Sumayyah Borders

22 March 2025

Introduction

The rapid expansion of the tech sector has transformed West Coast cities into global hubs of innovation, bringing economic prosperity, job opportunities, and urban revitalization. Neighborhoods, once struggling, have seen new businesses, infrastructure improvements, and rising property values. But this boom has come at a steep cost. While these cities have long been centers of innovation and cultural vibrancy, the expansion of tech hubs also brought about the rise of a troubling phenomenon: gentrification. Gentrification is the process by which wealthier individuals move into historically marginalized neighborhoods, displacing long-time residents and altering the area’s character [1]. It has become a defining issue in many of these urban centers. As tech giants like Google, Amazon, and Apple continue to expand, they not only fuel local economies but also contribute to a housing crisis that leaves many long-term residents unable to afford rising rents and home prices. Tech-driven gentrification transforms both the physical landscape and the social fabric of these cities. By examining the tech industry’s impact on housing markets and local communities, combined with the critical need for affordable housing; we better understand the debate surrounding the future of cities like San Francisco, Seattle, and Los Angeles. At the intersection of innovation, urban development, and social equity, the question remains: Can cities grow economically without sacrificing diversity and affordability?

The Rise of the Tech Industry in West Coast Cities

Situated in the southern part of the San Francisco Bay Area, Silicon Valley is perhaps one of the most iconic tech hubs in the world. This region became a hotspot for technology in the early 20th century, with the establishment of companies like Hewlett-Packard (HP) in 1939 and the eventual rise of major firms like Apple, Google, and eBay [2]. These companies, along with venture capital firms, helped Silicon Valley evolve into a global center for tech entrepreneurship and development. Outside of hardware and software companies, the growth of this region is further fueled by its reputation in academia. Its proximity to prestigious, high-tech research universities, such as Stanford University, the California Institute of Technology, and the University of California, Berkeley, has played a key role in attracting talented individuals from across the country and around the world. Over time, the region has seen a steady influx of engineers, entrepreneurs, and researchers, eager to work at the cutting edge of new technologies [3]. As the demand for highly skilled workers grew, so did the number of tech companies. This rapid expansion not only transformed the Bay Area’s economy but also reshaped its housing market. As tech companies such as Facebook, Tesla, and Twitter flourished in the 2000s,  job opportunities and salaries soared, making the region a magnet for young professionals. However, housing construction failed to keep up with the population boom. By the 2010s, home prices and rent in Silicon Valley and San Francisco had skyrocketed, with median home values exceeding $1 million and rents among the highest in the nation. As of January 2025, the median home price was about $1.2 million, and the one-bedroom median rent price was $3,160 [4][5].

While Silicon Valley remains the most dominant technological player on the West Coast, Seattle has emerged as another key tech hub in recent decades. The city’s tech growth can be largely attributed to the success of Microsoft, which established its headquarters in nearby Bellevue, Washington in the 1970s. Microsoft’s success paved the way for Seattle to become a leading city for technology, especially in the fields of software development and artificial intelligence [6]. Another major tech giant entered Seattle in 1994 when Jeff Bezos founded Amazon, marking a significant turning point in the city’s tech sector. The expansion of Amazon in the 2000s quickly turned it into one of the world’s largest and most influential tech companies.The opening of Amazon’s headquarters in Seattle’s South Lake Union neighborhood in 2010 attracted thousands of tech workers and further solidified Seattle’s status as a leading center for technological innovation [7]. The city’s industry has also benefited from a strong ecosystem of startups, venture capital firms, and research institutions, such as the University of Washington. Seattle’s growing reputation as a place for tech talent has made it an attractive destination for professionals in software engineering, cloud computing, and data science, contributing to the city’s expansion as a tech powerhouse.

Los Angeles, long known for its entertainment industry, has also more recently emerged as an important player in the tech world. Over the last decade, the city’s tech sector has expanded rapidly, which has given rise to the “Silicon Beach” phenomenon, a term used to describe the tech community that has developed along the Westside of LA [8]. Unlike Silicon Valley, which is focused primarily on software and hardware development, LA’s tech scene is known for its convergence of tech and media. The city’s connections to the entertainment industry has led to the emergence and influx of numerous tech companies focused on streaming, social media, gaming, and digital content creation. Some of these corporations include, but are not limited to: Hulu, Fandango, Snap Inc. (Snapchat), Activision Blizzard, and Tinder [9]. With its mix of creativity and technology, LA has increasingly become a destination for tech workers seeking to combine innovation with the city’s unique culture. 

The Housing Crisis

As the tech industry has flourished along the West Coast, it has contributed to a deepening housing crisis in technologically advanced cities. The influx of highly-paid tech workers, coupled with the massive demand for housing driven by the growth of tech companies, has led to rapidly rising property values. This has resulted in both the displacement of long-time residents and a shift in neighborhood dynamics. The effects of tech-driven gentrification and rising property values are particularly evident in specific neighborhoods that have historically been home to working-class, immigrant, and minority communities. Below are in-depth case studies from San Francisco, Seattle, and LA, each illustrating the ways in which the housing crisis has affected residents, local businesses, and the cultural fabric of these cities.

The Mission District, historically a cultural and ethnic hub for Latino communities and San Francisco’s oldest neighborhood, has experienced significant gentrification due to the tech boom. Proximity to Silicon Valley has made the area attractive to tech workers seeking urban living, driving up demand and property values. In 2010, the median rent in the Mission District was approximately $2,400 [10]. However, by January 2025, the median rent had soared to around $3,400, a 41 percent increase over the national average [11][12]. Similarly, the median sale price for a home in the neighborhood, which was once as low as $30,000 in the 1970s, has since exploded to over $1 million in 2025 [10][13]. This surge in property values has led to the displacement of long-standing residents and the transformation of local businesses. Rent-controlled units—once an affordable option for many—are being converted into luxury condos. Traditional stores and eateries have been replaced by trendy cafes, high-end boutiques, and luxury restaurants catering to wealthier newcomers [8]. These changes have not only altered the neighborhood’s demographics but have also impacted its cultural fabric, as generations of Latino families are priced out of their homes and communities.

Los Angeles, like many West Coast cities, has felt the profound impact of the tech industry on housing prices, but it is perhaps most visible in a neighborhood like Boyle Heights. Long known as a stronghold of the Chicano and Latino communities, Boyle Heights has faced mounting housing pressures as property values and rents have surged. Between 2000 and 2020, rents in Boyle Heights increased by 97 percent, outpacing the citywide average increase of 61 percent. Although rents remain lower than in other parts of LA, the rapid escalation has made affordability a growing concern, driving demand for market-rate housing. To address these challenges, the Boyle Heights Community Plan outlines a series of policies designed to balance growth with affordability. A key component is the Community Benefits Program, which incentivizes the inclusion of affordable housing through density bonuses, ensuring that new developments contribute to long-term affordability. Additionally, the plan introduces mandatory inclusionary housing policies that require a portion of new residential units to be set aside for low-income residents. By promoting these affordability measures, the city aims to curb displacement while fostering sustainable development that aligns with the neighborhood’s cultural and economic needs. Despite these efforts, tensions remain high between long-time residents and developers, as concerns over gentrification persist and rising property values continue to put pressure on working-class communities. The success of these policies will depend on strong enforcement mechanisms and continued investment in affordable housing initiatives [14].

As the tech industry has flourished in Seattle, particularly with the growth of Amazon’s headquarters in the South Lake Union neighborhood, tech workers have increasingly become the primary demographic capable of affording rising rents. Seattle now ranks as the second-highest-paying city in tech, with an average salary of $99,400. This influx of high-earning tech professionals has driven demand up for housing. For instance, Capitol Hill, known for its vibrant LGBTQ+ community and artistic culture, has been affected by Seattle’s booming tech sector, with its close proximity to Amazon’s headquarters [15]. Once a haven for working-class residents and marginalized groups, Capitol Hill has seen rising rents and property values as tech workers flock to the area. As of February 2025, the average rent in Capitol Hill is approximately $2,484, making it one of the most expensive neighborhoods in Seattle [16]. A one-bedroom apartment averaged about $1,500 per month in March 2015. Today, that same apartment would be roughly $1,900 per month [17][16]. This phenomenon of increasing tech-driven rents has contributed to significant displacement in neighborhoods once known for their cultural and social diversity. Local businesses that catered to the LGBTQ+ community, working-class residents, and artists have also struggled to survive in the face of gentrification, further eroding the neighborhood’s character [15].

Public Policy and Responses to Gentrification

City governments have implemented various housing policies that attempt to slow displacement, promote affordability, and regulate real estate speculation. San Francisco, in particular, has long been at the forefront of tenant-protections, largely due to its history of housing activism and the city’s ongoing struggles for affordability. In response to soaring rents and widespread displacement, tenant-led movements pressured city officials to pass rent control laws, leading to the enforcement of San Francisco’s Rent Control Ordinance in 1979. Enforced by the San Francisco Rent Board, the ordinance applies to rental units in buildings with a certificate of occupancy before June 13, 1979, excluding single-family homes and commercial units [18]. Over 60 percent of the city’s rental units fall under rent control, with annual rent increases capped by the Rent Board, typically up to 7 percent per year. Additionally, landlords must cite “just cause” reasons for evicting a tenant, such as nonpayment, property damage, illegal subletting, or owner move-in. Some evictions may include buyouts, relocation assistance, or future move-in rights for tenants [19]. 

The state of California expanded these protections in 2019 with the passage of the Tenant Protection Act (AB 1482), implementing statewide rent control. The law limits annual rent increases to a maximum of 10 percent or 5 percent plus the cost-of-living adjustment—whichever is lower—over a 12-month period. It also provides eviction protections similar to San Francisco’s ordinance at the state level [20]. In contrast, the state of Washington has no rent control laws, allowing landlords to raise prices without restriction [21]. However, Seattle has sought to strengthen tenant protections through local measures like the Just Cause Eviction Ordinance. Additionally, the city’s Rental Agreement Regulation Ordinance mandates that landlords provide tenants with at least 60 days’ written notice for any housing cost increase of 10 percent or more within a 12-month period [22]. 

Beyond rent control, cities have introduced zoning reforms and affordable housing mandates to mitigate gentrification and expand access to housing. San Francisco’s Inclusionary Affordable Housing Program, established in 2002, requires new residential developments with 10 or more units to contribute to affordable housing through one of two ways: either by paying an affordable housing fee or by including Below Market Rate (BMR) units—housing priced below market rates for eligible low- to moderate-income residents—within the development. Alternatively, developers can provide BMR units at a different location within the city. Eligible applicants must meet income and residency requirements and apply through a lottery system managed via the DAHLIA San Francisco Housing Portal [23]. To prevent displacement, BMR units must be used as primary residences, prohibiting subletting on platforms like Airbnb [24]. However, given the city’s ongoing housing crisis, city Mayor London N. Breed introduced the Housing for All plan in 2023 to remove barriers to housing and speed up city permitting [25]. 

Los Angeles has also pursued affordable housing initiatives, such as Measure JJJ, passed in 2016, which mandates that residential projects with 10 or more units include a percentage of affordable housing or pay in-lieu fees. The measure also ensures fair labor practices by requiring developers to pay prevailing wages and hire local workers. It further led to the creation of the Transit-Oriented Communities Program (TOC) program, which incentivizes development near public transit to promote sustainable growth and increase housing density [26]. Although LA’s housing policies have sought to balance affordability and growth, they have been criticized for increasing construction costs and limiting new development. Measure JJJ, for instance, has been blamed for making housing development more expensive due to its labor requirements. The mandate that developers pay prevailing wages has significantly increased construction costs, making some projects financially unviable. As a result, fewer housing units have been built than initially projected, and some developers have opted to build in less-regulated areas outside of LA [27]. Likewise, the TOC program has had mixed success. Affordable housing-based transit-oriented development (TOD) programs must include sufficient subsidies and incentives to attract developers, as affordable units typically generate less revenue. The success of LA’s TOC program is largely due to its tiered incentive structure, which offers extensive bonuses to developers who commit to higher levels of affordability. However, research highlights a common issue where developers and landlords may avoid affordability requirements, particularly in neighborhoods experiencing rising property values, where market-rate units become more profitable. Despite these challenges, the TOC program has been effective in increasing the number of affordable housing units in certain areas. For instance, the Wilshire plan area has seen approvals for 4,613 units, with 17 percent designated as affordable. Conversely, the South East Los Angeles plan area, while approving only 314 units, boasts a higher percentage of affordable units at 94 percent [28].

Seattle has also attempted to address affordability through zoning and affordability requirements. The city launched the Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) program in 2019, requiring new multifamily and commercial developments in designated urban villages to either include affordable housing units or contribute to a citywide affordable housing fund. The program allows developers to build taller, denser structures in exchange for increasing affordable housing supply [29]. By 2022, the MHA program had resulted in thousands of new affordable units, though its impact varied across neighborhoods, with some areas exceeding expectations while others lagged behind [30]. Despite these gains, critics argue that the MHA program has not kept pace with demand. The affordability contributions required from developers are often seen as too low to make a significant dent in the housing crisis. Moreover, the city’s strict zoning laws still limit density in many areas, preventing larger-scale affordable housing projects. Additionally, while the program has increased housing supply in some neighborhoods, it has not necessarily prevented displacement in historically low-income communities, where development has led to rising rents and demographic shifts [31]. 

Conclusion

The housing crisis in major West Coast cities demonstrates the impact of tech-driven gentrification, where rising property values and rents have displaced long-time residents, altered neighborhood dynamics, and deepened inequality. While policies like rent control, inclusionary zoning, and transit-oriented development incentives have helped curb some of the negative effects, they are not sufficient. To fully address this crisis, policymakers must take a multidimensional approach that balances tenant protections and affordable housing programs; creating lasting affordability and preventing further displacement. The following recommendations outline key strategies that cities should pursue:

1. Strengthening Tenant Protections

Expanding rent control policies can help stabilize housing costs, particularly in high-demand neighborhoods. More cities should enhance just-cause eviction protections to prevent landlords from unfairly displacing tenants. Additionally, programs like the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA), which gives tenants the first right to buy their rental buildings before they are sold to developers, can help preserve affordable housing stock and empower communities. TOPA laws currently exist in Washington D.C., San Francisco, and Minneapolis, and they have been introduced in California (Berkeley, Oakland), New York (New York City), and Massachusetts (Boston, Somerville) [32][33].

2. Increasing Affordable Housing Development

Cities must streamline approval processes for affordable developments by expanding “by-right” zoning, which allows projects that meet affordability criteria to proceed without extensive discretionary review [34]. The Boyle Heights Community Plan offers a valuable model, and implementing similar plans in other at-risk areas can ensure that development benefits existing residents rather than displacing them.

3. Investing in Public and Community-Owned Housing

Relying solely on private developers has not been enough to meet affordability needs. Cities should expand public housing initiatives and support community land trusts (CLTs), which enables non-profit organizations to acquire and manage affordable housing stock [35]. Greater investment in cooperative housing models can provide long-term stability and shield communities from speculative market forces.

4. Reevaluating Zoning and Land Use Regulations

Restrictive zoning policies continue to limit density, preventing the construction of affordable housing at scale. Cities should consider upzoning transit corridors and traditionally single-family zones to allow for higher-density developments. However, these changes must be paired with strong anti-displacement measures—such as affordability requirements and relocation assistance—to prevent upzoning from accelerating gentrification.

By combining these policy strategies, cities can create a more equitable housing landscape. Without decisive action, the housing crisis in tech hubs will only continue to deepen, exacerbating inequality and eroding the cultural identity of historically diverse neighborhoods. Addressing the root causes of gentrification requires a long-term commitment to inclusive development, tenant rights, and proactive urban planning.

---

Special thanks to Dr. Herbert Wang of the Department of Urban Studies for the feedback.

Image via Pexels Free Photos

Works Cited

[1] The Uprooted Project. “Understanding Gentrification and Displacement.” The University of Texas at Austin, 2024. https://sites.utexas.edu/gentrificationproject/understanding-gentrification-and-displacement/. 

[2] Protin, Corey, Matthew Stuart, and Matt Weinberger. “History of Silicon Valley in One Animated Timeline.” Business Insider, December 18, 2020. https://www.businessinsider.com/silicon-valley-history-technology-industry-animated-timeline-video-2017-5. 

[3] Athanasia, Gabrielle. “The Lessons of Silicon Valley: A World-Renowned Technology Hub | Perspectives on Innovation.” Center For Strategic & International Studies, February 10, 2022. https://www.csis.org/blogs/perspectives-innovation/lessons-silicon-valley-world-renowned-technology-hub. 

[4] Zillow. “San Francisco, CA Housing Market: 2025 Home Prices & Trends,” 2025. https://www.zillow.com/home-values/20330/san-francisco-ca/. 

[5] Zumper. “Zumper National Rent Report,” January 28, 2025. https://www.zumper.com/#rent-report. 

[6] Woodward, Hayden. “Seattle’s Technology Industry.” ArcGIS. Esri, June 6, 2023. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/1197ff6b7b6a426c9f01d926fe73d242. 

[7] Rosenblatt, Lauren. “Majority of Seattleites Say Amazon and Tech Make the City a Better Place, Poll Shows.” The Seattle Times, July 5, 2023. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/majority-of-seattleites-say-amazon-tech-make-the-city-a-better-place/. 

[8] Gruet, Magali, and Habeeba Kamel. “Los Angeles’ Silicon Beach Goes back to USC’s Information Sciences Institute.” USC Viterbi | School of Engineering, February 1, 2023. https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2023/02/los-angeless-silicon-beach-goes-back-to-uscs-information-sciences-institute/. 

[9] Wikipedia. “Silicon Beach.” Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., November 14, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Beach. 

[10] Garofoli, Joe, and Carolyn Said. “A Changing Mission – the Story.” San Francisco Chronicle, 2024. https://www.sfchronicle.com/the-mission/a-changing-mission/. 

[11] Zillow. “Average Rental Price in 94110 & Market Trends,” February 15, 2025. https://www.zillow.com/rental-manager/market-trends/94110/. 

[12] Zillow. “Average Rental Price in US & Market Trends,” February 15, 2025. https://www.zillow.com/rental-manager/market-trends/united-states/. 

[13] Zillow. “Mission San Francisco, CA Housing Market: 2025 Home Prices & Trends,” 2025. https://www.zillow.com/home-values/274552/mission-san-francisco-ca/. 

[14] AECOM. “Boyle Heights Community Plan Update Draft Regulations Economic Feasibility Assessment,” 2023. https://planning.lacity.gov/odocument/85831da3-4255-4c08-9b63-a8d8aa078757/Boyle_Heights_CPU_Economic_Study.pdf. 

[15] Romano, Tricia. “Cultures Clash as Gentrification Engulfs Capitol Hill.” The Seattle Times, March 13, 2015. https://www.seattletimes.com/life/lifestyle/culture-clash-on-capitol-hill/. 

[16] Apartments.com. “Average Rent in Seattle, WA – 2025 Rent Prices,” February 17, 2025. https://www.apartments.com/rent-market-trends/seattle-wa/. 

[17] RentHop. “Average Rent in Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA | Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA Rent Costs.” Renthop, 2025. https://www.renthop.com/average-rent-in/capitol-hill-seattle-wa. 

[18] San Francisco Planning. “San Francisco’s Community Stabilization | Rent Stabilization and Eviction Protection,” 2018. https://projects.sfplanning.org/community-stabilization/rent-stabilization-eviction-protection.htm. 

[19] Bungalow. “Rent Control in San Francisco: Everything You Need to Know,” February 1, 2022. https://bungalow.com/articles/rent-control-in-san-francisco-everything-you-need-to-know

[20] Tenant Protection Act, (2019).

[21] Tenants Union. “Statewide Rule Changes & Rent Increases,” 2024. https://tenantsunion.org/rights/rule-changes-rent-increases. 

[22] Solid Ground. “Seattle Laws,” October 19, 2015. https://www.solid-ground.org/get-help/housing/for-tenants/seattle-laws/#just-cause. 

[23] San Francisco Planning. “Inclusionary Affordable Housing Program,” 2018. https://sfplanning.org/project/inclusionary-affordable-housing-program#about. 

[24] SF.gov. “Inclusionary Housing Program,” 2025. https://www.sf.gov/information–inclusionary-housing-program. 

[25] SF.gov. “Mayor Breed Announces next Steps on Housing for All: San Francisco’s Plan to Build More Housing,” April 3, 2024. https://www.sf.gov/news–mayor-breed-announces-next-steps-housing-all-san-franciscos-plan-build-more-housing. 

[26] Zhu, Linna, Evgeny Burinskiy, Jorge De la Roca, Richard K. Green, and Marlon G. Boarnet. “Los Angeles’ Housing Crisis and Local Planning Responses: An Evaluation of Inclusionary Zoning and the Transit-Oriented Communities Plan as Policy Solutions in Los Angeles.” Cityscape 23, no. 1 (2021): 133–60. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26999943. 

[27] Toebben, Gary. “Vote No, No, No on Measure JJJ.” Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce, October 4, 2016. https://lachamber.com/blog/2016/10/04/the-business-perspective/vote-no-no-no-on-measure-jjj/. 

[28] Staal, Dirk. “Analyzing Disparities in Affordable Housing Allocation within the L.A. City Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) Program.” Accessed February 17, 2025. https://www.oxy.edu/sites/default/files/assets/UEP/Comps/2021/staal_dirk_analyzing_disparities_in_affordable_housing_uepseniorcomps2021.pdf. 

[29] Seattle.gov. “Mandatory Housing Affordability – Housing.” , 2021. https://www.seattle.gov/housing/housing-developers/mandatory-housing-affordability. 

[30] “2022 Mandatory Housing Affordability and Incentive Zoning Report Seattle Office of Housing.” Seattle.gov, 2023. https://www.seattle.gov/documents/Departments/Housing/Reports/2022_MHA-IZ-AnnualReport_Final.pdf. 

[31] Puget Sound Sage. “Mandatory Housing Affordability Is Not the Answer We’ve Been Hoping For: Why We Need a Comprehensive Strategy to Stop Displacement alongside MHA.” Pugetsoundsage.org, 2018. https://pugetsoundsage.org/why-we-need-comprehensive-strategy-to-stop-displacement-alongside-mha/. 

[32] Housing Justice for All. “Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Ac.” Housing Justice for All, March 29, 2024. https://housingjusticeforall.org/our-platform/tenant-opportunity-to-purchase-act/. 

[33] Gilgoff, Julie. “Giving Tenants the First Opportunity to Purchase Their Homes.” Shelterforce, July 24, 2020. https://shelterforce.org/2020/07/24/giving-tenants-the-first-opportunity-to-purchase-their-homes/. 

[34] Manning, Paul. “Legalize It – ‘Development by Right’ Unlocks More Homes for Our Neighbors.” Moreneighbors.org, October 29, 2024. https://moreneighbors.org/2024/10/29/legalize-it-development-by-right-unlocks-more-homes-for-our-neighbors/. 

[35] Grounded Solutions. “Community Land Trusts – Grounded Solutions Network.” Grounded Solutions, 2022. https://groundedsolutions.org/strengthening-neighborhoods/community-land-trusts/.