|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The signs prohibiting oversize vehicles in Mountain View from parking on public streets are being installed in the last area of the city, leaving residents living in vehicles wondering where they will go once the law takes effect.
The process of installing the signs began in August as the city took steps toward enforcing its controversial ban on oversize vehicles on city streets –ones that are 40 feet wide or less – which prohibits RVs from parking on 444 of the city’s 525 streets.
The city’s contractor began the process of installing signs at the San Antonio/Rengstorff/Del Medio neighborhood Jan. 31, according to Lenka Wright, public information officer with the city of Mountain View.
“We anticipate they will complete this area by mid-February 2022 and will have finished project installations at that time,” Wright said in an email.
While the city has said it won’t begin enforcing the parking ban until April 5, it has moved forward with installing the large red-and-white “No Parking” signs, which apply to any vehicle taller or wider than 7 feet or longer than 22 feet.
On Monday afternoon, Crisanto Avenue, a popular area for people who reside in vehicles and RVs to park, was quiet, with few people walking around, but a few were willing to chat with the Voice.
Joaquin Arellano, who lives in an SUV parked on Crisanto Avenue, said the signs had been up about a week. Around that time, a city officer had come over to talk to the street’s residents, and they were told they won’t be given tickets until April 5.
He said he’s been living on the street for about six years, and plans to stay there, because his vehicle is small enough to not be subject to the oversize vehicle ban. But his neighbors aren’t so lucky, he added.
“I feel for the people who have to move,” he said. “We’re neighbors, we take care of each other.”
Estefani Morena and her family are among those living in RVs who will have to find a new place to park their vehicles once the new law takes effect. In Spanish, she explained that she, her husband and their children had moved into an RV during the pandemic when they lost their apartment. She said she was aware of the April 5 enforcement date, but they didn’t yet have a plan for where they would relocate.
“We don’t know where we’re going to go,” she said.
City officials have said that there will be in-person outreach to people living in vehicles in the area about how to access the city’s safe parking sites, which have been at or near full capacity over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. Arellano said he hadn’t yet heard from any safe parking site representatives.
“Hopefully they find a spot for us,” he said.
Lawsuit pauses action
The city’s delay in enforcing the oversize vehicle ban comes from a 90-day stay of litigation, a result of a lawsuit filed by the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, which alleges that the parking restrictions attempt to prevent homeless people residing in Mountain View from seeking shelter in vehicles. A U.S. federal court judge declined to dismiss the case, but also decided against an injunction to prevent the laws from taking effect while the lawsuit makes its way through the courts. The trial date has been pushed out to March 2023.
“It is cruel and unusual punishment under the Constitution to criminalize sleeping outside or in a vehicle when, as in Mountain View, a city has zero available shelter beds,” Michael Trujillo, Staff Attorney at the Law Foundation, said in a 2019 press statement. “Measures like the proposed parking ban that intentionally make life more difficult for people who are homeless or housing insecure offend bedrock notions of fairness and equality and send a message that the City of Mountain View is not really open to all.”
RVs in Mountain View
A recent survey conducted by volunteers in November 2021 found that there are more than 200 inhabited RVs parked along public roadways in Mountain View.
Across northern Santa Clara County, an estimated 25% of homeless residents are relying on cars and RVs for shelter. Many of the vehicles are in violation of the city’s 72-hour parking limits, have nowhere to dump waste, and have frustrated nearby residents seeking enforcement of the limits.
Mountain View operates three safe parking sites that provide RV residents with a place to park their vehicles off of city streets, receive case management services and get on a path toward permanent housing. Citywide, there is room for 68 oversized vehicles through the safe parking program, which had a waiting list, as of December.
Community-based organizations the Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning and the Mountain View Housing Justice Coalition have also recently called on the city to publish a map showing where oversized vehicles are still permitted to park, rather than maps showing only where “no parking” signs are being installed. They also asked the city to consider dropping parking prohibitions between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. on wide roads where RVs are still permitted.
On Nov. 8 last year, Judge Nathaneal Cousins found that the city’s parking restrictions on oversized vehicles do not appear likely to cause immediate, irreparable harm to people who are living in RVs. However, it also denied Mountain View’s motion to entirely dismiss the case, arguing that multiple allegations in the lawsuit had enough merit to come before a jury.
Mountain View looks to encourage more multifamily housing with zoning updateJanuary 12, 2026 12:51 pm
A map of the 81 streets sat aside for oversized vehicles should only be shared with our current vehicle dwellers. Only once everybody accommodated should the city make this map public. Neighboring cities will otherwise print this map and send their unwanted RVs our way. A huge camp in Contra Costa County is currently dismantled, San Jose is clearing areas around the airport. We are known in the area as RV city. Let’s protect the ones currently here and give them a first shot at a new street spot.
Vehicle residents wonder where they’ll go?
They are literally residing in vehicles. They can go anywhere.
We claim to be pro-immigrant but we’re forcing out immigrants trying to get their footing here.
We claim to be anti-displacement but we’re using the force of law to displace people.
We claim to be pro-inclusivity but this is definition of exclusion.
Where are our values? Who with a heart does this? The council members who supported the RV Ban should be ashamed of themselves.
People living in vehicles are a sure sign that we have too much parking and not enough homes!
In other words, NIMBYs got what they asked for.
Mountain View had done more for the RV dwellers than any surrounding city, yet Michael Trujillo (Staff Attorney at the Law Foundation suing Mountain View) said, “Measures like the proposed parking ban that intentionally make life more difficult for people who are homeless or housing insecure offend bedrock notions of fairness and equality and send a message that the City of Mountain View is not really open to all.”
Why are they not suing Los Altos, LAH, Menlo Park, Sunnyvale and other cities that outright PROHIBIT any RVs on their streets, nor have made any of the efforts to help RV dwellers to gain housing? Instead, these law firms harass and sue the one city that has spent well over $1.5M of taxpayer funds to help these people by opening “safe lots”, providing garbage collection, offering raw sewage removal, and providing services to help them gain employment and housing. Other cities do nothing but suggest their homeless move to Mountain View!
I’m astounded these attorneys attack the one city that has shown compassion.
@Local
Well said. I always felt that had Mountain View just not allowed this to begin with, they wouldn’t be demonized like they currently are. Meanwhile, as you pointed out, neighboring citied simply don’t allow it and they get a pass.Go figure!
@ Local:
Thanks for your comment; well said.
If you look, you will find people living in oversized vehicles on the streets of Palo Alto and Sunnyvale, at least.
The citizens of Mountain View voted for this. This is how democracy works. Some commenters should realize this was not a council decision.
The transient RV problem/issue will not be resolved until the city provides a cost-effective large-scale, mobile-home park (with all of the amenities including restrooms, shower facilities, electricity,
and laundromat) for those residing in their RVs.
Being a progressive and humanitarian community (unlike Los Altos), Mountain View can become a leader in accommodating the less fortunate and economically depressed.
So Loren, you’re saying that you are 100%. absolutely sure this problem of RVs on our streets will be resolved as soon as we provide land and utilities for 250 RVs. Then, presto, the problem will go away. Right?
SalsaMusic, what problem are you talking about? As I understand it, and as the city is claiming in court, this is only a traffic issue. Surely, if they’ve identified the narrow streets using a rigorous danger and traffic analysis, there is no longer a problem when they are on any other street.
Ah – U all – Just why are there no RV parking prohibited street signs on every block in Los Altos? There are not even signs posted about this on EVERY public road entering the City of Los Altos. (which I thought was necessary if there was a ‘city-wide’ ban.)
@Steven Nelson Most city have an overnight parking ban of oversized vehicles on public streets. None of them needed signs. It is in their code of ordinances for motor vehicles. We used to have something to the effect of regulating sleeping in vehicles which was changed and is no longer regulated. Sleeping in vehicles in MV was always allowed. Talking to concert attendees during our 3 day summer events at Shoreline: they loved MV, they did not have to get a hotel and could just sleep in their vehicles close to the concert venue. This was years before COVID. Try and sleep in your vehicle in Los Altos. You will be chased away immediately. San Diego has one of the strictest parking rules, so does Boise. Park your RV overnight in those 2 cities on a public street you will get a knock on your door. Both cities have no signage anywhere regarding their ordinance. You have to know when you drive there!
Why doesn’t Los Altos has this problem you ask? That’s easy. Because they enforce the law.
Enforce the 72 hour parking law and the majority of these junk heaps are done in a week. Most can barely move. All you have to do is drive down these streets and you’ll see at least half with a bucket under their waste water drains. That means their waste tank(s) is leaking. Another violation easily enforced. Enforce vehicle registration requirements. Enforce vehicle equipment violations.
There are a ton “storing” so much junk around, under, on top. Easy dumping violations.
Not really sure why Mountain View had to go and create a new law and why we had to spend the money on posting ugly signs all over the city. There are plenty of laws already on the books to deal with the issue.
Thank you 2. I don’t knbow ‘the Vehicle Code’ that well but I can see the point – Throughout California there is a 72 hour “move it” law. But if I sleep in my vehicle, don’t move it for 60 hours (most of 3 days) then it seems that I am keeping within the 72 hours state-wide ‘move it’ law, Yes?
With schools and our City Adopted 15 MPH when children present ordinance – the Stare Vehicle Code only allows this on 25 MPH two lane roads. (odd maybe but I think still true), That is why Graham on Castro (2 traffic lanes) can have this special speed limit – while St. Joseph and St. Francis on 4 lane Miramonte cannot have “15 MPH” school related restriction.
thanks again – makes U think