East Los Angeles gentrifying a lot slower than expected. (Alhambra: hair salon, crime rate)

[sdlife619]

Why do all you White folks keep insisting on gentrifying every damn poor minority neighborhood? You guys already have all the nicest spots in the city, and all throughout the state of CA. Leave the poor and struggling areas alone and let them be so they can have a damn roof under their head. If they really wanted all this change, they would ask for it and if so, let the projects and developments support the people that already live their, not trying to lure outsiders with all kinds of money that want to change everything up including the culture of a neighborhood.

We are dealing with similar gentrifying problems down here in SD which is pushing many longtime residents out of their homes and apartments. It affects SD on a greater scale than L.A., because SD is so much smaller of a city and county, so we have less area's for the poor to lower middle class to move to if they get displaced.

Relax White folks, you will eventually take back CA entirely as all the poorer Hispanics and Blacks leave the state for greener pastures. But don't complain when you can't find anybody to mow your lawns, babysit your kids, pick your fruits in veggies, take your orders at any fast food joint, or work on your car because those hard working, working class Latinos will be nowhere in site because of the brutal effects of gentrification.

[Cream1]

Originally Posted by sdlife619

Why do all you White folks keep insisting on gentrifying every damn poor minority neighborhood? You guys already have all the nicest spots in the city, and all throughout the state of CA. Leave the poor and struggling areas alone and let them be so they can have a damn roof under their head. If they really wanted all this change, they would ask for it and if so, let the projects and developments support the people that already live their, not trying to lure outsiders with all kinds of money that want to change everything up including the culture of a neighborhood.

We are dealing with similar gentrifying problems down here in SD which is pushing many longtime residents out of their homes and apartments. It affects SD on a greater scale than L.A., because SD is so much smaller of a city and county, so we have less area's for the poor to lower middle class to move to if they get displaced.

Relax White folks, you will eventually take back CA entirely as all the poorer Hispanics and Blacks leave the state for greener pastures. But don't complain when you can't find anybody to mow your lawns, babysit your kids, pick your fruits in veggies, take your orders at any fast food joint, or work on your car because those hard working, working class Latinos will be nowhere in site because of the brutal effects of gentrification.

Why did all you poor folks keep insisting on ruining every damn middle class neighborhood?

[erin_elise_]

Originally Posted by sdlife619

Why do all you White folks keep insisting on gentrifying every damn poor minority neighborhood? You guys already have all the nicest spots in the city, and all throughout the state of CA. Leave the poor and struggling areas alone and let them be so they can have a damn roof under their head. If they really wanted all this change, they would ask for it and if so, let the projects and developments support the people that already live their, not trying to lure outsiders with all kinds of money that want to change everything up including the culture of a neighborhood.

We are dealing with similar gentrifying problems down here in SD which is pushing many longtime residents out of their homes and apartments. It affects SD on a greater scale than L.A., because SD is so much smaller of a city and county, so we have less area's for the poor to lower middle class to move to if they get displaced.

Relax White folks, you will eventually take back CA entirely as all the poorer Hispanics and Blacks leave the state for greener pastures. But don't complain when you can't find anybody to mow your lawns, babysit your kids, pick your fruits in veggies, take your orders at any fast food joint, or work on your car because those hard working, working class Latinos will be nowhere in site because of the brutal effects of gentrification.

I'm a 29 year old black women who is interested in the status of gentrifying neighborhoods. I wouldn't assume that whites are the only block of residents that are interested in such. To say that is to say, non whites don't want "nice" places to live as well.

[BuildingsR'Us]

I consider myself pro-gentrification. I have no sympathy for long time residents being priced out. I strongly believe the pros out weight the cons, lower crime rates, gangs start to dissemble,better ownshiper value for real estate.

Gentrification isn't destroying any culture, there are pockets of Riverside, Fresno, Bakersfield, Fontana, Yuma Arizona, and El Paso they can move to. So many choices and all affordable. It would actually benefit the people that are struggling in Boyle Heights to just self-willingly give up and move as soon as possible to get a head start financially.

[ashpelham]

Originally Posted by BuildingsR'Us

I consider myself pro-gentrification. I have no sympathy for long time residents being priced out. I strongly believe the pros out weight the cons, lower crime rates, gangs start to dissemble,better ownshiper value for real estate.

Gentrification isn't destroying any culture, there are pockets of Riverside, Fresno, Bakersfield, Fontana, Yuma Arizona, and El Paso they can move to. So many choices and all affordable. It would actually benefit the people that are struggling in Boyle Heights to just self-willingly give up and move as soon as possible to get a head start financially.

Problem is, a lot of us can't afford to move. Now, I live in a largely white suburb of Birmingham, AL, which is not comparing Apples to Apples, more like pears. But I would like to move. Problem is, property values have flat-lined to decreased, and the repairs and maintenance on my now 18 year old house are more than I budgeted for, and more than I have managed to put together.

Bad planning on my part, and if I do sell, I will personally not try to own again in my lifetime. Unless some major things change about my income and my situation.

So, we stay put. We stay in neighborhoods that perhap aren't great for us, and paying for things we can't really afford to, but manage to. We keep up our bills, and we survive. Not all Americans thrive, many just survive. Most probably.

[bruhms]

Originally Posted by BuildingsR'Us

I consider myself pro-gentrification. I have no sympathy for long time residents being priced out. I strongly believe the pros out weight the cons, lower crime rates, gangs start to dissemble,better ownshiper value for real estate.

Gentrification isn't destroying any culture, there are pockets of Riverside, Fresno, Bakersfield, Fontana, Yuma Arizona, and El Paso they can move to. So many choices and all affordable. It would actually benefit the people that are struggling in Boyle Heights to just self-willingly give up and move as soon as possible to get a head start financially.

The problem is the people not the location.

[socal88]

Gentrification certainly has some negative consequences, but the pros definitely outweigh the cons. If I was a homeowner in a gentrifying neighborhood, I would certainly be happy to see a drop in crime and an increase in property value. Obviously, renters might be up in arms as rents go up and they may get pushed out, but I guess it beckons the question of whether you'd rather live in a cheap area you can afford that has high crime or a safer area that will be more difficult to afford. I find it odd when anti-gentrification folks claim how gentrification is ruining the character and feel of a neighborhood. Apparently they may have a high tolerance for crime at the expense of keeping the neighborhood flavor.

In the context of LA, areas like Echo Park, Silver Lake, Venice and parts of Hollywood that might have been no-go zones with a greater gang presence 20 years ago are certainly better off. I understand that honest, hard working individuals get displaced and the problems just migrate to a new location if the bad folks merely move elsewhere. But I'd say the city of LA is better off.

The issue I see with gentrification is where there is displacement that occurs and the new entrants act as if those already living there are beneath them. I find it funny how some folks move somewhere touting its "diversity" and other unique characteristics but ultimately eradicate those elements as residents/business owners providing those unique elements get priced out. The other annoying aspect is how people want to move somewhere because of its hip factor. And unfortunately in this country, there is a prevalent attitude to an extent where parents tell their kids to get out of the house when they turn 18. With the amount of housing demand and restricted supply, you've got a lot of young adults who could easily be living in their parents' place where there is plenty of space but instead may move into an already dense gentrifying neighborhood so they can "grow up and become an independent adult." There is unnecessary artificial demand and upward pricing pressure for housing that could to some extent easily be alleviated if people lived at home with parents. It's one thing to move somewhere to be close to work/school. It's one thing just to move somewhere to discover yourself.

[WizardOfRadical]

Originally Posted by BuildingsR'Us

I consider myself pro-gentrification. I have no sympathy for long time residents being priced out. I strongly believe the pros out weight the cons, lower crime rates, gangs start to dissemble,better ownshiper value for real estate.

Gentrification isn't destroying any culture, there are pockets of Riverside, Fresno, Bakersfield, Fontana, Yuma Arizona, and El Paso they can move to. So many choices and all affordable. It would actually benefit the people that are struggling in Boyle Heights to just self-willingly give up and move as soon as possible to get a head start financially.

That's because you're not from LA. Why not just go back where you came from

[Geo-Aggie]

The thing is that in a metro with so many gentrified and expensive areas, not everywhere can gentrify. Places may improve because of proximity to well-off areas, and this will likely be what we see in East LA, but to expect a Starbucks on every corner and people tearing down bungalows to build McMansions, may be unrealistic. Los Angeles is a wonderful metro, but no metro can have the entire region gentrify. I believe this is what we'll see in East LA.

Improvement, but still working-class.

[WizardOfRadical]

Originally Posted by Geo-Aggie

The thing is that in a metro with so many gentrified and expensive areas, not everywhere can gentrify. Places may improve because of proximity to well-off areas, and this will likely be what we see in East LA, but to expect a Starbucks on every corner and people tearing down bungalows to build McMansions, may be unrealistic. Los Angeles is a wonderful metro, but no metro can have the entire region gentrify. I believe this is what we'll see in East LA.

Improvement, but still working-class.

East LA is too close to industrial areas, and has too many environmental issues to gentrify.

Areas that gentrify either have a nice ocean breeze, or great urban bare bones (or close to places that do). Neither of which is the case for east LA.

It's just decayed pre-ww2 suburban grid housing, with run down mid 20th century apartments that were slapped up on tear down lots. There is literally no allure.