DMN's Tod Robberson Thinks Golf Alone Saved East Lake and Can Save Southern Dallas Too

Thumbnail image for eastlakegolfcoursexx.jpg
pgatourcourses.com
The renovation of East Lake Golf Club in Atlanta was part of a sprawling effort to that led to its neighborhood's renaissance.
In an interview with the Morning News over the weekend, Mayor Mike Rawlings qualified some of his previous statements about the potential of AT&T and SMU's proposed Trinity Forest Golf Course to be an economic game-changer in southern Dallas. The project could spur lots and lots of economic development and transform the area, he said, but that would take a more concerted effort on the part of the city and the businesspeople and investors that play there.

That leaves the Morning News' Tod Robberson as the most vocal proponent of the golf-course-as-magic-bullet theory, which he first introduced in a column last week. His thesis was more or less dismantled here, so Robberson gave it another shot this week.

He refined his argument in a Monday evening blog post carrying the headline, "Evidence suggests golf courses do transform neighborhoods." That evidence comes from East Lake Golf Club in Atlanta, which went to seed before Tom Cousins, a local real estate developer, helped finance an extensive renovation in the mid-1990s.

Robberson explains:

In 1990, per-capita income for a one-mile radius surrounding the club was $7,174, according to an analysis I did using ESRI's Community Analyst. The first Census after the renovation was 2000. By then, per capita income stood at $15,700 -- more than double, and representing a whopping 8.15 percent annual growth rate. According to the latest Census figures, per capita income stands at $16, 686. It's important to remember that per capita income is the average of all earnings divided by the total population. That is, not just the working population, but every man, woman and child, employed, retired or unemployed. So a low figure like $16,686 can be deceptive.

In 1990, average household income was $23,416. By 2000, it was $43,284. Today it's at $40,276. Yes, the level has dropped slightly since 2000, probably because of the recession. But the difference between the pre-renovation, 1990 figures and today's remains staggering. There is no other major feature in East Lake that would explain such a dramatic jump in household incomes.

Pre-renovation, 33 percent of East Lake's population lived below the poverty level. By 2000, it had been halved, to 18.3 percent. The population was nearly 94 percent black in 1990. It remains majority African American (around 60 percent) but represents a far more healthy racial mix.

We'll leave you to puzzle over what Robberson considers a "healthy racial mix" -- three cups white, two cups black and sprinkle in some brown for taste? -- and focus on the rest of his argument.

It's true that the East Lake neighborhood has undergone a transformation, from a racially homogeneous pocket of high poverty and crime to a more diverse, economically vibrant and even trendy part of Atlanta. But "no other major feature?" Is the News' Google-maker broken?

The golf course played one part in an ensemble cast of change. As The Atlantic explored over the summer, the course was accompanied by a host of measures aimed at making the neighborhood more palatable to higher incomes. The city razed East Lake Meadows, a notoriously terrible housing project, scattering 400 of the neighborhood's poorest residents and replacing most of them with well-to-do white people. City and private funds were poured into redevelopment efforts. A pioneering charter school was established. The East Lake Foundation raised and distributed money to steer the revitalization efforts.

In other words, East Lake's skyrocketing incomes occurred as part of a big, targeted, multi-pronged effort to remake an entire neighborhood into something "healthier."

That will prove more difficult here. Unlike East Lake, much of the land surrounding the proposed Dallas course is in a floodplain, a river or a forest. As City Manager Mary Suhm said last week, it can't be developed. And East Lake was a once thriving neighborhood of historic homes that had been neglected for a few decades. The area surrounding the Trinity Forest course has been neglected forever.

Then there's the question of who benefits from an East Lake-style makeover. As two Georgia State researchers concluded in a 2003 paper paper examining redevelopment of East Atlanta, it's not, for the most part, the poor people who lived there. They were forced out by changes in public housing and rising property taxes and replaced by well-to-do white people -- the migration that explains the area's increasing incomes.

Still, though, Tod's right: East Lake was a net positive for Atlanta, and a similar transformation would be a net positive here. And if it takes a high-priced golf course to kick-start it, great. But just like East Lake did, we're going to need a lot of "other major features."


Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
10 comments
drtz
drtz

My first thought after seeing the comparison to East Lake was "this is nothing like East Lake except that they want to build a golf course in the 'hood."  On second thought, though, East Lake is a perfect comparison, and a proven example that a golf course isn't going to magically make a neighborhood better.

There was already an exclusive golf course in East Lake before the revitalization, but it was still a run-down, crime-infested area.   The area only began to improve after a *community-driven* project razed the adjacent housing project and had a lower-cost, publicly accessible golf course built in it's place.

If you want a better comparison to ATL -- and an even better example of how the city can make a real long-term economic impact -- look at Atlantic Station instead.

Guesty
Guesty

"Then there's the question of who benefits from an East Lake-style makeover. As two Georgia State researchers concluded in a 2003 paper paper examining redevelopment of East Atlanta, it's not, for the most part, the poor people who lived there. They were forced out by changes in public housing and rising property taxes and replaced by well-to-do white people -- the migration that explains the area's increasing incomes."

To be fair, this is  true for any large scale urban redevelopment effort targeted at a particular neighborhood.  If you make a specific neighborhood nicer (it doesn't matter how or why), it will attract people with more money while displacing poor residents.  The faster you improve a specific neighborhood, the greater the effect.  There are a number of reasons for this, including: 

  1. poor people usually rent rather than own (i.e. they don't benefit from increased property values, but rents will increase as the neighborhood improves, often beyond their means); 
  2. those that own can't afford the increased taxes and are often better off cashing out than participating in the improvement in the neighborhood (if you are very poor, it doesn't make economic sense to have so much value in your house when you have some many other debts, particularly if many of the "improvements" don't directly benefit you, e.g. a golf course); 
  3. improving a neighborhood necessarily will attract people with more money.  

To put in bluntly, poor people live in bad neighborhoods because they can't afford to live in good neighborhoods.  If you take a bad neighborhood and make it good, you haven't changed this economic reality for the poor.  All you've done is eliminated one of the places they used to be able to afford.  

All of this is premised on targeting a particular neighborhood for large scale improvements rather than generally improving city infrastructure for everyone or making more modest changes in a larger area.  If you want to help the poor, you don't rush in and develop a particular neighborhood--you do it by working for gradual improvements in many neighborhoods.  Sadly, slow, gradual improvement over a large area doesn't make headlines.

s.aten
s.aten

The city spent millions upgrading Cedar Crest golf course & the Stevens Park golf course in the Southern Sector.    The city already has plenty of golf courses owned by the city.  I don't see the need for any additional golf courses.

P1Gunter
P1Gunter

Because the area around Cedar Crest and Tenison is so great. All the fried chicken you can afford near the former, all the liquor you can afford at the latter.

I really wish DMN would quit shilling for this city. Is there anyone in local media willing and able to follow the money to see who is getting rich off projects other than Jim Schutze?

Love or hate his political leanings, at least the old man digs as deep as possible into his local stories.

AT&T and SMU don't just decide to donate money to build a golf course in a flood plain in Pleasant Grove. And then relocate the Nelson there. There is something fishy about this entire thing.

I'm honestly shocked Schutze hasn't written about it yet. I can only hope it's because he's following the money to see who is making a buck off this.

Montemalone
Montemalone topcommenter

If golf is the magic bullet, then why not fix up Cedar Crest? It's not far from the floodplain forest. There's lots of low income people already there. Plenty of cheap land. 

As with everything else that gets pushed on this city, I know someone involved in this is planning on making a fortune. Find out who that is and tell us please.

P1Gunter
P1Gunter

@Montemalone there is also that course off Jim Miller, I just can't remember the name. Not a bad course, but not a developing neighborhood either. The last development was the DART line next to it.

oakclifftownie
oakclifftownie

@Montemalone Dallas National is Just south of Arcadia Park in Oak Cliff I doubt there has been any improvement in income and growth there .

P1Gunter
P1Gunter

@joeptone1 thanks for the link. I somehow missed that article.

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...