Can Gentrification Battles Promote Civic Health? A Case Study Analysis in San Antonio, Texas

Abstract

Civic health presents an understudied aspect of the gentrification/public health dynamic. When gentrification occurs, community connections and engagement may decline for remaining residents. We turn this question around, however, considering how opposition to proposed land-use changes seen as gentrifying may stimulate civic health, evidenced by emergence of a cohesive opposition effort. Our analysis highlights the context in which community opposition may fend off the deleterious impact of gentrification on public health. Our investigation proceeds through two case studies in San Antonio, Texas, in which a low-income community opposed zoning changes perceived as threats. Through an assessment of the public record (media coverage and City Council hearing archives), we create a baseline framework of association that may be generalized to future studies. In both cases, the threat fostered elements of civic health, driven by both organized and newly formed groups, and premised on concerns about dislocation, sense of place, and historic/cultural destruction. Concerning impact, we found mixed results. Trailer park tenants facing displacement lacked the resources to prevail. On the other hand, opponents of a mixed-use development partially replacing aging public housing lost their initial rezoning battle, but eventually prevailed through stronger resources and foundational arguments.

Keywords:

• Civic health
• gentrification
• land use/zoning

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Per the classic definition from Glass (1964), we use the term gentrification to reference the process by which lower income residents are replaced by middle and upper income residents, with existing residential structures replaced or reconfigured.

2 Alazan and the smaller, adjacent Apache Courts (together frequently called “Los Courts”) opened in 1940 to house Hispanic residents, whereas other projects were intended for African Americans (Lincoln Heights; Wheatley Courts) and Anglos (Victoria Courts) (Zelman, 2021). Federal funds used to finance construction imposed no rules for or against segregation; Zelman (1983, p. 138) ascribes that choice to “social convention” in the city.

3 As a whole, this work includes instances of gentrification on a wide-ranging scale, from expansive redevelopment of an urban swath, to the sorts of discrete projects that our own investigation examines.

4 The analysis did not include direct, post hoc interviews with any of the community organizers, a data source that we acknowledge might have yielded additional information.

5 Our intercoder reliability score averaged 90%, meaning coders agreed on all themes for every speaker 90% of the time. However, for identifying the dominant themes, such as dislocation in the Mission Trails case, the score was 100%.

6 Most areas of the city are defined by a broad land-use category, designated by the Master Plan, which comprises numerous sector and neighborhood subplans. Each category allows a variety of zoning designations by right. When a requested zoning change is not permitted in that category, then an amendment for both land use and zoning must be pursued from, respectively, the Planning and Zoning Commissions, and ultimately approved by City Council.

7 These reports did not address conditions in the park. After the case ended, the Rivard Report editor expressed remorse that no one in the community or the media “intervened on behalf of the Mission Trail residents to address the squalid living conditions at the trailer park: uncollected brush, unsanitary pools of standing water, leaking sewage and dozens of abandoned, stripped and collapsing trailers” (Rivard, 2015).

8 The San Antonio Zoning Commission makes recommendations to City Council, which has final authority on whether to grant requested zoning changes. The case was initially continued at Council to a later date upon request of a Councilman from another district; the District 3 Councilwoman had already indicated her support for the project.

9 This organization, which played a role in both of our cases, “was founded in 1987 by a group made up of mostly Chicana activists seeking to bring together diverse movements for peace and justice in San Antonio and around the world” (https://esperanzacenter.org/who-we-are/our-history/).

10 Underscoring these fears, two speakers reportedly collapsed during the hearing and were taken to the hospital (Baugh, 2014), although this was not apparent from the video record.

11 Sixteen units would be for families earning 30% or less of area median income (AMI), 32 units for 50% or less of AMI, and the remainder for 60% or less of AMI.

12 See Mirabal (2009) on the link between any project with “lofts” in the name and gentrification. Apparently cognizant of this, SAHA later held a “public naming session” to consider alternatives: https://saha.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/SAHANamingOfAlazanLofts_April2020.pdf.

13 In 2021, a member of the Alazan Lofts opposition was elected as the new councilwoman from this district. Councilwoman Gonzales had reached her term limit, and endorsed another candidate in the race.

14 In a virtual caricature of gentrification, the new complex offered a “resort style pool with cabanas,” the onsite Pawderosa Ranch Doggie Daycare (Parton, 2020), and kayak docking areas (Rivard, 2015).

15 However, SAHA never fully accepted the legitimacy of Esperanza’s role in the process, as the board chairwoman and chief executive officer claimed in an open letter to the Esperanza Center director that its suborganization did not represent the community, as it was “headed by your sister and the majority of its members consist of your family members” (Dimmick, 2020b).

16 Perhaps more important than whether the Plan allowed four-story buildings, it includes a seven-page section on the area’s valued cultural/historic fabric. In contrast, the South Central San Antonio Community Plan (1999, p. 4) encompassing Mission Trails merely states the need to “maintain and build on the old-fashioned neighborhood character.”

17 Although beyond the scope of our investigation, timing may also have benefitted the Alazan opponents. The 2020 developments leading to SAHA putting the plans on hold coincided with nationwide protests against policies disadvantaging people of color and the poor.

18 The setting itself is not likely to present inherent bias against a project’s probable realization, in comparison to those that do not require a zoning change. As Smith (1996, p. 56) observes, zoning and other regulations “are rarely if ever severe enough to displace the market as the basic institution governing the transfer and use of land.”

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Francine Sanders Romero

Francine Sanders Romero is an Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Public Administration at the University of Texas at San Antonio. Her work focuses on policy determinants, with a particular emphasis on land use, including zoning and planning policies, as well as civil rights and policies of the Progressive Era. An extensive record of public service includes successive appointments to the City of San Antonio's Planning and Zoning Commissions and recent appointment as a trustee of CPS Energy of San Antonio.

Patricia A. Jaramillo

Patricia A. Jaramillo is an Associate Professor of Instruction in the Department of Public Administration at the University of Texas at San Antonio. She focuses on experiential and project-based teaching and her research includes community engagement, with particular interest in Latina and Latino political participation.