|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
At its Nov. 12 meeting, the Menlo Park City Council held off on voting on a new parking ordinance, which would ban recreational vehicles from parking overnight on Menlo Park streets. The ordinance would also allow the Menlo Park Police Department to authorize towing any vehicles that are parked on city streets for over 72 hours. The ordinance also would make other changes to prevent cars from parking in the sight lines of cross walks.
The council voted 3-2 to delay the vote until after the newly elected council members are seated, with Vice Mayor Drew Combs and council member Maria Doerr dissenting.
Doerr was driven nearly to tears with concern over the uncertainty that the council would be causing for Menlo Park residents who live in RVs by not making a decision at the meeting. She asked that the council not pass the RV ban, and instead consider more “creative solutions” to aid those who are living in these vehicles, such as initiating a safe parking program similar to East Palo Alto’s. Doerr made the decision to not run for re-election due to a pending move out of the area, and will be replaced by newly elected council member Jennifer Wise in December.
“This is just not sitting well with me; it’s quite concerning that we have a sitting council that has been here for a long time and is not able to make a decision about creating some kind of certainty for our community about what will happen to these residents,” Doerr said.
Combs also strongly disagreed with holding off on a decision, but for a different reason. Combs advocated for passing the RV ban in order to provide relief to the residents and business owners who have been complaining about the RVs that have collected along Bohannon Drive, Campbell Avenue and Scott Drive in the Belle Haven neighborhood of Menlo Park.
“This has been a yearslong issue with the city … if anything the property owners and the people that work (near the RVs) have said that the city’s engagement here has been much too delayed,” he said.
Several council members wanted to see an implementation plan and administrative policies from the police before they felt comfortable voting either way on the ordinance.
“I’m having a hard time seeing how this all plays out — where people go, what happens to their stuff, how do they get it back?” said Council member Jen Wolosin. “Before knowing some of those details, I’m having a hard time committing to doing anything to these RVs.”
Menlo Park Police Chief Dave Norris, who presented the ordinance to the council, said that the department has a commitment to a “care first” approach to policing, which involves offering resources and aid before ticketing or towing. However, Norris said he did not think writing new staff policies would be productive until a new ordinance had been passed.
“My feeling is that we have policies that can fit to these circumstances. …I’m not going to review and change (the policies) before we have some legislative changes that are going to change how we’re looking at (the issue),” said Norris. “I can’t bring you a policy and say that this will be our policy if we haven’t made changes that will require us to change our behavior.”
Mayor Cecilia Taylor, Betsy Nash and Wolosin opted to hold the item until January after much discussion over how an RV parking ban might affect Menlo Park’s unhoused residents. Wolosin also opted not to run for re-election due to personal circumstances, and will be replaced by newly elected council member Jeff Schmidt in December.
“I don’t know if I have the stomach (to vote) to tow these right now,” said Wolosin. “If we’re just stalling because we don’t want to make a hard decision tonight, that’s just silly. However, there might be some new perspectives coming in. I’ve never abstained from a vote in my life, but I’d be delighted to have fresh eyes looking at this.”
Several community members spoke at the meeting, advocating for Menlo Park to develop a safe parking program for people living in RVs who may be displaced by this ban, or to conduct an impact study to see how such a ban might affect people.
The issue of oversized vehicles parked for long stretches of time, specifically people living in RVs, has been brought up to the council several times throughout the year during public comment at council meetings. Aileen Lattmann, who works in a building on Campbell Street in the Belle Haven neighborhood, has commented at multiple meetings about the “hazards” caused near her place of work by the “increasing numbers” of RVs parked nearby. She mentioned “waste, … trespassing and illegal dumping.”
According to a staff report prepared for the meeting, the Menlo Park Police Department receives “multiple complaints daily” regarding various parking issues, including vehicles parked for over 72 hours, vehicles blocking driveways and crosswalks and oversized vehicles obstructing sight lines.
Combs said that if the RVs were parked in any other part of the city, the council would have already taken action to alleviate the issue. The area where the RVs are located is within the district he represents.
“I’ve walked this area several times … there are all sorts of very suboptimal conditions,” he said. “If there were 40 RVs parked in the parking lot at Sharon Park, this meeting would be filled with residents from Sharon Park. … It’s easy to take principled positions when it doesn’t impact you, when it’s removed to the other side of the city.”
The council also voted 4-1 to pass the section of the ordinance that would allow the public works department to prohibit parking near areas where increased visibility is needed, such as near crosswalks. Combs dissented on passing this section of the ordinance as he supported passing the entirety of the ordinance, including the sections that would ban RVs from parking overnight on Menlo Park streets.
There are currently no regulations in Menlo Park’s municipal codes that directly address oversized vehicles. The proposed ordinance would ban oversized and recreational vehicles from parking on any public street in the city overnight (specifically between the hours of 2 and 5 a.m.).
Oversized vehicles are defined in the proposed ordinance as vehicles that are taller or wider than seven and a half feet, longer than 22 feet or heavier than 10,000 pounds, or any camp trailer, camper, house car, recreational vehicle or mobile home as defined by California’s vehicle code.
The proposed ordinance includes exemptions for emergency conditions, governmental operations, residents readying their own recreational vehicles for use overnight or certain commercial and construction operations.
Chan Zuckerberg Initiative announces $10M donation for Menlo Park, East Palo Alto familiesApril 13, 2026 12:00 pm
Redwood City attorney sues ‘First Amendment auditors’ after Menlo Park disputeApril 2, 2026 11:31 am
I get that this is a legitimately complicated ethical issue. But why is it a legal one? Menlo Park already HAS an ordinance preventing overnight parking on the streets. I have to assume based on the street names and picture that these blocks are not zoned ‘residential’ and thus code “11.24.050 Night parking prohibited” doesn’t already apply.
But even if this is the case, I don’t understand why the discussion (or perhaps just the coverage here?) didn’t bring up the fact that Menlo Park already has restrictions on most of the town. Extending it to non-residential areas isn’t really that much of a stretch.
SHOULD we, is a different question. And I’m supportive of the idea of having alternatives in place before threatening towing. But let’s not act like it’s really a wholly new thing.
11.24.050 Night parking prohibited.
No person shall stop, stand or park a vehicle at any time between the hours of two a.m. and five a.m. upon those certain streets or portions thereof located within a residential zone or located within three hundred feet (300’) of a residential zone. Physicians engaged in professional calls, persons engaged in governmental duties or emergency activities are exempt from this provision. A “residential zone” includes all lands located within the following zoning districts of the city: RE, RES, R-1-S, R-1-U, R-2, R-3, R-3-A, R-3-C and R-L-U. (Ord. 697 § 1(A), 1984).