Boston’s population is growing at a faster rate than the City can keep up with.
The housing plan Boston Mayor Martin Walsh hashed out four years ago to combat the city’s increasing population demand called on the City to construct 53,000 new units by 2030, a goal that was already ambitious.
But while the City is on track to meet that target, it turns out Walsh set the target too low — he’s had to increase the number of units to 69,000 and slated that 22 percent be affordable to lower- and middle-income residents.
If this housing project is supposed to combat gentrification, it’s failing from the start. Far more than 22 percent of Boston’s population is in the lower or middle class — in fact, 30 percent of Greater Boston’s population is upper class, leaving 70 percent of the population in the lower or middle class struggling to make ends meet when the rent bill comes every month.
Why are these numbers not proportionately reflected in the types of housing the City builds for these demographics? Creating new housing is meaningless to Boston residents unless controls are in place to ensure that the city’s working class is able to live in it.
The median rental price in Boston costs $2,800, according to The Boston Globe. Considering that a middle-class family in Boston earns between $50,000 and $125,000 annually, this rental price is more than many members of the middle class can reasonably afford. Some families classified as “middle class” would spend over half of their annual salary on rent for a median-priced unit.
There are several questions we must ask about Walsh’s plan. First, how much of the new housing will be swept up by the short-term rental market? Companies like Airbnb are partly responsible for Boston’s housing crisis, detracting from an already very small availability of affordable housing.
And while it sounds good on paper to say that we’re building 69,000 new units to accommodate this multiplying population, will we really have the space? If this many people are moving to Boston, many factors are tangential. The transportation system, the roads, even simply walking down the sidewalk will be affected. Walsh cannot build thousands of new housing units without bolstering our public transit system to take on a new load of passengers.
It’s also a cause for concern that the administration has drastically increased the number of units it expects to build without changing the deadline. With a limited amount of space and a time limit, health measures need to be factored in — especially in building affordable housing units, which are often built closely together in densely-populated areas. Safety cannot be sacrificed for the sake of efficiency.
Walsh tweeted Wednesday that addressing housing costs is essential in ensuring anyone who wants to live in Boston can. “Proud to share our updated plan that increases housing goals to meet the growing population & increase opportunities for all,” he wrote.
“Opportunity” is a selling word for Walsh. He promised in his inaugural address in January that he would “prioritize the fundamentals of middle-class opportunity” in Boston. The ability to live in Boston, first of all, might be a good place to start.
If Walsh wants to really invest in Boston residents, affordable housing is one of the most basic requirements. Moving to a more-affordable city isn’t an option — and shouldn’t have to be — for people whose careers, families and livelihoods are centered around Boston. The members of Boston’s loyal workforce should not have to consider uprooting their lives because they can’t compete with the elite.
