The Fight for RV dwellers and van dwellers

[BobBski]

If you check into it you’ll find the homeowners aren’t even allowed to park their own RVs, boats etc. on their own property based on known homeowner covenants by the Homeowners Association.

 

[John61CT]

> is the vehicle off of private property?

Don't you mean **on** private property? And then you've got all the land-use restrictions.

But public property, no one has a "right" to sleep there, at least not in practice.

Of course you can argue that all Americans have a "right" to safe and dignified housing conditions, but that doesn't seem to be a norm here.

 

[John61CT]

> If you check into it you’ll find the homeowners aren’t even allowed to park their own RVs, boats etc. on their own property based on known homeowner covenants by the Homeowners Association.

Not just HOAs, many municipal areas don't allow residents to park their $500K motorhome where it can be seen from the road.

 

[John61CT]

> The genesis of the 14-day limit, no overnight parking, time restrictions at rest stops etc. are more about controlling squatting than trying to restrict our rights, just my opinion.

I'm confused, what rights?

Squatting is a time-honored right historically, and relates to these exact issues.

Protection of property values is #1.

The only reason we are able to live as we do is because the property owners aren't aware of us as a problem.

As soon as the problem becomes visible, they will want to move us on down the road.

There is no general "right" to live in a vehicle, that will always be conditional on the time, place and whose ox is getting gored.

 

[trailsailor]

^^^^Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Sent from my SM-J327VPP using Tapatalk

 

[trailsailor]

>The only reason we are able to live as we do is because the property owners aren't aware of us as a problem.


Bingo! Well stated.

Sent from my SM-J327VPP using Tapatalk

 

[lenny flank]

When a big phat ritzy rich neighborhood bans street parking and/or RVs... I don't believe for a second that it's about traffic safety. It's about property values and making the homeless (or perceived homeless) people stay out of their city and go where they'll be somebody else's problem.

Well, except that they ban all the big fancy half-million-dollar Class A RVs from parking, too. I'm guessing there are no homeless people living in those half-million-dollar Class As. Just a guess, of course.

 

[lenny flank]

The problem as I see it is when cities make ordinances trying to deal with one end of the spectrum they (the laws) apply to all of us as well.  

Yes to this. Whatever one thinks of the way "homeless people" are treated (and I think they are treated utterly unfairly) the blunt reality is that not all of us van-dwellers are "homeless" in the way that most people conceive of it, and we should not be treated as if we were.

 

[John61CT]

I think having enough money to keep the vehicle working and thus just move on down the road is a key difference, be grateful for that.

Let's face it, being minority trans trying to make their way in our society would usually be a much greater burden, especially if you're straight.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

I'm confused, what rights?
Squatting is a time-honored right historically, and relates to these exact issues.
Where exactly and by whom has squatting been declared a right and to what extent?

Protection of property values is #1.
Maybe that is because property values pay most of the freight for local & county government.

The only reason we are able to live as we do is because the property owners aren't aware of us as someone mobile hasn't created a problem.

 

[tripper]

The problem is twofold.
1) You can't park your rig in a residential neighborhood, EVERYONE gets suspicious, nobody wants a random in a van or RV around their kids in their own neighborhood. You have to park in a place where no one will care, not near homes or schools or children.
2) Can't homestead in one parking spot. Keep the rig looking decent and mobile, move to a new spot every day.

The ordinances are there because of the few that totally blow it. Homeowners do have the right to not have some POS parked in front of their house. Like I said earlier I lived in a 69 Dodge Class A motorhome that looked like a spaceship, it stood out, I parked where nobody would care and parked some place different every night, I did this for years in San Diego without one time being bothered by the Police.

 

[mert6706]

There's a big difference between "dwelling" and "being homeless". And as you point out, that difference is in "choice". As much as we try to dress it up and prettify it, the brutal fact is that most people who live in their vehicles do so because they simply have no choice--they are forced into it by economic or other circumstances. They are in effect homeless people, whether they like that word or not. 

Those of us who have the resources to live in a S&B but choose NOT to, though, and who voluntarily live in a van or RV instead, are a minority, and one that most people don't really think about because we are so far out of their normal experience. The very notion that we may not need or want a "home", and all we really need is a safe place to park, is something that everyday people find hard to grasp.

You are so right! I am surprised at the reactions I am getting at the very suggestion I want to live in a vehicle. One friend of 60 years, one of 30 years, another of 12 years all seem to be sending "disapproval" vibes my way. The offer to visit one of them when I get on the road has been met with silence. Presumably, she might be worried I will show up like Ma and Pa Kettle with pots and pans hanging of the sides and embarrass her in front of their S&B neighbors. On the other hand, a cousin I would have expected to disapprove is cheering me on! Go figure! Just observations, I can't worry about other folks reactions; have to do what's good for me.

 

[user 37446]

Not a lot new to add, just my take on it.  The condo I rent is on a cul-de-sac, so no way anyone is parking there without 5 other residents noticing the vehicle right away.  The street that the cul-de-sac is off of has a few vehicles parked on it in front of the houses, but they are always the same ones in the same general places. Any "stranger" would be noticed and questioned after a day or two (moral of the story - keep moving every 24 hours and not just 100 feet up or down).

There are other more secluded or un-built up areas (public roads) where people sometimes have visitors with RV's show up, it's kinda "agreed upon" by the locals that guests park there.  I've seen different kinds of rv's park there for up to 1-2 weeks, but they usually have a note in the window saying "guest of so and so" if they are there for awhile.

On the flip side, in the strip malls nearby that don't have private security and are not posted, I've seen more dilapidated rv's camped there for 3-4 weeks before they finally move on or are cited. I'd say the older or "in more need of repair" rigs get more LEO/store owner attention, the newer and cleaner vehicles are given more of a "pass".  

As long as you don't openly camp out and you move every 24-48 hours to an area at least several blocks away, there is a lot less concern. Now this is not a high dollar/high demand area and those places have different enforcement (think beachfront or coastal).  

I've looked up my municipality code/bylaw and this is the parking of trucks and rv's section where I live:

"No person shall park a recreational vehicle or utility trailer on any street within a residential zone, except in conformance with this section. A person may park a recreational vehicle or utility trailer for a period not to exceed 72 hours up to two times per month, provided:
(1)
The recreational vehicle or utility trailer does not block the driveway of another property owner;
(2)
The street adjacent to the recreational vehicle or utility trailer available for vehicular traffic is no less than 20 feet wide; and
(3)
While parked on the street, a person may perform activities necessary to prepare for vehicle usage or to clean up the vehicle upon return from its usage. Under no circumstances shall any person be allowed to sleep, cook, inhabit or perform other activities associated with temporary or permanent living quarters within, on or around a recreational vehicle while parked on a street.
(c)
No person shall park a truck, recreational vehicle, or utility trailer in the front, side, or rear yard of any residence, so that any portion of the truck, RV or utility trailer is closer to the front street than any portion of the residence, unless the truck, RV, or utility trailer is completely hidden from view in a garage or other permanent structure specifically intended for such use.
(d)
No person shall park a truck, recreational vehicle or utility trailer within 30 feet of the curb return of an intersection while parked on a street in a residential zone.
(e)
No person shall park a truck, recreational vehicle or utility trailer on a street using a jack stand or similar support device unless the person places under each jack stand or support device a piece of wood, plywood or other item of other construction that has a surface of at least 36 square inches and is capable of distributing the weight of the vehicle in such a manner that the underlying street is not damaged or disturbed."

End of quote from bylaws

So while it is "selectively enforced" by our city PD, the bylaw exists and can be enforced when/if they want to or get a complaint. I have no idea if the California Supreme Court rulings will affect Arizona, some eventually filter through here but many don't. 9th Circuit Court (Federal) ones obviously do.

 

[John61CT]

Yes I doubt there are any even country areas in the East or along the West coast, or **any** well-built-out population centers that wouldn't have similar or stricter laws.

And even without them we all know LEO can pick from hundreds of issues 90% of citizens are violating daily to arbitrarily select people to "move along".

Blatantly unjust and classist IMO, but then "the poors" are not a category protected against discrimination under law in the U.S., quite the contrary.

We have no "rights" except those established by law, and then only to the extent they're actively enforced and protected by respected citizens with the necessary resources.

 

[lenny flank]

You are so right! I am surprised at the reactions I am getting at the very suggestion I want to live in a vehicle. One friend of 60 years, one of 30 years, another of 12 years all seem to be sending "disapproval" vibes my way. The offer to visit one of them when I get on the road has been met with silence. Presumably, she might be worried I will show up like Ma and Pa Kettle with pots and pans hanging of the sides and embarrass her in front of their S&B neighbors. On the other hand, a cousin I would have expected to disapprove is cheering me on! Go figure! Just observations, I can't worry about other folks reactions; have to do what's good for me.

In my travels, I have noted that there is a hugely different reaction from when I say "I live in my van" (which people associate with "poor homeless bum") and "I travel around the country in my camper van" (which people associate with "rich tourist".

 

[mpruet]

In my travels, I have noted that there is a hugely different reaction from when I say "I live in my van" (which people associate with "poor homeless bum") and "I travel around the country in my camper van" (which people associate with "rich tourist".

I got the same last year when I told folks that I was car camping in my Prius all summer long.  Never mind that I'm retired with a rather nice nest egg.   ;-)

 

[John61CT]

Yes, as I pointed out, the ability to move on is a key distinction.

People "stuck" in a job, or can't afford to fix the van up for a long road trip, are much worse off when a given city starts to crack down.

 

[slynne]

This is the code in the city where I live:

Sec. 122-733. - Recreational vehicles.

(a)

The parking or storage of recreational vehicles, whether or not the recreational vehicle is mounted upon or hitched to another vehicle, including vacant mobile homes, antique or racing automobiles, or any other vehicles of a similar nature and related equipment, is prohibited on any lot in an R1, CN-SF, CN-Mid, CN, MD or HHS zoning district unless parked within a completely enclosed building or within a rear or side yard other than within a required yard setback area. Such vehicles stored in a side yard must be screened from view from the street and the adjacent property by an acceptable fence or landscaped screen, in accordance with article XI, division 4 of this chapter. Notwithstanding the above, no recreational vehicle may be parked or stored on any indoor or outdoor parking space which is required to meet the minimum parking space requirement in an CN, MD or HHS district.

(b)

No more than two recreational vehicles per dwelling unit may be stored outdoors at one time. The size of recreational vehicles kept or stored outdoors may not exceed eight feet in width, ten feet in height, or 32 feet in length.

(c)

Trailer coaches, motor homes, and other vehicles or equipment designed or adaptable for sleeping purposes must remain unoccupied and must not be connected to sanitary sewer facilities, or to electricity, water, or gas.


The good news is that it is not especially well enforced. I can see that some of my neighbors store their RVs in their driveways and since the RVs are still there, I assume no one has hassled them. Most ordinance enforcement in my small city is based on resident complaint. No one complains, no one cares. When I started to pressure my city council person about changing this ordinance because my plan is to buy a van and then live in my backyard while renting out the house, he suggested that I just do it and that since my neighbors already know I am a weirdo, no one would complain. LOL. He is probably right. I have started to notice that there are a LOT of people living in RVs in this city. Some on private property, mostly out of sight in backyards but some more visible in side yards. Also, there are a bunch of people who I see parked around town in different places all of the time. I assume they don't get hassled because they are out there doing it. The town where I live has a pretty active bunch of people who are serious advocates for the poor so I think the police are reluctant to enforce this too much. The fall out would be great. I don't know why but a lot of people where I live LOVE drama and there is always something that has people up in arms. Currently it is that this ordinance is keeping people from building tiny houses on wheels. A different ordinance is keeping people from building tiny houses not on wheels.

 

[Numpty]

Here's a link to a Sydney newspaper article showing how the municipalities have been forced to crack down on sleeping in a vehicle.
https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/n...s/news-story/8ffd4c2176e1a41c9c85335ef43abc32

It's ruined things for local fishermen like myself who used to enjoy staying 2 or 3 nights parked at a beach headland.
Some of Sydney's best fishing beaches now have such restrictive parking it's just not worth going there.

Check out this Youtube of the garbage they leave behind.