So, rents are supposed to level off by 2010, says an expert in adivising apartment owners and managers. But at what level and will anyone but a Microsoft millionaire be able to afford this leveled off rent?

The story on Page One of this week's paper quotes Mike Scott of Dupre and Scott Apartment Advisors as suggesting the increase in rents and the diminishing apartment vacancies as being at least partly because of the massive conversions of apartment buildings - many older buildings - to condominiums.

Apartment development hit its peak in Seattle in 2001 with about 1,800 new units, then fell to about 500 in 2004. Scott also notes that fewer units are being constructed in the south end of Seattle, while growth in new apartment units will hit 2,900 in the north end and 2,200 downtown. Rents, says Scott, will remain high with many younger people willing to pay higher rents for smaller places so they can live in urban centers.

All of this follows the laws of supply and demand, at least for the higher-earning folks. But we still wonder about those who are making, say from $20,000 to around $50,000 a year, as well as those making far less than $20k.

We first thought John Fox of the Seattle Displacement Coalition was getting carried away with his vociferous denouncement of a plan to give developers tax incentives to build facilities with up to 25 percent of the units for those making $49,000 to $63,300 a year.

But we have come onboard with his opinion that the plan is a "shallow subsidy" that "awards developers who build high-end housing."

Where will be employees continually being sought for our "service economy" jobs - baristas, burger flippers, dishwashers and the like - be able to live? How will they be able to come into the city to work by day (or night) and flee to the suburbs, and will they?

We have a perfect storm approaching and no one in city government has yet fully grasped the problem.

- Jack Mayne