curb lane signage in the study area and
an example that illustrates signage incorporated into a consistent city-wide parking theme. Disabled Parking
spaces should be located at the tail end of the block so that users can easily access the existing ADA curb
ramps. The 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design and the Public Rights of Way Accessibility Guidelines
provide details on space placements and frequency.
Parking Management Plan | Page 77
Figure 16: Example of Curb Lane Signage
Example of Signage Without Branding Theme Example of Signage Incorporated into Brand Theme
Source: City of Seattle
Recommended On-Street Reconfiguration and Curb Lane Management Strategies
The following strategies are recommended for the City:
• Review red curbs and driveway closures on a programmatic basis – Using red curb location data
collected (Spring 2017) during the development of the PMP and other data sources, the city
engineer should conduct a comprehensive and area-wide review to determine safety and access
priorities of each red curb and driveway to determine the possibility of removal or closure. If
acceptable to remove red curb markings or close driveways based on safety protocols, the city can
then determine whether there is sufficient space to convert to on-street parking. An on-street
parking space requires 24 feet of contiguous space in a parallel parking configuration. If 24 feet is
not available, a new parking space cannot be added to the curb lane. When adequate space is
available, there is an opportunity to convert that space to on-street parking.
• Consider angled parking – Angled parking, either front-in or back-in, could replace existing parallel
parking on roadways that meet the following criteria:
At least 49 feet of right-of-way for angled parking along both curbs
Existing street
signage in Carlsbad
Parking Management Plan | Page 78
At least 44 feet of right-of-way for angled parking along one curb
Low traffic volumes and low vehicular speeds
Recommended on roads with two lanes of travel – Roads with four lanes could be
acceptable in certain conditions as determined by the city, however, four lane roads
typically have higher traffic volumes and higher speeds. Providing angled parking on
four lane roadways increases the likelihood of crashes and conflicts with other motorists
and bicyclists.
These conversions will be identified based on the programmatic review of curb lane restrictions.
• Develop a specific curb lane management program – Define a consistent approach for
reconfiguration of the curb lane, including parking, transit, loading (passenger and commercial),
and business support. Curb lane management strategies should support the City’s investment in
livable streets, which recognizes the street as a public space and ensures that the public space
serves everyone (elderly, children, bicycles, pedestrians, persons with disabilities, etc.) within the
urban context of that system (e.g., accounting for all adjacent land uses). Vehicle parking is only
one consideration. Examples of curb lane strategies include the following:
Structure delivery services – The city has received complaints about delivery vehicles
blocking travel lanes during peak times of day. To address this, the city should consider
prioritizing commercial loading during off-peak times (e.g., times of day that avoid 7
p.m. on a weekend and 1 p.m. on a weekday) or require delivery services to use alleys
(through signage) during peak conditions to reduce the potential conflict. The
prioritization of loading could include flexible loading areas (e.g., all on-street parking
spaces) in morning periods and restrictive loading areas (e.g., limited loading zones
spread throughout the area) in peak conditions.
Prioritize curb lane uses – It is important to identify block-face priorities and develop
guiding standards that follow these prioritizations. The guidelines communicate how the
city intends to manage parking and other curb lane assets to businesses and landowners
who wish to request certain business-supporting uses along the curb. Business-
supporting uses include loading areas, valet staging, curb cafes, and other business-
specific uses that only serve the adjacent use rather than the community as a whole.
Parking Management Plan | Page 79
Parking Time Limits
One of the basic initial tools to manage parking allocation and
demand is to implement parking regulations in the form of
time limits. This approach provides guidance on the proper
use of parking and is intended to help balance demands
between short- and long-term users and allocate demand
appropriately among resources. This technique is particularly
effective in the on-street parking environment, where spaces
need to turnover to support short-term transactions at retail
and commercial businesses. An example of a long-term user is
an employee, who will be parked for multiple hours, if not all
day. There is an existing imbalance between parking within
the study area where long-term parkers are using on-street spaces rather than off-street spaces. For instance,
the public survey responses indicated that 64 percent of the employees said they were parking in on-street
spaces, directly in front of or close to their place of work. These employees are occupying on-street spaces for
long periods of time when they should be parking in an off-street facility. The on-street spaces should be made
available for customers and short-term parkers so that access to businesses is maintained. As demonstrated in
the Vancouver Peer City Highlight box later in the plan, higher parking turnover equates to increased sales.
None of the peer cities reviewed for this study has a coordinated curb lane program; however,
several cities identified for the development of the San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG) Regional Parking Management Toolbox had strategies and practices related to the
curb lane. Although not a peer city, the City of Charlotte completed the Uptown Curb Lane
Management Program in 2011, developed in response to public feedback related to signage
and confusing messaging about curbside parking requirements. The goal of the program was
to provide a clear and consistent curb lane structure and ensure that the curb lane uses made
sense in relation to the adjacent land uses. The program’s mission was to properly serve and
support business, residents, commuters, employees, and other users.
Source: SANDAG Regional Parking Management Toolbox, http://www.sdforward.com/mobility-planning/parking-toolbox
Peer City Highlights
Parking Management Plan | Page 80
The technique is only as effective as the enforcement practices that support the policies. If enforcement is
consistent, the time limits will promote turnover. If enforcement is inconsistent, the public will take more
chances because they know they are likely to get away with parking violations.
The following strategies are recommended for the city:
Maintain and enforce existing time limits
– data collected and analyzed as part of
this study indicate that the two- and
three-hour time limit restrictions are
currently adequate for supporting
turnover in the study area. The data
showed that most people in the Village
(where time limit regulations are
currently posted) parked for two hours or
less. This indicates that the existing time
limits of two and three hours is
reasonable for the study area. However,
the survey data also indicated that
employees of businesses in the study
area park in on-street spaces directly
adjacent to their destination. This
indicates the need for proactive enforcement to encourage employees to park off-street.
The annual collection of parking occupancy and duration data can be used to adjust time limit
regulations to meet the changing needs of the community. In some instances, it may be suitable to
implement shorter time limits to influence turnover or longer time limits to influence a shift in
demand.
Extend time limits to new areas – According to the buildout (2035) projections, commercial
development is planned to intensify in the Village, particularly along Grand Avenue through the length
of the study area (from Ocean Street to I-5), and on streets between Grand Avenue and Oak Avenue.
To encourage turnover in these areas and support business access, it would be beneficial to implement
time limit restrictions along those streets. Although the Master Plan calls for future growth in these
areas, real growth may occur differently than what is anticipated. Therefore, the city should evaluate
parking occupancies and duration annually in conjunction with a review of commercial developments
to identify areas of commercial growth and expand the time limit restrictions to support those
developments. In the beach area, this annual review is of particular importance so coastal access is
maintained. During annual review, the beach areas should be evaluated separately, as well as in
conjunction with the larger system, to determine the best approach for managing parking time limits in
that area. Figure 17 illustrates the opportunity area for expanding time limits.
Extend parking time limits after 5 p.m. to 4 hours – If parking enforcement hours are extended to 8
p.m., the time limits during this time should also be adjusted. In the evening, people come to the area
San Luis Obispo – Variable time limits in
different parts of the downtown area are
based on actual parking demands to help
manage access to businesses in areas with
a higher competition for spaces. Longer
time limits are applied in areas where
lower demands are observed, while shorter
time limits are applied in areas with higher
observed demand.
Peer City Highlights
Parking Management Plan | Page 81
for nightlife activities, such as dining. Parking for restaurants requires a slightly longer time period than
retail, which for retail is about two or three hours. The existing daytime parking limits are adequate to
accommodate the daytime demands; however, the city should extend the time limits to four hours
after 5 p.m. to allow patrons to visit restaurants and other nightlife destinations without worrying
about receiving a citation. It is important to maintain parking time limit restrictions after 5 p.m. to
encourage turnover of spaces, since 7 p.m. is the peak parking period in the study area.
Revise overnight parking restrictions – The current overnight parking restrictions are in place to
prevent non-residential users from parking on the street. However, this has restricted access to on-
street parking by the residents, especially at the north end of State Street where more residential
housing is being constructed. Going forward, the city should assess the necessity of maintaining the
overnight restrictions, then resort to other parking management solutions if necessary.
Revise Oversize Vehicle Ordinance – During the public outreach process, many participants noted that
RVs, trailers, and other oversized vehicles are parking on-street for long periods of time. The Oversized
Vehicles Ordinance allows RVs and other oversized vehicles to park on the street for a consecutive 72-
hours. It is recommended that the city consider reducing the time RVs are allowed to park on-street to
24-hours. The city should also implement a graduated fine for repeat offenders. Each time the same RV
is in violation of the parking regulation, the fine will increase. The intent of this recommendation is to
limit long-term RV parking or camping on city streets while maintaining public access to the beach for
recreational purposes. It is not recommended to provide off-street parking for oversized vehicles as
this will unintentionally encourage “camping” in the off-street parking facilities.
Provide time limit information on city website – Develop program information to be placed on the
city’s existing website. This includes an interactive map that shows parking facilities, number of spaces
available and any associated time limits or restrictions. The intent is to provide easy-to-access
information on parking regulations throughout the study area.
Evaluate and Update Municipal Ordinance – The ordinance should be updated to support the changes
to time limits, such as streets with time limits, time limit restrictions, oversize vehicle ordinance, and
enforcement.
Parking Management Plan | Page 82
Figure 17: Time Limit Expansion Opportunity Area
Parking Management Plan | Page 83
Enforcement and Ambassadors
Enforcing existing and proposed parking regulations is critical to the success of the program. Parking
enforcement should be conducted regularly and consistently and with a focus on customer service. For
instance, if an area has two-hour time limits, the route for the enforcement personnel needs to be completed
in two hours. Active enforcement encourages compliance with the parking regulations through education and
citations, thus maximizing the use of the existing parking resources.
The following strategies are recommended for the city.
• Prohibition of On-Street Storage of Oversized and Recreational Vehicles – To discourage possible
long-term storage of oversized and recreational vehicles or urban camping on public right-of-way,
and increase coastal access for the general public, increased enforcement effort of overnight
parking prohibitions would effectively manage the abuse of on-street parking by oversized vehicles.
• Evaluate parking enforcement resources and strategies – The findings of this study conclude that
proactive enforcement is necessary to ensure compliance with parking time limits. Based on
conversations with Police Department staff, the city currently does not have the resources to
proactively manage enforcement operations on a regular basis. It is recommended that the City
phase in more regular enforcement in high demand areas and expand enforcement as resources
allow. Proactive enforcement is required for the parking within the study area to function. The
recommendations held within this Plan will be ineffectual if proper enforcement is not
implemented. Therefore, finding enforcement resources is paramount to the success of the parking
program. Options for enforcement include:
Self-Operation – The city operates the parking program itself. This entails that the Police
Department maintains responsibility for enforcement and commits to proactive
enforcement. This requires that the Police Department dedicates some portion of staff
to regularly enforcing the parking system. Regular enforcement, however, does not
mean that an officer needs to make rounds hourly, or even daily throughout the study
area. It means that an officer must make rounds periodically and frequently enough to
encourage compliance. Please see the recommendation below for more information on
this sporadic approach to enforcement.
Management Contract – The city contracts a private parking management firm to
handle day-to-day operations and maintenance through a management contract.
Through the management contract, the private parking management firm is either paid
a fixed management fee and/or a percentage of gross revenues and is reimbursed by
the city for all costs incurred in the operation. Contract options are discussed in greater
detail in the Parking Program Administration section.
Concession Agreement – The city contracts a parking management firm to assume full
responsibility for all aspects of the operation, including expenses, and the parking
management firm pays the city a guaranteed amount and/or a percentage of gross
revenues (or a combination).
Parking Management Plan | Page 84
• The city may investigate contracting enforcement operations to a third party that that could handle
day-to-day enforcement. The contracted company could be instructed by the city through either
the Police Department, which currently enforces parking, or through the Public Works Department
under the direction of the new parking manager. Enforcement could occur according to how the
city dictates (first offense warnings, ambassador-style approach, etc.).
• Sporadic enforcement patterns – Introduction of a consistent enforcement presence can cause
some members of the public to react negatively because parking has been unregulated, and change
is sometimes uncomfortable. To minimize the presence of enforcement, enforcement can be
conducted on sporadic schedules. The same pattern of enforcement should not be repeated each
day. Rather, a few days a week of intensive, targeted enforcement should occur in the study area.
The sporadic nature of enforcement keeps the public from learning the enforcement pattern. The
public is then more likely to comply with parking regulations and use the parking spaces as
intended.
• Consistency with enforcement – Increase enforcement resources over time to be more consistent
if necessary. This would include providing more routine enforcement in high-demand commercial
areas and increased focus in areas with high levels of repeat offenses.
• Extend enforcement hours to 8 p.m. – The peak parking period in the study area is 7 p.m.;
therefore, the parking should be enforced at least through 7 p.m. to ensure that turnover occurs to
provide more parking availability. The enforcement hours need to be consistent with the business
peaking to ensure that patrons can find parking and employees are not allowed to park on-street
directly in front of or adjacent to businesses.
• Enforcement officers as ambassadors – Parking enforcement personnel should be trained to serve
as community ambassadors, serving the dual role of enforcing parking time limit regulations and
providing friendly customer service by helping patrons navigate the community and orient
themselves within the various areas of the city.
• First offense warnings – Do not penalize first-time offenders with a citation, but rather use the
opportunity to educate on how and where to park legally with a friendly warning. A warning should
have a different look from a regular citation (e.g., different color paper) and provide information on Peer City Highlights The cities of San Luis Obispo, Monterey, and Dana Point all have dedicated park staff ranging
from 5 to 10 full time equivalents. San Luis Obispo and Monterey both operate as enterprise
funds meaning that all revenue generated is reinvested into the parking system and
operations. Both also operate within separate parking divisions of the city. All three enforce
violations with punitive fines unless there is an extraordinary circumstance or new regulation
in which case short educational periods of warning citations are used.
Parking Management Plan | Page 85
parking regulations in the study area (e.g., time limits, hours of enforcement). The warning also
could include a map of restricted parking locations and available off-street public parking. The
intent is to encourage compliance through education rather than through citation. People will
appreciate that they did not receive a ticket, thus creating a positive perception of enforcement
and parking in the area. Additionally, they will likely park correctly the next time, which contributes
to the system operating more efficiently for all people in the area.
• Graduated fine structure – In conjunction with the first-time warning approach, implement a
graduated fine structure that becomes more punitive for habitual offenders. Citation information
should be recorded and saved in a database so that officers in the field can access the data using
hand-held devices to determine if the vehicle has multiple offenses. Database management tools
are discussed in the Technology section of this report. As an example, the fine structure could be
structured as follows:
1st Offense – $0 fine with a warning educating the user
2nd Offense – $25 fine with an explanation on the ticket of how and where to park. The
intent is to ensure compliance through education, not harsher punishments
3rd Offense – $50 fine
4th Offense – $100 fine
• Use advanced technology – The Police Department has recently invested in handheld technology
for streamlining enforcement practices. The handheld devices are efficient for capturing violation
and vehicle data and issuing citations. The data is entered manually by an officer as they make the
rounds. This type of technology is adequate for the current parking system in the study area.
However, as the area becomes more developed and the parking system more complex, another
form of technology may be necessary to further enhance enforcement operations.
This PMP recommends the city acquire advanced parking enforcement equipment, including
mobile vehicle mounted license plate recognition (LPR) and ticketing devices to use in day-to-day
operations and support ongoing data collection. This equipment will improve staff efficiency and
allow for better communication with data servers that can be accessed to manage permit and
citation data. The city is currently investing in stationary LPR cameras along major roadways as part
of safety and traffic enforcement. Since these cameras will be stationary, it will be difficult to
enforce parking throughout the study area as the cameras will not be able to capture license plates
from a great distance. As the enforcement program expands, mobile LPR cameras mounted on
enforcement vehicles will be necessary to quickly cover an expanded enforcement area. These
technologies are discussed in the Technology section of this report.
• Provide information to public – Publish enforcement information, including citation types and fine
structure on the city website. Use this location to also educate users about where to park based on
parking type (e.g., short-term vs. long-term, or patron vs. employee). After years of little
enforcement, people have become accustomed to parking wherever they want for as long as they
want. Once enforcement becomes consistent and regular, people may become frustrated if not
warned that enforcement practices are changing. Transparency of information and education on
Parking Management Plan | Page 86
the changes (why they are happening, where they are taking place, and what it means for people)
will reduce frustrations. First-offense warnings and enforcement officers as ambassadors also help
to soften the negative perception of parking enforcement.
• Evaluate and Update the Carlsbad Municipal Code – Ordinance should be updated to support the
changes to enforcement, such as authorities, enforcement hours, enforcement practices, rate
structures, etc.
Although not a peer city, a study in Vancouver, BC concluded that sales increased due to
higher parking turnover rates because each parking space could accommodate more
customers throughout the day. Having enforcement practices and regulations that promote
turnover can have beneficial economic impacts. With a turnover rate of 5.6 vehicles per day,
average retail transaction of $31.55, and 303 shopping days in a year, the potential retail sales
per occupied stall was found to be $53,534 per year.
Source: Employee Parking in Downtown Vancouver, WA, City of Vancouver, WA (2014) Peer City Highlights
Parking Management Plan | Page 87
Shared and Leased Parking
Shared and leased parking allows two or more land uses to utilize the same parking facility without conflict.
The intent is to optimize the use of the parking supply so that parking is not underutilized. The practice of
shared and leased parking works best with a mixture of nearby land uses that have offsetting peak conditions,
such as an office and a church. Typically, shared and leased parking is a tool that is used between private
businesses. However, cities can and do participate in shared and leased parking opportunities. Businesses
closed on weekends and evenings, for example, present opportunities the city could explore as potential
public parking resources throughout the Village.
Shared and leased parking is an option for private property owners and the city who wish to participate in the
program. The intent is to provide more options for property owners to make meeting parking demands more
affordable by optimizing the use of existing parking resources. A shared parking agreement may exist between
the city and private property owners, or two or more private property owners (this includes existing and new
development). The city’s role will be to standardize the process, broker agreements, analyze parking supplies
and demands annually and relay this information to property owners and developers and the public so that
they understand the data and what it could mean for their business or property.
The following modifications are recommended to the city’s Shared Parking policy.
• Develop standard liability language – The city currently does not have standard liability coverage
for shared and leased parking agreements. The parking manager, discussed later in this document,
should explore standard shared and leased parking agreements from peer and/or other example
cities, such as San Clemente’s Offsite Shared Parking Agreement, for appropriate liability and other
agreement language that would be desirable by the city.
• Maintain and broker shared and leased parking agreements to encourage development – The
parking program should be responsible for actively brokering shared and leased parking
agreements for existing businesses and new development using the known inventory of parking
spaces, occupancy data from this study, and subsequent updates based on annual data collection
efforts to help define opportunity areas. For shared and leased parking to be successfully
implemented, the city needs to play a very active role in both identifying shared and leased parking
opportunities in high-demand areas and negotiating agreements for the shared use of the parking
facility. Shared and leased parking can be between two or more private businesses (existing and/or
new development) or between the city and private businesses (existing and/or new development),
where the private business decides to open its parking facility to the public during non-business
hours.
Identify parking that is underutilized (50 percent or lower occupancies) and is within
1,320 feet (quarter mile, which has been identified in the Draft Village and Barrio
Master Plan as an acceptable walking tolerance in the study area) to the business.
Underutilized parking facilities will be identified on an annual basis as part of the annual
data collection.
Parking Management Plan | Page 88
o For instance, in the Park+ modeling, facilities observed at 50 percent occupied or
less were identified and recategorized to demonstrate the impact of such
agreements on the parking demand distribution. This metric, however, can be
adapted as opportunities are reviewed, if needed.
o While any facility that is consistently observed below effective capacity can be a
good candidate for a shared and leased parking agreement, the greatest impact
will be achieved through incorporation of those facilities with lower occupancies
that can realistically absorb more vehicles. For instance, a surface lot with 100
parking spaces that averages 50 percent occupancy may provide a greater return
on effort in negotiating an agreement than a surface lot of the same size that
averages 80 percent occupancy. However, if the lot with the lower occupancy is in
an area that does not already experience high demand, a shared or leased parking
agreement will have little to no effect on redistributing the demand. Therefore,
both occupancy and location must be evaluated in identifying shared and leased
parking opportunities.
Revise existing distance requirements for shared parking from 300 feet (as stated in the
existing Village Master Plan) to the longer distance of 1,320 feet, which is generally
considered an acceptable 5-minute walk and is recommended in the proposed Master
Plan.
Annual data collection results should be made public with specific analysis of shared and
leased parking efficiencies and areas of opportunity provided to private property
owners in order to inform them regarding their options regarding parking as it relates to
future new developments and expansions.
Use incentives to encourage businesses and developers to participate in shared and
leased parking agreements. Incentives successfully utilized in other communities
include:
o Reductions to parking minimum requirements
o Maintenance services (e.g. line striping or lot cleaning)
o Provision of liability insurance to help cover risk for private property owners
As with any parking facility, the pedestrian experience should be considered when
evaluating potential facilities for shared and leased parking opportunities. This includes
a safe path of travel between the parking facility and destination that is well illuminated,
has clear wayfinding and signage, and is designed to promote a walkable, park-once
mentality for residents, employees, and visitors in the area. Also, it is important to keep
in mind that many pedestrians need to utilize assistive devices, such as wheelchairs and
walkers. ‘Universal’ accommodations should be provided.
• Utilize shared and leased parking opportunities to create off-site employee parking – Define
specific employee parking opportunities where employees who work in the study area can park in
the designated facility. This can be accomplished through outreach and education or through a
Parking Management Plan | Page 89
permit program. This approach works best when on-street parking is regulated with time limits or
paid parking, because employees must choose among:
1. receiving a citation for a time limit violation;
2. moving their vehicle every two or three hours to avoid a citation.
Permits can be provided at no cost to further incentivize their use. The city should administer the
permits to employees, with proof of employment in the study area. For instance, the EasyPark
Employee Parking Program in Anchorage, Alaska provides employees of the central retail district
with reduced cost permits that provide access to specific shared and public parking facilities, but
require employees to demonstrate continued employment within the qualifying area on a regular
basis.12 Large-scale permit programs such as these generally permit based on license plates to
prevent pass-back entries often associated with card systems or doubling up on placards.
• Utilize shared and leased parking opportunities for valet parking – Parking valet services can
simplify the parking experience for visitors and is appropriate for popular destinations like the
Village. Underutilized off-street parking facilities can be used to house vehicles that use valet
services, where applicable. The city should broker agreements between valet companies and
parking facility managers to determine the amount of parking that could be set aside for valet use
and the times and days of the week it would be appropriate to share the parking facility. Not only
does this support improved utilization of existing parking assets, but may provide new
developments an additional parking resource.
As previously mentioned, each application of this strategy will be unique to the location and should
be carefully reviewed to determine the optimal location of the valet station, loading zone and
queues, the location of the storage lot, and parking method, as well as the impact of traffic along
the route from the generating land use(s) to the storage lot. Policies should be set to determine
how far a storage lot can be from the destination and around valet service operations should be
managed to ensure neighborhoods are not detrimentally impacted.
The valet could be managed through a centralized valet that serves primary destinations
in the Village. A centralized valet uses one valet operator stationed at strategic locations
throughout the area to serve a large section of the community. This centralized
operation allows patrons to drop their vehicle at one location, walk between multiple
destinations, and pick up their car from another valet stand at another location. This
concept provides greater access to businesses in a district and promotes more active
use of the district. Coral Gables, Florida has a centralized valet program along their
Miracle Mile shopping area that is supported by adjacent businesses and promotes a
much more active environment and has resulted in higher sales returns for restaurants
and businesses in the area.
• Lease parking spaces in existing facilities for public use – Investigate the potential to lease parking
12 Downtown Employee Parking Program – Parking Incentive for Downtown Workers, July 15, 2016
http://www.easyparkalaska.com/latest-news/16-07-
15/Downtown_Employee_Parking_Program_%E2%80%93_Parking_Incentive_for_Downtown_Workers.aspx
Parking Management Plan | Page 90
spaces in underutilized facilities to open those spaces to the public and optimize the available parking
supply in the study area. These locations could be used as Park Once locations that are served by
mobility services that access areas outside of a reasonable walking distance of the leased lots.
• Lease parking spaces in NCTD facilities for public use – NCTD currently owns a significant portion
of right of way along the railroad tracks through the study area. Current plans to double-track the
railroad would use additional right of way, but still leave a surplus of useable space in the future.
This space would be predominately along the western part of the tracks between Tamarack Avenue
and Oak Avenue. Parking along the tracks could provide additional parking for beach access, which
in turn would relieve parking conflicts on residential streets between residents and beach-goers.
Figure 18 on the following page illustrates opportunity areas for leasing additional spaces from
NCTD.
While a portion of this area is currently farther away from many commercial or shared-use opportunity
areas within the Village and northern beach area, the area close to the Village is able to provide new
parking supply that could be of great use and benefit to the Village. Furthermore, even though the
southernmost portion is further from the Village, it could provide substantial parking resources for
beachgoers in the southern portion of the study area. This could alleviate some of the residential
concerns with use of on-street parking by beachgoers. Additionally, if plans to connect the street or
pedestrian network across the tracks are realized, there is a significant opportunity for the location to
serve local businesses, visitors, and employees, especially on the northern end of the potential parking
area. If the connectivity and transportation improvements are not made, the lot could still serve as a
Park Once lot if paired with regular or high-quality mobility services like a trolley or circulator.
All plans for improving parking should include an evaluation of whether adequate disabled parking is
provided in the facility.
• Monitor shared and leased parking
system annually – Annually audit the
shared and leased parking program by
collecting parking occupancy data and
feedback regarding the business and
patron experience. At the same time, the
city should also assess the status of any
shared and leased parking agreements in
place and how well they are functioning.
The city could adjust the program to meet
the needs of the community as it evolves.
Refer to the Parking Program Administration section of this document for further details on data
collection and analysis processes.
While participation in shared and leased parking agreements by private business owners
and developers is optional, including providing access to such private parking facilities
NCTD Rail Corridor – Potential to add more parking as a shared resource
Parking Management Plan | Page 91
for ongoing data collection and analysis of the parking system for the area, the City
should encourage such participation so as to better inform future parking decisions that
will impact all destinations with the given area.
Additionally, private properties that participate in shared and leased parking
agreements are only bound to the negotiated and agreed upon terms of the agreement
specific to their property or parking facility. The property owner has the flexibility to
determine the length of time they wish to participate in shared or leased parking. For
instance, an agreement may be renewable on an annual basis, and the property owner
(or lessee for that matter) may opt to not continue with the arrangement in favor of
expanding their primary building and change their parking supply, subject to city
approval. Property owners must still comply with the city’s parking standards and seek
proper approvals and permits for any changes to parking.
• Evaluate the proposed Master Plan and Carlsbad Municipal Code, as appropriate– Draft and
existing standards should incorporate, as appropriate, recommendations to support shared and
leased parking such as the city process for brokering and managing shared parking agreements, and
other strategies listed above.
The City of Laguna Beach leases spaces from private parking facilities that are
underutilized and remotely located. During the week, the spaces are for City of Laguna
Beach employees, but in the evenings (after 5 p.m.) and on the weekends, the spaces
are available to the public. Consistent wayfinding signage and messaging have been
highly effective in directing the public to the appropriate parking facilities based on
time of day. Peer City Highlights
Parking Management Plan | Page 92
Figure 18: Lease and Shared Parking Opportunity Areas
Parking Management Plan | Page 93
In-Lieu Fees
To encourage economic growth, maintain character, and encourage pedestrian-friendly downtown areas, a
growing number of municipalities allow developers to pay for the construction of parking spaces that they do
not provide on-site, which can then be used for shared and leased parking or other mobility improvements
that reduce parking demand. The city currently has an in-lieu fee program, but this study recommends that the
current program be restructured to minimize underutilized parking facilities and to contribute to mobility
improvements in the area.
In-lieu fee programs are important to not only support economic development in a downtown area, but they
also are a significant funding source for the community. In many communities, in-lieu fee programs fund non-
parking infrastructure improvements, such as alternative transportation measures that reduce parking
demand. The following strategies are recommended for the city.
• Maintain the current in-lieu fee rate – While the city’s current in-lieu fee is less than most of the
peer cities reviewed as part of this Plan (refer to Figure 11 for a comparison of rates), it is
recommended that the city maintain its existing fee. Maintaining the in-lieu fee rates will
incentivize developers to participate in the program, as participation to date has been lower than
optimal for supporting a shared and leased parking environment. The current fee ($11,240) is 60
percent of the estimated cost to construct a structured parking space in San Diego ($20,000 at the
lower end of the estimated range) and does not include land acquisition or other soft costs.
However, because a parking garage was not found to be necessary to accommodate future
demand, the current rate provides a viable revenue source to supply new surface parking ($3,500 -
$5,000 per space plus land and maintenance costs), fund leased and shared parking, and to support
implementation of parking management strategies. Furthermore, maintaining the fee encourages
developers to participate in the program. The city should continually monitor participation in the
in-lieu fee program as well as public parking occupancy rates. The fee should be re-evaluated
periodically as participation rates, program needs, and cost of alternatives change over time.
• Review fees annually – Evaluate the in-lieu fee annually and adjust as needed to prioritize
reinvestment of collected fees with the goals of the overall parking and transportation system. The
goal is to maintain a fee that encourages participation in the program and promote shared parking,
and is high enough to fully fund implementation of a range of parking management strategies. The
city should refer to RSMeans data to evaluate their fees annually. RSMeans data provides
construction costs and will enable the city to determine the cost of constructing a parking space.
Over time, the city should set the in-lieu fee to be no higher than 60 percent (based on current
conditions) of the cost of constructing a structured parking space in the community to encourage
participation in the program. All fees should be used to reinvest back into the parking system and
parking management strategies.
Fees are typically a one-time fee per parking space, and this is currently how the city
collects in-lieu fees. However, there could be future consideration of implementing an
annual fee per parking space, especially if the primary use of the fee is to lease parking
spaces.
Parking Management Plan | Page 94
o Annual fee – although not recommended, an annual fee could be paid over time,
rather than the full rate per space upfront. This method of payment is not
common practice and no peer city currently uses this form of payment for their
in-lieu fee programs. However, the potential benefits could be increased
participation in the in-lieu fee program. Property owners and developers may be
more inclined to participate in the program if the cost is more affordable
upfront.
While this approach could increase participation, it is not recommended for the
city due to the drawbacks associated with this approach. This includes increased
management and enforcement by the city. There will have to be repercussions
for those who do not pay their annual fee, and a process in place for properties
that change ownership or building use. This approach also places greater
importance on annual, if not more frequent, review of the in-lieu fee program.
An annual rate may increase participation in the program substantially and
therefore parking supply and demands, and program usage need to be closely
monitored to ensure a balance of parking is provided.
• Use development regulations to encourage participation in the in-lieu fee program – Current
development in the study area provides ample space to build parking; therefore, there is little
incentive for developers to participate in the in-lieu fee program. As infill development occurs in the
study area, developers will be encouraged to pay the in-lieu fee rather than construct new parking
because the relative value of available space for other uses will increase. The city could also use
development regulations that limit the ability to build surface parking for good urban design reasons:
more efficient use of land, improve aesthetics, reduce heat islands, promote walkability, etc. These
regulations could include location and placement of surface parking, setback requirements, and
general requirements to minimize lots that are primarily composed of surface parking and a smaller
building. An outcome of pursuing such policy may be an even higher participation in the in-lieu fee
program and encouragement of alternatives such as shared and leased parking. Additionally, the city
should actively promote the program during the development review process to encourage
participation.
• Allow funds to pay for parking program improvements – Amend the policies related to the in-lieu
fee program to allow the collected funds to support shared parking and leased parking that the city
will broker. Funds should also be used to support strategies that reduce parking demand in the
area. Eligible projects could include valet services, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian amenities or
programs that encourage ridesharing, which would reduce the need for on-site parking at
businesses and encourage the use of centralized shared parking.
• Consider geographic expansion in the future – As the community develops, the city should
evaluate the need to expand the in-lieu fee area west of the railroad tracks to support new public
demands and maintain proximate walking distances from future shared public parking facilities. If
there is a significant amount of commercial development, the city should re-evaluate the need for
Parking Management Plan | Page 95
expansion. Figure 19 illustrates the areas where future development may present an opportunity
to expand the in-lieu fee program west of the tracks.
• Evaluate the program annually – The intent of evaluating the program annually is to monitor
participation and make changes to structure and rate. Historically, use of the program has been
relatively low. However, in recent years, the usage appears to be increasing. Additionally, the
number of spaces purchased through the program varies. Sometimes a developer only pays for a
couple of spaces and others pay for over 60 spaces. Therefore, it is important that the following
metrics be reviewed annually so that informed decisions can be made regarding the in-lieu fee
program. The following metrics should be tracked and evaluated. The parking manager (discussed
in the Parking Program Administration section) should develop a database to track these metrics
and coordinate with other departments in the city to obtain the necessary information. The results
of these metrics should be released to the public and used as a way of educating and informing
private property owners and the development community so they understand their options, rights,
and abilities to meet their parking needs.
Parking occupancy in and around new developments – Parking occupancy should be
used as the metric that determines when changes to the in-lieu fee program need to
occur. The City should consider adding more public parking through leases and shared
spaces when the parking occupancy threshold within the in-lieu fee boundary reaches
85 percent occupancy.
Type, size, and location of new developments – Understanding where new
development is occurring, the type of developments (residential vs. non-residential),
and how large developments are in terms of square footage or number of units can help
the City make informed decisions about where the in-lieu fee program should expand.
This expansion should primarily occur where developments, such as commercial and
office, are generating higher levels of parking demand and provide the opportunity to
implement shared and leased parking. In the future, if non-residential development
starts to expand to the residential areas in the study area, the City should consider
expanding the boundary of the in-lieu fee area.
Revenue generated – Understanding how much revenue is generated by the in-lieu fee
program will help inform investment decisions of parking management strategies. If the
program is not generating enough revenue to cover parking management strategies
(e.g. lease rates for shared spaces), the city should consider discontinuing portions of
the shared parking program funded by in lieu fees that do not impact participants.
Compare the number of developments participating in the program vs. not
participating – Reviewing how many developments are using in-lieu fees to pay for
parking compared to those that don’t will indicate whether the program and supporting
policies provide enough incentive to encourage participation. As the area becomes more
developed, it is anticipated that more developers will opt to participate in the program
so that they aren’t encumbered by the economic burden of having to provide on-site
parking. To help encourage in-lieu fee participation, leased spaces and TDM
Parking Management Plan | Page 96
improvements should be implemented within a reasonable walking distance (1,320 feet)
to the participating developments.
Number of spaces paid for with the in-lieu fee vs. spaces actually provided (by
development and annual total) – Tracking this will allow the city to easily quantify how
much parking is being added to the parking system (both public and private) in the study
area, and the rate at which parking is being paid for through the in-lieu fee. This
information coupled with parking occupancy data (public vs. private) will inform the city
whether the public parking supply is efficiently meeting demands of participating
developments and the community at large.
• Make the program transparent – Provide information about how the in-lieu fees are utilized to help
promote transparent application of the collected fees. The program website should document
current and historic usage of the fee to help the community understand how the program is working.
Part of this transparency should stem from information released to the public and business
community regarding economic impacts and how they are related to parking availability. It needs to
be made clear to the public and businesses that it is not more parking that supports businesses, but
access to available parking and increased mobility that will contribute to economic success.
• Consider revisions to the proposed Master Plan – The drafting of the Village and Barrio Master
Plan should incorporate the recommended changes to the in-lieu fee program.
Most of the peer cities reviewed had some form of an in-lieu fee program except the City of
Encinitas. The peer cities represent a comparable market for the City of Carlsbad based both
on the size of the city or the character of the community. As such, their in-lieu fee rates
were reviewed to determine the market rates for the area. See Table 5 in Appendix C –
Technical Memorandum #3. Peer City Highlights
Parking Management Plan | Page 97
Figure 19: In-Lieu Fee Program Expansion Area
Parking Management Plan | Page 98
Reduced Parking Requirements
Parking requirements define the amount of on-site parking that various developments must provide.
Traditionally, these requirements have been applied to ensure that specific land uses have adequate parking
supply to meet demand. Although common in many communities, the requirement for each land use to
provide a minimum amount of parking could become detrimental to the economic growth and preservation of
pedestrian-friendly character in the Village and beach area. The intent of establishing reduced parking
requirements is to better align parking requirements with actual parking needs in the community and to
transition to a system that utilizes shared and leased parking supply. Shared and leased parking in
combination with reduced parking requirements for new development would optimize the use of existing
parking while still allowing developers new developments to provide necessary parking on-site. A reduced
number of spaces required encourages mixed-use, pedestrian-scaled development, and can stimulate
economic growth in the area. Given the underutilization of the overall parking system, as observed and
modeled in Park+ and previously discussed in the Future Parking Conditions section, a combination of shared
and leased parking initiatives, participation in the in-lieu fee program, and reduced parking requirements could
promote a more efficient use of existing parking facilities. New developments should only add the parking
necessary to support demands, as outlined in the following strategy recommendations below.
• Implement the parking requirements stated in the Draft Village and Barrio Master Plan – It is
recommended that the city implement the currently proposed rates in the Draft Village and Barrio
Master Plan. As shown in the Park+ modeling (discussed in the Future Conditions section and
detailed in Appendix B – Technical Memorandum #2), current parking requirements have resulted
in an unbalanced distribution of parking assets. The Park+ model generated parking rates are
representative of land use and observed parking occupancies in the study area. National standards
are based on parking occupancy case studies from around the country.
Table 10 compares the study area’s existing rates to the rates in the existing and proposed Master
Plans and the Park+ model. With the exception of restaurants, the table shows that the rates in the
proposed Master Plan are comparable to those derived from the Park+ model, with the Park+
model being slightly lower.
Since the proposed parking requirements in the Draft Master Plan are consistent with findings from
the Park+ model and similar (with the exception of restaurants) to parking requirements of the
peer cities (Table 7), it is recommended that these rates be adopted.
The use of these reduced parking requirements for future developments should help to reduce the
amount of underutilized parking in the study area and move to both right-size the parking system
and promote shared and leased parking, especially as involvement in the city’s in lieu program
increases. Though the restaurant parking rate in the proposed Master Plan is lower than the Park+
model (requiring 8 spaces per 1,000 square feet versus 13 spaces per 1,000 square feet,
respectively), adequate parking supply exists in the study area and the parking management
strategies identify opportunities, such as shared and leased parking, to further increase and
enhance supply. Strategies also recommend monitoring implementation of parking requirements
as well as parking demand and adjustment of parking rates if necessary.
Parking Management Plan | Page 99
Parking requirements are not intended to be reduced to a level where parking spaces are no longer
required for new developments or buildings expansions. Rather, any reductions or changes to
parking requirements will be as a result of parking data collected each year and the resulting
analysis of demands and utilization in the subject area(s). This annual evaluation of the parking
system will allow the parking manager to make informed decisions regarding supply levels,
demand, and mode split usage (transit and shuttle, bicycling, walking, etc.) to determine whether
parking minimums should be decreased or increased.
Table 10: Parking Rates
CITY
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT OFFICE HOTEL SINGLE
FAMILY
MULTI-
FAMILY
GUEST
Carlsbad
Municipal Code
(CMC 21.44)
2 spaces/unit 1.5-2
spaces/unit
0.3 spaces/unit
(up to 10 units);
0.25 spaces/unit
(more than 10
units)
3.3-5 spaces/
1,000 sf3
10 spaces/1,000 sf
if < 4,000 sf; if
4,000 sf or more,
40 spaces plus 20
spaces/1,000 sf in
excess of 4,000 sf
4-5
spaces/
1,000 sf
1.2
spaces/
room
CMC 21.45
(Planned
Developments)
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44, except
guest parking
may be permitted
on-street
n/a n/a n/a n/a
CMC 21.82 (Beach
Area Overlay
Zone)
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44 n/a n/a
n/a n/a
Existing Master
Plan – inside the
Coastal Zone
(Chapter 6)
Same as CMC
21.44
Same as CMC
21.44
0.5 spaces/unit
(up to 10 units);
0.25-0.3
spaces/unit
(more than 10
units)
3.3
spaces/1,000 sf
Same as CMC
21.44
3.3
spaces/
1,000 sf
Same as
CMC
21.44
Existing Master
Plan – outside the
Coastal Zone
(Chapter 6)
Same as CMC
21.44
1-2
spaces/unit None 3.3 spaces/1,000
sf 8 spaces/1,000 sf
2.9
spaces/
1,000 sf
Same as
CMC
21.44
Proposed Master
Plan (Section 6.4,
2016 Draft)
Same as CMC
21.44
1-1.5
spaces/unit
“ND” and “ED”
Districts: 0.3
spaces/unit (up
to 10 units);
0.25 spaces/unit
(more than 10
units)
All other districts:
None
2.8
spaces/1,000 sf 8 spaces/1,000 sf
2.8
spaces/
1,000 sf
1
space/
room
Study Area
(Park+ Results) 1.5 spaces/ unit 1.04 spaces/
unit - 2.7 spaces/
1,000 sf
13 spaces/
1,000 sf
2.4
spaces/
1,000 sf
0.69
spaces/
room
Parking Management Plan | Page 100
• Monitor implementation and demand – Annually monitor the new parking demand associated
with development and adjust parking requirements accordingly. With evolving transportation
patterns associated with driving behaviors, travel mode choice, and changing automobile
characteristics (rideshare, autonomous and connected vehicles), it will be critical for the city to
observe demands and adjust the parking requirements based on evolving occupancy and
community development.
• Consider further parking rate reductions – As discussed in greater detail in Technical
Memorandum #3, many of the peer communities included in the study currently provide reduced
parking requirements in select areas that have adapted parking demand management strategies
such as shared and leased parking and fee-in-lieu. In the future, as the area continues to develop,
and the impacts of parking management and TDM strategies are realized, consideration for
reducing the parking rates should be revisited. The data needed to analyze future changes is
discussed in the Parking Program Administration section of this document. Even further into the
future, possibly beyond the scope of this Plan, the city should consider implementing parking
maximums within the study area. Parking maximums place a cap on how much parking new
developments provide and helps to encourage walkability. The city could allow developers to
provide more parking than the maximum allowed under the condition that any surplus spaces be
made available to the public.
In the cities of San Luis Obispo and Dana Point, parking requirements in their
downtowns are half of what is required outside of the downtown areas. As a result,
businesses can develop in a more walkable and pedestrian-oriented fashion in the
downtown areas, contributing to improved economic vitality of the communities.
Dana Point: Municipal Code, Section 9.35.080
San Luis Obispo: Zoning Regulation 17.16.060 Parking Space Requirements Peer City Highlights
Parking Management Plan | Page 101
Residential Parking Program
A residential parking permit program (RPP) allows permit holders (residents or visitors with visitor passes) to
park on-street in select residential neighborhoods while restricting those without a permit from parking on-
street in the area during select times. Although a permit does not guarantee a permit holder a space, or a
space directly in front of their home, this type of program prevents non-residential users from occupying
spaces in residential areas. This type of program should be reserved for high-demand areas where the
occupancies have consistently reached 85 percent and spillover impacts of parking become a nuisance for
residents. All efforts should be made to maintain the public nature of public streets, until congestion and
parking demand impacts residents’ ability to park at their homes.
The implementation parameters of a program need to include measured occupancy, resident complaints, and
willingness to fund the operation and enforcement of the program through paid residential permits. Based on
the observed and projected parking occupancies, the residential areas bordering the Village Neighborhood to
the south and southwest could be considered a candidate for further monitoring and evaluation.
Many regulations can be implemented with a RPP. For instance, permits can restrict non-residential users all
day, every day. However, it is advised that parking restrictions reflect peak residential demand and be
implemented during peak periods in the evenings and overnight. Cities often have distinct regulations in
differing residential areas, which requires additional administrative oversight, but helps to cater the
restrictions to the specific issues of that neighborhood.
Any new RPP should be supported by data showing spillover trends from non-residential uses, utilization rates
above the effective maximum occupancy, and an extensive community engagement process to weigh the
needs of the greater community with that of the neighborhood residents. Furthermore, establishment of a
RPP should be considered after the implementation of other parking management strategies has been
exhausted.
The following strategies are recommended for the city.
• Consider a RPP only if necessary – Consideration of a RPP may be advisable in select areas due to
growing impacts of visitors parking in residential areas, restricting on-street parking access for
residents and their guests. However, the program should only be implemented when all other
management practices are exhausted and data clearly indicates there remains a serious parking
problem within the community. A RPP would preserve on-street parking for residents and their
guests, limiting the conflict to find available on-street parking. With regard to coastal access, the
RPP is intended to balance the on-street parking demands, while maintaining access for residents
and visitors. The program should be considered in neighborhoods that meet the criteria listed
below. These criteria should be made publicly available on the city’s website.
Pre-permit implementation occupancy levels – Prior to the implementation of a permit
program, the neighborhood streets must exhibit consistent occupancies that are 85
percent of total capacity. If the residential area is already regulated by time limits, or
will become regulated by time limits in the future, the use of a permit would allow
residents in those areas to park longer than the time limits without being penalized.
Parking Management Plan | Page 102
Neighborhood support – Neighborhoods should have petitioned signatures from at
least 51 percent of the residents in the neighborhood.
Permit cost and application – Residents will need to apply for permits, based on
permanent address, and are eligible for up to two permits per home and no more than
five guest permits per year. Guest permits should be good for up to two weeks.
Applicants must pay a fee per year for each permit. The cost for the fee should be set by
the city and should cover the cost of administering the program.
• Conduct public outreach prior to implementation – When a neighborhood meets the criteria for
inclusion in a permit program, the city should conduct outreach to the impacted residents and
adjacent businesses to communicate the parameters of the program, as well as potential impacts.
• Evaluate the application of residential permit time limits – In areas adjacent to commercial
districts, the city should implement time limit restrictions on parking during daytime hours to allow
non-residential users to park when residents are not typically home. In the evening, nighttime and
overnight restrictions should prohibit anyone without a residential permit from parking on the
streets. Residents will be allowed to park in on-street spaces overnight, as well as guests with an
appropriate visitor permit.
• Provide consistent enforcement in residential areas – The success of the residential program will
require proactive enforcement. This could include responding to neighborhood complaints in a
timely manner, as well as providing enforcement of restricted areas. The enforcement practices
can be sporadic (a few times a week at different times and different areas), but must be proactive
instead of reactive so that people are compliant with the program. Lack of enforcement will allow
people to potentially disregard the program, thus rendering the program ineffective.
• Provide ongoing evaluation of the program – Evaluation should include data collection related to
occupancy of parking spaces and impacts to adjacent residents and businesses. Impact evaluation
should include citation issuance and payment, as well as registered complaints from neighbors,
businesses, and/or patrons.
• Evaluate and update the Carlsbad Municipal Code and other standards – City codes, including any
master plan for the Village and Barrio, should be revised as necessary when and if a residential
parking program is implemented.
The City of Santa Monica’s program requires each neighborhood participating in the
program to adhere to the same regulations. The City of Santa Monica’s preferential
parking permit program was established to accommodate the needs of the residents
and their guests by allowing those with a valid permit to be exempt from the parking
restrictions on the street within a two-block radius of their registered address. Only
residents living on a block that has preferential parking restrictions may apply for the
permit. Peer City Highlights
Parking Management Plan | Page 103
Paid Parking
When parking demands in an area become so high that parking facilities (on- and off-street) operate above the
system’s effective capacity (85 percent occupancy), paid parking becomes a highly effective way to influence
behavior, redistribute parking demands, and promote economic activity through turnover of parking spaces. It
is critical to note that paid parking should not be implemented with the intent to increase revenue.
Implementation of paid parking must be driven by the parking demands experienced in the study area and the
need to create access to businesses.
The fee for parking encourages people to choose the priced transaction, park further away in a lower priced
facility, or use an alternative transportation option to reach their destination, thus creating more available
spaces in high-demand areas and facilitating access to businesses. The provision of options to park in other
locations or use alternative transportation helps to redistribute parking demand throughout the area.
Additionally, it is also important to understand the various components tied to paid parking. It is important to
understand that while parking in the study area is currently largely free, there is still a cost that is passed onto
people unbeknownst to them. It requires money to construct, designate, regulate, and manage parking,
whether it is on the street, in a lot, or a garage. These costs are absorbed by private property owners, store
tenants, facility managers, and the city. As a result, these costs are usually passed on to the customers through
marked up prices on goods and services but the cost to park is subsidized. By managing parking appropriately
and providing a cost to it, the consumer is able to make informed decisions on how they spend their money.
The following strategies are recommended for the city.
• Determine the threshold for implementing paid parking – Based on the findings of the parking
supply and demand analysis (see Appendix B -Technical Memorandum #2 for detailed information),
consider implementing paid parking in the future as the area continues to develop. The city should
continue to monitor parking demands in the short term and develop plans for evaluating technology,
pilot projects, and implementation as parking demands reach thresholds approaching the effective
capacity of the public system (consistently 85 percent occupied). To prepare for the potential
implementation of paid parking, the city should pass an ordinance that establishes a framework for
paid parking, including occupancy thresholds, rate structures, and criteria for future monitoring.
• Define locations to implement paid parking – Annually analyze collected data to identify locations
within the study area that are reaching the effective capacity faster than other locations in the
study area. Occupancies in the Village and beach areas north of Oak will likely reach occupancies of
85 percent before the Barrio. From a cost perspective, it would be beneficial to implement meters
in a smaller area rather than study area-wide. Over time, the paid parking system can expand as
parking demands dictate. It may also be beneficial to implement a Residential Parking Program at
the same time paid parking is implemented to mitigate impacts of spillover into areas surrounding
the paid parking area. Off-street and on-street public parking areas should be evaluated in
conjunction with each other and priced to encourage the desired parking behaviors (i.e., short-
term parkers in on-street spaces and long-term parkers in off-street parking).
Parking Management Plan | Page 104
• Define technology to manage the system – Identify technology that works to accomplish the goals
of the parking program. Technology to be considered include:
Smart Meters – Evaluate available smart meter technology to determine the most
effective use of resources within the area (multi-space meters, single-space meters, and
the various vendors that provide these meter types). The city should also consider how
well the available smart meter technology integrates with existing and future software and
technology systems, payment options available for users, ease of use (e.g., how far users
must walk, how complicated the machine interface is, etc.), cost, ability to collect and
retrieve backend system data (transaction information), and additional technology
enhancements (pay-by-cell, solar options, etc.). Additionally, the use of smart meters helps
to support enforcement practices by quickly indicating to enforcement personnel that a
meter is expired, unpaid, broken, etc. If enforcement officers are equipped with handheld
devices that communicate in real-time with the smart meters, they can be informed
immediately of these issues which streamlines enforcement and operation practices.
Pay-on-foot stations – In the off-street surface parking environment, pay-on-foot
stations work well because they require minimal infrastructure and can be configured to
accept pay-by-space, pay-and-display, or pay-by-license plate transactions.
Gated access – In the off-street structured parking setting, gate access with either pay-
in-lane or pay-on-foot configurations will help manage access and payments, while
minimizing the enforcement needed in the structure.
Smartphone applications and parking space readers – Applications can be used to
illustrate the location of parking (including disabled), and the availability of parking
within the system and allows users to reserve or pay for the parking transaction. This
remote payment method provides greater flexibility to the customer. However, the
accuracy of the system will require real-time space detection capability or a data
aggregation system that can be used to define historic trends and predict parking
availability. This does not require a paid parking system to implement, but the presence
of paid parking will provide a better set of data (transactions and durational
information) to inform a prediction system.
Before study-area wide implementation, the city should consider a pilot project to test these technologies in
small areas, obtain user feedback, and make an informed decision on what type of technology is appropriate
for the community.
• Establish a Parking Benefit District where paid parking is implemented – As the community
continues to develop, evaluate possible implementation of Parking Benefit Districts in high-demand
areas and where paid parking has been implemented. The intent is to create synergy between the
community and parking system, allowing the city to collect revenue from the parking system and
reinvest that back into the community in a transparent and collaborative manner. Parking Benefit
Districts have been used effectively in California to support appropriate use of the parking system
Parking Management Plan | Page 105
through paid parking and community enhancements through the application of fund revenues to
implement aesthetic and transportation improvements in the community.
• Evaluate the parking system regularly – Annual evaluation of the parking system (on-street and
off-street) is recommended to review parking behaviors and identify whether the occupancy has
reached a point where it is necessary to implement paid parking. Parking occupancy and duration
metrics should be used to determine the need for paid parking. The threshold occupancy for
indicating the implementation point is when the system (on-street and off-street) reaches a peak
occupancy of 85 percent for average periods. Thresholds for duration depend on adjacent land
uses and prevailing peak occupancies. Table 3 in the Existing Parking Behaviors section details
these thresholds.
• Evaluate and update the Carlsbad Municipal Code and other standards – City codes, including any
master plan for the Village and Barrio, should be revised as necessary when and if paid parking is
implemented.
Just like the City of Carlsbad, the City of Dana Point currently does not have paid parking.
However, the City of Dana Point is prepared from a regulatory standpoint for when they
do need to implement paid parking. An ordinance was passed in the City of Dana Point
that outlines the specific criteria for a paid parking program so that if/when it does
implement paid parking, the code supports the change. The City of Dana Point
established a parking district where paid parking is to be implemented, and set the
maximum rate to not exceed $1 an hour. The parking system will be reviewed annually,
and if the parking occupancies exceed 80 percent the City of Dana Point can increase the
rate by $0.25 an hour but not to exceed the $1 an hour limit. Peer City Highlights
Parking Management Plan | Page 106
Parking Wayfinding
Parking wayfinding is extremely helpful
in directing people to desired parking
locations. Effective means of
conducting wayfinding is through
stationary signage, dynamic signage
(electronic signs that change messages
to indicate how many spaces are open
in a facility), digital maps posted on
websites, and smartphone
applications. A few years ago, the city
implemented themed wayfinding
signage throughout the study area to
direct people to public parking
facilities, and it has been received
successfully by the community. The
following are recommendations to
expand upon the success of the current
wayfinding to allow people to find parking easier and faster and improve traffic congestion associated with
searching for parking.
• Additional signage for lots where the City leases spaces – As more off-street facilities are made
available to the public through shared parking agreements or leased spaces by the city (for shared
parking or valet), appropriate signage is needed to let people know that they are allowed to park in
these locations. If there are times of the day when the parking is not open to the public, messaging
should be included on the signage to relay this information. For instance, an office may restrict
parking to its employees and visitors during the day but will make its spaces publicly available in
the evening. Any new signs should be similarly themed and consistent with the existing wayfinding
signage, even if the new public parking facilities is created through shared and leased parking.
Similarly, signage for valet should be included and themed similarly to minimize confusion on
where to park in the study area.
Parking Management Plan | Page 107
Example of city lot that is restricted but has times when it is open to the public.
Themed signage should be developed for lots such as this.
• Smartphone applications – The city should use a smartphone application that provides a map of
the study area and identifies both on-street and public off-street parking. The city could work with
private parking managers to include their parking on the map as well. The map should also provide
information on parking regulations (time limits, enforcement hours, etc.). The intent is to enable
people to make informed decisions on where to park before they even enter the study area. This
knowledge could help to distribute parking demands since people will know that they are allowed
to park and may choose to park a block further than their destination since they know it would be
available rather than try to compete for parking directly adjacent to their destination. Having this
information could alleviate traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions created by circling for
parking. Eventually, the city should provide this data to online mapping platforms (e.g., Google
Maps) to reach an even wider audience of people who are visiting the City of Carlsbad.
Real-time parking information – Real-time data can provide people with necessary
information to know whether the parking near their destination is full or available.
Although obtaining real-time occupancy information is reliant on technology
investments (discussed in the Technology Needs and Management section below), it is
effective at distributing demands and encouraging people to park in lower demand
areas because they can see where parking is available.
Parking Management Plan | Page 108
• Post parking map on website – Parking location information and real-time occupancy information
(if available) should also be posted to the city’s website. Although most people have smartphones,
not everyone does. Therefore, posting the same information on the website is another way of
helping people plan their trip and reduce the time it takes to find available parking near
destinations. Businesses should be educated to direct their patrons and employees to this website
to support its use and help their patrons make better decisions about how and where to park.
• Evaluate the Carlsbad Municipal Code and proposed Master Plan for possible changes to support
additional wayfinding signs – The city should review applicable standards to ensure wayfinding
signs, particularly those that direct motorists to public parking on private property, are supported.
Curb Cafes
In areas with on-street parking supply, curb cafes
are tools to enhance vibrancy of the community
and to better utilize city assets. Curb cafes were
introduced in parts of the Village through a pilot
program, which expired in March 2016. The
program required the property owner to lease
the space from the city for $1,200 per space, per
year. The patios are required to be moveable in
case of street-related construction. Since the
end of the pilot program, no additional permits
have been issued.
Curb cafes can be very positive for both
businesses and the city. Assuming the city
permits curb cafes again, when parking reaches
the effective maximum occupancy (85 percent occupancy), new curb cafes should be restricted. For instance,
the on-street parking along State Street between Grand Avenue and Carlsbad Village Drive exceeds 85 percent
occupancy. Therefore, this block should be restricted from further allowance of curb cafes, unless a proper
parking mitigation plan can be determined to provide the necessary parking that would be lost due to the curb
café. If additional TDM strategies or valet locations are implemented on the block that would help balance
parking demands, more curb cafes could be allowed since parking demands would be mitigated through TDM
or valet parking. (Note: It is acknowledged that two additional and unbuilt curb cafés along this block were
processed prior to the expiration of the pilot program and before parking study recommendations were
developed. Therefore, these curb cafés may potentially proceed without the recommended mitigation plan.)
Curb cafe in the Village
Parking Management Plan | Page 109
Transportation Demand Management
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies consist of programs, services, and policies designed to
encourage transportation alternatives. Implementation of TDM measures helps mitigate traffic impacts and
parking demand associated with single occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips. TDM measures vary and can include
bicycle- and pedestrian-facility improvements; promotion of vanpool, carpool, and transit; provision of other
shared mobility services like on-demand rideshare and shuttle services; and commute incentive programs to
encourage employees to use transit, bike, or walk to work.
TDM complements parking management strategies and is a cost-effective approach to improve mobility within
the area. The implementation of TDM also helps to support sustainability goals and greenhouse gas reductions
identified in the city’s Climate Action Plan (CAP). The city is currently developing a TDM ordinance and
program, which will advance the goals of the Climate Action Plan, the Mobility Element of the General Plan,
and the Coastal Mobility Readiness Plan. The ordinance will identify community-specific TDM strategies that
reduce vehicle trips. As such, the parking management program and TDM program support each other and
should be coordinated to advance program goals. The 2035 CAP goals include a:
• 10 percent overall increase in alternative mode share by workers in the City of Carlsbad
• 40 percent alternative mode share by workers in new non-residential buildings
• 30 percent alternative mode share by workers in existing non-residential buildings13
In addition to mitigation of parking demand, coordination between the parking program and TDM can help
promote multimodal transportation, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and improve access within the
community.
Evaluation of TDM Impacts in the Study Area
During this study, the impact of TDM strategies on parking demand was considered. The goal of TDM
strategies are to reduce the number of SOV trips. When SOV trips are reduced, parking demands are also
reduced. To reduce SOV trips, the City supports the Park Once concept where parking is centralized, allowing
people to park in a single location and walk, bike, or take transit to other locations. The following TDM
strategies were identified by the City for potential inclusion in the TDM ordinance and future investments. The
potential parking demand reductions associated with each strategy are compiled from the Victoria Transport
Policy Institute, which is an industry-recognized resource for parking and TDM planning.
• Walking and Cycling – Improve walking and cycling conditions in the city to support a Park Once
environment that makes it easier for people to travel throughout and between neighborhoods by
bicycle, on foot, or in a wheelchair. For example, increase and improve bicycle infrastructure
including multiuse paths and adequate secure public bike parking. (Estimated parking demand
reduction 10 percent 14.) These improvements could be considered in the area where there are
13 City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan, Section 4.8, available at http://www.carlsbadca.gov/services/depts/pw/environment/cap.asp
14 Victoria Transport Policy Institute, http://www.vtpi.org
Parking Management Plan | Page 110
“alternative streets”. Should the city decide to improve these streets, they should be improved in a
manner that also considers bicycle and pedestrian connectivity with the provision of sidewalks, bike
lanes, appropriate markings, and lighting where appropriate.
• Mobility Management – Implement operational improvements that encourage efficient travel to
destinations. For example, accommodate ride-sharing, provide shuttle or circular services that
connect popular destinations in the study area, and improve transit options frequency. (Estimated
parking demand reduction 20percent 13.)
• Financial Incentives/Disincentives – Develop programs that encourage or discourage certain
behaviors by making transportation options more or less expensive. For example, offer reduced
cost transit, subsidies for vanpooling, or a guaranteed ride home program. (Estimated parking
demand reduction 20 percent 13.)
• Parking Regulations – Implement parking regulations that promote efficient use of existing parking
resources. For example, eliminate free parking and utilize demand-based pricing. (Estimated
parking demand reduction 20 percent 13.)
• User Information and Marketing – Establish user information and marketing platforms such as
mobile apps, maps, websites, etc. to locate available parking spaces in real time, so users know
where to go to park thereby reducing “hunting” for spaces. This promotes sustainability through
reduced carbon emissions and increases customer convenience. (Estimated parking demand
reduction 10 percent 13.)
• Smart Growth Design – Develop parking standards that encourage higher density, mixed-use
development. (Estimated parking demand reduction 20 percent 13.)
• Improved Enforcement – Enforcement ensures that parking regulations are followed which allows
the system to operate more efficiently and provides equitable availability of parking resources for
all parking system users. (Estimated parking demand reduction 10 percent 13.)
TDM Strategies that Support the Parking Program
Currently, most parking in the study area is free and underutilized. Under these conditions, people are less
motivated to bike, walk, or take transit as an alternative to driving. To positively influence travel choices,
comprehensive TDM strategies to consider include:
• Develop and adopt the TDM Ordinance – Adopt a TDM ordinance and establish a formal TDM
program that encourages transportation alternatives to the private automobile. The TDM program
should align with the parking program and coordinate with the objectives and regulations of the
proposed Village and Barrio Master Plan. For example, TDM strategies that incentivize employees
of businesses in the Village to use transportation alternatives can help reduce parking demand.
• TDM outreach and encouragement – Outreach, education, and marketing of the TDM program is
critical. Promoting information and incentives will increase awareness of TDM and encourage
people to make informed decisions about how they travel. Information on the TDM program
should be posted on the City’s website and provide clear instructions on how to participate in or
Parking Management Plan | Page 111
use various TDM programs and services. The website should provide all information in a single
location so that people don’t have to search to find information on a specific TDM strategy.
In conjunction with the messaging on the website, the City should continue to lead (or encourage
other groups and organizations to lead) promotional events such as a bike-to-work day or rideshare
week. An additional benefit of these promotional events is that they foster relationships between
the City and area businesses. The City continues to find new ways to partner with SANDAG to
promote commuter programs and services such as rideshare to residents and employees, and
should leverage this partnership to improve transportation conditions in the community.
• Ongoing coordination with the City department responsible for managing the TDM program –
Collaboration between the parking program and the TDM program is critical. As both programs
develop, regular meetings should be established to discuss strategies and make mutual decisions
where both parking and TDM are impacted.
• Provide ongoing evaluation of the program – Collect data related to primary travel mode and
parking occupancy. Mode share data can be collected via employee surveys. The City should also
encourage employers to join the employer services program of iCommute, the region’s TDM
program, which conducts surveys to assess employee commuting travel behavior.
• Expand wayfinding signage – Current wayfinding signage in the study area directs people to off-
street public parking facilities as well as pedestrians and bicyclists to a variety of destinations. The
signage should be expanded to incorporate transit stops, shuttle stops, rideshare stop locations,
and popular bicycle routes. The signage should be developed in the existing theme, which has been
well received by the community.
• Consider providing a circulator-type transit service within the Barrio, Village, and beach areas – A
circulator service, such as a trolley, can reduce parking demand by allowing residents to travel from
their homes to the Village, Village Station, Barrio, and beach areas without driving. Similarly, it
would allow visitors to travel through the area without moving their vehicles, promoting Park Once.
The city is currently conducting a Trolley Feasibility Study to help stakeholders and constituents
understand the recommended
resources for potentially establishing
future trolley services in the city. The
results of the feasibility study will help
the city determine whether trolley
services are a viable option in the
study area.
• Identify and dedicate passenger pick-
up/drop-off locations throughout the
study area – Several locations
throughout the study area could serve
as drop-off and pick-up locations for
both trolley services and on-demand
Example of potential passenger pick-up/drop-off location
Parking Management Plan | Page 112
rideshare services like Lyft or Uber. On the periphery of the study area, these locations should be
underutilized parking facilities.
The city should work with private property owners to allow public use of their private lots. For the
use of these periphery lots to be effective, the lots will need to be adequately signed and well
maintained to provide a safe and secure environment for riders. These lots will only serve the
efficient use of the parking system with consistent access to shuttles and rideshare services.
The city should consider leasing railroad right of way between Oak Avenue and Tamarack Avenue
on both the east and west sides to provide additional public parking (as discussed in the Shared and
Leased Parking section of this document). This can provide another option where people can catch
a trolley or rideshare to travel into the higher demand locations.
Trolley stops and dedicated rideshare curb space should be placed in the high-demand areas to
facilitate shuttle access as an alternative to driving to these periphery parking areas. These areas,
as well as the streets and sidewalks connected to these areas, should be well lit to provide safety
and encourage use. An example of a high-demand area is the area around the Village Faire and
beach access points. If people can park in the underutilized peripheral parking facilities and take a
shuttle or rideshare to these destinations, then parking demand in these destination areas should
be reduced. Education and business owner support will be critical for successful implementation of
this strategy.
• Provide employer based TDM programs – The city should encourage employer participation in the
TDM program by sharing information about incentives such as pre-tax commuter benefits,
subsidized transit passes, and preferential parking for carpool and vanpool participants. The intent
of these incentive programs is to not only give employees options on how they travel to work but
also to incentivize the choice to not drive a personal vehicle by offering some type of monetary
compensation. The personal vehicle remains the most convenient travel choice in many situations.
However, if incentives are provided that make other options enticing, people could opt to change
their behavior, which will lead to decreases in parking demands. The city will continue to partner
with the SANDAG iCommute program and leverage regional TDM services for employers and
employees.
• Build out a protected bicycle network with amenities – Safe bicycle facilities and bicycle
amenities, such as designated bike lanes, secure bike parking, repair stations, and protected cycle
tracks throughout the study area encourage biking as a convenient alternative and can help reduce
parking demand. Protected cycle tracks and designated bike lanes through the Village and Barrio
areas could encourage residents to bicycle between destinations while running errands. This
network is intended to increase biking comfort for short and medium trips within and between the
Barrio and Village. Cycle tracks could connect to existing bike lanes to create a seamless bicycle
network that attracts a variety of users. Additionally, provision of bicycle parking at multiple
destinations throughout the study area further encourages people to bike more because they know
they have a safe, secure place to leave their bike while visiting the area. Bicycle parking
requirements for new developments are being addressed in the TDM ordinance.
Parking Management Plan | Page 113
• Build out an enhanced pedestrian network – Enhance pedestrian network through north-south
and east-west streets that feature wide, tree-covered sidewalks, curb extensions and wide curb
ramps, safe crosswalks with rectangular rapid flash beacon (RRFB) indicators where needed, and
expansion of the existing pedestrian wayfinding signage. This network is intended to increase
walking comfort for short trips within and between the Barrio and Village, thus reducing parking
demand. This network enhancement provides excellent opportunities for persons with disabilities
to get around the area as well. In addition, should the city decide to eliminate “alternative street”
designations, these streets should be improved to accommodate pedestrian connectivity when
applicable.
• Promote the use of transit through transit-focused infrastructure upgrades – Include enhanced
bus stops (bench, shelter, trash can, lighting, route and system information), bus stop curb
extensions (to create room for increased amenities and speed up service), next bus arrival digital
displays, and bus priority treatments (bus-only lanes and queue jumps).
Buffered bike lane along Carlsbad Boulevard
Parking Management Plan | Page 114
Parking Program Administration
To help effectively manage the parking system, the city should consolidate the parking program under a single
department responsible for all parking management decisions. Under a consolidated department, the
program should be led by a manager with assistance from support staff. The department director would have
complete authority and responsibility for the management of all parking-related program decisions (e.g., off-
street parking facilities, on-street parking, residential parking programs, program financial performance,
system planning, and enforcement). Typical locations where the program could be housed include public
works, transportation, economic development, or planning departments.
Parking Program Structure
The Parking Management Plan is intended as a guide for the city and Parking Manager, but is developed to be
adaptable and flexible to allow the parking manager to make decisions in the future based on data and
realities experienced in the community at that time. The program will likely take a few years to form. At the
start of the program, a manager should be identified as the leader who can coordinate the early actions
required to establish the parking program (policies, enforcement, shared and leased parking, outreach and
education, curb lane management, data collection and analysis, etc.). Over time as the parking program grows,
additional staff may be required to support this initiative. The following sections provide an overview of some
of the key staffing roles and responsibilities associated with the parking program.
Program Manager
The city should hire a parking manager responsible for providing management oversight for parking policies,
programs and operations. This includes:
• On-Street – Coordinate annual data collection and analysis to evaluate program success and inform
policy decisions that improve parking. Oversee time limits, enforcement, and the curb lane
management program.
• Off-Street – Analyze data in all off-street facilities, both publicly and privately owned, to identify
opportunities for improving and balancing the parking.
• Shared Parking and Leased Parking – Develop and implement a proactive shared parking program.
Identify opportunities for shared parking or leased parking in high demand areas and broker shared
parking arrangements or lease agreements. Review shared and leased parking agreements
annually in conjunction with occupancy data to determine if shared parking is working effectively.
• Communications and Marketing – There is an opportunity to share the marketing and
communication responsibilities with the TDM program so that both programs benefit from
streamlined management of messaging. This also inherently creates consistency in messaging
between the programs, which is critical as they intricately support one another.
• Residential Parking Program (RPP)– If an RPP is established in the future, review participation in
the RPP annually in conjunction with annual occupancy data to determine whether the program is
performing adequately or whether changes need to be made. Metrics to use as indicators for
whether the program is effective are:
Parking Management Plan | Page 115
In the short-term, the parking manager will help with building the parking program. This will include enacting
the policies and programs identified as early actions in this draft Parking Management Plan; determining the
best method for administering parking enforcement; determining immediate contractor and
equipment/technology needs; and conducting outreach and education.
After the program is more established, the parking manager will need to focus more on program maintenance
helping to ensure that the system is self-sustaining and financially accountable. The longer-term role of the
parking manager will include evaluating program management, helping to implement new parking assets and
policy, and strengthening the connection between mobility and the parking program.
Ongoing Data Collection and Analysis
Collection of parking data allows the city to make informed decisions. Over time, the city will accumulate
historical data so that trends can be realized. As changes occur in the study area (e.g., more development,
implementation of parking strategies or TDM strategies), the city can be prepared to predict changes and
proactively manage the parking system. Data collection can be shared with the TDM program so that the
analyses performed are consistent between the parking and TDM programs. Additionally, it would reduce
duplicative processes between the programs since both programs will rely on similar data to inform
management decisions. The city can conduct the data collection and analysis in-house or contract staff to
conduct parking data collection efforts twice annually, including off-peak season (spring or fall) and on-peak
season (summer). These collection periods should be consistent year over year to better define changes in the
program and community. For consistency purposes, the data should be collected during the same time periods
conducted for this study.
Parking Management Plan | Page 116
Data Collection Methodology
The city should oversee data collection twice a year during off-peak season and on-peak season. Use of
technology, such as License Plate Recognition (LPR) technology, enables faster and easier data collection and
analysis.
• Times of day to collect – Data should be collected in the morning, afternoon, evening, and late
night times of day to capture peak periods and trends throughout the day.
Morning timeframe is defined as 7 a.m. to 11 a.m.
Afternoon timeframe is defined as 11 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Evening timeframe is defined as 4 p.m. to 7 p.m.
Late night timeframe is defined as 7 p.m. to 11 p.m.
Each parking facility (on-street and off-street) should be counted at least one time during each timeframe.
• Parking facilities to collect – All parking facilities should be collected at least once during each
timeframe. Parking facilities include:
On-street parking
Off-street parking (public and private)
o Shared parking facilities
o Leased parking facilities
Residential areas
• Data to collect - Table 11 provides a list of ideal data to collect bi-annually for each parking facility.
From the data that is collected, several analyses can be performed to determine how the parking
system is functioning and to identify areas where changes may need to be implemented.
Parking Management Plan | Page 117
Table 11: Data to be Collected Annually
DATA TO BE COLLECTED WHAT IT CAN TELL US HOW IT IS COLLECTED
Parking Inventory
Type of space (on-street,
off-street, public, private)
Regulations (time limits,
enforcement hours)
Location
Provides the baseline for analysis and allows the city to track
changes to the parking system over time and the impacts of
those changes (e.g., removal/addition of parking, regulatory
changes).
Bi-annual system field review conducted manually or
using GPS-enabled technology that can geolocate each
space or block face and record relevant data (e.g.,
number and type of space and regulator information).
Parking Occupancy Indicates how well the system is being used and when parking
strategies need to be implemented or adjusted. Time limit
policies can be adjusted to either encourage or discourage use.
Parking Management Strategy Data will inform:
Time limits
Shared, leased, and off-site parking
Parking requirements
Residential parking program
TDM effectiveness
Paid parking
Trolley or shuttle circulator
Parking benefit district
Areas with higher occupancies will likely have more users,
more turnover, a greater variety of time limits or other
regulations, and more violations. Parking management
Bi-annual vehicle counts performed manually or with
the use of LPR technology (which is recommended for
enforcement practices). Data for on-street and off-
street facilities within the study area should be
collected.
Occupancy data should be collected during the morning
time frame, afternoon timeframe, evening timeframe,
and late night timeframe as defined previously.
Parking Management Plan | Page 118
DATA TO BE COLLECTED WHAT IT CAN TELL US HOW IT IS COLLECTED
decisions could include more Parking Ambassadors assigned
to these areas as appropriate to enforce the higher degree of
complex parking regulations, adjustments to time limits
(reductions to encourage more turnover or implement time
limits in new areas).
Parking Duration Indicates how long people are staying in given locations.
Pricing and timing policies can be adjusted based on the
surrounding uses and turnover rate.
Parking Management Strategy Data will inform:
Time limits
Paid parking
Bi-annual vehicle counts performed manually or with
the use of LPR technology (which is recommended for
enforcement practices). Data for on-street facilities
within the study area should be collected.
To allow for decisions to be made regarding time limits,
durational data should be collected hourly.
Number of Citations Indicates how many citations are issued over a given period of
time. An analysis of this information can show whether
citations are increasing and may lead to further analysis to
figure out why that is happening and if an adjustment in the
parking strategies and policies is needed.
Parking Management Strategy Data will inform:
Residential parking program
Time limit restrictions
Paid parking
Shared and leased parking
Parking Ambassadors will collect citation information. A
combination of LPR and citation data management
technology is required. Refer to the Technology Needs
and Management section for further information.
Parking Management Plan | Page 119
DATA TO BE COLLECTED WHAT IT CAN TELL US HOW IT IS COLLECTED
Location of Citations This metric identifies whether violations are occurring in
isolated areas, and as such if there is a specific parking
problem in an area that must be addressed.
Parking Management Strategy Data will inform:
Residential parking program
Time limit restrictions
Paid parking
Shared and leased parking
Parking Ambassadors will collect citation information. A
combination of LPR and citation data management
technology is required. Refer to the Technology Needs
and Management section for further information.
Type of Citations This metric indicates whether a specific type of violation is
occurring and would provide insight as to what parking
strategy would be appropriate to implement.
Parking Management Strategy Data will inform:
Residential parking program
Time limit restrictions
Paid parking
Shared and leased parking
Parking ambassadors will collect citation information. A
combination of LPR and citation data management
technology is required. Refer to the Technology Needs
and Management section below for further
information.
* While it is recommended that the city work to collect data for all parking facilities serving the area in order to have a complete view of parking behaviors of the areas customers, residents and
employees, only those private properties that do not expressly decline participation should be included.
Parking Management Plan | Page 120 Parking Management Plan | Page 120
Technology Needs and Management
Technology platforms provide data for the continual management and evolution of the program, and support
policy decisions. The following section highlights the technology that can support the previous strategies at
the time that his plan was written.
Program Administration
The city should acquire a management platform that can store data related to LPR, citations, occupancy,
duration, etc. This could either be a software that the city purchases and administers or a third party
contracted to house and manage the city’s parking data. The latter is preferable since the third party will be
able to quickly synthesize and present the data in a format that the city can then use. For instance, companies
can take data that cities or parking managers collect (from LPR technology, gate control equipment,
transaction data from meters or pay-on-foot stations) and process that data to present meaningful occupancy,
revenue, and duration statistics. As a requirement in the solicitation for proposals, the city could also request
that the management software integrate with existing city software, including city GIS and management
platforms, during the solicitation for the software.
Enforcement
Investment in enforcement technology should be a considered as the city initiates the parking program. This
includes technology used to help identify parking violations and issue citations, and technology that helps to
store and manage the citation data.
• Technology for in-field enforcement – The city should consider the purchase of mobile vehicle
mounted LPR to pair with their handheld ticketing devices to use in day-to-day operations. This
equipment will improve the staff’s efficiency and allow for better communication with back-end
parking management systems that manage permit and citation data. This equipment, if configured
correctly, can also be used for occupancy and duration data collection annually, allowing the city to
do more to manage their system without having to invest in more technology. Companies can
provide LPR equipment that links to citation management and data management software that can
be accessed by the city to view parking and citation data.
• Technology for management of citations – The city should acquire an online parking citation
management database for collection, management, and operational improvements. The city
should require that the citation management system communicate with the overall program
management platform.
Parking Management Plan | Page 121 Parking Management Plan | Page 121
Wayfinding and Parking Availability
The following describe technology options for enhancing wayfinding in the study area.
• Real-time parking availability – Real-time parking availability is useful to help direct people to
available parking spaces as they enter the study area. This reduces the amount of time it takes for
people to find parking, thus reducing traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. To
accomplish this, real-time data should be made available in a smartphone application so that
people can access the information from their smartphone devices easily. The major obstacle with
real-time data is how to get it without spending a fortune. Technology options for obtaining real-
time data are presented below.
Sensors – Sensors can detect vehicles in defined parking spaces and relay information to
a cloud-based data management program, which can be accessed by the city, and which
then relays real-time parking information to websites and a smartphone application.
Sensors come in many forms, such as pucks which are installed in the ground, and pole-
mounted cameras which can be mounted to light poles. Companies offer both in-ground
and pole-mounted sensors with cloud database management capabilities.
o In-ground sensors – These sensors are placed in the parking space, but it is not
necessary to place a sensor in each parking space. Sensors can be placed in every
other space and positioned so that they collect data for two spaces per sensor.
In-ground sensors are effective for providing real-time data; however, they are
expensive (both capital and ongoing costs) and the inaccuracies with data make
this option less cost-effective compared to other technology types that can
achieve relatively the same level of accuracy for less money.
o Pole-mounted sensors – These sensors perform similar functions as the in-
ground sensors, but are pole-mounted and therefore able to detect vehicles in
larger areas. Depending on the sensor size, they can detect 16 to over 300
parking spaces. Pole-mounted sensors cover large areas, thus capturing more
spaces with fewer sensors. There are some limitations with coverage if the area
has trees or other obstructions.
LPR and data management software – If the city chooses to purchase mobile vehicle
mounted LPR technology, then the data used to determine whether vehicles are parking
legally or not can also be used to provide occupancy information. LPR technology works
by reading individual license plates. With each circulation route a Parking Ambassador
runs, the reads can be used to determine where a vehicle is parked (based on GPS data)
and how long it has parked (based on license plate number, GPS data, and time stamp).
If the city were also to invest in data management software, that software could be
used to provide real-time parking data to the city. The city would have to then have a
means of communicating the data to their website or smartphone application. Many
Parking Management Plan | Page 122 Parking Management Plan | Page 122
smartphone app vendors can extract this data from the management system to inform
their application system.
Google – Over the next few years, Google is planning to roll-out parking information in
cities across the United States in its Google Maps platform. This parking information will
be related to how easy parking is to find near a destination. Although the city will have
no control or access over this application, it should be aware that this information will
be available on the Google Map interface, which most people already use to find
destinations and directions. The city should embrace this approach, provide aggregated
and anonymous data to the Google Maps platform, and use it to the best of their ability
when it becomes available in the city.
Smartphone Applications – The city can partner with smartphone application
developers to display the real-time parking information in a mobile format for
customer’s ease of use. The city could also partner with the Carlsbad Village Association
to develop a unique mobile application to provide business and parking information.
• Paid parking – Although paid parking is not recommended at this time, the city may consider it in
the future to help manage parking demands. Parking revenue control technology is changing
rapidly. What is popular now may be obsolete in five years. It isn’t clear what type of technology
will be available if/when the city decides to implement paid parking. Furthermore, when the city
decides to implement paid parking, the parking system will operate differently than it operates
today. Therefore, recommending specific technologies at this time would not be prudent. When
that time comes, the city should conduct a study to evaluate the most appropriate and effective
technologies available to meet their needs and goals. A pilot study can be conducted to test
multiple technology types in conjunction with a public survey to obtain public feedback on the
technology and its user-friendliness. The city should analyze the results of this pilot test and
identify an optimal technology (or combination of technologies) to be implemented in the study
area. Technology today related to paid parking consists of the following:
Smart meters – These meters can be multi-space or single-space meters that accept
credit card, cash, coin, and pay-by-phone payment. The meters will clear once the
allotted time has been reached, which makes it easier to identify vehicles that are
parking longer than for the paid transaction length. Smart meters are also connected to
software installed in the city’s servers to manage and store transaction data,
maintenance data, and collections information. This data can be exported to useable
formats so that the city can determine parking occupancy and durations based on
transaction data. This occupancy data will not be real-time, but it allows cities to
periodically monitor their parking occupancy without having to do manual field work.
Smartphone applications – Smartphone applications allow people to pay for parking
using an app. This provides greater flexibility for the user since payment through
smartphones for nearly everything is growing in popularity. This type of payment
Parking Management Plan | Page 123 Parking Management Plan | Page 123
technology may be the most popular form of paying for parking, which would make
smart meters obsolete. Many smartphone payment platforms allow users to pay as well
as extend their transaction, which is beneficial for infrequent visitors who are concerned
they might receive a ticket.
Gated access and pay-on-foot stations – These technologies are beneficial for off-street
parking lots and garages should the city decide to implement paid parking in off-street
facilities. Gated access allows the city to monitor facility use (both transient and permit
holding parkers). Similar to smart meters, transaction data can be used to help monitor
the facility.
• Outreach and education – The city should create a robust online presence for the parking program.
Much of the communication with the parking patron should occur through a consolidated
webpage. This site should include information on how and where to park (interactive map), the
regulations associated with parking, citation information, links to the Municipal Code sections that
contain the parking policies, and contact information should the user have questions. It should also
link to the TDM program webpage on the city’s website for information on alternative modes of
transportation. The webpage should be designed to be mobile responsive since it will likely be
viewed from a mobile device.
Financial Assumptions
A range of possible costs associated with various parking management strategies are presented in this section.
They illustrate several technologies and options for staffing that the city and its parking manager could
consider. These costs can vary and will change over time so the administrative and capital costs below should
be treated as estimates for reference purposes. The city will need to evaluate their priorities and resources to
determine the best approach for investing in the parking program. Initially, the City should invest in hiring the
parking manager to establish the program and guiding policies.
Administrative Expenses
• Staffing Costs (for program manager): estimated at $125,000 per year for salaries and internal
administrative costs.
• Management Fee (contracted management): $100,000-150,000 for initial contracted parking
management. The actual fee will need to be defined by the procured parking management staff
through the request for proposal process.
• Enforcement Fees: to be paid by the contracted management program, through the management
fee. Officer responsibilities will be determined by the size of the program.
A basic formula for the city to consider is one Parking Ambassador for every 500 spaces.
With 4,971 on-street parking spaces, the city will likely need 5-10 Parking Ambassadors,
based on the frequency of enforcement
Parking Management Plan | Page 124 Parking Management Plan | Page 124
o This number of spaces includes both regulated and unregulated spaces. Those
regulated spaces will need to be enforced more frequently than unregulated,
which could mean less enforcement needs and thus less staff
o A sporadic approach to enforcement initially could also mean less staffing needs
initially
o The number of officers grows within the program as the number of spaces and
areas grows
Capital Costs
• Enforcement Technology:
$47,500 per LPR vehicle (Car - $25,000, LPR - $18,000)
Handheld device and printer: $4,500
• Data Collection Technologies:
Parking sensors: $300 per space capital and $30 per space per month for data service
Camera-based data collection: $300 per camera plus per space rate for monthly service
• Back-End Management Software
Initial Capital Implementation Cost: $50,000 - $75,000
Ongoing Service Fees: $30,000 - $50,000 annually, with escalations for program size
• Smartphone Applications:
Use of existing platform: ongoing service fees, with development fees likely minimal
• Paid Parking Technology:
Single-Space Smart Meters: $500 per meter, plus annual service contract and
transaction fees
On-Street Pay Station: $5,000 - $7,500 per station, plus annual service contract and
transaction fees
Pay-by-Phone Application: Usually free implementation with transaction fees ($0.35 -
$0.50 fees per transaction)
Off-street gate controls: $5,000 - $15,000 per lane, plus annual service contract
• Parking Facilities:
Leasing existing spaces: $44,000 annually (based on city’s current annual lease rate with
NCTD for 102 spaces)
New Parking lot: $3,500 - $5,000 per space (construction only)
Garage: $20,000 (average cost for construction only)
Parking Management Plan | Page 125 Parking Management Plan | Page 125
Investment Priorities (Parking Management vs. New Structured Parking)
The cost to provide parking can be substantial for businesses. On average, in the State of California,
construction of above-ground structured parking is estimated at approximately $20,000 per space15 without
land acquisition. Surface parking spaces could range anywhere from $3,500 to $5,000 per space for
construction alone, not inclusive of land acquisition costs or other soft costs. However, this cost can vary
throughout the state. The cost for underground parking is substantially more expensive. The cost for
underground parking increases with each level that is constructed underground.
One option that many cities use is an in-lieu fee program to pay for structured parking, by collecting fees from
new and redeveloping businesses in lieu of them building on-site parking. However, the city’s current in-lieu
fee program does not generate the funds necessary to cover the costs of constructing structured parking. On
average, 10 spaces a year are paid for with in-lieu fees, equating to approximately $112,400 annually. Since its
inception in 2000, the in-lieu fee program has earned $1.9 million and has an approximate balance (as of
October 2016) of $790,000. At the current rate of participation in the in-lieu fee program, the revenue earned
through the program is not enough to pay for the construction of structured parking. Given the adequate
supply of parking within the parking system to meet current and future projected parking demand, it is not
recommended that city invest in construction of additional parking supply at this time. Rather, to address the
observed parking demand imbalance and maximize the efficient use of the parking system, the draft Parking
Management Plan recommends that the revenues earned through the program should be reinvested into
funding shared parking and lease parking opportunities and other parking program management strategies.
These recommendations, however, should not preclude private business owners and developers in providing
or expanding private supply of parking to meet their individual needs, as they may see fit.
15 “Parking Structure Cost Outlook for 2015”, Carl Walker
Parking Management Plan | Page 126
Phasing of Parking Management Strategies
The strategies identified as part of this study have been summarized in Table 12 according to implementation planning horizons.
Table 12: Summary of Parking Management Strategies
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
On-Street
Parking
Reconfiguration
and Curb Lane
Management
The city has curb lane markings
and signage that indicate where
and when on-street parking is
permitted
Review red curbs and
driveway closures to identify
potential opportunities to
create additional parking
Consider angled parking
where conditions allow
Develop a curb lane
management policy and
program
Implement curb lane
management policy and
program
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Evaluate effectiveness of
curb lane management
policy and adjust as
needed
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Parking Time
Limits
2- and 3-hour time limits on-
street in select areas
(See Figure 7)
In some areas parking is not
allowed between
2 a.m.—5 a.m.
3 a.m.—5 a.m.
Enforce existing time limits
Reduce time limit to 24-hours
for RVs
Revise the Oversized Vehicles
Ordinance to continue to allow
RV access to the beach while
restricting long-term parking
on surrounding city streets
Extend parking time limits
after 5 p.m. to 4-hours
Consider reducing time limits
to 1-hour to encourage more
turnover in high demand
areas
Evaluate extending time
limits to new areas based on
collected data
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Parking Management Plan | Page 127
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
Revise overnight parking
restrictions in residential areas
Provide time limit
information on the city
website
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Enforcement and
Ambassadors
Enforcement Hours:
7 a.m. – 6 p.m. Mon-Sat.
Enforcement is handled by the
city’s Police Department on a
complaint response basis
Implement proactive
enforcement on a more
regular basis in areas with
the highest parking demand
Implement first offense
warnings
Evaluate cost-effective
options for administering
enforcement
Provide enforcement
regulation information, such
as fines and how to contest a
citation, on the city website
for simplified public access
Expand enforcement if data
demonstrates that parking
duration is an issue.
Extend enforcement hours to
8 p.m. to cover the peak
period
Consider implementing an
ambassador approach to
parking enforcement
Implement a graduated fine
structure
Re-evaluate enforcement
needs and adjust
enforcement levels as
necessary.
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Shared and
Leased Parking
The city allows property owners
to enter into shared and leased
parking agreements where they
can share a common off-street
Document inventory of
shared and leased parking
opportunities
Evaluate shared and leased
parking opportunities for
employee parking
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Parking Management Plan | Page 128
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
and/or off-site parking resource
to meet their parking needs, if
the shared or leased parking
facility is within 300 feet (within
the Village) or 150 feet (outside
the Village) of the subject land
uses.
Within the Village, allow the
walking distance to be 1,320
feet and allow varying shared
and leased parking
agreements
Develop shared and leased
parking agreement templates
and resources, including a
standard city liability policy
Define development/
business incentives for
participating
Broker shared and leased
parking agreements with
property owners
Evaluate shared and leased
parking opportunities for
valet parking locations
Continue leasing NCTD
spaces
Coordinate with NCTD to
enter a lease agreement to
use railroad right-of-way,
between Oak Avenue and
Tamarack Avenue, on the
east and west sides of the
railroad tracks, for public
parking. Work with NCTD to
investigate opportunities to
incorporate public parking
into future non-rail
development on NCTD
property.
In-Lieu Fees The city allows developers of
properties east of the railroad
tracks in the Village to pay a fee
of $11,420 per space in-lieu of
providing the parking required
Maintain existing in-lieu fee
rate
Use development regulations
to encourage participation in
the program
Evaluate program
performance and
review fees annually.
Adjust fees if the program is
underutilized or if the fee
falls below 60 percent of the
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Parking Management Plan | Page 129
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
by the adopted Village Master
Plan and Design Manual (2013).
Use funds to support shared
and leased parking
Make program transparent
by posting information on
program utilization on the
city website
cost to construct a parking
space (based on RSMeans).
Consider expanding program
west of the tracks if
commercial development
increases in this area
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Reduced Parking
Requirements
Existing parking requirements
may be reduced in the Village
area. Requirements may vary
depending if the development is
located within or outside of the
Coastal Zone. Barrio parking
requirements are generally the
same as the rest of the city.
Adopt the proposed parking
requirements in the Draft
Village and Barrio Master
Plan based on observed
parking ratios
Monitor implementation and
demand
Evaluate the effectiveness of
the TDM Ordinance to
determine if the timing for
the parking reductions is in
alignment with first mile and
last mile transportation
opportunities
Monitor development
demands and adjust ratios
accordingly
Consider implementing
parking maximums
Parking Management Plan | Page 130
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
Residential
Parking Program
(RPP)
None Monitor parking occupancies
annually. If occupancies
consistently reach 85 percent
in residential areas, evaluate
whether a RPP would be
appropriate.
Define the locations and
criteria for implementation
Implement RPP if
neighborhood meets
program criteria
Evaluate RPP on an
ongoing basis
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Paid Parking On-street and off-street parking
is free with exception of the
Tamarack State Beach and two
private businesses.
Determine threshold for
implementing paid parking
Evaluate parking system
annually
Create an ordinance that
defines the parameters for
implementing paid parking in
the future
If data dictates, then:
Implement paid parking
Define technology to manage
parking system
Establish a Parking Benefit
District
Evaluate parking system
annually and adjust fees as
needed to manage demand
If data dictates, then:
Define locations to
implement paid parking
Establish a Parking
Benefit District
Evaluate parking system
annually adjust fees as
needed to manage
demand
Parking
Wayfinding
Themed wayfinding signage to
public off-street parking
Develop additional signage
for new public parking
facilities created through
shared and leased parking
Evaluate and select a
smartphone application that
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Parking Management Plan | Page 131
PARKING
STRATEGY CURRENT CONDITIONS SHORT-TERM (BY 2020) MID-TERM (BY 2025) LONG-TERM (BY 2035)
provides real-time parking
information
Create a map of public
parking facilities (location
and number of spaces) and
post to the city website
Curb Cafes Pilot program permitting curb
cafes expired; several cafes
previously approved remain in
use; Property owners are
currently allowed to pay a fee to
the city for use of on-street
space(s) to operate a Curb Cafe
Subject to curb café program
approval, continue to allow
existing curb cafes and
review parking occupancies
prior to approval of new
facilities
Monitor occupancies
annually. Restrict the use of
curb cafes when parking
occupancies reach 85 percent
in areas around and serving
the location(s) of the curb
café(s) in consideration
Continuation of previous
recommendations
Continuation of previous
recommendations