Document text
3 of 3 Premium Clicks used this month SUBSCRIBE Print + Online Subscriber Activation | Register x Forgot Password | Need an Account? e-edition | subscribe | newsletter | deals Classifieds Jobs Autos Real Estate FEATURED » NEWS NOW California man dies in I-5 rollover ... Medford man wins Megabucks jackpot ... Budget tops $339 million for 2016-17 ... California man dies in I-5 rollover ... Medford man wins Megabucks jackpot ... Budget tops $339 million for 2016-17 ... OUR VIEW Our View: Deep breaths needed on tiny house plan Comment MailTribune.com Writer Posted Apr. 10, 2016 at 12:01 AM Posted Apr. 10, 2016 at 12:01 AM » Social News Adjacent business owners and others concerned about a proposed village of tiny houses north of downtown are reacting to what they imagine the village might be, not what supporters actually envision. The City Council should carefully evaluate the actual proposal rather than bowing to pressure based on fear. Neighbors of the proposed site at Third and North Front Street who spoke to the council Thursday about transients loitering, sleeping in the bushes and leaving syringes on the sidewalk were describing the existing situation. If they succeed in convincing the council to deny the proposal, nothing will change. If it is allowed, it might actually make things a bit better. Contrary to fears raised by neighboring businesses, here is what Hope Village is not: It is not large. About a dozen, and no more than 14, tiny dwellings would be moved to the one-third-acre lot. One individual or a couple — no families with children — would be allowed in each unit. That means a maximum of 28 people and probably fewer. It would not be unsightly. Slats would be installed in the chain-link fence that already surrounds the lot to screen the site. Only residents would be allowed inside; visitors would be required to be escorted by a resident. It would not be a "magnet" luring homeless people to the area. No food would be distributed there. It would provide no benefit to anyone not living there. It would not be unruly. No alcohol or drugs would be permitted on the premises. Residents would be responsible for policing behavior, and violators would be required to leave. It is not permanent. It is a pilot project to evaluate whether the concept will work. If it works, it likely would be made permanent and expanded — in a different location with more room. Some opponents have suggested a tiny house village would be more appropriate outside of town. That doesn't make much sense from a logistical standpoint. If residents are expected to use their new digs as a base to look for work, they will find it much easier to do that from inside the city, where they can walk or ride a bus. As it is, this proposed location is not near residences, which reduces the opposition from potentially hundreds of residential neighbors to a relative handful of business operators. The other problem with the "put it somewhere else" attitude is that any location, no matter how remote, will generate opposition. Everyone wants something done about the problem of homelessness, as long as it's not in their neighborhood. In Thursday night's council meeting, Councilor Michael Zarozinski said Hope Village might be appropriate for the right people, but "If you get the wrong one, it could be a disaster." That's true of any neighborhood — especially, it might be argued, in one where you don't have to fill out an application to move in. It's likely true of the 50 low-income apartments being built adjacent to the Mail Tribune. That's not a reason not to build them. The important thing to remember about this proposal is that it will have virtually no effect on the number of homeless people in the immediate area. They are already there, as demonstrated by the complaints from neighborhood businesses. Now, they are sleeping in bushes and defecating in doorways, loitering on street corners and dropping syringes on the sidewalk. Hope Village won't change that for the worse; instead it will take some our community's homeless off the streets. Mayor Gary Wheeler was on the right track when he asked organizers for a copy of the lease agreement for Opportunity Village, a Eugene project that is the template for Hope Village. The council should study this proposal carefully and then make a decision based on facts, not fear. MailTribune.com Writer Posted Apr. 10, 2016 at 12:01 AM » Comment or view comments Reader Reaction » STAY INFORMED Email NewsLetter Sign Up Today Sign up for our newsletter and have the top headlines from your community delivered right to your inbox. Southern Oregon Directory Featured Businesses Loading... Business Name address Location, ST | website.com Find Southern Oregon Attractions Bars Restaurants Beauty Salons Entertainment Doctors Medical Specialists Contractors Education Lawn Services Lawyers Shopping Travel Tanning Used Cars Wedding Services ▼ Add your business here + Events Calendar Connect with MailTribune.com Facebook Twitter RSS Back to top Reader Services Reader Services Home Subscriptions Subscriber controls Contact us Submissions Photos Events Letters to the editor Corrections Announcements Obituaries Story ideas Since you asked Alerts Email Alerts RSS Feeds Text Alerts Advertise Media Kit Home Products and services Ad rates Advertising contacts Propel Marketing Mail Tribune Daily Tidings The Nickel Shop Our Valley Blogs Mobile Site Stay Informed Email newsletter Sign Up Today Sign up for our newsletter and have the top headlines from your community delivered right to your inbox. Your privacy is important, read our privacy policy. © Copyright 2016 Local Media Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Local Media Group Publications Original content available for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons license, except where noted. MailTribune.com | P.O. Box 1108, Medford, OR 97501