Part 3 was to discuss privileges, rights, responsibilities and opportunities, but so many have given me so much feedback that I am going to write out of planned order, and instead, reveal the places I not only find much better to place a homeless shelter today, but also allow for future improvement of services via physical expansion, and help to generate a percentage of the operating revenue. Maybe now, those of you I meet on the street, we can discuss how to solve (or at least reduce) the problems rather than where the facility should locate, which has been a hot issue that has gotten my ears talked off! Let me take a moment to thank Dan Cook of the Free Times for his journalistic integrity. He has included my articles in the paper, the second of which he edited, but stated so and listed the link to the full article. Though he and I may disagree on some points of this issue, he is willing to allow debate and opposing points in his paper without censorship. Dan, thank you on behalf of all that read the Free Times. It is nice to see such unprejudiced journalistic integrity and reassures all readers of the desire on the part of the Free Times to inform us fairly regardless of editorial opinion.
Originally I suggested the river area that has been a blighted industrial area for years, for a comprehensive homeless center, based on ideas I had from Rick Baty’s excellent suggestions and far reaching vision. But what was good 12 years ago is not necessarily good today, especially as the Canalside developers were told directly, and assured, that the homeless shelter on the river was temporary and would be gone in 2 years. This was stated by council members in the living room of one of the leaders of the homeless movement, as I was told by that leader. Here again we have a case of a city council and mayor that cannot be trusted as to their word. This not only chills, but stops investment and development in our city. I have heard this for years from developers that will not do any within Columbia city limits, rather take their projects to other cities.
With Canalside, the increased development of Elmwood, Main and north Marion Sts., the strong attempts at improving Main St. both downtown and north of Elmwood, and the potential residential/mixed use redevelopment of the former state mental health facility, other areas offer a better opportunity for homeless service without the conflicts. One such area is the Beltline area where abandoned car dealership facilities are, along with Cooperative Ministries, a facility that serves those in need. It is also near the old Midlands Shopping center, another location of agencies that provide support to the needy. With large buildings on large tracts available at probably fire sale prices today, close to helping agencies, and close to all the other state and local agencies in town, why would not this area work? The sale price of the Main/Elmwood properties should be able to buy much Beltline land, rehab the facilities, and provide some operational funding. The Main/Elmwood facilities require rehab anyhow, so use that money on Beltline.
This area appealed to some, and some have expressed reservation, so let me present 4 more. First is 94 acres that is presently for sale just past the Wal-Mart off Sumter Highway (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=33.948077,-80.916431&spn=0.012727,0.019312&z=16) on Old Garner’s Ferry about 2 blocks down. Notice the sparse population around the area (use the Google satellite view). It is close enough to town, yet far enough from heavy population. Across the street is a church, with very little else close. Go a little farther down and there is a lake (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&ll=33.946595,-80.92113&spn=0.025455,0.038624&z=15&msid=112881840360438175137.00045ac01730ad04ba953 ) that once had a country club on it, but no longer. It was for sale at one point, though I am not sure it still is. But it is rough and appears uncared and unused for quite a while. Again, away from population centers, but with the added benefit of a lake for fishing and an irrigation source for agriculture.
Two more are in the Bluff Rd. area, not far from the others. One is the property that Richland County purchased for the now aborted new state farmers market, near Bluff and I-77. We own it, it is over 100 acres, why not use it? The other is a little farther down Bluff Rd. by Big Lake and John Mark Dial Dr., the Richland County Detention Center site (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&ll=33.929901,-80.960827&spn=0.050919,0.077248&z=14&msid=112881840360438175137.00045ac01730ad04ba953). Again, away from population centers and in a sparsely populated area. I doubt that it is a desirable area for new housing and probably has available land for sale at reasonable cost. Adding lake access only enhances what can be accomplished.
Why are these areas better? They are away from most population and in areas that will create far fewer problems. But better than that, they are areas that are large, so they can grow with needs and homeless population growth, which will happen when we build it (they will come-more on that in a future issue). They provide fertile ground for agriculture so that fruits, vegetables, and flowers can be grown for use and sale, reducing the cost of shelter operations. Live stock could also be raised. Farm and gardening skills can be taught, along with landscaping and machinery operation. Day and night shelters can be built, and expanded without future land costs and zoning restrictions. Shower facilities, a laundry, a mail stop, telephones and computers for communication and job search, and just a place to hang out, all can be provided in one place for assistance, rather than our fountains that are now used for bathing and washing clothes, our library and other public facilities that are used for day shelters, and various inappropriate places that are now used as toilet facilities, my place sometimes being one of them. A comprehensive services building can be built for helping agencies to collocate satellite offices for daily and weekly service. This would provide the added benefit of agency workers being not only onsite to see the actual needs of those they serve in real life situations, but also to put these various agency workers in face to face contact, rather than via telephone, mail and email. This should serve to greatly increase communication and efficiency of service to the needy and across agency lines.
For the future, near and far, facilities for job training can be built, and classroom sessions can be held. Computer skills, which are so necessary today, can be taught. Literacy classes can be held. A demo house can be built to teach all the homebuilding skills needed, such as plumbing, carpentry, electrical, masonry, insulation, grading and foundation, along with remodeling skills, which are different from new construction. Heavy equipment operation, restoration, food prep, hospitality, plant maintenance, the list of training is long. There is even a potential connection with Habitat for Humanity. Wall assemblies and roof trusses could be built there and transported to Habitat sites, with savings to Habitat and skills developed by those who want to learn. On site renovation work could be done with Homeworks of America. The possibilities are endless and extremely exciting!
For this, expandable facilities and land are needed, and these areas fit the requirements. Plus they are large enough to have recreational areas. Fitness is part of good health, and sports are a fun, enticing way to fitness and good mental health as well.
But our city cannot carry this burden alone. It must be a cooperative effort with Columbia, Richland County, Lexington, Kershaw, Fairfield, plus all the other cities around us that have a homeless situation but no means to care. Churches, hospitals, businesses and individuals, along with the state government all should participate. If not, we are doomed to an inefficient and ineffectual homeless center that will always be on the edge of shrinking or folding due to lack of funding, much as has happened with the Salvation Army downtown.
It can be done. Those in need can take daily scheduled shuttles to the facility and back, just like the proposed shuttles to the Main St. facility. (FYI, the proposed Main St. facility will only allow bused in patrons, not walk up.) It can work. We have to develop the cooperation and will. And we must have incentives, opportunities, responsibilities and laws that encourage success.
It is time in Columbia we solve the problems, not the symptoms.
In the next issue, I will discuss more of the problems, the who and where and why, along with opportunities, incentives and responsibilities. Better yet, I would love to devote the next issue to your comments, ideas and solutions. I will say that so far, the great majority of Columbia residents feel that a facility should not be on Main St. or near heavily populated areas.
Thanks for reading, and even more so for your participation and comments.
Joseph Azar
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment