From: Carol Scott
To: Council, City; Baird, Nathan; Shikada, Ed; Planning Commission Cc: Mike Eager; Paul Machado; Neilson Buchanan
Subject: Removal of Item #7 From Consent Calendar for August 11, 2025 Council Meeting Date: Friday, August 8, 2025 12:34:07 PM
Attachments: Letter to City Council - August 2025.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
!
Dear Council Members, Mr. Shikada and Mr. Baird,
I write to ask you to remove item #7 from the Consent Calendar for your upcoming City Council meeting on August 11, 2025.
This item proposes to increase the number of employee permits in
the Evergreen Park Residential Permit
Parking program ('EVP RPP') and to make certain changes to the parking zone boundaries within the RPP.
The reasons for my request, which I explain in more detail in the attached memorandum, are:
1. City staff have cited no need for an increase in permits at this time.
Although Zones A, B, and C have sold
out of their allotted permits, Zone D has not, i.e., permits are available
for purchase in Zone D.
This is an
important
concern for residents of EVP that deserves open discussion before a vote is taken.
2. The proposed zone boundaries do not improve the problem (noted at the Council meeting on August 12, 2024) of overloading residential blocks closest to El Camino Real in Zones B, C, and especially D, but instead will institutionalize them.
They need further discussion work.
3. We have no data on which to base these decisions about the number of permits or appropriate zone boundaries at this time.
Such a study was promised as part of an evaluation of the Changes in the EVP RPP made in August 2024.
The Staff mentions "observations", but provides no details as to the methodology
used to collect
these observations.
Please see the attached memorandum for further explanation of the issues.
I very much appreciate your consideration of this request.
Carol Scott
--
Carol Scott
This message could be suspicious
The sender's email address couldn't be verified.
This is their first mail to some recipients.
Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
From: Paul Machado
To: Council, City; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; [email protected]
Subject: Evergreen Park RPP
Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2025 12:47:54 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
Next Monday you will discuss changes to the Evergreen Park residential parking program.
This program was initiated by residents as
commercial intrusion into the neighborhood was severely affecting the quality of life of residents.
Now there is a request from staff to change this program.
I only ask
you to note that this program is a residential program to prevent the neighborhood from merely being viewed as a commercial parking lot.
Also if commercial permits are allowed in the neighborhood, any plan proposed
should be designed so the commercial permits are evenly distributed throughout the neighborhood and not designed so all the commercial parking is closest to El Camino, like metal filings to a magnet.
Packing cars solid in an area makes the area useless to residents and visitors.
Paul Machado
Evergreen Park
From: Tony Lee
To: Council, City
Subject: Re: El Camino Real Parking Changes: Impact on Stanford Coin Wash and other small businesses Date: Tuesday, August 5, 2025 9:04:07 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Palo Alto City Council Member,
I am writing to follow up on my previous correspondence regarding the parking changes on El Camino Real and their impact on Stanford Coin Wash. Specifically, I have not yet received any updates concerning the "delivery vehicles excepted" signage I observed next to the Tesla and McLaren dealerships.
I continue to drive past these dealerships on El Camino Real daily and still see these special permit signs prominently displayed. This observation reinforces my earlier point about the precedent for accommodating specific operational requirements for businesses.
Given this, I would like to formally request a similar parking permit for the area directly in front of my laundromat. My aim is to provide my customers with the same privilege as those delivery vehicles when they are dropping off or picking up their laundry. As I previously highlighted, many of my customers, particularly the elderly and those with disabilities, face significant difficulties walking several blocks while carrying heavy bags of laundry. A designated loading/unloading zone or a short-term parking permit would greatly alleviate this burden and ensure continued access to my services for these vulnerable customers.
I remain eager to work with the City of Palo Alto to find a practical and equitable solution that supports local businesses like mine while also respecting the objectives of the El Camino Real Improvement Project.
Thank you for your continued attention to this urgent matter.
Sincerely,
Tony Lee
650-224-2230 cell
On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 10:33 PM Tony Lee <[email protected] > wrote:
Dear Palo Alto City Council member,
I am writing to you regarding the recent changes to parking regulations on El Camino Real, specifically the implementation of "No Parking" in front of my laundromat, Stanford Coin Wash, located at 2045 El Camino Real. I understand that these changes are related to the Caltrans El Camino Real Pavement Rehabilitation and ADA Improvements project.
While I understand the importance of these infrastructure improvements, I am deeply concerned about the severe impact this "No Parking" regulation is having on my business and my ability to serve my customers, as well as other small businesses.
Unlike many retail establishments, a laundromat's business model relies heavily on customers' ability to load and unload bulky and heavy items – in this case, laundry.
Customers often arrive with multiple large bags or baskets of laundry, and the "No Parking" restriction makes it extremely difficult, and in some cases impossible, for them to access my business.
The lack of convenient parking directly translates to:
Loss of Customers: Many of my regular customers, particularly those who are elderly, disabled, or do not have assistance, are finding it too challenging to use my services without the ability to park briefly. I am already seeing a decline in customer traffic.
Reduced Revenue: The decrease in customer volume is directly impacting my revenue and threatens the viability of my business. As a small business owner, this is a very serious concern.
Operational Inefficiency: Even for customers who are able to manage, the "No Parking" rule forces them to park at a distance and carry heavy loads, creating inconvenience and delays, and potentially causing safety issues. ______________________________________________________________________ Observations on "Delivery Vehicles Excepted" Signage
In addition to the immediate impact on my business, I've observed a related issue that I believe highlights the need for more nuanced parking solutions. I've noticed specific signs displayed prominently in front of several car dealerships along El Camino Real, including Tesla, Volvo, and McLaren, that state "delivery vehicles excepted" under the "No Parking Any Time" sign.
This observation raises a few important questions relevant to our parking discussions:
Ordinance or Justification: What is the specific ordinance or justification behind these "delivery vehicles excepted" signs? Are these standard for all commercial properties or unique to certain business types? Understanding the legal framework for these exceptions could offer valuable insight into how we might approach the unique loading/unloading needs of other businesses like mine.
Balancing Needs: If certain businesses are granted exceptions for their logistical needs, it suggests there's a precedent for accommodating specific operational requirements. I believe laundromats, with their reliance on customers loading and unloading heavy items, warrant similar consideration to ensure equitable access and business viability.
______________________________________________________________________ I urge the City of Palo Alto to consider the unique needs of businesses like mine that require customers to load and unload items. I respectfully request that you consider the following potential solutions:
Designated Loading/Unloading Zone: A designated loading/unloading zone, even if limited to a short duration (e.g., 15-30 minutes), would provide a practical solution for my customers to access my business.
Short-Term Parking Permits: Explore the possibility of issuing short-term parking permits for customers of businesses like mine, specifically for the purpose of loading and unloading.
I am eager to work with the City of Palo Alto to find a solution that addresses the needs of the El Camino Real Improvement Project while also ensuring the survival of local businesses like my laundromat. I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this matter further with you at your earliest convenience. You can reach me at 650-224-2230 or
Thank you for your time and consideration of this urgent matter.
Sincerely,
Tony Lee
Stanford Coin Wash
650-224-2230 cell