What happened to the city of San Francisco? (Vallejo, Richmond: lofts, neighborhoods)

[the topper]

What the heck happened to the city of San Francisco? Soul completely robbed out of SF shockingly: sterile boring city. I was in San Francisco and found the city completely sterile: Mission District is very gritty with fewer creative types and scattered restaurants/shops. Haight is more dangerous and not as hip it once was. What's is left of SF?

*This is not a knock on the city; just very shocked and sad

[sfca30]

Extreme liberalism happened. The city's apathy towards improving QOL issues and being too politically correct to take on crime. This is a city that prioritizes illegal aliens over citizens and worries more about whether you're drinking a soda than whether you're safe.

I moved a month ago after 10 years.

[Finper]

All the right brainers had to leave because they can't afford to live there. OC is going through the same thing. I call it living in beige because all that's left is white collar elitists and homeless.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by the topper

What the heck happened to the city of San Francisco? Soul completely robbed out of SF shockingly: sterile boring city. I was in San Francisco and found the city completely sterile: Mission District is very gritty with fewer creative types and scattered restaurants/shops. Haight is more dangerous and not as hip it once was. What's is left of SF?

*This is not a knock on the city; just very shocked and sad

What era are you comparing it to? The Mission has always been gritty. It went through a phase of "creative types" and non-profit orgs locating there, but that was the first step toward gentrification, which continues in parts of it. What part of it were you in?

The Haight? When was the Haight hip last--the 60's/70's? Flower power has been over for a long time, old-timer! The Richmond is still a mellow nabe, the Fillmore still has character, City Lights is still alive and kicking along with the rest of North Beach.

It doesn't sound like you were in the City for very long; more like a hit-and-run judgment call. Has it changed? sure, what city hasn't? But you can still find the old SF flavor, if you know where to look, and are open to it.

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by the topper

What the heck happened to the city of San Francisco? Soul completely robbed out of SF shockingly: sterile boring city. I was in San Francisco and found the city completely sterile: Mission District is very gritty with fewer creative types and scattered restaurants/shops. Haight is more dangerous and not as hip it once was. What's is left of SF?

*This is not a knock on the city; just very shocked and sad

Sterile??? It's the opposite of sterile IMO. It's filthy.

Anyways, cities change over time, countries change over time, people change over time... everything changes over time...

[the topper]

I guess exorbitant cost of living finally did this city in: tons of people(creative types) moved to East Bay, Sac. and Pacific Northwest. It's just left with a hollowed shell despite new high rises downtown/ mid rises in neighborhoods.

[the topper]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

What era are you comparing it to? The Mission has always been gritty. It went through a phase of "creative types" and non-profit orgs locating there, but that was the first step toward gentrification, which continues in parts of it. What part of it were you in?

The Haight? When was the Haight hip last--the 60's/70's? Flower power has been over for a long time, old-timer! The Richmond is still a mellow nabe, the Fillmore still has character, City Lights is still alive and kicking along with the rest of North Beach.

It doesn't sound like you were in the City for very long; more like a hit-and-run judgment call. Has it changed? sure, what city hasn't? But you can still find the old SF flavor, if you know where to look, and are open to it.

From 23rd to 14th st. and Mission Delores park to Valencia. North Beach is meh: too many strip clubs and a no go zone at nights due to rowdy night life. The only area I haven't gone:Castro. Then what's left? Just look at the youtube video of SF in the 70's and even 80's: full of life, clean, and a lot of soul and happiness.

[the topper]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

Sterile??? It's the opposite of sterile IMO. It's filthy.

Anyways, cities change over time, countries change over time, people change over time... everything changes over time...

Meant to say sterile and filthy with lack of original soul

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by the topper

I guess exorbitant cost of living finally did this city in: tons of people(creative types) moved to East Bay, Sac. and Pacific Northwest. It's just left with a hollowed shell despite new high rises downtown/ mid rises in neighborhoods.

There were actually some last holdouts, creativity-wise, in SOMA, among the old lofts there, but the last ones sold out in the early 2000's, and moved to the East Bay, Vallejo, etc. Some still sell their art in the Geary St. galleries, fwiw.

[7 Wishes]

Originally Posted by sfca30

Extreme liberalism happened. The city's apathy towards improving QOL issues and being too politically correct to take on crime. This is a city that prioritizes illegal aliens over citizens and worries more about whether you're drinking a soda than whether you're safe.

I moved a month ago after 10 years.

I've only been to SF three times in my life (in 1985, 1993 and 2001), but from what I've read I would think it's the other way around.....a lot of the stuff that made SF "fun and unique" was replaced with urban versions of boring chain stores and it all also became super-yuppie and too expensive. A very similar "boring evolution" is true about Manhattan/NYC (though ironically a lot of people say what you say about the latter as well, with proposed soda taxes and sanctuary city legislation).