Post a New Topic
Original post made
on Jun 13, 2014
This works only if the landlord doesn't charge for parking...
Oh, right, 90 spaces is a big help! What is needed are more like 1200, considering how many residents have 2-3 cars ( many keep a spare for when the other two break down at the same time, or for a working teenage child). The owners have a strange idea of what their tenants really need, and what their tenants' reality is.
Yes, Crescent Park Dad, the residents are being charged. Or, at least the Mercury News article indicates such.
I would assume with 1800 units, some of which are 4 bedrooms, Woodland Park would need at minimum 3600 parking spaces. Adding a mere 90 spots is almost comical.
Yes, we ARE laughing, palo alto parent. I feel bad for people who 8still* need parking. And the parking problem WAS created by EQR.
What A Joke ....
> Oh, right, 90 spaces is a big help! What is needed are more like 1200, considering how many residents have 2-3 cars ( many keep a spare for when the other two break down at the same time, or for a working teenage child). The owners have a strange idea of what their tenants really need, and what their tenants' reality is.
Well, I do agree it's a joke, but this is way way over on the other side of University, so it will not alleviate parking problems near the Newell Bridge area for those folks. What about them?
But people who think the answer to reliable transportation is to have 3 broken cars are people who cannot afford to live here and are pushing off the cost of their incompetence onto the cities and blaming their landlords ... if that is what is really happening. Can you back that up?
I know housing for low incomes is non-existent, and parking is worse than housing, unless you just park in a public space. The idea of taking the space needed for 1200 cars and donating it to people who have 3 cars is very funny, at least until it actually would get done ... then laughter should turn to tears. That is a huge cost - to someone.
How do you suggest they create parking? Is it the landlord's responsibility? The city's?
These buildings were not build by their current owners or in current circumstances. They used to function for people, but now the density of living has gone up, and the density of cars. There are cars all over most areas of EPA, and Palo Alto too.
Yes, of course the current landlord created this problem. We didn't have this problem until EQR took over. [Portion removed.]
Some missing information in the PA Weekly/Online article:
Before this article was published, The City of Palo Alto recently replaced the previously installed no overnight parking signs with "No Parking Anytime" signs at its borders with East Palo Alto: On Newell near Woodland and the week before the article was published, on West Bayshore. This has contributed even more to the extremely difficult parking situation that has been occurring in the last few years on Woodland Avenue in East Palo Alto west of Highway 101.
The additional lots constructed by Equity have had little effect on Woodland Avenue south of Newell Avenue parking, mainly because they charge for parking. Woodland, south of Newell, is now a haven for trucks with commercial license plates, large SUVs and other non-resident vehicles who use Woodland Ave as their parking lot, when they don't live on this street.
Posted by Hmmm, a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jun 13, 2014 at 9:19 pm
Hmmm is a registered user.
>> instead opine, as usual, with few known facts.
HEY EDITOR, I've only Reported Objectionable Content about 13 times now on this particular personal attack and insult and nothing has been done, although you have removed my post complaining about it. How about doing something?
Well, CPA, you know it's true - you're not in possession of real facts in the matter.
Hmmm, why can't you seem to keep from making negative personal comments about me or most of those you disagree strongly with. If we could look back and some of your deleted posts you regularly lose it on people, and not just me.
Whatever the substance of my opinions are, when you imply that I "always" don't know the facts, when the real facts are that nearly half of your comments end up being deleted or edited. Maybe you should look at your part of whatever brings about that outcome. You seem to have that kind "entitlement mentality" where you think your opinions are superior so you can get self-righteous to others and be insulting and dismissive of others.
Others are supposed to take on faith that you know and can speak for all of East Palo Alto, and blame most of Palo Alto. I asked you a question about the real facts of the matter you said your knew and you taunted me about, but did not answer, and you your posts and my post deleted in the process. No, I didn't appreciate it.
Too bad for you, CPA. That you can't figure out how little you know, but you post based on your factless opinions, and then get irked when I point it out, if your problem. Many posters, incl me, who don't understand or know the facts about an issue ask relevant questions and try to get answers. You should perhaps compare your posts with, say, Crescent Park Dad's so that you see what I mean.
Further, you pretend to understand issues on the westside based on having lived her 30 years ago. The fact that you didn't even know the Equity Residential is largely responsible for the current parking problem is an example of you not knowing what's currently going on, but you post comments as if you do. I'm not gonna hold your hand when you're wrong, I'll point out that you're wrong or missing important issue.
I actually do represent a good portion of people in my town on some issue. I am entitled in that my opinions on issues that I call you on are because my opinion is based on facts. While we're all entitled to our opinions, we're not entitled to pretend we know facts that we don't. You do that, re the westside, but I don't. So if you want to call what I post entitled, you're entitled to do so. But be clear that I do so because I have the facts when you don't.
There is plenty I blame Palo Alto for, and I am right about that, too. I know the history of how each city has impacted the other quite well. Do you?
I'm certainly dismissive of people whose opinions aren't based on fact. That's pretty common everywhere. It's kind of weird that you take it so personally, instead of learning from my critiques of your posts. For example, Crescent Park Dad and I have argued a lot about Equity Residential. But we still see rationally eye to eye on many issues, and/or we ask similar questions about a topic. He has kids in Palo Alto schools, I don't. I've learned a lot from him on details I'm unfamiliar with. I make the distinction between being educated in Palo Alto and currently having kids in school there. You, otoh, can't be bothered to try to know what's going on, really, here on the westside, or overall in E. Palo Alto, nor do you admit when someone else knows more about something than you do. You pretend that all opinions are equal, when they're not. You've also, of course, ignored the many times I've agreed with you, which is also strange. Have a nice summer solstice!
> The fact that you didn't even know the Equity Residential is largely responsible for the current parking problem
That is your unsubstantiated claim based on your apparent feeling that any apartment complex has a bottomless well of money to solve problems however you think they should be solved.
> I'm not gonna hold your hand when you're wrong
Yeah, well you making another irrelevant comment, stop losing your temper, cound to ten or whatever it is you need to do and quit the personal attacks, you just counter one with another three.
It' is too bad that Hmmm is more current on the issues facing the Westside, and such a better writer than Crescent Park Anon. If they were better matched it might be more fun to read their exchanges. As it stands, Crescent Park Anon isn't learning how to better grasp the facts, so is always lacking in information and so is unable to postulate a decent argument. In Hmmm's latest post there was no personal attack, just an honest response.
Crescent Park Anon is wrong about Equity Residential, because they really do have endless funds, and there is no excuse for them being such terrible landlords who always break the law. This information is very easy to get, but Crescent Park Anon seems to think that they should be spoonfed facts. It's no wonder Hmmm won't enable Crescent Park Anon.
> Crescent Park Anon is wrong about Equity Residential
Hey Memories ... refresh my memory ... what did I say about this issue ... nothing maybe!
Please find me a cut and paste if you will, because you won't and can't and are just sucking up to Hmmm.
It is Hmmm that has made all kinds of statement about Equity Residential that have no basis or backup. I asked twice now for something, and all you both can do is bring in another loose PAO cannon to attack me. If asking for an answer to a question about a serious accusation is spoon-fed ... I guess so.
It's laughable, really, because Equity Residential's terrible record is so easy to find. I found it, so you go find it, Crescent Park Anon.
People on the other side (Woodlands Ave) of the Newell Bridge place ads on craigslist looking for someone to sell them a parking sticker or space for parking on the Palo Alto side.
Parking has always sucked in west EPA. When I lived in woodland back in 2006-2007 The problem was that at that time and it it probably still rings true today, Most of woodland's apartments were often occupied by 3 or more families living in one apartment with the kids living in the living room.
Funny, I though, hutch, that you have lived in old Palo Alto for a long time, based on your old postings
^ My family has lived in old PA for many years. I moved away after high school (1999) went to college in the Jefferson State and came back for overpaid work reasons.
Make that 23 years to be exact
Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.
Post a comment
Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online.
Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information
We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.
Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?
- Barron Park
- Charleston Gardens
- Charleston Meadows
- College Terrace
- Community Center
- Crescent Park
- Downtown North
- Duveneck/St. Francis
- Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
- Esther Clark Park
- Evergreen Park
- Greater Miranda
- Green Acres
- Greendell/Walnut Grove
- Leland Manor/Garland Drive
- Meadow Park
- Monroe Park
- Old Palo Alto
- Palo Alto Hills
- Palo Alto Orchards
- Palo Verde
- South of Midtown
- St. Claire Gardens
- The Greenhouse
- Triple El
- University South
- Woodland Ave. area (East Palo Alto)
- Addison School
- Barron Park School
- Duveneck School
- Egan Middle School (Los Altos)
- El Carmelo School
- Escondido School
- Fairmeadow School
- Gunn High School
- Hoover School
- JLS Middle School
- Jordan Middle School
- Juana Briones School
- Nixon School
- Ohlone School
- Palo Alto High School
- Palo Verde School
- Santa Rita (Los Altos)
- Terman Middle School
- Walter Hays School
- another community
- Another Palo Alto neighborhood
- East Palo Alto
- Los Altos
- Los Altos Hills
- Menlo Park
- Mountain View
- Portola Valley
Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.
Draeger’s Los Altos eyes upgrades, expansion
By Elena Kadvany | 4 comments | 3,238 views
Housing is for People
By Steve Levy | 33 comments | 2,231 views
College Visit: Lehigh and Lafayette
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 4 comments | 1,565 views
"the Summit" (CompPlan): Forewarned is Forearmed
By Douglas Moran | 21 comments | 823 views
A quiet moment
By Sally Torbey | 8 comments | 631 views
Home & Real Estate
Shop Palo Alto
Send News Tips
Circulation & Delivery
Mountain View Voice
© 2015 Palo Alto Online
All rights reserved.