Where is gentrification in this country eventually leading to? (San Francisco: real estate, neighborhoods)

[Nineties Flava]

I posted this in the General US board but it fits on this board as well...

Originally Posted by Nineties Flava

I've been wondering about this for a while...


Just looking at the bay area, I've been... less than impressed by the direction gentrification is taking. Take San Francisco, for example... the Fillmore has perhaps been hit by gentrification worse than any other neighborhood in the city. What was once the heart of the black jazz musician community in the bay is becoming increasingly less black and is increasingly at risk of losing its connection with its history.


Oakland, which was once the black mecca of the bay, is also becoming increasingly less black... according to the most recent census, blacks are no longer the biggest minority... whites are. West Oakland, the historically black neighborhood of Oakland and the heart of the bay area blues scene, is quickly being gentrified away... even now it's a shadow of its former self. North Oakland is being gentrified too, and the Fruitvale neighborhood of East Oakland is likely next.

East Palo Alto used to be the only majority-black community on the Peninsula and still has the largest black community by far... however, this says more about the lack of blacks on the peninsula than the large number of blacks there are in EPA. EPA's black population has continued to dwindle thanks in large part to the continued gentrification of the areas of EPA near the 101 EPA/Palo Alto border and the area immediately east of the Ikea/Ravenswood shopping center. Now, the largest group in EPA by far is Latino; slowly but surely EPA is beginning to strongly mirror neighborhoods such as North Fair Oaks, East San Bruno and other communities along the peninsula that are east of El Camino Real. EPA's gentrification has happened at quite the exaggerated rate... this is understandable, though, considering that the land that EPA occupies is prime real estate.


The blacks in the bay are getting pushed farther north and east, with cities like Pittsburg, Fairfield, Antioch, Vallejo and more recently Concord being the most popular destinations. If the trends continue, eventually blacks will be pushed out of the bay area entirely.


Why is this happening now? In a lot of ways, I feel this has a whole lot to do with Silicon Valley. Being that the Valley has attracted a lot of upper-middle to upper class families to the bay, it's not surprising that poorer families are getting pushed out.

With all that being said, here's the question I ask you: Is this trend ultimately harmful to the cultural future of the bay area as a whole?


And it's not just the bay... All one has to do is look at Harlem in NY and Columbia Heights in DC to realize that it's happening everywhere. Thanks to Katrina, New Orleans is likely about to be gentrified en masse...


Is the American black community going to considerably decrease in the next 20 years? Where are they going to be pushed to? These are all relevant questions to me as a young black man...

[Mr. Fantastic]

I think focusing these thoughts around race so heavily is unhealthy and not very productive.

[Nineties Flava]

Originally Posted by Mr. Fantastic

I think focusing these thoughts around race so heavily is unhealthy and not very productive.

Who's getting pushed out by gentrification? Tends to be minorities, and blacks in particular... the black community in the bay has been hit a lot harder by gentrification than any other group.

[Huckleberry3911948]

its a combo movement, illegal immigration to urban areas and move from wasp suburbia to urban downtown areas. the sum total of these 2 movements is to move the poor urban AA population out of the cities.
great example is S. LA, was 60% AA 12 years ago now 60% latino.

[Mr. Fantastic]

Originally Posted by Nineties Flava

Who's getting pushed out by gentrification? Tends to be minorities, and blacks in particular... the black community in the bay has been hit a lot harder by gentrification than any other group.

You know, I really don't know how to approach this subject. I'll have to do more reading. It's a complex question.

[doodahman1969]

Class and race mixing is extremely healthy for the country, while gentrification is not. Gentrification implies a manifest destiny style takeover of a city, instead of mixing in with the preexisting culture.

Prettay prettay simple.

[18Montclair]

I wish that developers of high-density housing projects didnt solely think of wealthy hipsters and empty-nesters.

I would love nothing more than moderately priced 3-4 bd units that whole families(with kids) could live in comfortably--oh at for less than $300,000.

That would be awesome.

[HowGoesIt]

Gentrification is NOT a country wide problem, in fact, it's the exact opposite. Most cities in this country still have extremely gritty urban areas and safe, newer suburbs. The only cities I can think that aren't like this are SF, Boston, NYC, and parts of WDC.

[Mr. Fantastic]

I'm on the fence on the benefits/ills of gentrification.

Take Oakland for instance. It has one of the highest murder rates in the country, 124 people died in the streets of that city in 2008, and another 100 or so in 2009. What could you possibly do to change that type of dynamic?

Sometimes there are places that are a lost cause, and gentrification solves that problem by making it unaffordable for the riff-raff and forcing them to move elsewhere.

[Curmudgeon]

Gentrification is an economic issue, not a racial issue. It's open to all regardless of ethnicity. If people want to stay then it's incumbent upon them to obtain the education and skills necessary to sustain them in their changing neighborhoods.