Regarding the survey for people to give their thoughts about RV dwellers, it seems like it would be a really good idea to survey the RV dwellers to learn more about their circumstances, so we have a more accurate picture of what is going on.

I know for a fact, some are making very good money at tech companies, but they choose to live on our streets in their RVs. I would consider a LIMITED permit system where QUALIFIED people, not trendy Googlers trying to save a buck, get a pass to be in certain pre-approved areas such as church parking lots, but only on a temporary basis.

If it's open for all without restriction, why don't we all rent an RV parked in front our the house we own while we rent it for 4K per month?

I might be dreaming (highly likely) but I envision a city where the Council sets up a large area for RV parking and living, installs showers, bathrooms and security. Strictly enforced rules regarding illegal activity could / should be enforced.

Rents are restricting more and more folks and the choice to live in a vehicle versus a house or apartment is not one taken lightly. The majority of those living in RV's are gainfully employed but simply do not make enough money to afford to live in "regular" housing.

Making good money at tech companies, sometimes as much as $100,000 still doesn't necessarily enable you to rent. In my neighborhood small houses, formerly rented by couples or small families, now house three, sometimes four unrelated tech workers. The parking is getting pretty intense.

How about it Mountain View? Could we provide safe parking and facilities for these folks? In any event, thanks for listening :-)

Once again it must be stated that there are MANY less expensive areas to live. Why should MV allow RVs and the many negative issues that come along with them?

Come on City Council, is that really what you want in your legacy, "the Council that contributed to the decline and fall of what was once a lovely suburban town"?

Allowing RV living is NOT healthy for our City.

To cover costs of a designated area (and to create a fund for other housing-related services, the city should charge a permit or monthly fee. If these are truly mountain view residents who have been displaced by rising rents, then they should be able to afford something approximating a portion of what they had been paying for rent. (As an example, if their rent 5 years ago was 2,000 and the rent climbed to 3,000, then it's reasonable that they pay 1,000+ for city-maintained space (or the street space outside where others are paying 3,000).

And in the process, we might find that many of these RVs are not displaced mountain view residents, but have come to our welcoming city.

These RVs need to be parked in an RV park, in the same sense that mobile homes need to be parked in a mobile home park. Unfortunately, there are not enough RV or mobile home parks in the city.

Why? The land costs too much. People who buy existing single-family detached homes in Mountain View think they are paying nearly 2 million dollars for the home. What they are really paying for is the land; the home itself is less than a quarter of the price.

The price of land in Mountain View is not going down until the demand for it goes down, and I don't want businesses or residents to leave Mountain View.

Mountain View must start building up--there is no "out" left to build on.

We need information about why they're there, so we can make a good decision.

It might be there's many people who make enough money to rent, but want to save money - but, there's other scenarios (like financial hardship) and we need to know out what the reasons are for most people.

Like most residents, I don't want to allow RVs to park overnight for more than a short while, but I'm willing to hold off judgement until we understand why it's happening.

Why is it happening? Because there are some very enterprising folks seeing the opportunity to charge much less for sub-standard living to people who want to stay in MV and don't realize they can live better and less $ just 15 minutes down the ECR.

What do you think, there's all these displaced people who suddenly pulled into town in their RV's? No. Someone is funding these RVs, offering "cheap" living to those willing to live in sub-standard living.

Who cares, you say? Well, if you care anything about your community YOU should care. They're not paying taxes, they're often security and sanitation risks and yes, I'll just say it outright, they're a blight on our community.

NO RV's.

The RV'ers probably pay MORE taxes than many of the landlords in this area that use tax loopholes to get out of their fair share. They are parked legally on the street and whether or not they spend the night there is not our business.

If an RV'er actually does damage and breaks the law, then they should be held accountable. To discriminate against them BEFORE an infraction is unfair and unconstitutional.

YES, many of these RVs are occupied by Google people and others who we cannot consider "needy", but are scamming the system. Maybe they can't afford a $2M house in Mountain View, but that is NO REASON, to encourage the degradation of OUR neighborhoods. Mountain View is not an island - there is much more affordable living in many neighboring towns. MOST of us live in a different town than that in which we work. We get back to the fact that you cannot live in a town JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO, or we'd all be living in Atherton and Woodside and Los Altos Hills.
I wonder how many actually were Mountain View residents before living in their RVs - or if they came merely BECAUSE IT'S ALLOWED? If we encourage this, we only bring down property values for ALL OF US who value the Mountain View we came here for in the first place. We'll end up with a huge infusion of RVs throughout the city, with their sewage problems, overcrowding, security risks, and overall degradation of neighborhoods. All this costs the taxpayers money, and these RVs pay no taxes to the city. Do you REALLY want YOUR neighborhood to look like the neighborhoods listed in the article? I feel sorry for the neighbors who worked hard and made sacrifices to buy their home or condo, only to see their neighborhood character change so drastically and quite honestly suffer the degradation of their investment and property value.
We can't solve everyone's problems. I agree with "Monthly Fee", above, that any RVs should be by permit, be charged a sizable fee, and be here SHORT TERM if at all - but NOT on our city streets. It remains to be seen if we taxpayers are willing to fund these RV residents with OUR taxes, as they pay none. We can't give everyone what they want just because they want it.

What a bunch of NIMBY's... Oh wait, they aren't parked on your street!

They pay taxes just like you do and deserve the same protections under the law. This feels like the Deep South where ignorant and intolerant thrive. [Portion removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language]

They currently enjoy all the protections under the law, and when the law changes they will continue to have the same protections.
I guess some think anywhere there is a no parking sign, its because of oppressive NIMBYs. Damn red curbs.

Love the generosity and spirit of Mtn View! How can we get the word out to RV dwellers around the state? Come to Mountain View! Our streets and city services are yours! In fact, I think the city should install and provide free electrical and sanitation hookups on every street to accommodate the coming onslaught of weary travelers. Maybe there is some way we can provide free gas as well?

We had someone living in a RV next to our house for almost 2 years. I wouldn't force others to live in that situation- either in the RV or next to it. The smell coming from the RV was so bad that we couldn't open the windows on the side of the house. There wasn't a bathroom in the RV, and in an emergency, someone relieved themselves in the side yard in the bushes. I didn't feel like hunting for the source, and it took a few months for the smell to go away. A couple of times a few people came over and were drinking, and it was a bit uncomfortable for us because we had small kids. Luckily, they realized it wasn't a good situation for hosting parties and stopped.

Beyond the sanitation issues, it doesn't seem fair to rezone someone's neighborhood into an RV parking lot. I think it's shameful to call people insults for not wanting to live in that situation. The city and police were unwilling to help us find a solution for our problems, and we actually received a parking citation ourselves after calling the police to see what could be done. Eventually, the person living in the RV was convinced by their social worker to live in low-income housing in MV. I don't think they actually were forced to live in an RV but chose to do it. I don't see why we give someone the choice to turn the city into an RV park if there are other options, and making the city streets into a sewer doesn't seem like a good option anyways.

Calling someone "ignorant and intolerant" because they don't want their neighborhood degraded with the type of street RV that is near the Target store, is EXTREMELY ignorant and intolerant of YOU. Those homeowners or renters who chose to live in a nice, safe and clean neighborhood, have every right to WANT it to stay that way. They all have every right to EXPECT it to stay that way, and not be blindsided by a sudden RV camp (without sewer hookups, water, trash hauling, etc.) move onto their street. Allowing these street camps only encourages more to come from all over the Bay Area, and by the way, they DON'T pay taxes to Mountain View for the services they take (police and fire protection, street clean up, street lighting, etc.).
Our City Council needs to act rationally to protect the tax paying residents of this City. If they choose to open an RV Encampment with gas/electricity, water, showers, public restrooms and trash collection, it should be voted upon by the residents of Mountain View, as we're the ones that will pay for it. Those who are truly needy and actually were MV residents before moving into RVs, could be helped, but opening the door to an influx of RVs - by providing for them - is extremely detrimental to all aspects of Mountain View.

[Portion removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language]
There is nothing illegal about sleeping in your car. That has been decided on by the courts. These folks pay a lot of money via sales tax, so are contributing to the city services. In fact, they are contributing far more than certain greedy landlords that are evading property taxes! Consider all emergency services that are needed at an apartment complex vs far fewer people who happen to sleep in their vehicles!

Did you know that these "RV dwellers" use far less water than yourself?!?! Ever hear of the drought?!?! My god!

Love your fear mongering about sanitary issues. If someone breaks the law and defecates in public, then arrest them! Ever hear the concept "personal responsibiliy"? Apparently not.

How much do they pay in property taxes to Mtn View? Yah, I know alrweady, the answer is $0.00.

We're going to change the laws, as happens all the time as communities evolve. I hope they abide by the new laws. I plan on doing so.

Why so angry? You claim apartment owners are greedy and tax evaders, you claim RV campers are paying their share of taxes, that they are honoring the drought? You dismiss lack of sanitation and defecating on public property as "fear mongering"? You make rude remarks to other posters, and you make statements that contain questionable "facts".

Calm down, man. When you're as frantic as you seem to be to criticize other's opinion, perhaps you need to take some time out. This is a public forum and we need to respect, and respectfully respond to the opinions of others. That's what a civilized society does.

The issue seems to be that a vehicle can only remained parked in one spot for 72 hours before it must be moved. The law does not seem to apply to the RVs, but I'm guessing it most certainly wood if anyone were to park their car in front of a single family home or that of a council member for more than 72 hours. These RVs seem to have found a grey area to park in whereby they are technically not parked in front of any one's home.

Whatever the City decides to do it should be equitable to all. If such parking of RVs becomes allowed. It should apply to any street in Mountain View as long as it's not time-limited or metered parking.

Maybe the Crossing neighbor would be a good place to start for an open season on parking RVs anywhere and everywhere. That neighborhood seems to be pretty much open to anything.

Oh another RV dweller thread. Lemme see...did anyone in favor of the practice offer to have the RV dwellers park in front of their own homes?

Um......nope.

They're ok with it only as long as it's in front of your place....all while accusing those opposed of being "heartless, ignorant & intolerant".

Hypocrites.

Show us how enlightened and tolerant you are. Invite the RV dwellers to park in front of your home....I'm betting you don't.

Actually, there are quite a few residents that store extra vehicles out on the street. The police won't cite them unless it is downtown. So, it seems of fellow tax-paying permanent residents are flaunting the law even more egregiously than RV's! Worse, the RV's are moving every 72 hrs to stay in compliance, unlike the so-called "residents".

There are some intolerant people posting nonsense. Heartless may be a better word. Fortunately, the higher courts ruled that it is OK for people to sleep in their vehicles, so this conversation is over.

The only thing false is the equivalency you've drawn.

Parking an RV that one owns in front of the home in which they reside is hardly the same thing as living in an RV in front of the home of someone else.

The latter is a practice I'm fairly certain you'd not approve of if it were happening in front of the home you own.

The easiest way to get people out of RVs is to build enough housing that prices drop back to reasonable levels.

If we still see more RVs than we like, then we have failed in our duty to house the community. When we exclude others just to keep our property values artificially high, we fail as human beings.

Don't let us become a selfish incumbent landowner caste, like those NIMBYs choking off Palo Alto and San Francisco. Don't turn a nice town into yet another soulless corporate enclave by denying people the chance to participate meaningfully in the community and the local economy.

Don't be the ones to blame for exacerbating the growing plague of homelessness and displacement in the region.

The soul of our community depends on us to do the right thing.

Your logic is flawed. We will NEVER be able to build enough housing for everyone who wants to live here. I'm not saying we shouldn't build more. We should build a reasonable amount. But your comment about building until there are no RV's in the street is ridiculous. Unless you want to have skyscraper after skyscraper like parts of China, and even then I doubt that would be enough housing for everyone who would like to live here.

At some point we just have to accept there will be some people who can't afford to live here. That's life. My parents never led me to believe that I was entitled to anything I wanted. Build some more housing, but also accept that you will never be able to accommodate everyone.

cha.ching, exactly @OldTimer

Old Timer: you throw out a lot of terms
"failed in our duty" "NIMBYS" "incumbent landowner caste". Really? Seriously you're saying this?

Perhaps most telling: "by denying people the chance to participate meaningfully in the community"

How does parking unsanitary RVs equate to participating meaningfully?

[Portion removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language]

What unsanitary RV's? Have you gone out and witnessed this? Take some pics? No? Oh....

What houses are they parking in front of? Got some pics? No? Oh.

[Portion removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language]

Change only happens when we discuss issues. Change is in fact coming, but we still need to keep the dialogue going. If we let the discussion die nothing will get done.

Lets put them in the VTA bus yard.

Sounds like a business opportunity for a gas station or U-haul. Add an RV dump station and water supply in addition to their propane service.

I, Patricia Murphy Hardy, have been forced out of my hometown (lived here ALL of my 66 years on this earth) by a greedy landlord who has made no improvements on our duplex since my husband and I rented this place in 1988, [Portion removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language] . Who knew I could have found accommodations on either Crisanto or Latham, located conveniently close to public transportation, city parks,bathrooms (Rengstorff Park) and free trash and sewage pickup courtesy of the city? Sweet!!!

From the Mountain View Municipal Code:

SEC. 19.72. - Parking in excess of seventy-two (72) consecutive hours prohibited.

No person who owns or has possession, custody, or control of any vehicle shall park such vehicles upon any street, alley or publicly owned parking lot for more than a consecutive period of seventy-two (72) hours. This prohibition shall also apply to vehicles which have valid Parking District No. 2 permits. To comply with this section, vehicles must be moved at least one thousand (1,000) feet (approximately two-tenths (2/10) of a mile), every three (3) days. Pushing or moving a vehicle a short distance or attempting to rub away the tire markings will not be considered compliance with this section, and may result in the issuance of a citation without further warning. The owner of the vehicle shall be liable for the cost of all citation(s), towing and storage fees should the vehicle remain in violation. For the purposes of this section, the mileage reflected on the odometer of the subject vehicle shall be presumed to be an accurate indication of the distance that the vehicle has or has not been moved.

SEC. 19.111. - Regulation of storage or parking of vehicles in residential areas.

It shall be unlawful for any person owning or occupying any residential premises to cause or permit the parking or storage of any vehicle in violation of any of the provisions of this article. The following provisions shall regulate the parking and/or storage of a mobile home, recreational vehicle, camper, utility trailer, boat trailer, car, truck, trailer or other vehicle (collectively referred to herein as a "vehicle"):

a.

Any vehicle parked or stored in areas visible from a public street (defined as including the entire front yard and any part of the side yard that is not screened from view by a six (6) foot high opaque fence) for more than seventy-two (72) hours shall be owned or leased by the occupants.

b.

No vehicle parked or stored in residential areas shall be used or occupied for dwelling purposes, except that one (1) vehicle designed for human habitation may be stored or parked on a driveway in conjunction with a residential use for a period not to exceed seventy-two (72) hours for use by guests. Occupants may apply to the chief of police for a permit to extend the seventy-two (72) hour limitation for an additional fixed period, not to exceed thirty (30) days, on a showing of special circumstances pursuant to guidelines adopted by council resolution.

c.

No vehicle parked upon any public street shall be occupied or used for dwelling purposes.

@PrinceAdam: they are using the car wash facilities in the city, like the one on Oak Ln/ Bay St.
Great for free laundry, fresh water fill up and sewer dumping.
I heard this from an adjacent business owner, have not witnessed it myself.