New Version: Draft Metro Rental Housing Sub Area Growth vs. Growth in Cost Burdened Renters.

Ever work on a project that seems destined to be your version of Moby Dick?

Well...it sure feels like that with my work on the table I have previously posted showing Metro's projected growth in households vs the growth in cost burdened households (from their Urban Growth Report/Plan).

In my most recent "corrected" post I said that the numbers represented ALL households, not just rental households. But, "Au contraire, the big white one", it turns out that numbers ARE indeed ONLY renter households. (I confirmed this with Metro).

SO for what is the third and HOPEFULLY last time I have:

1. Deleted my earlier post and posted a revised table, with corrected labels, HERE.
2. Continued to sort the table by low growth disparity in growth of cost burdened renters vs growth in all renters. (that's column 13, highlighted with a red border).
3. I added conditional formatting in each % column so that any % that is higher than the regional average shows up in yellow.

I am hoping to get exact counts of renter households by sub area from Metro so that I can remove the DRAFT label from this table. Right now I calculated renter households by sub area using the rounded %'s that were in a Metro table.

Originally created and posted on the Oregon Housing Blog.