06-25-2018, 08:46 PM
(06-25-2018, 09:28 AM)Markster Wrote: This is what people mean when they complain about gentrification. And it really is a shining example the double-edged sword.
Those 53 units were clearly in disrepair, and not a healthy place to live in, but the 103 units that replaced them are now too small for families, and likely cost almost the same in rent.
So … how big were the units before, and how big are they now? How many people lived in each one? Do we actually know that the rent per square foot is doubled?
Charlie West two-bedroom units are 700-800 sq ft, and arguably a two-bedroom unit should be big enough for at least a three-person family, possibly even a four-person one. (In other countries it certainly is, and I shared a bedroom with my brother until I was 15, and didn't complain about it, either.) And for those people, there are now twice as many units available, and some of them will likely be subsidized, so this should be a win for them. (This assumes no value judgement about smaller but nicer units.)
14.3% of households consist of four people and 8.3% consist of five people or more (three-person households are 15.6%). That's 22.6% that potentially cannot live in Woodside. But those families are also more likely to want a dwelling with a yard than a single person or a childless couple would be, so I would argue that they would likely only make up 10-15% of potential apartment-dwellers. For them, it's a loss, but I really don't see the evidence at this point that this is a huge loss for affordable housing.