Those condos are likely to be reserved as Below Market Rate housing stock for households making somewhere around the area median income (who, honestly, still can't afford them). You get the same incentive structure that the medicaid gap created.

It's very frustrating to be /in/ the gap. Bay Area homeowners act like the apocalypse is coming if increased supply means poors who /only/ make 100k are allowed to buy next to them. The horror. The humanity.

Nope, Greater Seattle Area.

Still, we are a couple nearing our 40s, it seems insane to me that we need to "settle down" for a 1 bedroom flat while making ~3x the median local income.

There are a few areas where housing values are massively higher than the rest of the country. You are in one of them.

Have you looked at how many people need to commute there to work because they can’t afford to live there

Oh I agree! But better to avoid renting in general imo, if it’s a possibility.

Not correct. In most HCOL cities in the US, you can rent space for less than the equivalent cost to own.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/23/realestate/owning-renting...

Before Covid, there's sections of my city where you could either A) put 500K down + have 1M in outstanding mortgage (whatever that payment was) + 1600/month taxes + 1600/month condo fees or B) Rent a place in the same building for $4K/Month for similar sized apartment

It might be good investment when you sell it in a few years. But lets leave the specifics...

To live (with long term attachment and commitment) at a place, people want something that is decent and new-ish and much bigger than a 1B condo. Especially given how laborious and costly the buying and selling process.