Shared Prosperity
As I have continued to discover with the previous modules’ immersion efforts, the prosperity of the residents of East Cesar Chavez community (ECC) is segmented. There are clear signs of progress and prosperity in the community. New construction of houses, condos, offices and retail stores that are full of color and energy line streets for blocks on the northern side of the neighborhood, while the southern side is filled with aging buildings, older cars and incredible tree canopies that contribute to a dimmer environment with less energy. Watching and interacting with residents and passersby in ECC, it seems that these physical aspects of the environment also define the hope and outlook of the residents.
While the residents mostly have access to the same opportunities, the resource allocation is much different. This gives a strong advantage to the newer, younger, wealthier residents to redefine the housing and business landscapes. The entire downtown Austin area is undergoing incredible change – becoming a hipper, cleaner and wealthier place to live. ECC is just on the other side of the interstate from downtown which is moving like a glacier (not fast, but with incredible force) to the east side of town. As I have mentioned in previous immersion assignments, investors have taken notice and are also playing a heavy part in the redefining of ECC. These faceless investors have money and impact, and haven’t necessarily had to play by the rules defined in the ECC neighborhood plan of 1999.
Long-standing residents now are not only feeling removed from the area’s prosperity, but also victims of it. New business that open, take customers and revenues away. With all the changes in the landscape, tax appraisal values have also increased, taking money directly out of the residents’ pockets for the benefit of living in the area. These changes make the income per capita even more disparate. Prosperity is not shared equally amongst all residents and businesses.
An amendment to neighborhood plan needs to be included with buy-in from the City of Austin. The amendment should include opening a community center that focuses on the heritage of the community and gives the residents and business a place to interact, host community meetings and start smaller community focus-groups; updating the plan’s zoning and permitting suggestions to not be as restrictive allowing for more growth and progress; and requiring new business entrants to adopt parts of the community’s heritage in its building architecture and an effort to employ community members.
While the residents mostly have access to the same opportunities, the resource allocation is much different. This gives a strong advantage to the newer, younger, wealthier residents to redefine the housing and business landscapes. The entire downtown Austin area is undergoing incredible change – becoming a hipper, cleaner and wealthier place to live. ECC is just on the other side of the interstate from downtown which is moving like a glacier (not fast, but with incredible force) to the east side of town. As I have mentioned in previous immersion assignments, investors have taken notice and are also playing a heavy part in the redefining of ECC. These faceless investors have money and impact, and haven’t necessarily had to play by the rules defined in the ECC neighborhood plan of 1999.
Long-standing residents now are not only feeling removed from the area’s prosperity, but also victims of it. New business that open, take customers and revenues away. With all the changes in the landscape, tax appraisal values have also increased, taking money directly out of the residents’ pockets for the benefit of living in the area. These changes make the income per capita even more disparate. Prosperity is not shared equally amongst all residents and businesses.
An amendment to neighborhood plan needs to be included with buy-in from the City of Austin. The amendment should include opening a community center that focuses on the heritage of the community and gives the residents and business a place to interact, host community meetings and start smaller community focus-groups; updating the plan’s zoning and permitting suggestions to not be as restrictive allowing for more growth and progress; and requiring new business entrants to adopt parts of the community’s heritage in its building architecture and an effort to employ community members.