The Fight for RV dwellers and van dwellers

[TampShawn]

Here is a news story about a class action lawsuit against the city of San Diego. 

Thought people would find it interesting
http://www.cbs8.com/story/36866106/homeless-living-in-motorhomes-suing-the-city

 

[lenny flank]

There are many cities that ban RV parking on the streets. After all, they can be a traffic hazard. So this could potentially have a wide effect.

It strikes me as odd though that some RVers and van-dwellers think they have some "right" to park anywhere they want. There is no such right.

 

[Ballenxj]

I understand the traffic hazard if somebody parks too close to the intersection and blocks visibility, but on the other hand, as long as your RV is legally registered and insured, you are just as entitled as anybody else to park where it is legal to do so, on "any" public  road. The exception to that would be certain county areas where the property owner actually owns to the middle of the street. Not sure how many of those are left.

 

[lenny flank]

as long as your RV is legally registered and insured, you are just as entitled as anybody else to park where it is legal to do so, on "any" public  road. 

But that's the thing, ain't it----there are laws specifically banning RVs from parking on the street, making it illegal to do so.

And while I am sure in some areas this is just an anti-homeless provision, in other areas it is not: some cities don't allow it because it's not safe for traffic--they ban it even in the big phat ritzy rich neighborhoods where people have half-million dollar Class A's.

 

[bigskybob]

I would think it would be detrimental to property values to have homeless people living in autos and rvs in front of your house.Don't know what the answer is except to stay in an rv park.I guess it all depends on which way you look at it.Property tax payers vs non payers.

 

[musicman]

Always blm land, state parks and national parks. Ive seen that under a certain length go without notice.  I assure you a 30 footer or so in a residential neighborhood is going to be checked out especially with out of state plates.

 

[westriver]

A few years back, due to a family emergency (my father was dying at the VA hospital), we spent a month in a San Diego rv park. It was sad to see how many folks were living in really rough, really old motorhomes, and how many were just barely squeaking by. The RV park was located in a commercial/industrial park. At one point, the city announced that they were going to resurface the street in front of the park on a Saturday, and any vehicles parked there would be impounded. This street was maybe a mile and a half long, and there was at least 15-20 rigs permanently camped there. Thursday and Friday were a mad rush, as folks desperately scrambled to get non-running motorhomes off the street. One guy rented a brand new Uhaul pick-up, and strapped it to the front of a really rough, 40 year old, huge class A, using a piece of thick rope. He pulled the thing forward, then pushed it into a gravel lot, a few feet away. On Sunday he repeated the task, getting the thing off private property before it was towed. It didn't matter if it was a city street, or a Home Depot lot, it seemed that near homeless folks in barely inhabitable rigs, were everywhere in San Diego. It was a sad situation all around, and most of these rigs and owners were not going to be heading for BLM land, or any other decent option, any time soon, as there were pretty much at the end of the line, when it comes to options.

 

[whatsananna]

San Diego appears to be trying to do something by expanding available places to park:

http://www.cbs8.com/clip/13821930/homeless-crisis-parking-plan-for-homeless-living-out-of-their-cars

One thing that strikes me is that people who live in their vehicles are presumed to all want to live in sticks-and-bricks housing - I wonder what they would do with people who say "thanks but no thanks" to their offer of help to move to more permanent housing.

 

[Cranky Nomad]

The little city in Upstate New York where I come from bans ALL overnight on-street parking. As a homeowner there, I loved it. I didn't even like my neighbors parking in front of my house during the day, let alone strangers during the night. I'm not fan of "stealth" camping, though I do appreciate the fact that it is a necessity for some people.

 

[tripper]

I lived in a class A motorhome on the streets of San Diego for a couple of years. There are plenty of places to park that are out of the way not in front of residences. Like others I found myself on the street by having two roomates bail before paying monthly rent and I had to leave the premises in 3 days so worked a deal with a friend to buy his old RV, so I know circumstances do put you on the street. I always moved my RV to a new spot every day, someplace that would not bother people. This was 25 years ago before that law, but the police still hated people camping out in one spot too long. San Diego is a big city and if those RVers were to move their vehicles to different locations often this problem would likely not happen. The reason I'm sure many of them choose to stay in the city is social services, and in my case I was still working part time and going to college, justnot enough money to rent a place. I actually enjoyed my RV time on the streets, spent a lot of time at OB and mission beach.

BTW I love that Toyota RV shown at the beginning, that would be a great one to restore.

 

[WanderLoveJosh]

It keeps saying “homeless people who live in an rv”.

How can you be homeless if you have a place to live?

 

[lenny flank]

San Diego appears to be trying to do something by expanding available places to park:

http://www.cbs8.com/clip/13821930/homeless-crisis-parking-plan-for-homeless-living-out-of-their-cars

One thing that strikes me is that people who live in their vehicles are presumed to all want to live in sticks-and-bricks housing - I wonder what they would do with people who say "thanks but no thanks" to their offer of help to move to more permanent housing.

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.

 

[Travelmonkey]

San Jose and other parts of the Bay Area have similar challenges with RV dwellers on the streets.  In Palo Alto, the city where Stanford University is located, there is a main street loaded with RVs.  The Palo Alto police gave them notice in advance that they would start enforcing the 72 hour parking limit (RV needs to be moved 1/4 mile).  In the news story the PA police seemed more sympathetic to the plight of the poor than San Diego does in the news segment.

This is a real problem for some cities that is hard to solve.  A few months ago I was in an industrial part of San Jose and I was stunned to see several RVs parked permanently.  Many didn't seem like they could be moved at all.  The areas where RVs are parked look bad.  Stuff is all around the RV.  I'm concerned about where waste gets dumped (even if these vehicles can move on their own, San Jose does not have a public or private dump station for RVs that I could find).

I'm not sure what the solution is but the tickets SD is issuing seems like harassment.  It doesn't address the issue; it simply pushes the problem to another jurisdiction down the road and causes added stress to the poor.

 

[John61CT]

Which is perfectly fine with 99% of the jurisdictions in America.

 

[lenny flank]

I've heard that Hawaii has a program to buy plane tickets for homeless people and fly them to the mainland.

 

[RVTravel]

Didn't someplace in California get into trouble for buying homeless people one way tickets to Nevada?

 

[John61CT]

"Get in trouble" meaning "some people said oh that's bad".

More usual for politicians who don't want to spend what's required to use this meme to "other" those in need of services.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-homeless-bus-tickets-20160423-story.html

This issue is a perfect example of a problem that can't be dealt with at a local or state level.

 

[HumbleBeginnings]

...
And while I am sure in some areas this is just an anti-homeless provision, in other areas it is not: some cities don't allow it because it's not safe for traffic--they ban it even in the big phat ritzy rich neighborhoods where people have half-million dollar Class A's.

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.

 

[John61CT]

Yes 100%.

Since the founding of our country, protecting the interests of property owners has been the top priority.

The welfare of the common people may not be at the very bottom of the list but it's certainly near there.

Zoning and all land-use regulation especially so.

 

[trailsailor]

Vehicle dwelling, like autism is on a spectrum. On one end of the spectrum are the desperately poor with the next step down being tent city.

On the other end are the glampers in their very well appointed motorcoaches living out their well-earned retirement years.

Most of us here it appear to fall somewhere in between. Whether initially by choice or necessity the CRVL crowd lives like this because they want to.

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.

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

Some things cities could easily without probably much trouble is to simply enforce laws that are already in place.

- is the vehicle licensed with a current registration?

- is the vehicle insured?

- does the vehicle run?

- is the vehicle off of private property?

If yes to all then please Mr. Policeman, leave me alone.

If no, then they have every right to tell you to bring your vehicle up to code or remove it.

Sent from my SM-J327VPP using Tapatalk