HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 2609-6730CITY OF PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting
Monday, September 14, 2026
Council Chambers & Hybrid
5:30 PM
Agenda Item
6.SECOND READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Chapter 10.49
(OSV Parking Permit Districts) to the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending PAMC
Section 10.60.010 (FIRST READING: August 24, 2026; PASSED: 7-0) Public Comment
2
1
5
1
City Council
Staff Report
Report Type: CONSENT CALENDAR
Lead Department: City Clerk
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
Report #:2609-6730
TITLE
SECOND READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Chapter 10.49 (OSV
Parking Permit Districts) to the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending PAMC Section
10.60.010 (FIRST READING: August 24, 2026; PASSED: 7-0)
BACKGROUND
The City Council heard this item on August 24, 2026, for a first reading and approved it on a 7-0
vote. No changes were made to the ordinance, and it is now before the City Council for a
second reading.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Chapter 10.49 (OSV
Parking Permit Districts) to the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending PAMC Section
10.60.010
APPROVED BY:
Mahealani Ah Yun, City Clerk
*NOT YET APPROVED*
1
168_20260813_ts24
Ordinance No. ____
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Chapter
10.49 (OSV Parking Permit Districts) to the Palo Alto Municipal
Code and Amending PAMC Section 10.60.010
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. California Vehicle Code section 22507 authorizes preferential parking permit programs.
B. The City Council desires to regulate the parking of oversized vehicles through a permit
program to mitigate the health, safety, and traffic impacts of such vehicles by creating an
Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit Program in new Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter
10.49.
C. The City Council also desires to amend PAMC section 10.60.010 to clarify that civil penalties
can be imposed for parking violations of several chapters of the PAMC.
SECTION 2. New Chapter 10.49 (Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit Program) is hereby
added to Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to read as follows:
Chapter 10.49
Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit Districts
10.49.010 Definitions.
For the purpose of this Chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the
following meanings:
(a) “OSV Parking Permit District” or "District" shall mean a geographical area in which the
City Council has established an OSV Parking Permit District to regulate the parking of Oversized
Vehicles. A District may also regulate the parking of other types of vehicles not classified as
Oversized Vehicles.
(b) “Oversize Vehicle”, “Oversized Vehicle” and “OSV” shall all have the same definition as
the term “Oversized Vehicle” does as defined in PAMC section 10.44.015.
10.49.020 Establishment of OSV Parking Permit Districts.
A District shall be established by adoption of a resolution of the City Council. The
resolution shall specify the following:
2
(a) The boundaries and name of the District.
(b) Hours and days of enforcement of parking regulations and other restrictions that shall be
in effect for permit holders and non-permit holders. This may include, but is not limited to, time
limits, reparking restrictions, parking prohibitions, or any other parking regulation or restriction
authorized by law.
(c) Such other matters as the council may deem necessary and desirable.
10.49.030 Administration of districts.
(a) No permit will be issued to any applicant until that applicant has paid all applicable permit
fees.
(b) All permits shall be displayed as directed by the City.
(c) No Guarantee of Availability of Parking. A parking permit shall not guarantee or reserve to
the permit holder an on-street parking space within the designated District unless explicitly
stated in writing.
(d) Restrictions and Conditions. Each permit issued pursuant to this Chapter shall be subject to
each and every condition and restriction set forth in this Chapter, in the resolution
establishing the respective District, and in any applicable administrative regulations, as
may be amended from time to time. The issuance of such permit shall not be construed to
waive compliance with any other applicable law, regulation or ordinance.
(e) Exemptions.
The following vehicles are exempt from District parking restrictions in this Chapter:
(1) A vehicle owned or operated by a public or private utility, when used in the course of
business.
(2) A vehicle owned or operated by a governmental agency, when used in the course of
official government business.
(3) A vehicle for which an authorized emergency vehicle permit has been issued by the
Commissioner of the California Highway Patrol, when used in the course of business.
(4) A vehicle parked or standing while actively delivering materials or freight.
(5) A vehicle displaying an authorized exemption permit issued by the City of Palo Alto.
(6) A vehicle displaying a State of California or military-issued disabled person placard or
license plates.
3
(f) Authority of Staff.
(1) The City Manager or designee is authorized to promulgate administrative regulations
that are not inconsistent with the purposes of this Chapter. This includes, but is not
limited to, administrative regulations on permit eligibility, permit sales processes, and
health and safety requirements. The administrative regulations may be different for
each District and may impose additional restrictions not in conflict with this Chapter.
(2) A private parking enforcement contractor approved by the City shall have the
authority to enforce any parking restriction and administrative regulations
established pursuant to this Chapter.
10.49.040 Violations and Penalties.
(a) No person shall park a vehicle adjacent to any curb in a District in violation of any posted or
noticed prohibition or restriction, unless the person has a valid and current parking permit
for that vehicle, or is otherwise exempt. A parking permit must be properly displayed or
affixed pursuant to any applicable administrative regulations to be valid. Use of any permit
issued under this chapter shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter and the
administrative regulations. Violations of this subsection shall be punishable by a civil
penalty under PAMC Chapter 10.60.
(b) No person shall sell, rent, or lease, or cause to be sold, rented, or leased for any value or
consideration any permit issued under this chapter. Upon violation of this subsection, all
permits issued to for the benefit of the permittee for which the sold, rented, or leased
permit was authorized shall be void. Violation of this subsection (b) shall be punishable as
an infraction and/or as an administrative penalty.
(c) No person shall buy or otherwise acquire for value or use any permit issued under this
Chapter, except as provided for in this chapter. Violation of this subsection (c) shall be
punishable as an infraction and/or as an administrative penalty.
(d) No person shall fail to abide by the administrative regulations authorized by this Chapter.
Violation of this subsection (d) shall be punishable as an infraction and/or as an
administrative penalty.
(e) Each separate day or any portion thereof during which any violation of this Chapter occurs
or continues shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense.
(f) Where not inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution or other applicable law, vehicles parked
in violation of this Chapter are subject to tow.
10.49.050 Revocation of permit.
In addition to all other remedies, the City Manager or designee may suspend or revoke a
permit issued under this chapter of any person found to be in violation of this chapter or its
administrative regulations by providing written notice of the suspension or revocation to the
permittee. Such written notice shall include a statement outlining the grounds for revoking the
permit.
4
A person may appeal a suspension or revocation by requesting a hearing under the
procedures in PAMC Section 1.12.060. The hearing shall be conducted under the procedures in
PAMC Chapter 1.12.
SECTION 3. Section 10.60.010 of Chapter 10.60 (“Parking Violations”) of Title 10
(“Vehicles and Traffic) is hereby amended to read as follows (new text underlined):
10.60.010 Parking violations punishable as civil penalties.
Except as otherwise provided, violations of any provision of Chapters 10.36, 10.40, 10.44,
10.46, 10.47, 10.48, 10.49 and 10.50 of this Title 10 and parking related violations in PAMC
Chapter 22.04 (hereinafter referred to as a "parking violation") shall be punishable by a civil
penalty (hereinafter referred to as a "parking penalty"). These parking penalties, together with
any late payment penalties, administrative fee, and other related charges shall be established
by ordinance or resolution of the city council.
SECTION 4. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this
ordinance, or the application to any person or circumstances, shall be held invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance which can be given effect
without the invalid provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance
are hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective on the 31st day after
adoption.
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
5
SECTION 6. CEQA. The City Council finds and determines that this categorically
exempt under CEQA regulation 15301 (existing facilities) and 15304 (minor alterations).
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
____________________________ ____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
____________________________ ____________________________
Assistant City Attorney City Manager
____________________________
Chief Transportation Official
From:stephanie wansek
To:Council, City
Cc:Clerk, City; City Mgr
Subject:September 14 Consent Calendar – OSV Parking Permit District Ordinance
Date:Thursday, September 10, 2026 11:49:47 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Veenker and Council Members,
I am writing as a Palo Alto resident regarding the OSV Parking Permit District ordinance
scheduled for second reading on the September 14 Consent Calendar. I urge the Council to
pull this item from Consent and reconsider the sequence and scope of the ordinance before
permanently adding Chapter 10.49 to the Municipal Code.
I support establishing a clear, objective citywide restriction on overnight parking of
oversized vehicles on public streets, regardless of zoning. The parking ordinance should
regulate the vehicle — its size, location and hours of parking — not the person inside it. Who
is living there, why they are there, and what assistance they may need belongs on a separate
track.
I understand that some form of permit authority may be necessary to transition Palo Alto’s
existing OSV population. My concern is not with creating that limited authority. My concern
is permanently codifying a general OSV Parking Permit District framework BEFORE
the City has established its long-term citywide parking rule, WITHOUT tying that
authority to a defined transition population or providing a sunset.
There are now several regional models worth considering. Menlo Park adopted its current
OSV restrictions in March 2025. Cupertino adopted a citywide overnight OSV
restriction in September 2025, effective October 2025, with only limited temporary
exceptions. Redwood City has had an overnight RV restriction since 2020 and paired it
with a temporary transition program that ended in 2023. San Francisco adopted a
citywide large-vehicle restriction in 2025 while creating a time-limited transition
program for a defined population already living in vehicles in the city.
These newer approaches now have actual operating histories that did not exist when Palo Alto
first considered some of them. Redwood City’s restriction has been in place for nearly six
years, and the current Menlo Park, Cupertino and San Francisco ordinances have now been in
effect for approximately a year or more. I have not been able to identify litigation
challenging the current Menlo Park, Cupertino or San Francisco ordinances, and
Cupertino’s legal analysis states that Redwood City’s program had not been legally
challenged. I believe that experience should now be part of Palo Alto’s assessment of
litigation risk.
It is also important to distinguish between the parking rule and the legal issues that can
arise in its implementation and enforcement. Several cases Palo Alto has considered
involve towing, impoundment, displacement, encampment removal and other homelessness-
related enforcement issues rather than simply the existence of an objective vehicle-based
parking restriction. That is not a reason to avoid establishing the underlying parking rule;
it is a reason to design the transition and enforcement process carefully.
Palo Alto can do both. The City can establish a clear citywide rule while developing a
thoughtful, legally sound transition for the existing population. Those implementation
questions should follow from the parking policy, not prevent the City from establishing
one.
I am also concerned by suggestions that OSV Parking Permit Districts could become a
permanent feature of Palo Alto. We cannot keep moving the same problem from one
neighborhood or commercial area to another and asking each new area to absorb it. The
repeated opposition when specific locations are proposed should tell us something:
permanent public-street OSV habitation districts are unlikely to be broadly accepted
anywhere in the city.
If permit districts are intended as a temporary transition tool, the Municipal Code should
reflect that purpose. If instead Palo Alto intends them to become a permanent feature of
public-street parking, I believe that is the wrong long-term policy and simply perpetuates the
location-by-location conflict.
The City needs to establish the parking rule first. If temporary permit districts are
necessary to transition the existing population, authorize them expressly for that
purpose, with a defined population, a defined transition period and a sunset.
Without first establishing the parking rule, the City risks remaining stuck indefinitely in the
much larger questions surrounding housing and services. The ordinance creates the boundary;
the implementation period gives the City time to address assistance, accommodations and
individual circumstances on a separate track.
I respectfully ask Council to pull the ordinance from Consent, establish the long-term citywide
OSV parking policy first, and structure any permit authority as a defined transition
mechanism rather than a permanent substitute for the underlying rule.
Thank you,
Stephanie Wansek
Resident Vantage Palo Alto