Letters to the Editor: This housing project isn’t ‘down the street.’ It’s right next to single-family homes

To the editor: Your editorial on the local opposition to a temporary housing project for homeless people in a West L.A. residential neighborhood failed to include any objective data or arguments on why the Midvale Avenue site is not a suitable location for a shelter.

First and foremost, the project is inconsistent with Mayor Karen Bass’ own Executive Directive 1. The mayor could not have been clearer when she stated that a project covered by the order should “in no instance ... be located in a single family or more restrictive zones.” This project is in a single-family zone.

Second, the city-owned parking lot upon which this shelter would be built is the lifeblood of dozens of businesses that depend on it for customer parking, especially for disabled people.

Third, the shelter would not be just “down the street.” It would be literally next door to a single-family home.

Finally, your editorial states that people “always think there is another spot for it better than near wherever they live,” and then goes on to state with a factless certainty: “There isn’t.”

But there is. Community members actually put forward two separate options close by that could house far more people.

It is not “brave” but rather self-destructive and disruptive for city leaders to propose a project when even the most basic analysis demonstrates that the site, according to the mayor, is not eligible for such a shelter.

Jay Jacoby, Los Angeles

..

To the editor: While I am grateful for your editorial supporting Bass’ and City Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky’s work to house people experiencing homelessness, I must urge The Times to rephrase reference to people experiencing homelessness rather that “homeless people.”

Although this may sound like a semantic quibble, it is not.

“Homeless people” is like referring to “short people” or “tall people,” both characteristics that cannot be changed.

Giving people experiencing homelessness access to housing restores their basic human rights. But once they have been labeled as “the homeless,” many people with houses refuse to have them as neighbors even as the people who once experienced homelessness will be moving into housing and not putting tents next door.

“People experiencing homelessness” denotes an experience, not a permanent characteristic. And all people, regardless of their past experiences, are entitled to be treated with dignity and respect.

Marsha Temple, Los Angeles

The writer is executive director of the Integrated Recovery Network.

..

To the editor: I completely agree that more housing of every type needs to be built throughout Los Angeles. I would even applaud more aggressive policies on land use.

How about zoning all the lots next to Wilshire Boulevard, Santa Monica Boulevard and other main arterials to allow six-story apartment buildings?

I do take issue with one statement in your editorial — that 75% of all homeless people live in the area where they had housing.

It is pretty obvious that people still move to Los Angeles in hope of starting a new life. Of course they come with money to rent at least a hotel room for a while, but some fall into homelessness. I beg to differ on the idea that they were L.A. residents in any meaningful way.

Michael Lampel, Granada Hills