Good work by the city. All of us in the community benefit from more affordable housing and safe parking for people who currently live in their vehicle.

This lot is used by commuters and is close to full M-F during business hours.

The following statement excerpted from article is simply not true.
Does anyone ever verify what they write anymore?

The property, at the corner of Evelyn Avenue and Pioneer Way, was a transit park-and-ride lot, but it hasn't seen much use since the Evelyn light rail station closed in 2015.

Why are we paying millions of dollars to lease land from VTA when Mtn View already owns plenty of land that has been sitting vacant for DECADES on Cuesta Drive. Lets put the Cuesta Park Annex to good use ... turn it into an RV park. Charge reasonable RENT, $1000 to $1500 per month, and provide the necessary services. Get the RVs off the street. It will pay for itself. Gee, what a thought.

RoxieK...the reason why they won't use the lot at Cuesta..NIMBY.

RoxieK and MVFlyer, how about giving the RVs a spot outside your house, or on your driveway, um, perhaps NIMBY, too? (I’m afraid there’s a little NIMBY in all of us.)

Peter,

Don't make it hard on your neighbors or your city. This is an option if you have lots of homes or if there is no drive that is right for your truck. And keep in mind that if you are buying a trailer, you still want the most fuel efficient trailer available.

Are commenters really proposing turning city parks into RV parks? Take away open space and jam it full of people?

There are some good reasons for those who are proposing this, including the fact that RV parks are usually rented by city agencies. While they may not be available year round, those in favor of parks turning into RV parks have a few ways to mitigate that.

One approach is to require city or county agencies to apply for a zoning exemption, which, by law, only applies to the "parking and recreation" part of the zoning. RV parks would get their zoning exemption the first year they become available and stay there for 30 years.

The quotation from Mr. Pataky is not correct. He did not say he had "hiring clients." He said he had "high-rank clients." This was quoted correctly in Thursday's Palo Alto Daily Post. Is the Mountain View Voice too embarrassed to report on the same level of conceit that Palo Alto takes for granted?

Stupid idea and waste of money. $11 million to park couple of dozen RVs close to the city downtown - are you kidding me?

This would be an amazing resource to help with building the streetscape there. It should not be just an office block or residential zone.


My question is about the idea that people should move here and park their cars at these places. I don't know if a lot of people would move here and there isn't really a lot of commercial traffic, but there are still people walking and biking and the bike racks are often in places. In other words it's easy to get into an urban wasteland and it's hard to create a vibrant and productive urban environment. People need to move north, south, east, west, etc.

The Cuesta Annex isn't empty land, it's a city park and a leash free area for dogs.

BTW, the neighboring Cuesta Park isn't a leash free area except a small portion of it, despite ignorant dog owners who let their dogs run free in the rest of Cuesta Park.

The city isn't overwatering the grass for dogs to poop in, you have the Annex for that.