Letters to the Editor: 1 million more homes for L.A. and Orange County? That’s reckless

To the editor: The newly adopted housing plan for Southern California, which requires communities in Los Angeles and Orange counties to accommodate more than 1 million new homes, is based on the assumption that cities must plan for however much population growth is projected for the next eight years.

If California took the same approach to climate change, it would require local governments to accommodate sea level rise, wildfires and extreme weather while ignoring the carbon emissions that drive these changes. Instead we should heed the words of Swedish activist Greta Thunberg and abandon our belief in the “fairy tales of eternal economic growth.”

Let’s stop the boosterism that seeks to attract more businesses and industry to our state, which is already burdened by an unsustainable population level.

It is significant that neither the inland communities nor the coastal cities in Southern California want massive new housing projects. They recognize that these will negatively impact the well-being of current residents. It is time to start addressing the causes of our problems, both climate change and overpopulation, rather than simply reacting to the symptoms.

John La Grange, Solana Beach

..

To the editor: Nearly everyone loves Southern California’s coastal climate, but we are increasingly losing open space to development, and we do not have enough water.

Water is already the single most difficult issue for California, and yet our leaders want to bring millions of new thirsty mouths here over the next several years. How long can we keep this up?

Worse yet, as sea level is rising and the shoreline is being rapidly eroded, our “leaders” in Sacramento and in the Southern California Assn. of Governments keep pressing to send more people to communities closer to the coast. These officials most resemble the leaders of lemmings.

Mark Driskill, Long Beach

..

To the editor: The concession by coastal communities to allow for the construction of more housing, easing the burden on inland cities, is a positive first step.

Rent control is fine and dandy, but it’s a lip-service solution. What we need is more housing in core urban areas where people want to live and where jobs are right now.

Until all stakeholders work together to build more housing for the growing workforce, rents will continue to rise and quality of life will continue to fall.

Todd Hays, Pasadena