Car campers in beach parking lots • Hacker News Board

Re: Car campers in beach parking lots

#61

Post by omegaworks » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 7:44 PM UTC

jethro_tell wrote: post #33

HeWhoLurksLate wrote: post #21

> In December, Cheatham, her children and their father qualified for a three-bedroom, two-bathroom house in Mountain View. > The couple isn’t completely reconciled, but they came together to provide a roof — one that’s not welded to a chassis — over their children’s heads. > “We’re working things out,” said Cheatham, 37. “The most important thing is to have a stable place for our kids.” It's amazing to me to see / he…

>Why does it seem to be that we, at least in America, punish the poor for being poor, instead of, or even at the same time that we try to help them up? I think that's the natural consequence of having spent years pushing the idea that being poor is a personal choice or a lack of character. Once you make the connection that it's directly linked to a lack of character, you can be punitive instead of providing a safety…

>punitive is much cheaper for those of us with high moral character.

It's one of those sad states of affairs where the data doesn't at all back up the prevailing notion.

https://www.vox.com/2014/5/30/5764096/homeless-shelter-housi...

Re: Car campers in beach parking lots

#62

Post by seem_2211 » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 7:46 PM UTC

onetimemanytime wrote: post #34

mikeryan wrote: post #13

Living in Berkeley/Oakland area I'm torn on this one we have a growing problem with tent encampments (in SF too) I don't know if this is anything but a cosmetic solution but its an interesting tact allowing people to overnight in vehicles.

sucks for your property value. No one with a $million home wants a camp near it, lets be honest. The govt can move the hot potatoes around until someone gets stuck with it. I wonder what this does for crime rates?

Well maybe if the people with their million dollar homes let some more housing be built in the general area (shock & horror) there wouldn't be this problem.

This is largely a self inflicted problem that California has caused for itself.

Re: Car campers in beach parking lots

#63

Post by axaxs » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 7:47 PM UTC

rhacker wrote: post #56

ChuckMcM wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sort of, sort of not. I agree that it would be better to create more RV parks but the zoning issues are pretty extreme in that most cities are not big fans of RV parks for more historical reasons than actual ones. Sunnyvale, as a city, has preserved its mobile home parks in an effort to keep housing more affordable. I have an inquiry out to a developer on the cost of building a 'multi-story' RV park. Not trying to re…

These fifth wheels and class As can weigh up to 24000 pounds (even if they where never legally allowed to). A moving object at that weight would make a multi-story RV park an architecture/safety nightmare. I'm talking about east-bay area that still has space. Not sunnyvale. - Just checked out the ready player one images - holy mother of guacamole.

What about having ground level RV, and apartment/condo/business space on top?

* And perhaps additional levels of parking for tenants.

Re: Car campers in beach parking lots

#64

Post by breatheoften » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 7:47 PM UTC

I rented one of those expensive Ocean Beach ocean-view houses right by the parking lot they are talking about for a few months once. I've also lived out of a van in San Diego for some range of years (I used to do Oceanographic research and traveled 3-5 months a year). I quite literally have lived both sides of this story -- although I never once stayed in the parking lot in question in my van. I honestly can't imagine why anyone would want to stay in a van in that parking lot -- it is much too exposed and intrusive both in terms of the outside world coming in and in your inside world going out. It would also be very annoying to comply with the parking requirements ...

I think regulation to provide a path to legality for people to van dwell should happen but it should also take into account the needs of the communities and home-dwellers in an area. I never parked overnight in residential areas -- it seems to me a strange van parked overnight in a neighborhood could easily impact somebody who lived nearby, especially if they saw someone climbing in or out. Making someone nervous when they go for a walk in their own neighborhood is more than high enough cost to be worth avoiding.

The reality though is that there is a _lot_ of space in a most American cities that _nobody uses at night_ -- and its often not far from desirable places to be. Opening up small pockets of space sufficiently close to desirable locations for legal and safe use by van dwellers, in conjunction with other regulatory approaches (special vehicle registration, possibly even innovation via things like ODBC-gps appliances to allow local municipalities to collect van-dwelling taxes) could really curtail the negative effects residents experience while also enabling people the freedom to pursue the lifestyles they are already pursuing ...

Its possible to do all of (1) limit impact of van dwellers on communities (2) make van dwelling safer and more convenient (3) keep costs of van-dwelling lower than traditional housing and viable for people on a range of incomes

Re: Car campers in beach parking lots

#65

Post by 0000011111 » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 7:47 PM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #53

rhacker wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually a better business is to start having more RV parks in the SV. The last 5 years has been record breaking sales history for RVs. Yet the rest of the industry (RV parks specifically) isn't catching up. Most of the people buying RVs are now surprised that no RV parks have availability. I've watched for the past 5 years bay area periphery cities go from having tons of space any time of the year, to being complete…

Sort of, sort of not. I agree that it would be better to create more RV parks but the zoning issues are pretty extreme in that most cities are not big fans of RV parks for more historical reasons than actual ones. Sunnyvale, as a city, has preserved its mobile home parks in an effort to keep housing more affordable. I have an inquiry out to a developer on the cost of building a 'multi-story' RV park. Not trying to re…

We need stacks like in ready player one!

Re: Car campers in beach parking lots

#66

Post by gph » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 7:49 PM UTC

CalRobert wrote: post #46

ChuckMcM wrote: post #32

I talked with a guy living in a motorhome in Mountain View California, he works for Google. He could certainly afford an apartment but said his payments on the motorhome are about $600 a month, and an apartment close to Google would be $2500 a month at least, so he feels like its a free $2000 a month to save or spend. He's fortunate that Google also has nice showers, free food, and laundry. Things he might otherwise…

The insanity, here, is that you can't take the land the motorhome is on and build a studio on it. We give cars free places to sleep while people are homeless.

>We give cars free places to sleep while people are homeless.

This is basically the equivalent of saying, "People give pets free food and shelter while letting the homeless starve, what's wrong with our society"

Sure sounds deep and meaningful, but really it isn't

Re: Car campers in beach parking lots

#67

Post by save_ferris » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 7:50 PM UTC

homerhomer wrote: post #51

I'm against live-in vehicles and this life-style choice. On paper it sounds fine but in reality horrible for many reasons. For the most part, people in this situation are in a challenging state and the least of their worries is the environment around them. Is a mother of 2 living in a small RV who relies on donations going to pay for disposal service? I live in Portland, a city that used to known for being a clean ci…

This comes off as super NIMBYish.

The rise of this lifestyle is a direct result of rising inequality in our society. Yeah, that mother of 2 living in a vehicle probably has way bigger problems than paying for disposal service. But people utilizing services they can't pay for is what concerns you, not the fact that so many people are in such dire financial straits that living in a car makes economic sense.

Re: Car campers in beach parking lots

#68

Post by newnewpdro » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 7:50 PM UTC

veryworried wrote: post #41

I don't need to live in a van, but I have thought about building out a van that I could drive around the country to different cities and then leave there and fly home. This way, if I ever wanted to fly out to that city on a whim I'd already have a place to stay. Might even be useful to have two such vehicles on opposite ends of the country. I'd probably keep some cameras hooked up so I could drop in and see what's go…

I think anywhere you could park a vehicle unattended for extended periods without fees/fines you could probably afford to buy a small plot of undeveloped land in cash instead. Then just build some small utility structures on your properties, they'll be more comfortable than a vehicle (and you could park vehicles on them if desired, without concerns for tickets).

It's a far better investment IMHO, and as the years go by you may find yourself slowly adding infrastructure and before you know it you have multiple small off-grid homes.

Also keep in mind a small shed requires a lot less maintenance than an automobile to serve its purpose. Leaving automobiles unused for months or years tends to break them. A shed needs a coat of paint or shingles replaced occasionally (corrugated metal roofs last > 50 years).

Re: Car campers in beach parking lots

#69

Post by logfromblammo » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 7:52 PM UTC

klank wrote: post #39

jethro_tell wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why does it seem to be that we, at least in America, punish the poor for being poor, instead of, or even at the same time that we try to help them up? I think that's the natural consequence of having spent years pushing the idea that being poor is a personal choice or a lack of character. Once you make the connection that it's directly linked to a lack of character, you can be punitive instead of providing a safety…

> and punitive is much cheaper for those of us with high moral character. I didn't understand this assertion. Could you expand on it a bit?

It takes less energy to kick a man that's down, or to step over him, than to hoist him to his feet and keep him standing.

I read "high moral character" as sarcastic equivalence to "not poor". I presume that it is very common for people who have never been poor, or even at risk for being poor, to attribute their good fortunes to an imagined causal factor within their own sense of identity, rather than being entirely due to random chance. They reason that they are rich because they are good, and then, though back-formation, also reason that poor people are, if not entirely bad, then at least less good.

Thus, "people of low moral character" becomes a euphemism for poor people. It is shot through with fallacies of reasoning and circular argument, but based on the statistics, many rich people didn't get rich by being smart, either.

To someone with this type of worldview, poor people deserve to be punished. And since it's less effort than helping them to be less poor anyway, everybody wins. Nobody who deserves wealth has to become less rich in order for other people who don't deserve anything to be less poor.

I can't say for certain whether or not this is a real thing, but the hypothesis does fit a lot of observations.

Re: Car campers in beach parking lots

#70

Post by joe_the_user » Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 7:53 PM UTC

rhacker wrote: post #45

ChuckMcM wrote: post #32

I talked with a guy living in a motorhome in Mountain View California, he works for Google. He could certainly afford an apartment but said his payments on the motorhome are about $600 a month, and an apartment close to Google would be $2500 a month at least, so he feels like its a free $2000 a month to save or spend. He's fortunate that Google also has nice showers, free food, and laundry. Things he might otherwise…

Actually a better business is to start having more RV parks in the SV. The last 5 years has been record breaking sales history for RVs. Yet the rest of the industry (RV parks specifically) isn't catching up. Most of the people buying RVs are now surprised that no RV parks have availability. I've watched for the past 5 years bay area periphery cities go from having tons of space any time of the year, to being complete…

Uh, the non-existence of RV parks in SV is hardly an oversight. The social stigma of the "trailer park" is high but that's ultimately a marker for trailer and RV parks reducing home values. And why that reduced value? Sure, perception are a big thing but these funnel into increased supply means reduced prices.

Even in situation of hardship, “I would have bought my house next to a trailer park if I wanted that — but I didn’t," becomes the ultimate reaction [1].

[1] Chico Resist FEMA Trailers: https://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/fires/article22...