It’s time to support middle housing
Over the past six months I have had the privilege of working with peers from across the country on a top issues research council organized by the International Downtown Association addressing the topic of missing middle housing. The Council, consisting of economic development and housing experts from New York, California, Ohio, Tennessee, and Washington, D.C., was created to understand why middle housing is so elusive across the country and how downtown programs could help facilitate its growth and expansion.
Even agreeing upon a definition of middle housing proved to be a challenge. Our shared definition refers to smaller housing projects (up to 12 units) that fit the scale and scope of their neighborhood and are priced within the reach of working families and individuals…. typically, 80% to 120% AMI (area median income).
The interior of a housing unit that is priced for middle income occupancy in Ithaca, NY.
In Ithaca, as well in many other places in the United States, communities struggle to build significant numbers of middle housing units. Why? What is holding this segment of the market back? The IDA Council identified such deterrents as:
Zoning policies that prioritize single family housing over the various middle housing options available (accessory dwelling units, duplexes, tri-and quad-plex’s, townhouses, cottage clusters, and so on)
Parking requirements in zoning codes that complicate the creation of small format housing.
NIMBY attitudes held by many neighborhoods adjacent to downtowns.
The lack of financial tools for assisting such projects.
For many communities, the cost of downtown development precludes the easy introduction of middle housing. The smaller number of units can make this type of housing too cost prohibitive for downtown sites. However, considerable activity seems to be occurring in neighborhoods near or adjacent to downtowns. These lower cost, lower density areas can provide the landscape for middle housing, but typically only with some degree of public subsidy or support.
In the City of Portland, Oregon, the community succeeded in changing their zoning to accommodate middle housing options. But, according to Sightline, a Portland based housing organization championing middle housing, most middle housing options in Portland are financially infeasible without some form of public assistance (not included in their revised zoning package).
I am reminded that here in Tompkins County we suffer from the same lack of public incentives to create middle housing as most of the rest of the country. In Downtown Ithaca we have long prioritized supporting urban housing of all types through our local CIITAP tax incentive program. This program has been extremely successful in making sure privately developed housing units are strategically sited in the urban core, where we want them to take advantage of the infrastructure and resources that the community has already built. But the reality is that this new housing (over 1,000 new units) is typically either higher end or affordable in pricing. The middle market is simply missing, just as it is across the entire city and county.
Ithaca and Tompkins County, like many other communities in New York and across the country, need to invest in middle market housing. This missing rung of the housing ladder makes it challenging for residents to move up in their housing choices. It stymies middle-income families and workers from living in our community, forcing them further out of the city, contrary to our longstanding urban housing policies. There are some funding options for affordable, low-income housing from the State and Federal governments. But there are no incentives for developers or investors seeking to build to address middle market housing shortage.
A housing project in Tampa, Florida.
Until we elevate middle housing types and middle market housing as community priorities, we will continue to struggle to support and retain many of our critical middle market residents. It is time to consider a community policy to support middle market housing, just as we have committed to support green central urban housing.
What could community leaders do to boost the supply of middle housing and provide financial support? Here are just a few ideas:
The city and other jurisdictions could pre-approve template middle housing plans, making it faster, easier, and less expensive for investors and developers to tackle projects. This approach was done in South Bend, IN.
Middle housing projects could be fast tracked through the permitting process, saving investors and developers money and time. This has been done in multiple cities, such as San Diego.
A stepped, tiered tax abatement program (parallel to the existing Ithaca CIITAP program) could be created to reward individuals and developers who invest in middle housing projects.
Jurisdictions could create loan programs to provide subsidy support for units that fit within the definition of middle market housing.
For too long we have watched new and existing residents seeking more affordable housing options move further and further away from our community core. It is time to start a community conversation about middle housing.
