Helping Those Who Can't Help Themselves

I start this posting with a disclaimer- I do not have a degree in any of the social sciences, I have a very limited understanding of what causes people to be homeless and the past solutions that have been applied to resolve this tragic issue, be they successful or not.

However, in my last posting, "Parks are Good, Right?" I touched upon the issue of homelessness as the homeless sometimes utilize parks as resting areas. It is a sad fact that homelessness is not limited to big cities. In my small town in the central valley in California we have several homeless people, some of whom live in the park near my house. I think one of them lives, or at least was resting in the bush behind the fence that sections off a neighboring sub-division, or at least I thought I heard a bush talking as I was rushing off to work one morning. Could have been my ipod.

In any case, homelessness is an issue that remains an ugly and stubborn stain on the fabric of American life.

However, I came across an innovative solution in the Livable City: Revitalizing Urban Communities by Partners for Livable Communities, where in Washington D.C. a Business Improvement District (B.I.D.) opened a "daytime drop-in center in a local church where the homeless can eat, shower, wash clothes, and meet representatives of various government and nonprofit agencies offering job training and detoxification programs." (the Livable City, 166)

This is an excellent idea and hopefully will be adopted by other cities. It's one thing to say that all the homeless need to do is clean up and find a job, it's another thing to help them accomplish such a task.

Also, a surprisingly touching and revealing take on this issue is in Mel Brooks lesser-known movie, Life Stinks! I won't go into the details, but suffice to say Mr. Brooks gives an honest and sympathetic, but never patronizing look at what life is like to be homeless, albeit, through the eyes of Hollywood.

One Trick Pony

At this time I do not have to commit to a concentration in my studies yet my thoughts have been all over the place. Urban planning on a whole fascinates me so much that I get distracted by each shiny new tidbit- disaster relief housing, post-industrial cities, community development?! Bring it all on!

As mentioned earlier my emphasis in learning had originally been community development, especially within post-industrial cities and downtown revitalization. I extolled the promise and regenerating energy a new shopping center (or other major development) could and has provided to many cities.

However, an interesting point was made in a book called, the Livable City: Revitalizing Urban Communities by Partners for Livable Communities, editor Paula Park (McGraw-Hill: New York, New York, 2000: 121-122)-
"Very often (121) city officials fall in love with a single megaproject and become overly reliant on the tax revenues that such projects promise.
In turn, many cities may feel obliged to throw good planning out the window in order to accommodate the demands of the megaproject.
In the end the city runs the danger of having a poorly designed downtown and a city hall dependent upon the fortunes of a single project."

My fallacy would probably have been pointed out by a professor should I mention this in a classroom setting. However, at this time I am entirely self-taught (with the exception of the generosity of the planning staff at the city of Visalia and their invaluable real-world experience advice)

Irregardless, it is food for thought. Just like we would all like to find a miracle cure that would stop and reverse aging, AIDS, cancer, MS, bad boy/girl friends, underdog sports teams- take your pick- urban planners secretly put on their wish list for Santa a magic Band-Aid that could fix a city in trouble.

But a city is composed of many facets and to throw a one-size-fits-all solution over everything hoping it will do the trick is both a disservice to the city and to the people who live in it.

I'm not saying that a new shopping center, sports stadium, park, aquarium, etc., wouldn't benefit a city, but to put all of one's hopes in one proverbial golden goose is more foolish than risky.

I would also like to mention an article in slate.com that casts a doubtful eye on the city-wide redeeming power of a sports stadium. "Buy Me Some Peanuts and Cracker Jacks also some hotels and low-income housing by: Daniel Gross