The opening of Safford Commons in Woodstock earlier this week has been widely and deservedly celebrated. This 28-unit development was about a decade in the making – a decade marked by legal battles and neighborhood opposition. You can get some of that history from a Valley News story on the ground breaking a year ago, and a you can get an thumbnail idea of where things stand now from accounts on Vermont Digger and on VPR, source of this photo:

Let’s throw a little context around this. Woodstock is an employment center, with more than 2,100 jobs in more than 270 establishments last year, according to the Vermont Department of Labor. By that measure alone, Woodstock would seem to be a prime candidate for workforce housing – that is, housing that working people can afford to live in.

Woodstock is also a relatively wealthy town, with an estimated median income of about $99,600, compared to Vermont’s average of $68,100, according to Vermont Housing Data. A smaller share of its total housing units are rented (23.5 percent) than Vermont’s average (25.9 percent), and those residents who do rent in Woodstock tend to be slightly better off than their average Vermont counterparts. Just 29 percent of Woodstock’s renters are housing-cost “burdened” (that is, they pay 30 percent of their income on housing), compared to Vermont’s average of 52 percent; and just 14 percent are “severely burdened” (they pay 50 percent or more), compared to Vermont’s average of 26 percent.

All of which suggests that many of the lower-wage employees who work in Woodstock don’t live there and have to commute from some place else.

Until Safford Commons opened, however, Woodstock had only two subsidized housing complexes (Melishwood I & II), with a total of 26 units (11 of them for elderly residents). The addition of a third affordable rental complex in Woodstock is not only welcome, it’s overdue. Here’s hoping it won’t be the last.