LAR 388-Race & The Built Environment

Instructor: Prof. Miriam Solis

Spring 2019

Case Study – Phase I and II

Clara Restrepo
EID: cpr665

1
1. CASE STUDY AND ANALYSIS (PHASE I)
The experience of living in Austin for three years, and the various visits I have made to Pease
Park over the past three months, have shown me that this park is used almost exclusively by
Austin’s white population. The Park, which is in a central area of the city between Downtown
Austin and The University of Texas at Austin, is currently rarely used by people of color. The
neighborhoods that surrounds the park are white communities, while communities of color live
10 minutes away by car from this public space.
This paper is about Peace District Park and the legacy of segregation in this public asset. Located
in Austin, Texas, and part of an ecological trail that runs from north to south, it is bordered by W
24th Street, W Lamar Boulevard along Shoal Creek, W 15th Street, and Parkway Street. The
history of the site goes back to native civilizations that were located there as early as 11,400
years ago. There were several battles up to 1835 between new settlers and Native Americans.
However, there is no record on site of any of this history (https://peasepark.org/). In 1853 the
Park was donated to the city by Elisha Pease, who was governor of Texas and owned a plantation
of 365-acres with slaves. Nowadays the park covers 23 acres.
Looking at a city map of Austin from 1909 (See Image #1), around 26 years after the death of
Elisha Pease, it can be seen the amount of land still owned by L.C. Pease (Governor Pease’s
wife). Being located to the west side of the highway that eventually became Interstate 35, this
land was predominately white by law. Communities of color were only allowed to live east of
the interstate until mid-1900’s (Straubhaar et al, P.47). A photograph form 1903 of the mansion
of the governor still located at the site (See Image #2) shows a view of the large plantation-style
house with columns and a small group of people sitting on the front steps. They are wearing
clothes that show they are not working the land. They have beautiful clean dresses and suits that
fit perfectly. The house has a roman architecture style and the symmetrical landscape shows
influences from Europe. As a monument to an economy that could only exist on the historical
basis of slavery, this picture shows a landmark of white supremacy in the Pease Park area.
The third primary source found is an article from The Austin Statesman newspaper from 1888
entitled “Pease Park” (See Image #3). This article is about the aim of individuals to create a
public city park open to everyone, and in the same spirit another article (See Image #5) from
1904 talks about how this area located at the center of the city is most likely to become the best
asset of the city. The fifth primary source is another article from 1904 (See image #4) that talks
about how several hundred children attended an Easter egg hunt in the park. This article says that
“all schools [were] represented”, while to the top right of the paper it highlights a “Young Negro
Arrested”. It is very hard to imagine that a society that calls a person of color negro would see
them as equals to white people and that at the same time when it says that all schools were
represented it is understood that schools of color kids were not represented at the park.

2. FIELD ANALYSIS (PHASE I)

Regarding what Urban Design and Landscape Architecture says about public parks in densely-
built areas, I will analyze five ideas from different scholars. First, inequality of healthy green
spaces among cities due to the differences of income power that individuals living in a same city
have. The green spaces that families have access to, and the valuable assets there such as trees, is

2
usually dependent on their level of income. The power of capitalism shapes the environment and
makes it unequal because the more money one has, the greener areas with great trees one can buy
(Heynen & et al. Pag 5-7). The second point to analyze is how some groups from the same city
are affected disproportionally due to environmental injustices, which impacts the social
environment as well. For example, when indigenous land was taken from native Americans
where Pease Park is located an environmental injustice was enacted by force to colonize and
erase what was there. People are pushed to move to other areas that might not have the same
environmental qualities such as climate, air quality, traffic, or access to work or social spaces,
which affect how the social life of the communities were formed (McKenzie et al. Pag 61).
The third idea is about what sustainable development means according to Urban Design
experts. Sustainable development can exist if there is: “environmental quality, economic
prosperity and social equity”. These three pillars are the base upon which a healthy society can
thrive, with open spaces that are used by any race, people of any color of skin among other
qualities that make people different from one another, because only when those people come
together is there social equity (Yigitcantar et al. Pag 163). These scholars argue that only when
the environment is clean from waste and nature is able to be the home of living organisms that
can create habitat and, on top of that people have more money than just the amount that allows
them to pay their bills, along with social equity – just then we can define a place as sustainable
over time for the good of all living beings.
The fourth idea to analyze when thinking about segregation of public spaces in cities is that
historically there has been strict distribution of land for white and black communities (Boone
et al. Pag 768). The fifth idea is about the positive impact that open green space signifies to
human beings daily. Daily activities such as commuting through a natural environment or
having a place to relax and meet people for recreational purposes at the end of the day are key
components for physical, mental and psychological health

2. CRITICAL RACE THEORY (PHASE I)

After the analysis of different levels of inequality that are present in the public sphere, it seems
easy to critique the events of the past and understand that some beliefs that were accepted by
society are now banned by morality and by law. Factors such as the unjust appropriation in the
distribution of green spaces in dense cities and regulations that controlled settlements of people
based on the color of their skin have become a target of academic discussions, but in the present
time is not as easy to identify the structures of segregation that are hidden behind a land that was
regulated back in time based on people’s skin color (Schein, Pag.3). When looking at a place that
is predominately used by a certain race, such as Peace Park, the racialization of this space is
implicitly a result of segregation in the Austin, Texas. The racialization of place can be traced to
the history of Governor Pease when he owned slaves, for example. The power that the Pease
family had over the land and what the family of Governor Pease inherited still somehow defines
the social interactions that take place in the park, continued through custom and convenience. It
is evident that history since the colonization by Europeans of the Native Americans had lead to
the present site that is racialized due to connection between the power of the people who
colonized that space and the physical qualities of the place (Lipsitz, Pag 1).

3
3. CHALLENGES TO DESEGREGATE PEASE PARK (PHASE II)
Pease Park is an invaluable public resource for Central West Austin and the city in general. In
order to give greater access to all it is necessary to look at how to increase diversity around Pease
Park. Based on what was covered previously in Phase 1, the first issue that this area faces in
order to gain more diversity is related to the racialization of this space and its history of slavery,
and how the park continues to primarily benefit Austin’s white population.
The second issue is related to who lives there today. Based on the Census 2010 (Image #1), the
neighborhoods surrounding the park are 90% white and less than 1% black. The diversity that
exits to the east side of the park represents West Campus, which is predominately home to
students who are not permanent residents of Austin. The lack of racial diversity around Pease
Park is perpetuated in part by housing policies that exclude all but the wealthiest Austin families.
Zoning for single family land use almost completely covers the area around the park (Image #2),
and the median home value in this zip code is over $880,000 (Zillow, 2019).
Furthermore, local opposition efforts that effectively raise barriers to diversity are represented by
the Central West Austin Neighborhood Planning Area, which is committed to minimizing multi-
family zoning (Image #3). The area around the park does not have a future land-use proposal, so
there is no plan to reform zoning in this area. Finally, the 2018 Election Results showed
resistance to increased density and diversity. Proposition A in favor of affordable housing was
supported by 50-60% (significantly below the 73% overall rate for Austin) and Proposition J
against reforming land development code had more than 60% (versus 48% overall across Austin)
(Robinson 2018A and 2018B).

4. COUNTER-EFFORTS (PHASE II)

One counter-effort in favor of increasing density and diversity in Central West Austin is a group
called Aura. This is a volunteer organization that works in urban and regional planning. They are
committed to making Austin a more inclusive place by contesting land use injustice through the
analysis of transportation, policies and political engagement. Aura has grown to be the main
force that is talking about the pro-density movement in town. One of the main ideas they are
discussing is related to the view that general Austinites have with respect to developers. The
general public often inaccurately thinks they will turn the city into a very dense place such as
Manhattan if they are in support of “missing middle” housing, which is a house typology in
between the single-family housing type and large-scale multi-family housing (Cohen, 2019). A
second idea from Aura is that increasing density could benefit homeowners and renters because
by broadening the tax base ( Goff, 2019). Additionally, the third effort is to allow low-income
households to access different housing types in order to increase diversity and integration among
people with different income levels. One strategy Aura used was to create a petition asking
Austin’s City Council to allow Granny Flats and other small houses (Brown, 2019) and to fix the
regulations to allow and encourage their construction (Goff, 2019). The fourth struggle by Aura
is to educate the population and fight to simplify the permitting process for housing. This process
included rules, lot sizes, building height, and set-backs among others (Murphy, 2019).

4
5. COUNTER-EFFORT’S IMPACT ON THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT AND POLICY
MAKING (PHASE II)
In June 2015 Aura presented to the city of Austin a proposal for Accessory Dwelling Units called
“ADU City: How Granny Flats & Garage Apartments can help save Austin.” Due to the
information presented in that document, Austin City Council initiated a code amendment to
make the construction of this housing typology easier. These included: garage apartments,
secondary unit and granny flats. Thanks to this proposal, direct changes on the built environment
are recommended. Examples of these recommended changes include the reduction of the ADU’s
driveway, which currently must be 9 feet wide. Second, the minimum lot size should be reduced
from 7000 sq. ft to 5750 sq. ft. Third, in case a neighborhood does not have a local amendment
to the land code called a Neighborhood Plan (NP), a secondary apartment infill currently is not
allowed. The aim of Aura’s proposal is to change that to open opportunities by default even if
there is not NP. Fourth, the proposal reduces the separation distance between main house and
attached ADU, from 15 ft to 10 ft (Bradford, 2019). Aura’s code amendment recommendations
include: no additional parking spaces required for small ADU’s (less than 550 sq.) or those
located in transit-oriented district areas. Also, when an older house tries to build a secondary
dwelling, the requirement for more parking should maintain the initial regulation (grandfather
parking) instead of asking for three more additional parking spaces. Currently the minimum size
for a secondary dwelling unit is at least 850 sq. ft, but Aura proposes to reduce this to 15% of lot
size instead. And finally, it is necessary to remove the restraint on the size limit on the backyard
cottage to houses that are older than 50 years, so it could help the neighborhood to be less
gentrified and preserve the character and history of the place (Goff et al. 2019).

6. KEY ACTORS INVOLVED AND HOW I SEE MYSELF INVOLVED (PHASE II)
The first constraint is the local government because it tends to provide more benefits to private
developers, such as easier access to publicly owned land which leads to disadvantages for the
minority population, who are more likely not be represented than developers. A second
constraint is the limited outreach to the public that might not be well-enough informed to identify
reforms that could improve their quality of life. As a landscape architect I might be drawn to
projects aimed at a more educated group by designing sustainable districts, but these projects in
reality could promote gentrification and push old residents away from their houses due to taxes
increase (Hutson, Malo André, 2015).
The skills needed to fight back against these constraints include: First, good communication
skills and a broad knowledge of racial theory in the United Stated. This information is needed in
order to become part of grassroot communities’ coalitions that can push the change in local
government policies. Second, create a great relationship with the city government as well as with
groups representing minorities. Third, research by interdisciplinary team efforts to attract
investment capital in order to activate neighborhoods’ economies, through specific
neighborhood’s plans. Finally, to be part of “Occupy Movements” which educate about
inequality of land distribution (Yang, K.W, et al. Pag 23, 2012), which is the core constraint in
social justice since the colonization of land, (Yang, K.W, et al. Pag 24, 2012).

5
 Image #4
Key Actors Involved Diagram

6
 Image #1 (Phase II)
Austin Area / Pease Park

https://demographics.virginia.edu/DotMap/index.html

7
 Image #2 (Phase II)
2018 Land Use Inventory / Central West Austin

8
 Image #3 (Phase II)
Central West Austin Neighborhood Planning Area

9
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Boone, Christopher G & Buckley, Geoffrey L & Grove Morgan & Sister, Chona. “Parks and
People: An Environmental Justice Inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland” in Annals of the
Association of American Geographers, Vol 99, No. 4 (Oct. 2009), pp. 767-787).
Bradford, Chris. “AURA's proposal for accessory dwelling units”. Austin Contrarian Chris
Bradford on Austin, economics and other stuff. Accessed 13th, May 2019:
https://www.austincontrarian.com/austincontrarian/2015/02/auras-proposal-for-accessory-
dwelling-units.html.

Brown, Cory, “AURA commends City Council for allowing more backyard cottages in Austin”.
Aura. Accessed 12th, May 2019:
https://www.auraatx.org/aura_commends_city_council_for_allowing_more_backyard_co
ttages_in_austin.
Cohen, Josh, “Can Austin’s YIMBY Movement Go from Backyard to Ballot?”. Next City.
Accessed 12th, May 2019: https://nextcity.org/features/view/austin-yimby-movement-
city-hall.
Douglas, Ian & James, Phillip. Part IV. Urban and Uses of urban ecosystem services. Contact
with nature: human health and well-being in “Urban Ecology an Introduction”.
Routledge, New York. 2015.
Goff, Eric, “Growing List of Organizations Join AURA’s Call to Legalize Backyard Cottages
Across Austin”. Aura. Accessed 12th, May 2019: https://www.aura-
atx.org/growing_list_of_organizations.
Goff, Eric; Griffin, Brennan; Hartman, Amy; Sommers, Susan; Yarak, Steven. “ADU City. How
Granny Flats & Garage Apartments can help save Austin”. AURA an Austin for
Everyone”. Accessed 13th, May 2019:
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/aura/pages/29/attachments/original/1438459715/AURA_
ADUCity_060615_web.pdf?1438459715.

Goff, Eric, “AURA Calls on Austin City Council to Fight Housing Crisis by Legalizing
Backyard Cottages Everywhere”. Aura. Accessed 12th, May 2019: https://www.aura-
atx.org/aura_calls_on_austin_city_council_to_fight_housing_crisis_by_legalizing_backy
ard_cottages_everywhere.
Heynen, Nik & Perkins, Harold A. & Roy, Parama, “The Political Ecology of Uneven Urban
Green Space. The Impact of Political Economy on Race and Ethnicity in Producing
Environmental Inequality in Milwaykee” in Urban Affairs, Volume 42 Number 1, Sept.
2006. Pag 3-25.
Hutson, Malo André. The Urban Struggle for Economic, Environmental and Social Justice:
Deepening their roots, Taylor and Francis, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central,
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/utxa/detail.action?docID=4186132. Created from
utxa on 2019-01-22 18:35:06.

10
Lipsitz, George. “The Racialization of Space and the Spatialization of Race. Thorizing the
Hidden Architecture of Landscape”
McKenzie, Arcia & Koushik, Jjada Renee & Haulza-Delay, Randolph & Chin, Belinda &
Corwin, Jason, “Urban Environmental Education Review” Chapter Environmental
Justice, Cornell University Press, 2017.
Murphy, Jack, “As housing costs and economic segregation increase, Austin’s granny flats
proliferate” AN. Accessed 12th, May 2019: https://archpaper.com/2016/09/austin-granny-
flats-affordability/#gallery-0-slide-0.
Robinson, Ryan. “Proposition A: Affordable Housing.” City of Austin, November 2018.
Accessed on 13 May 2019:
http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Planning/Demographics/
Affordable_Housing_2018.pdf
Robinson, Ryan. “Proposition J: Land Development Code Voter Approval.” City of Austin,
November 2018. Accessed on 13 May 2019: http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/
default/files/files/Planning/Demographics/Prop_J_2018.pdf
Schein, Richard H. “Landscape and Race in the United States” Routledge.
Straubhaar, Joseph & Spence, Jeremiah & Tufekci, Zeynep & Lentz, Robert G. “Structuring
Race in the Cultural Geography of Austin” in Inequity in the Technopolis, University of
Texas Press, 2012.
Yang, K.w & Tuck, E. Decolonization is not a metaphor in “Decolonization: Indigeneity,
Education & Society” Vol.1, No.1,2012.
Yigitcanlar, T. & Dizdaroglu, D, “Ecological approaches in planning for sustainable cities a
review of the literature” Global J. Environ. Sci. Manage. 1(2): 159-188, Spring 2015.
Zillow. Accessed on 13 May 2019: https://www.zillow.com/austin-tx-78703/home-values/

11