Why?

Creating housing for families is very important, and it is a great shame that many places in the Bay Area do not have enough housing suitable for families. But the number of nonfamily and one-person households is very sizeable and should not be dismissed as an irrelevant fringe demographic, as is often done.

As these statistics show, more than one in every five housing units in the United States as well as in California (and almost two in five in the Bay Area) are occupied by individuals living without relatives, and most of them live alone. Hence, it should not be seen as unreasonable for a locality to accommodate potential development of housing marketed toward small, childless households. The common statement that urban apartments and stacked condos will only appeal to singles and empty-nesters might often be true, but it does not imply per se that the market is tiny enough to relegate these housing types only to "adult Disneylands" like downtowns and novel mixed-use developments.

August 18: "Households of Singles Go to First in U.S." says the Los Angeles Times (Hartford Courant printing of story linked by Planetizen):

The [Census Bureau] report, based on new calculations of the 2000 and 1990 tallies, found that solo households grew by 21% over the decade, while the next-largest category, married couples without children, grew by 11%. As a result, married or unmarried couples with children make up 31.3% of all homes. Individuals make up 31.6%. [Emphasis added.]

Michael Patrick 10:35 Pacific | #post |