Connecting You to Your Community
Lodi, California •

Indexes

March 4th, 2010
March 10th, 2010
March 9th, 2010
March 8th, 2010
March 6th, 2010
March 5th, 2010
March 4th, 2010
March 3rd, 2010
ADVERTISEMENT
Zane Grever shows his Winnebago Luxor RV on Thursday at his home in Lodi. Currently, the limit a RV can be parked on a city street is 72 hours. (Brian Feulner/News-Sentinel)

Lodi City Council to decide how long an RV can park in same spot

By Maggie Creamer
News-Sentinel Staff Writer
Friday, May 1, 2009 6:06 AM PDT

With his recreational vehicle parked in front of his house, David Vera walked back and forth as he prepared for a two-month trip across the country.

Vera usually parks his RV on Vienna Street for two days before and after trips, even though he legally can leave his vehicle on the street in front of his house for 72 hours.

"No RV owner is going to make the street our parking spot," he said. "We respect our neighbors."

RV owners in Lodi could see the amount of time they can park their RVs on the street decrease if Lodi City Council members change the city's laws.

After receiving three complaints about RVs in front of people's houses, Councilwoman JoAnne Mounce asked city staff at a recent meeting to study other cities' policies regarding RVs. Mounce said the citizens she talked to would like to see RVs only allowed on the street for 48 hours.

"I am a true advocate of when a citizen has a major concern that affects the city at large, it is important to be able to give that citizen a voice," she said. "This must obviously be a larger concern than what I may be aware of."

Mounce said she had not noticed a problem with RV parking, but wanted the council to look into it after she received the complaints.


A change to a city ordinance could further limit the amount of time an RV is parked on the street. (Brian Feulner/News-Sentinel)

On Thursday afternoon, Mavis Dockter had her RV in front of her house and was charging it for a weekend trip. In the past, she has received a warning from the city to move her RV before it is ticketed.

"They should clean up other stuff in Lodi, before picking on RV owners," she said.

She said it irritates her to almost receive a ticket on her RV when other homeowners fill their front yards with trash and junk.

Lodi has more time built into its ordinance than most cities City Attorney Steve Schwabauer has looked at. He said most of the ordinances have a 24- to 48-hour limit.

After he compiles a report on other cities' policies, the council will consider what type of restrictions it wants to adopt.

Vera, who has owned RVs since 1977, usually parks them at a church near his home. He said he thinks the rule limiting RVs to only 72 hours in front of houses is a technical issue.

"You can take it to shop for a half a day, and then park it again," he said.

Describing it as the "missing part of the ordinance," Councilman Phil Katzakian also asked city staff to add a requirement that RVs be moved for a certain amount of time before being parked again in the same spot. His neighborhood requires RVs to be moved for at least 72 hours.

Lodi's RV issue at a glance

Current policy: All vehicles can only be parked on a city street for 72 hours at a time. To avoid this rule, people will often drive their vehicle briefly and park in the same space.

Proposed changes: The Lodi City Council will consider decreasing the amount of time recreational vehicles are allowed on the street.

Councilman Phil Katzakian also recommended the city add a requirement that the RVs must be moved for a certain amount of time before being parked again in the same place.

News-Sentinel staff

While he understands people need to load and unload, RVs in front of houses can be inconvenient, Katzakian said. He specifically mentioned some of the newer developments that have narrow streets.

"Some of the streets, I'm surprised that you can have RVs in the front. It's tough when people bring them home in my neighborhood and let them sit for three days," Katzakian said.

While washing his car's windows in front of his house, Zane Grever said he is lucky to have a driveway that can fit his Luxor Winnebago and his son's RV when he visits.

"I feel for people who buy motor homes and trailers but have nowhere to keep them," he said.

While he thinks 72 hours is enough time for residents to load and unload for trips, he wishes more time could be allowed for people who come and visit.

"If people are visiting, give them two weeks," he said. "They could be coming from New York or Kentucky or who knows where?"

Contact reporter Maggie Creamer at maggiec@lodinews.com or read her blog at www.lodinews.com/blog/citybuzz.

Reader Feedback

Bob Loblaw wrote on May 8, 2009 11:43 AM:

" Watch out journey. Remember that X-Files episode about the master planned community? It could be you next.... "

95240 wrote on May 7, 2009 7:32 PM:

" 72 Hours is fair..I am a RV owner and I also think they should not be in the front yard. Park them in the back yard or on the side yard. "

Lodian wrote on May 4, 2009 3:33 PM:

" johndoe: A permit to park an RV is unnecessary. There is already a law on the books for 72 hours. That's really all that seems to be needed. Well that and enforcement of the 72 hours. "

johndoe wrote on May 4, 2009 2:28 PM:

" Obvious the owners of RV units will be the only partys to complain. They need to be more considerate of their neighbors. To limit the time the units can be parked on city streets it should be required to get a city permit stating the interval (begining and end) they expect to be parked there. This would allow for out of town guests stays and owner loading/unloading/maintenance periods. Any expense for operating the permit program could be covered by a small charge ($5.00 or $10.00) If the owners can afford 10 MPG gas expense, thay certainly can afford a small permit fee. "

Lodian wrote on May 2, 2009 8:46 PM:

" Journey: Do you live in Lodi? Gated community or ??? "

OTH wrote on May 2, 2009 1:51 PM:

" Journey

Sounds right out of the Stepford Wives. I'm curious are we paying city personnel to do your nightly traffic patrols or do you have a special little car posse? "

lodidian wrote on May 1, 2009 9:03 PM:

" I would like to see all rv's, boats, trailers, and "prooject cars" off the street and even removed from front yard's and driveways after 72 hours. I think people who park these things at home are disrespectful to the entire neighborhood.

Store it elsewhere---it's not all you! "

commonsense1 wrote on May 1, 2009 7:42 PM:

" Between Monroe's concern with reducing the city's 72 hr parking laws, makes as much sense as Hitchcock now demanding the council members delay the start of Farmer's Market at Lodi Lake...... Obviously, these are the first two case's of "swine flu" in Lodi. It's creating serious mental problems. "

danieliii wrote on May 1, 2009 5:47 PM:

" The 72 hour limit is reasonable; let it be and enforce what exists. The City Council should realize the tail is wagging the dog here. Get busy with real issues, and leave the RV parking to the enforcement people.

Gee whiz...we have enough micro-managing of our lives with Obama in office, YUK! "

davidd wrote on May 1, 2009 5:05 PM:

" new2cali, I'm not entirely sure with public streets, but I believe the towing company tows the vehicle for free.

Then when the owner claims the vehicle, they pay the towing company whatever the fee is.

At least, that's how it works when a vehicle is towed from private property. "

weezer wrote on May 1, 2009 4:55 PM:

" We deserve the government that we elect.

I see t-shirt sales booming for the one with the design, "Don't blame me, I didn't vote for them!" "

papershredder wrote on May 1, 2009 4:32 PM:

" Three complaints, out of how many who live in lodi, 60,000+ wow. I'm going to call Joanne and tell her the fire trucks going past my house are too loud with there sirens blaring and horns blowing. There are some things that as a city you let your citizens do. I have an idea, leave the city ordinance alone and do something about cleaning up the east side. Going to the east side of lodi is like walking into a third world country, there is trash everywhere you look. Alley ways are terrible, they are a breeding ground for bugs and rodents. The asphalt has more holes then swiss cheese. I don't go over there after dark and very rarely go over there at all. City council needs to get there heads out of their butts cause i've never seen anyone with a glass bellybutton. Election days comes pretty fast i'm lobbying for change. "

new2cali wrote on May 1, 2009 4:11 PM:

" My question would be if they did decide to tow them away who would they hire? I mean they are threatening lay-offs and such, so how can we afford to hire someone to come take the "RV's" away. I mean all they are doing is sitting there and boom. Talk about picking on the innocent. Poor RV's!!!! Wake up people. Things are getting way out of hand in this town and its time for changes. POSITIVE CHANGES!!! If the city council wants to represent the city, then they need to listen to them. Its awesome to see that the $11,666 (<~ little freaky) the city attorny gets paid a month is well spent. I mean it must be tough to sit and compare our city with others. Good job guys! "

justlookin wrote on May 1, 2009 3:44 PM:

" It would be nice if all towns were safer and people wouldnt hurt other peoples property. (dream on,i know). The old RV CENTER on kettleman which just closed would make a nice storage facility,but there would have to be hired security which would be expensive to boot.It is very sad they closed down.... "

Robb wrote on May 1, 2009 3:34 PM:

" The next thing you know cats will be living with dogs... mass hysteria..!! "

Lodian wrote on May 1, 2009 2:14 PM:

" Journey wrote on May 1, 2009 8:41 AM:

" My HOA rules state that our RV can be parked in front of our house -- NEVER. Not only that, no cars can sit on the street overnight. If they do, they are tagged and towed the next day. I love those rules. That's why I bought in this master-planned community. Everything -- including yards -- stay immaculate 24/7/365. "


Journey: That sounds like a terrible way to live. "

Lodian wrote on May 1, 2009 2:13 PM:

" I really don't know why this is an issue that needs looking into right now. Give RV owners 72 hours in front of the house. After 72 hours they get a ticket, done. I guess it could become an issue if the owner does this a lot, but maybe a monthly limit could be set on RV parking in residential areas. Maybe there is already something similar on the books. IDK "

Lodian wrote on May 1, 2009 2:08 PM:

" Observer wrote "My guess is that the only people who can afford an RV live in the Sun West area."

That's simply not true(maybe you were being sarcastic). "

jramagic wrote on May 1, 2009 11:57 AM:

" Actually- I'd love to have one myself....and may, someday. My neighbor owns one of the largest and finest...a new 40' diesel Monaco Pusher.
Holy Cow....its huge! Gorgeous, too. But he pays to store it in a big hanger locally...not at his home. That's the way to go, I think. He does bring it home for a day or two before and after trips...not a big deal. My gripe is the characters who try to save the storage and / or try to create a guest house by parking them at home.... "

reading wrote on May 1, 2009 11:50 AM:

" I find myself on both sides of this issue, having been in both a near miss (large motorhome blocking view of cross traffic) accident, and being the owner of a small travel trailer, which I have in front of my house during trip preps and-or unloading and cleaning.

Bottom line, 72 hours is fair and enforcing tickets for violators beyond that should be the focus. The Nazis can move into their gated communities to stay happy.

The City council should focus on the more serious issues we face. "

Leonard wrote on May 1, 2009 11:45 AM:

" Journey wrote on May 1, 2009 8:41 AM:

" My HOA rules state that our RV can be parked in front of our house -- NEVER. Not only that, no cars can sit on the street overnight. If they do, they are tagged and towed the next day. I love those rules. That's why I bought in this master-planned community. Everything -- including yards -- stay immaculate 24/7/365. "


Ugh...

That sounds like a pic and span, tidy little Hell on Earth. "

Journey wrote on May 1, 2009 10:20 AM:

" You couldn't..........even if you tried. :( "

midtowner wrote on May 1, 2009 10:03 AM:

" That's because I refuse to goose-step with the rest of you. Ya Vol! "

Journey wrote on May 1, 2009 9:55 AM:

" and...........we don't have any "midtowner" neighbors! :) :) "

T & C wrote on May 1, 2009 9:40 AM:

" It is always about how a city can ger more revenue! $$$$$ "

Mad Dog wrote on May 1, 2009 9:14 AM:

" I am curious about the legality of this issue. The State of California vehicle code uses the 72 hour rule. How can the City of Lodi supersede the State law? "

Observer wrote on May 1, 2009 9:12 AM:

" Hey x209x, have you priced a RV recently. They are expensive and cost more than I paid for my first house. My guess is that the only people who can afford an RV live in the Sun West area. By the way, which council member lives in Sun West? "

midtowner wrote on May 1, 2009 8:50 AM:

" Journey: Sieg Heil "

Journey wrote on May 1, 2009 8:41 AM:

" My HOA rules state that our RV can be parked in front of our house -- NEVER. Not only that, no cars can sit on the street overnight. If they do, they are tagged and towed the next day. I love those rules. That's why I bought in this master-planned community. Everything -- including yards -- stay immaculate 24/7/365. "

bigskytrader wrote on May 1, 2009 8:40 AM:

" I recently returned to Lodi to visit and in newer subdivions the streets are so narrow two vehicles can't even pass each other if other vehicles are parked in the street but I agree that if you can afford to buy an RV, you can afford to store it. That big new Super WalMart that has been an issue for years in Lodi, welcomes RVer's that want to save a buck on RV Park fees. ;-) "

DeputyChief wrote on May 1, 2009 8:32 AM:

" Lodi has a lot more to worry about other than the parking of RVs. Try focusing on grafitti, gangs and drugs. "

max stanfield wrote on May 1, 2009 8:02 AM:

" 48 hours or 72 hours ? This is a non-issue in search of a problem. In the words of the famous Don Imus "Shut up, get out !" "

jimp wrote on May 1, 2009 7:39 AM:

" Yeah, that's it. Haul the RV's off, and don't forget the boats too, and the old cars, and the broken down cars, and the projects cars, and the storage bins, and the dumpsters, and if you stand in front of your house too long, then hauls you off too. It figures that with all the problems this city has the council wouldn't have anything more to worry about than this. Let's ignore the big stuff and focus on the trivial. Way to go. "

x209x wrote on May 1, 2009 7:28 AM:

" the city council is worried about RV's being an eyesore? well most of the eastside is an eyesore. give them 72 hrs to get out. just because the city council members dont park RV's in front of their Sunwest mansions, dont take it out on people that dont make a ridiculous amount of $$$ "

al da long wrote on May 1, 2009 7:19 AM:

" Lodi, a church on every corner and an RV in every senoir's driveway. "

midtowner wrote on May 1, 2009 7:09 AM:

" Doesn't the city counsel have more important issues to debate? You crybabies who whine about RV's parked in your neighborhood are spoiled! We have a huge budget deficit with programs being cut and this is what our elected officials are discussing. I'm outraged! "

jramagic wrote on May 1, 2009 6:39 AM:

" Oh- and this move and re-park game is BS, too. After 72 hours, if the beast is moved, it should not be allowed to return for at least 72 hours before the clock restarts. The bottom line- the streets are not an RV park. Those who want these things need to be prepared to pay to store them...just like boat owners do with their slip fees. Hey... "

jramagic wrote on May 1, 2009 6:35 AM:

" 72 hours. Period. Then a big fat ticket. These big monsters parked on residential streets are an eyesore, they create dangerous blindspots, and simply are NOT appropriate. If RV visitors arrive, they should park in the local RV park...not on the street. Many do this where I live and I don't like it at all. "

Comments on this story are now closed.