Area Overview
Dear Waymo,
Seven months ago, you began renting two open air lots on our street, in the heart of residential Santa Monica. These lots are robotaxi depots for charging and maintaining your fleet of autonomous cars. In theory, this is fine: We're a tech town, and robots already roll up and down our street. In practice, these lots were poorly planned, run beyond capacity, and openly violate local laws established to protect us. We regret your presence.
This open letter will outline each of the ways your operation negatively impacts local residents. Our goal is to bring you back into compliance with Santa Monica City Ordinance, adjust your operations to repair the negative community impact you've had, and to start a new line of conversation about how corporate neighbors are still expected to be good neighbors in Santa Monica.
Sincerely,
Residents of Euclid Street, Santa Monica, CA
Waymo operates their lots 24/7. They are open air (un-enclosed) robotaxi depots for charging, maintaining, and storing cars between rides; they are within 100 feet of many residences.
Santa Monica prohibits this. Check out this section of our local ordinance:
§ 4.12.150 Business support operations.
(a) No business establishment shall engage in the following activities outside of an enclosed building between the hours of eleven p.m. to six a.m. if the property on which the establishment is located is within one hundred feet of a residentially zoned property:
(1) Receipt or delivery of merchandise, goods, food, or any item for use in the operation of the business;
(2) Trash disposal and recycling activities;
(3) Any maintenance or cleaning of equipment or furnishings;
(4) Any cleaning of the property with pressurized or mechanical equipment.
...
(Added by Ord. No. 2115CCS § 1, adopted 2/24/04)
This twenty-one year old ordinance makes a lot of sense, since keeping residential areas livable is a core goal for Santa Monica. Unfortunately, we have to contend with the constant beeping, flashing lights, mechanical noises from the cars, cars coming and going all night, and the general sounds that come from operating a transit business in open air next to our bedrooms.
Note that this ordinance doesn't have a noise threshold/decibel requirement, unlike others in section 4. Instead, these kinds of business support operations are simply prohibited by law, because they keep people (us!) from sleeping. This explains the explicit 11pm - 6am restriction. There is no mystery in this law, it is a common sense ordinance that must be followed for good reasons.
Waymo is running an open air taxi depot, where cars come and go at all hours of the night for charging, cleaning, and maintenance. There is an entire crew of people servicing these cars around the clock. This law was meant to curtail the exact operations that Waymo is engaging in. If they wanted to run overnight, they should have found an open air lot that is not next to residential zoning! (How did a company with so much money miss this?) The previous tenant, Ford, used this lot to store cars for decades, and knew how to close down for the night. This is entirely new behavior for this lot not seen by Waymo's predecessor.
The bottom line here is simple: Running an illegal operation that keeps us up at night is a huge problem, and there isn't a secret second option for Waymo: Shut down this lot during the required hours, per §4.12.150
Waymo's overnight operations bring impossible light and sound pollution. Up to 60 idle Waymos park in the lots with their headlights on, and their brake lights flashing. Neighbors have had to buy black out curtains, and keep windows closed during the summer.
The sound coming from these lots is also egregious. As one neighbor puts it:
"Waymo's vehicles emit pulsing backup sounds late at night and throughout the day — I counted over 50 this
morning alone from one vehicle! Even though they've promoted a program called "Operation Quiet as a Mouse,"
the noise persists, especially when the system is triggered by nearby people (i.e., the workers in their own
lot). Please consider this: The backup sound has a low, droning pulse — like a subwoofer — that travels far
and penetrates walls."
This ordinance was put in place to legally ensure quality of life for Santa Monicans, when simply being asked to be a good neighbor isn't enough.
Waymos routinely jam up their lots' driveways, causing frequent gridlock. Our parking is only accessible from the alley, making it impossible to leave or come home.
These lots are operating over-capacity, and have a constant line of Waymo vehicles trying to exit and enter the lot. Each lot has only one gate, which empty out into narrow alleys that were never meant to handle this level of traffic!
Every day, Waymos will get themselves stuck in a traffic jam, as they try to pass each other and turn into the alley. The gridlock routinely escalates into blocking traffic from using Broadway, as well as 12th Court and Euclid Court. Since residents' parking spaces and garages are only accessible from the alley, we have no choice but to use these alleyways to access our homes.
Some days and times are better than others, like when the majority of Waymos are out and about during peak pickup times. This makes it very unpredictable when the gridlock will occur; sometimes there won't be any traffic, and look relatively empty. Of course, this momentary reprieve ends as the flock of Waymos eventually return for service support.
So, what happens when a fire truck needs to access the back of an apartment building via the alley? Or an ambulance needs to get to someone having a heart attack?
This is not a hypothetical question. Just on August 2nd, an ambulance got stuck in this traffic and tried to use it's lights to get out of the situation. We're also not the first city to wonder about this. In 2023, the San Francisco Fire Department reported:
"Multiple incidents were reported where a barricade would be up in the road along the parade route and a Waymo self-driving car would stall out—not knowing what to do... San Francisco Fire Department Assistant Deputy Chief Darius Luttropp said so far this year, a self-driving car, like Waymo or Cruise, has impeded an emergency vehicle's ability to respond to a scene 66 times."
Source: KRON4
The Waymo-induced daily gridlock on each of these roads shows the capacity for disaster. Our personal cars are occasionally trapped in Waymo gridlocks, too, pinned in front to back by confused autonomous cars with no idea how to proceed.
For example, one resident had this exact experience early morning August 1st 2025. For nearly 10 minutes, he found himself trapped on Broadway between seven Waymos all trying to turn into 12th Court. If this had been a first responder, what would have happened? Could lot attendants and remote operators been able to figure this out in time? They didn't seem to be in a hurry for a mere neighbor, that's for sure.
No, after our experiences, we don't think they are.
We thought their San Francisco roll out would have taught them more about being good neighbors, but we're still fighting a lot of the same kinds of fights as they did, and some new ones. The state of Waymo's autonomous driving is usually passible, but still in an experimental stage. Yet, this project is minimally supervised on-site. Waymos make constant blunders into crosswalks, get stuck in simple situations, and wander into private property.
Waymo's autonomous driving is both impressive, and infuriating. So far, this letter has focused on the hard, physical fact that the alleyways used by these lots simply cannot accommodate the volume of new traffic. But we should spare a moment to identify the second, just as important issue here: Waymos suck at basic problem solving. If there were fewer cars, or operations were on a wider street, it would still be true that Waymos get confused, stuck, and require help from a human override far too often. Just tonight, on August 2nd, we watched as a Waymo parked itself in the crosswalk, and couldn't be moved for half an hour, despite police and lot workers showing up. That crosswalk was on 12th, a wide open road unlike our alleys.
The Waymo algorithm/model does not yet contain the capabilities required to consistently operate well on our residential block. Across from one Waymo gate is an apartment's parking lot for neighbors. Waymos are constantly wandering into their private lot, nearly hitting the parked cars, taking over parking spaces, and making confused U-turns. Our neighbors have since had to buy orange cones to keep them out; late night lot workers have moved these cones to allow Waymos back in, since they're so desperate for space. None of this is okay, or in the spirit of positive community impact.
Directly across from one of the lots is an elementary school, with flashing crosswalk signs and painted crosswalk stripes and stop sign indicator lines. Several of us have seen Waymos running pedestrian crosswalks, including this one. One neighbor caught it on video as recently as July. We're concerned with the Waymo's choppy driving before completely running the crosswalk while a pedestrian was crossing:
It won't surprise you to learn that Waymo has a section on their website dedicated to Community Impact where they highlight the good they do!
Of course we have no issue with any of the individual charity Waymo conducts for people in need, but it does feel like an example of inverted priorities: Performative charity to escape accountability for the actual negative impact they cause to neighborhoods they operate in.
Why would Waymo photograph an event with the caption "Spending time [with] seniors in our community at On Lok Senior Center in San Francisco" as an example of positive community impact, while Waymo's core business removes another community's basic dignities like safety, being able to sleep at night, and commute on our own roads? Here's a hypothetical pitch for Waymo's "Community Impact" program: Don't negatively impact our communities in the first place, and certainly get that right before you go for the bonus points. You're not a charity, you're incorporated specifically to make money, and pretending otherwise is just obvious pandering.
Aside from the previously mentioned "Operation Quiet as a Mouse," (a failed attempt to quiet Waymo vehicles,) let's examine the only other noticeable change Waymo has made due to complaints: The ineffective bamboo thicket installed between their lots and an abandoned lot next door that they also rent out.
Let's talk about the lot neighboring Waymo. It's been a condemned and abandoned building for over 16 years, fenced off to deter squatters. The owner is waiting for a high enough bid to sell, and doesn't mind the rot and infestations it presents to the rest of us. So imagine our shock when we found the fence opened, and Waymo staff parking in the back? Rumor is, Waymo is paying $3,000 a month to use this lot. We can't confirm the agreement or amount, but can confirm that Waymo now operates out of this lot 24/7 as well.
Bringing this back to community impact, let's call this out: Waymo is incentivizing blight on our street. That property will continue to sit there for as long as it makes money, the owner has been clear about that. So as long as Waymo is renting the back lot, we'll be stuck with this nonsense. We're also not really sure if this agreement is legal, but that's been lower on our lists of priorities to research. Seeing this happen mostly feels like a slap in the face, whereas the main lot operations is the knock-out punch to our heads.
Based on the last seven months, we give Waymo an F on Community Impact. They may eventually get it right, but never forget the amount of personal time, effort, and fighting we were forced to engage in to make it right, documenting issues, making calls, and holding meetings. There was no Waymo representative made available to interface with, which is a reasonable standard to expect for a company that claims "Community Impact" as a value.
The Waymo-induced traffic was predictable, given the narrow alleyway and number of cars trying to use it now. Why was there no public hearing, and why has it taken seven months for the City to barely acknowledge our complaint? Why are there no consequences for breaking the law, if you're related to a 2 trillion dollar company?
We want to first acknowledge that there are State-wide laws that supersede Santa Monica's local laws, and a number of them involve EV chargers and cars. But that only explains part of the situation, and we're left to speculate on the rest. Some neighbors have heard that Waymo was not the initial client slated to use these lots, and came in later in the process; some neighbors believe the city has a double standard when it comes to impressing their big-name tech denizens, and that comes at the expense of the individuals who live around them. We're not sure if the lot's permits are sufficient for Waymo's operations, if a traffic study was conclusively done to look for remedies, the legality of renting out 1512 for parking, or how to have the law enforced on a straight forward, daily open-air violation. We'll update this section as we learn more, and leave it to you to decide what to think.
One thing that we have seen and heard with our own senses is the confusion of who is the right department to deal with this; we get bounced from Traffic Enforcement to Code Enforcement, to the City's 311 reporting system, to the non-emergency police line. Some City Council members have been engaged, while others have opted to ignore us. We have recently met with our local Resource Officers dedicated to our neighborhood. We handed them printed out copies of the specific ordinance we believe is being violated, and spoken at length about the disruptions we face. We have shared video, photo, and watched the officers witness the issues first hand, in front of us.
We are optimistic that the neighborhood Resource Officers are engaged and willing to work with us. We are currently and actively pursuing that path with them. They genuinely understand the negative impact we're experiencing, with one officer noting that he'd "be pissed too, if this was next to me." We have been warned, though, that this process takes time: We have to build up records of calls and complaints; they want to talk to the City Attorney, to make sure everything is done by the book and covers their actions. They also noted that they do not like wasting their days in depositions, and so any actions would have to be methodical and air-tight to litigation.
We're not necessarily upset with the care they're using to make sure this is done right, since we believe in preserving personal rights with a high standard of due process. What makes this harder is that Waymo is specifically hiring a third party to manage their lots, with no direct Waymo employees present to talk to. The best Waymo can do is have a lot attendant call a supervisor at night, and put them on speakerphone with an officer. By doing this, Waymo puts unrelated bodies in the way of legal repercussions. Police are unwilling to cite or ticket these third party workers, and it becomes murky as to how to give a lawful order to shut down the lots at night. Citing anyone has been ruled out of the question.
And here we find the heart of the double standard in how the law is enforced if you're a person, or related to a big-money corporation like Google. How many times do you think a police officer would respond to a raging party, who refuses to shut down, before someone gets cited or arrested? At a certain point, the level of care being used here is just an excuse to slow walk the enforcement of a very clear law on a big name company. That's the mechanism by which the rich get a better, second tier of privilege, and this entire situation is a direct example of it. So here we wait, in the normal line for stupid normal people, hoping for justice, as Google's Waymo uses their Fast Pass to skip the line and keep making money.
We should note: The local Resource Officers know we support them and we are glad they're working with us now. They know our frustration, and they have acknowledged that they are not immune from criticism and feedback. Thus, this section is both required and offered in good faith.
"... It's imperative that Waymo (a Google company) respects the right to peace and tranquillity of the residents of Santa Monica by lowering the sound of their autonomous vehicles and operating during appropriate hours only. Let us rejoin forces to regain our right to peace and quiet. We urge the management of Waymo and the city to address our concerns and undertake urgent measures. Please sign this petition and join us in resolving this issue."
This page contains personal opinions and criticisms held by us, some of the neighbors to these lots. We cannot speak for every person on this block, and are open to hearing disagreement within our community, such as approaches to solving these problems--We still stand together, regardless.
The contents of this page are offered in good faith, as is the accompanying media. We have attempted to blur faces and unrelated license plates where possible. If there is something identifiable that you would like removed, please contact us and we will honor reasonable requests.
We do not accept donations or funds of any kind, instead opting for neighbors volunteering their time toward solving Waymo's negative impact to our community. One neighbor voluntarily and personally funded the entire twelve dollars to register this domain and add it to his hosting, and doesn't expect to be paid back. We have no social media accounts to share. This page is not offering legal advice, and the primary author of this page is not a lawyer. Finally, we are interested in feedback, updates, as well as corrections in the continued spirit of operating in good faith.
This page was last updated August 3rd, 2025 by Euclid Neighbor