Chestnut Commons proves the strong housing demand near downtown. The project is 100% occupied despite its proximity to high crime. The properties design and overall layout are the visions of 30's something year old's right down to the exterior paint selection. It has bright colors and inviting sitting areas throughout the project. Developing 32 cottages and 32 flats in price ranges of $140-$220k one could only assume that gentrification is occuring.
I tend to agree with Ausitn resident, Brian K. Burns author of Revitalization vs. Gentrification. Revitalization, in its purest form, refers to a process in which there is a "giving life back to", or "stimulating the life of", an existing body. As a socio-economic term, and as it relates to East Austin, it has to do more with the building up of the existing neighborhood in order to enrich the lives of the people who currently reside there. It is NOT the improvement of the houses, roads, businesses, and amenities of a region with the intention of making it aesthetically pleasing or financially profitable for others (i.e. new residents, new land owners, and financial speculators). When improvement is made to an economically impoverished area by a wealthier group of outsiders, and the first focus is not to better the lives of the downtrodden or current population, but instead to increase the financial holdings of this outside group, it is not classical revitalization - it is gentrification.
Prior to the development of Chestnut Commons it was a concrete facility. Therefore it’s not as if Momark Developments are offering neighbors low amounts to take control of residents existing properties. Momark Development built with the intentions to create affordaeble housing but do to site costs could not do so. Therefore Momark Development donated $1.2 million from their sales proceeds back to the community to rehabilitate existing housing stock.
However this project may entice real estate investors to jump on board. Rehabilitating some of the existing properties in the area should prove to be extremely profitable. The fact that individuals purchased 667 square foot one bedrooms with one car garages for $130-$140k tells me that 3/2/2 renovated homes could be extremely profitable. I believe that if the market wouldn't have turned sour there would be much more activity in this area.
Overall the development was a success. Individuals can easily access downtown without major traffic concerns. The neighborhood is improved and all investing parties recieved a return.
Mark, I was one of the developers of Chestnut Commons. . . Thank you for your assessment. Chestnut is a good example of how we (as a society) can bring lower cost housing to our urban core. At the time Chestnut was built, vacant lots in this area were selling for $200k . . . which I am sure is lower today. The redevelopment pressure will grow as Austin grows. Let's hope that any redevelopment that does occur is sensitive to the context in which it occurs. Thanks again for your analysis.
ReplyDelete