• usualsuspect191
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is a really tough nut to crack… Even if you were personally fine with a shelter nearby, it’ll affect things like property values since most people wouldn’t be fine with it. Couple that with the likely increase in things like theft and vandalism it’s really hard to get people on board to live near a shelter when they know there’ll be an increased burden placed upon them. I don’t think it’s fair to demonize people who aren’t willing to take that burden on themselves.

    In my city the shelters are located mostly away from residential areas which does help somewhat, but if you know anyone who lives within approx 10 blocks of a shelter they will absolutely notice the difference from before the shelter was put in.

    • Drusas@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re unfortunately very correct. Housing aimed at the homeless (living on the street type homeless) increases crime and trash in the area. I sympathize with people who buy a house and then have a transitional housing project built near them because they bought their house without expecting that change. However, it has to go somewhere.

      It’s a problem here in Seattle that a lot of these homeless services get placed in districts which have a lot of minorities or are lower income in general. It’s not fair–extremely classist–and these services should be spread out and include the wealthier, whiter neighborhoods as well.