Question: What do you think about the ruling against Missing Middle?
Answer: It’s a joke amongst Realtors that if you want to do some business, go on vacation, and your phone will start ringing. I guess the same goes for me getting the Breaking News that Missing Middle/EHO has been overturned by Judge Shell as I head out of town.
So instead of my planned article comparing our local/regional housing market to the rest of the country, I’m going to share my first thoughts on Missing Middle getting thrown out while I wait for my flight.
Good Riddance Missing Middle (v1.0)
I support the idea of bringing actual Missing Middle housing to Arlington by creating broader, more flexible zoning policy so the market can supply the type of housing we lack and the type of housing that’s in demand (3-4BR homes with ~1,500-3,000 SqFt and some yard space), but I did not support the version of Missing Middle/EHO in the recently overturned policy.
Speaking purely from a housing market perspective (leaving aside my person concerns as an Arlingtonian), I had two main issues with it:
- It didn’t allow for the construction of the type/size of homes that I think are most in demand and missing from Arlington. It also didn’t properly incentivize construction of the type/size of homes allowed in the v1.0 policy that were closest to what was most in demand and missing from the Arlington market (duplex and three townhouse developments).
- The policy did not properly incentivize the type/size of housing that most aligned to demand and missing supply so naturally, builders were incentivized for more density (4-6 unit multi-family units) and the result was the majority of units applied for/approved under Missing Middle were of the size and type that we currently have the most supply of…1-2BR condos and apartments, which I wrote in Nov 2023 meant that Missing Middle was not achieving its goals (and a failed policy)
We got v1.0 wrong. I say v1.0 (my label, not the County’s) because I have no doubt our community and County Board will continue to work on v2.0 of Missing Middle/EHO to develop a more thoughtful policy.
How We Can Get v2.0 Right
There are tons of people more qualified to offer opinions on how to do Missing Middle right, but I’ll offer some here:
- Start with Honesty: Be honest about what we’re trying to achieve. Is it making Arlington housing more affordable? Then let’s talk housing affordability and Affordable Housing, not Missing Middle. Is it about making North Arlington schools and neighborhoods more socioeconomically diverse? Then let’s have that conversation, not Missing Middle. But if the goal is allowing the market to build housing that’s lacking in supply and high in demand, then let’s discuss a better implementation of Missing Middle housing.
- Build Actual Missing Middle: The v1.0 policy brought us too much of what we already had in high supply and not enough of what was actually missing from our market. Set a clear intention to bring certain types/sizes of housing to the market where there are currently gaps and work backwards to build a policy for the intended outcome.
- Engage the Builder Community: I can’t recall where I read it, but one of the most shocking things I learned was that the County was intentional about not giving the builder community (and those in similar fields, like local architects/engineers) a seat at the table in planning because they didn’t want to give the impression they were doing this to line builders’ pockets (though plenty accused the County of it anyway). The County must understand how their policy will be implemented by builders and work together with them to create policy that properly incentivizes the market to build the desired product.
- Vary Zoning Policy by Location: Allow for higher density and smaller units (multi-family) primarily along high-traffic corridors like Glebe, George Mason, Carlin Springs, etc where redevelopment of old, obsolete housing is slower under the current single-family zoning. Strongly consider allowing/encouraging assemblages of adjacent lots along these corridors to promote a broader range of development (townhouses/duplex). Taper/adjust the zoning code to keep multi-family development where it makes sense (in Metro/walkable/commuter corridors) and do not allow multi-family style development inside neighborhoods.
- Increase Parking Requirements: The v1.0 policy required just .5 or 1 parking space per unit and was going to result in a problematic number of cars being parked on neighborhood streets; many of those streets were already near or at capacity for parked cars. Create policy that is realistic about the numbers of cars that people will have in new Missing Middle housing and make sure there’s space for most/all on-site.
This is far from an exhaustive list of priorities to consider in the next iteration of Missing Middle/EHO and doesn’t include significant ones like infrastructure and environmental concerns.
My Big Question Is…
…What happens to the Missing Middle that has been approved or is under construction? There is no longer a zoning policy in place to for the County to issue a Certificate of Occupancy under and even if the County says they will honor approved permits, I imagine the neighbors will file suit and either prevent altogether or endlessly tie up the completion of a project in court. Get your popcorn ready…
If you’d like to discuss buying, selling, investing, or renting, don’t hesitate to reach out to me at [email protected].
