Chinatown - Progress or Gentrification?

kmp1284 said:
But is there really? Does the supposed cultural aspect justify it remaining a slum?
Click to expand...

I agree with this. It really is a terrible area and they need funding badly. I wonder what the sale of the Chinatown Garage would do, in addition to Millennium funds. It is easily the sketchiest area in the city and I continually had my trash gone through and attempts to break into my car living in the Bay Village.

I appreciate the cultural aspect, and would like to see it remain, just think they need a little bit of an infrastructural overhaul.
 
bayvillagebrahmin said:
I agree with this. It really is a terrible area and they need funding badly. I wonder what the sale of the Chinatown Garage would do, in addition to Millennium funds. It is easily the sketchiest area in the city and I continually had my trash gone through and attempts to break into my car living in the Bay Village.

I appreciate the cultural aspect, and would like to see it remain, just think they need a little bit of an infrastructural overhaul.
Click to expand...

Compared to what it was it is night and day better now. I have my trash gone through weekly both in Dot and Westie - and know people who had cars broken into in Westie and Dot. Kind of just living in a city. People also don't seem to realize that Chinatown is probably the most densely populated area in the City - certainly population wise, and possible restaurant wise. Of course its going to be dirty.

Chinatown will eventually go the way of the North End, though. "Chinatown" stays in that the gate, restaurants, etc, all remain - they make too much money. The actual population will continue to yupify, though, until its basically the North End.
 
between height-terrified NIMBYs and pearl-clutching "oh, my - this place is filthy!" types, i feel like somewhere along the way whole segments of the population didn't get schooled on what a city is. you want pastoral and safe and all the rest of it -- move to the country (or at least the suburbs). not only is the point above (that chinatown is MASSIVELY both cleaner and safer than it once was) entirely valid, i for one appreciate that it's one of only a few remaining pockets of actual urban grit left in boston. i don't want the city to be a disgusting, trash-covered mess characterized by violence and rampant debauchery, but i also don't want it to turn into a large-scale, outdoor burlington mall. chinatown is awesome.
 
Chinatown is NOT a slum. If you want to see what an actually slum is like, go to Skid Row in Los Angeles.

And pushing people in Chinatown out in the way of gentrification will only increase resistance elsewhere. Residents often cite the West End to fight development. In a few years, they will cite Chinatown as well and they will be less open to the idea of allowing towers in the neighborhood knowing that they will set a new precedent where current residents will be pushed out and replaced by wealthier residents.
 
KentXie said:
Chinatown is NOT a slum. If you want to see what an actually slum is like, go to Skid Row in Los Angeles.

And pushing people in Chinatown out in the way of gentrification will only increase resistance elsewhere. Residents often cite the West End to fight development. In a few years, they will cite Chinatown as well.
Click to expand...

Chinatown is gross. It's dirty, the buildings are poorly maintained, and the area often smells terrible because trash is piled on the streets. It's not Skid Row but compared to the North End, Beacon Hill, Bay Village, Back Back, the South End... it's a mess.

A West End style raze and rebuild would be a disaster, a disaster no one is asking for, but having some of the character taken out of the neighborhood by developers willing to throw money at it wouldn't be the worst thing.
 
SlothofDespond said:
Chinatown is gross. It's dirty, the buildings are poorly maintained, and the area often smells terrible because trash is piled on the streets.
.
Click to expand...

Shoulda walked through it 25-30 years ago; it's a vast improvement. Unless you prefer a neighborhood where prostitutes, and drug dealers rule streets at night as they once did.
 
between height-terrified NIMBYs and pearl-clutching "oh, my - this place is filthy!" types, i feel like somewhere along the way whole segments of the population didn't get schooled on what a city is. you want pastoral and safe and all the rest of it -- move to the country (or at least the suburbs). not only is the point above (that chinatown is MASSIVELY both cleaner and safer than it once was) entirely valid, i for one appreciate that it's one of only a few remaining pockets of actual urban grit left in boston. i don't want the city to be a disgusting, trash-covered mess characterized by violence and rampant debauchery, but i also don't want it to turn into a large-scale, outdoor burlington mall. chinatown is awesome.
Click to expand...

This is such a stupid comment I feel dumber for reading it. Your logic basically amounts to "It's a city therefore it's OK that it be dirty / decrepit / sketchy".

Yea it's better than it once was, and it can still be better just like the Back Bay, South End, and Bay Village, Seaport or Roxbury can also be better. Improvement is continuous.
 
There is a difference between retaining your culture and a little cleanup. Chinatown in NYC is significantly nicer than Boston because a little bit of money was put into it, buildings and facilities were improved with that, etc. It has nothing to do with pushing everyone out.
 
Chinatown in Boston feels like a NYC neighborhood imo. It's dirty and smelly with tall towers, just like NYC.
 
SlothofDespond said:
Chinatown is gross. It's dirty, the buildings are poorly maintained, and the area often smells terrible because trash is piled on the streets. It's not Skid Row but compared to the North End, Beacon Hill, Bay Village, Back Back, the South End... it's a mess.

A West End style raze and rebuild would be a disaster, a disaster no one is asking for, but having some of the character taken out of the neighborhood by developers willing to throw money at it wouldn't be the worst thing.
Click to expand...

Agreed. That's why developers should prioritize on affordable housing there on top of their hotels. It's only an issue if all the developer wants to do is build hotels that has nothing to do with Chinatown. It should be a compromise.
 
Can anyone use an extra $6.7B?

Boston has a hotel room shortage. If you're a developer in Chinatown, the only thing you want to be building on these small parcels is hotels. The $$$ is insane.

The BPDA is motivated to maintain and preserve the 'ethnic' character of Chinatown. The only way that happens is to continue to add apartment density by getting buildings built, then use the linkage and $$$ in the general fund to reach the desired number of affordable units.

Given current economics, the BPDA will be permitting more 15-28 story highrises going forward. But they carry a high number of luxury units. You propose them, and the neighborhood groups freak out.

You go back to (hotels) on a couple of parcels – which addresses the other problem. There's more revenue with hotels. The developer can give you more tax $$$ without the political fallout (so you thought). You bring forth a project, and the neighborhood groups are freaking out again.

The BPDA is backed in a corner. Follow the wishes of neighborhood activists, and somewhere between nothing and next to nothing gets built. The BHA can only build a limited number of units. They'd run out of funding long before sufficiently meeting the need.

But, Chinatown's been getting affordabble units – with more on the way from Winthrop Square/MP, and eventually, DOT parcels 25, 26, 27, and 28 when they are developed. http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?t=5193

Logic would assume that we need to stay the course. Revenue projects are the way to go. ....i believe the 'nimby' factor is beginning to do serious harm to Boston. We continue to squander parcels or get into these neighborhood skirmishes that seem to go on for years.

This the kind of stuff that makes me worry when i look 5 or 6 years out. i think we reach a point (well sooner than people realize) where the process vs nimby obstructionism eventually grinds projects to a halt. And has this not already begun to occur? A normal, robust process is not taking place here. We're seeing an unhealthy level of mischief.

citylover94 posted on City Data several weeks ago (i adjusted it for population increases from current information available);

Boston
Land area: 48.4 square miles
park area: 5,040 acres
airport: 2,384 acres
Land area excluding airport and parks: ~36 square miles
Population: ~650,000

San Francisco
Land area: 46.8 square miles
Park area: 5,384 acres
airport: 0 acres
Land area excluding airport and parks: ~39 square miles
Population: ~837,500

---------------------------------------------------------------

So, i thought i'd compare fiscal budgets....

Boston's fiscal budget for 2017; $2.98B

https://www.boston.gov/departments/budget
(breaking down the numbers);
http://www.cityofboston.gov/news/Default.aspx?id=20197)

San Francisco's fiscal budget for 2017 (settled); $9.7B

http://sfmayor.org/article/mayor-lee-presents-proposed-balanced-budget-fiscal-year-2016-17-2017-18
(breaking down the numbers);
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SF-budget-increase-aimed-at-homeless-safety-7955697.php

What the fuck? It seems the truth is out there about what the anti-development obstructionism has done to incite Boston's low fiscal scale. i don't know how else to interpret it – given even, that i'm working with just the flat numbers. Even when you factor in the lack of inclusion of Cambridge, Somerville, and Brookline from the core neighborhoods, the advanced state of San Francisco's economy.... to be able to put forth a budget of such inordinate scale is shocking.

In just this year alone Bart will receive a $175M increase in funding on top of $ ++billions in capital improvements already happening!

God.
 
Last edited:
bayvillagebrahmin said:
I wonder what the sale of the Chinatown Garage would do, in addition to Millennium funds.
Click to expand...

Speaking of Millennium funds, the way the 115 Winthrop Sq. project proposal has pitted various neighborhoods/socioeconomic cohorts vs. each other seems rather unprecedented. Numerous support letters from Chinatown ("we need the affordable housing!"), Roxbury/Dorchester ("we need the economic opportunity") up against equally numerous against letters from Back Bay/Bay Village/Beacon Hill ("we need the Common preserved"). Perhaps an inevitable outcome when the shadow law aspect transforms the discourse from debating the project "on the merits alone" into a referendum on major developments in Boston overall....

P.S. Definitely more than one major garage in Chinatown--I count 125 Lincoln St. and 40 Beach St., 1 Nassau. Wonder which one you're talking about?
 
Before zoning froze them, neighborhoods were constantly in flux. Trying to save one out of "authenticity" is madness. The best you can do is allow everyone to build easily so that housing is cheap and people can choose where to live. Somehow, right thinking people are up in arms to save chinatown, while meanwhile immigrants are off creating new chinatowns in Quincy and Malden. Change is inevitable. Why don't we ease it by allowing building everywhere, including in chinatown.
 
odurandina said:
---------------------------------------------------------------
So, i thought i'd compare fiscal budgets....

Boston's fiscal budget for 2017; $2.98B

https://www.boston.gov/departments/budget
(breaking down the numbers);
http://www.cityofboston.gov/news/Default.aspx?id=20197)

San Francisco's fiscal budget for 2017 (settled); $9.7B

http://sfmayor.org/article/mayor-lee-presents-proposed-balanced-budget-fiscal-year-2016-17-2017-18
(breaking down the numbers);
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SF-budget-increase-aimed-at-homeless-safety-7955697.php

What the fuck? It seems the truth is out there about what the anti-development obstructionism has done to incite Boston's low fiscal scale. i don't know how else to interpret it – given even, that i'm working with just the flat numbers. Even when you factor in the lack of inclusion of Cambridge, Somerville, and Brookline from the core neighborhoods, the advanced state of San Francisco's economy.... to be able to put forth a budget of such inordinate scale is shocking.

In just this year alone Bart will receive a $175M increase in funding on top of $ ++billions in capital improvements already happening!

God.
Click to expand...
Only a stupid shit, or a shill, would try and compare the overall city budgets of San Francisco and Boston, and try to draw conclusions from the comparison. The two budgets are as different as apples and kumquats.

First, the budget for the San Francisco public school system is not included in the San Francisco city and county budget. The San Francisco Unified School District has its own sources of funding, and is governed by the Board of Education.

Second, a list of some of the enterprise funds for the city and county of San Francisco (county functions are in the city budget) reveals major differences, e.g.,
• San Francisco International Airport
• San Francisco General Hospital
• Laguna Honda Hospital
• MTA-Municipal Railway
• Port of San Francisco
• Public Utilities Commission-Hetch Hetchy [reservoir system]
• Public Utilities Commission- Wastewater Enterprise

In Boston, most of the above functions are undertaken by the MDC, Massport, and the MBTA. I included the hospitals because the public health budget for the city and county of San Francisco is over $2 billion. In Boston, the public health portion of the city budget is under $100 million.

Third, various county functions in the budget for the city and county of San Francisco are undertaken for Suffolk County by the Commonwealth and paid by the Commonwealth.
__________________________
Edited to add:

Here are some apples to apples comparisons, by department where the functions are similar. In millions of dollars.

Boston / San Francisco
Fire Dept. 223 / 356
Police Dept. 346 / 545
Public Library 79 / 117
Parks and Recreation* 49 / 179

* Boston is helped by the MDC ([State] Dept. of Conservation & Recreation) and several non-profits, and San Francisco is helped by the Federally-funded, Federal agency, the Presidio Trust (covers 2.3 square miles).
 
Last edited:
Really, really sick of people saying that no one has a "right" to live wherever they want, like it's some kind of drop-the-mic argument. No one has a right to build whatever they want, either. People have a right to petition their government for redress. It's a fight over what happens to the neighborhood, and the stakeholders (the people, the landlords) both have a right to affect policy.

I'm also really sick of hearing comfortable, well-off people shit all over neighborhoods they don't live in, and wave away the effects of an increasingly unaffordable city on people's lives by making vague references to "change" and the "market," as if those are immutable forces people should simply accept no matter the personal cost.
 
Boston's success outgrew it's size some time ago. Then we did something really dumb. We withdrew from aggressive planning in the neighborhoods. And, now we're caught playing catch-up.

It's nothing new. People have been sucking it up (to gentrification) for hundreds of years. The problem is we didn't build. Which has made the problem 3x worse.

It seems, building highrises at the West Roxbury, Dorchester and Roxbury train stops should help. Seems the less-cruel, less-oppressive solution than the alternative/s. ...as you can deliver the most quality living spaces to the most people.

Attempting to put affordable units Downtown (as we'll be attempting to do on the DOT parcels off Kneeland St) is the urban equivalent of child abuse..... When what we should be doing - is going for the big home runs, and putting the maximum #s of units in the neighborhoods.
 
Last edited:
bayvillagebrahmin said:
I continually had my trash gone through
Click to expand...

Is this a thing that bothers people?

I always thought this went without saying, but: Dear World, you are welcome to my trash because it is by definition something I no longer want.
 
Just keep in mind, there are more Chinese people and more people of Asian descent living in Chinatown than ever before.

That includes a lot of rich people from Asia, of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top