Draft Downtown Mesa micro‑mobility and parking plan promotes more bike lanes, clearer signage and added on‑street parking

City urban‑transformation staff and consultant Stantec presented a draft Downtown Mesa micro‑mobility and parking plan that recommends reconfiguring several downtown streets to add protected bike lanes, improve pedestrian comfort and add on‑street angled parking in targeted locations.

Jeff McVay, manager of Urban Transformation, introduced the team and consultant Ralph Denizchio of Stantec explained the plan’s goals: foster a welcoming downtown, integrate parking solutions, improve multimodal infrastructure, enhance safety and add clear wayfinding. "Downtown is the place where a city, any city, should come together," Denizchio said, urging a people‑first approach that preserves vehicle throughput while expanding safe walking, cycling and parking options.

Stantec reported an inventory of roughly 12,000–13,000 public parking spaces in downtown and a parking utilization study showing that at peak midday counts the public on‑street and off‑street inventory was generally less than 50% occupied in the core. The consultant and staff cautioned that the raw supply figure does not remove unused private lots or reserved locations and that perceptions of poor parking remain a barrier to visitation. To address that perception the plan recommends simplifying on‑street time limits in the core to consistent 3‑ or 4‑hour limits, standardizing public parking signs and opening some permit lots to the public at predictable times.

The consultant recommended "rightsizing" several streets by reducing vehicle lane widths or counts where traffic volumes do not require multiple travel lanes, adding protected bike lanes on both sides of select corridors, and converting parallel curb parking to angled stalls on streets such as West First Avenue to generate an estimated net gain of 200–300 on‑street spaces while preserving automobile throughput. Stantec also proposed coordinated bike and scooter parking hubs and geofenced pickup/drop‑off and micromobility parking areas.

Staff demonstrated a beta version of a smart parking app managed by parking staff; the app currently covers three garages and one street and reports live availability for those assets. Parking staff said the beta is about 95% accurate and could be expanded to additional garages and on‑street counts; later phases could identify temporarily available reserved spaces when assigned vehicles vacate spots.

Council members raised sight‑line, shade and signage concerns and asked about implementation sequencing and funding. Transportation staff said the city has a multi‑year pavement preservation plan to mill and overlay downtown streets over the next several years and that coordinating striping and low‑cost corridor changes to coincide with resurfacing is the preferred approach to limit disruption. Staff indicated some recommended items (restriping, signage and wayfinding, and app expansion) can proceed under annual transportation budgets and identified more capital‑intensive items (moving signal infrastructure or curb realignment) as projects that would require additional design and capital funding.

Denizchio said the plan documented public feedback and that the public meeting reaction was largely positive, with detailed questions about tree selection, sight lines and parking regulation clarifications. Staff said next steps include refining recommendations with council and transportation staff, developing an implementation and prioritization schedule timed against the pavement preservation program, and returning to council with a final plan.

Ending: Council members broadly supported moving toward an implementation plan tied to transportation’s resurfacing schedule and asked staff to return with prioritized phasing, estimated costs and a communications plan to publicize parking locations and the smart‑parking app.