Mailbag: 20% of motel development should go to low-income units

Colin McCarthy’s commentary on behalf of the Planning Commission regarding the Costa Mesa Motor Inn was very disturbing (“Commentary: Do not miss this opportunity to replace blighted motel,” Oct. 30).

He makes sweeping statements with seemingly great authority but questionable accuracy. Have “slum motels” really been plaguing our city for decades? Or have a few motels on Harbor and Newport boulevards been providing long-term housing as a last resort for scores of families through the years who otherwise would have no place to go?

It is almost stomach-churning to hear some of the City Council and Planning Commission members’ heartfelt concern for the poor children who have to live in such motels without any plans or seeming concern to provide other housing opportunities for them. (Note the Planning Commission’s refusal to ask for some affordable units from the developer, who is seeking approval to develop over 200 luxury apartments on the site.) At least the “tiny” motel rooms have running water, heat, cooking facilities and some refrigeration. Certainly more than a car or a park can provide.

In my work with Share Our Selves for over 23 years, I placed many homeless families at the Costa Mesa Motor Inn and other motels for a brief respite from living in their cars. Often just a few days at the motel gave them an opportunity to ease their panic, regroup, and find real avenues for eventual stability and a chance of recovering a normal life.

To characterize these motels as “slums” is degrading not only to the owners and operators, but to the tenants themselves. Of course there were probably “questionable” people and activities as there are in most environments, but as Pope Francis says, “Who are we to judge?”

We housing advocates are asking the developer, who is receiving a huge benefit from the city in its agreeing to change the zoning in order for him to proceed with his $50 million investment, to provide 20% of the units to be built as affordable to low and very low income people.

Most cities require at least some provision of this kind of housing for providing merely a density bonus to the developer. This deal includes a density bonus on steroids. The developer should be required to make adequate compensation for this huge benefit.

Setting aside 20% of the units for housing affordable to low and very low residents is very reasonable.

Jean Forbath

Costa Mesa

The writer is a member of the Costa Mesa Housing Coalition and the founder and a former executive director of Share Our Selves.