For what it's worth, specific to what I've seen in Seattle, the vast majority of the higher density apartment buildings being constructed in Seattle today are replacing single family homes, parking lots, and quite often single floor commercial development with mixed-use.
I hear this "there's too much construction, they're building luxury apartments for AMZN/MSFT workers and pushing out the artists and baristas" argument all the time on Capitol Hill, but I've sat down and looked at the many dozens of buildings that have been build in the last couple years and the ones currently under construction, and only once was a cheap building torn down for construction of a luxury building. The specific location is the NW corner of E Pine and Bellevue, and the former building was abandoned after a fire.
Along Broadway E, several blocks of commercial real estate have been replaced with equivalent commercial square footage plus 5-6 stories of apartments on top. No units lost, only gained. In Denny Triangle, Amazon is ripping out a car dealership and some parking lots to build three blocks out with 500ft tall office towers, and apartment and condo towers are popping up in the area surrounding that already.
The story is similar in Lower Queen Anne and South Lake Union. Generally, no units are being lost to new construction, and neighborhoods are getting more dense and more walkable, all of which benefits people who don't want to depend on cars.
One of the most exciting housing developments in the city right now is the Apodment craze. These small dormitory-style apartments are built in very walkable areas of the city, and priced so that students, artists, and baristas can afford to live in them. They're generally built without any parking at all, which helps keep costs down. They exploit a loophole in the building code to allow this high density, and the typical NIMBY characters are quite upset. Funny, the same people who complain about luxury apartments putting bland software developers in their neighborhood abhor the thought of housing that the artists can actually afford being built.
I hear this "there's too much construction, they're building luxury apartments for AMZN/MSFT workers and pushing out the artists and baristas" argument all the time on Capitol Hill, but I've sat down and looked at the many dozens of buildings that have been build in the last couple years and the ones currently under construction, and only once was a cheap building torn down for construction of a luxury building. The specific location is the NW corner of E Pine and Bellevue, and the former building was abandoned after a fire.
Along Broadway E, several blocks of commercial real estate have been replaced with equivalent commercial square footage plus 5-6 stories of apartments on top. No units lost, only gained. In Denny Triangle, Amazon is ripping out a car dealership and some parking lots to build three blocks out with 500ft tall office towers, and apartment and condo towers are popping up in the area surrounding that already.
The story is similar in Lower Queen Anne and South Lake Union. Generally, no units are being lost to new construction, and neighborhoods are getting more dense and more walkable, all of which benefits people who don't want to depend on cars.
One of the most exciting housing developments in the city right now is the Apodment craze. These small dormitory-style apartments are built in very walkable areas of the city, and priced so that students, artists, and baristas can afford to live in them. They're generally built without any parking at all, which helps keep costs down. They exploit a loophole in the building code to allow this high density, and the typical NIMBY characters are quite upset. Funny, the same people who complain about luxury apartments putting bland software developers in their neighborhood abhor the thought of housing that the artists can actually afford being built.