Raleigh’s new rules miss the point of ‘missing middle housing’

Rapid growth is making Raleigh’s affordable housing crisis even worse. In response, the City Council recently adopted new rules to allow “missing middle housing” within existing single-family neighborhoods.

When done right, missing middle housing types are infill units such as duplexes and the like, that, by virtue of their smaller unit size and shared walls, are more affordable in price and compatible in size with their neighbors. Unfortunately, Raleigh’s new rules make almost every mistake that experts say missing middle housing rules must avoid.

Daniel Parolek is the housing expert who defined missing middle housing concepts 20 years ago and literally wrote the book on the subject. When done right, he says it is a way to add neighborhood infill dwellings that are smaller, more affordable and that fit in with their neighbors. When done wrong, by simply allowing more density, he says the market will respond by building units that are instead larger, more expensive and more tightly packed.

Parolek has become so concerned about the misuse of his housing ideas that he recently led a national webinar entitled ‘The Top 5 Missing Middle Housing Mistakes’.

To illustrate his concern, Parolek showed several ugly multi-unit infill projects from the 1970’s, saying “We delivered a lot of bad results that are still eyesores … and now [with escalating growth pressures], new upzonings could produce even worse results”.

By failing to require housing affordability and neighborhood compatibility, Raleigh’s new rules promote the very abuses Parolek warns against. He illustrates what these abuses looks like in recent news accounts of large, expensive and tightly packed units that are generating outrage in Denver, Austin and other rapidly growing cities. Parolek’s rule #1: “[Don’t allow] multiple, full-sized single family units on one lot … this is what builders will default to if allowed”.

Parolek’s recent book, “Missing Middle Housing,” provides real world examples from cities like Portland, Ore., showing how to develop missing middle infill housing that is affordable, compatible and profitable. His Top 5 Mistakes analysis makes an equally strong case: Without effective rules to ensure neighborhood infill is affordable and compatible, the market will use added densities to increase profits by squeezing more big, expensive units onto upzoned and clearcut infill lots. Those mistakes are already cropping up in Raleigh neighborhoods.

If we fail to heed Parolek’s warning of ‘even worse results to come’, Raleigh’s new infill rules will simply lead us further down the well-worn path that shuns housing affordability and neighborhood compatibility in favor of greater development profits.

This story was originally published August 23, 2021 at 3:00 AM.