Council Recap: Missing Middle Housing

Part 2 of the April 8, 2024, Richardson City Council meeting. See Part 1 here: "Council Recap: Placetypes".

The City Council received a briefing from consultants on progress on updating the City's Comprehensive Plan. The "Key Policy Areas" presented were placetypes, missing middle housing, and vision for reinvestment areas. Upcoming public engagement opportunities will allow the public to comment on the consultants' recommendations. Here I will report on the City Council's own feedback on missing middle housing and the vision for reinvestment areas, as expressed in the City Council meeting.

---

The consultant defined "missing middle" housing as housing that "sits in the middle of a spectrum between detached single-family home and mid-rise to high-rise apartment buildings." It includes duplexes, fourplexes, Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), bungalow courts, courtyard housing, live-work structures, and townhomes. Such housing is "missing" because it's "typically been excluded in many communities by zoning regulations." I'll accept that definition and explanation for why it's lacking in Richardson. Unless a new Comp Plan is followed by wholesale updates to our City's zoning regulations, change won't happen.

What stood out for me in the consultants' preliminary recommendations is that secondary uses for the "Neighborhood Residential" placetype include ADUs, Bungalow Courts, Courtyard Housing, Duplex, and Townhomes. And for every other placetype (except parks), secondary uses include fourplexes, live-work, and multiplexes. If the consultants stick with this recommendation and the City Council adopts it, Richardson could begin to evolve to a denser, more walkable city. A new Comp Plan could bring "Live, Work, Play" to every part of our City, not just a few planned developments.

Here's what our Councilmembers had to say. Their comments have been slightly edited for clarity and brevity.

Councilmember Dan Barrios: "What's a 2.5 story" structure? The answer was, "Sometimes it might be an attic unit or something like that. In other parts of the country it might be a basement unit."

Councilmember Curtis Dorian: "I'm still a little surprised about the [public feedback] on open spaces...I always find that, no matter usage or development, I like to have some type of green open areas." The consultant clarified that the public feedback wasn't that open space wasn't desired in all placetypes. It was that the public did not want to see housing introduced into our existing parks and open space.

Councilmember Jennifer Justice: No comment.

Councilmember Joe Corcoran: No comment.

Councilmember Ken Hutchenrider: No comment.

Mayor Pro Tem Arefin: No comment.

Mayor Bob Dubey: No comment.

And that was it. The Council moved on. I would like to think that means they are all okay with allowing duplexes and ADUs in all of our "Neighborhood Residential" placetypes, which make up the vast bulk of Richardson's area. And all are okay with allowing fourplexes, live-work, and multiplexes everywhere else. But I don't think it's safe to take Councilmembers' silence as support. I wish Councilmembers would be more proactive about the process. But at least their response wasn't "Are you kidding? Hell no to that." The consultants will come back in June with recommendations they'll take to the public in the next "Public Summits."

---

The Council moved on to the third topic of Comp Plan briefing: "Vision for Reinvestment Areas." Councilmember Dan Barrios wasn't sure the Council had already decided on the areas to be studied. City Manager Don Magner said the Council had already made that determination and "confirmed it on a couple of occasions." (Barrios really should push more for formal votes during information items on the agenda, when hard decisions like this do get made without people necessarily being aware of it.) Barrios lobbied to remove the Bowser/Belt Line study area out of fear that "reinvestment" would mean the elimination of existing affordable housing there. Likewise he is concerned for the housing on the west side of the West Spring Valley study reinvestment area. Don Magner pushed back, arguing that the buildings in those areas are not going to survive another 25-30 years. If we don't study what comes next for these areas, we can't influence the future redevelopment that will inevitably occur. Point to Magner. Keeping aging apartments out of a study area won't protect them. What will protect them is for Barrios (and the other Councilmembers who care) to become proactive in the study process, devising and promoting strategies for reinvestment that don't just tear down old apartments and replace them with new (unaffordable) mid-rise apartments or townhomes. It's a damned hard problem being faced all across America. I will be cheering Barrios if he comes up a plan, not just a goal, to propose to the City Council.

---

"Richardson evolves.
Neighborhoods get redefined.
Council's stance unclear."
—h/t ChatGPT