Across the country—and particularly in Colorado—housing affordability has become a critical issue. It is one that continues to worsen at an accelerating pace. Much of the housing currently being developed does not align with market demand. Housing affordability today does not align with opportunities for ownership and equity-building, which have long been central to the “American Dream.”
At Urban Landscapes, we are focused on identifying solutions and tools to address this challenge. One important tool in that toolkit is integrating and encouraging “Missing Middle” housing. In early February 2025, we convened a group of small developers, architects, designers, and others engaged in the development industry. We sought out to identify barriers and brainstorm solutions for increasing Missing Middle housing options. Since then, the group has continued working with the City of Colorado Springs to determine what approaches make sense to move forward. We have made progress but are still working toward a solution—or at least a clearer path to addressing the issue.
As the term “Missing Middle” has become more mainstream, the term has become diluted. I want to offer my own definition.
The Missing Middle refers to housing that can be developed on relatively small parcels of land—often less than one acre. It can include single-family homes on small lots, tiny homes, duplexes, townhomes, stacked flats, apartments, and condominiums. These developments may include a mixed-use component integrated with residential uses, or they may stand alone. They can consist of a single housing type or a mix of types. While they are often more affordable by nature, affordability is not a defining requirement.
In my definition, a Missing Middle development does not exceed one acre. Smaller developments maintain a fine-grained mix of residential typologies for neighborhoods.
As a firm engaged in multiple Missing Middle projects, we see firsthand the hurdles and imbalances that often disincentivize this type of development. Most municipal development codes are structured primarily to prevent negative impacts on the built environment. This is contrary to the ideal, where codes would instead be designed to actively encourage the outcomes cities want to see.
To address this issue, it’s important to first understand the concerns often raised about development—particularly multi-family housing. Common objections include traffic, noise, crime, and occasionally impacts on property values. These concerns are often rooted in prior experiences and perceptions from citizens. My conclusion is that many of these perceived negatives stem from a high concentration of a single use, density, or intensity within a limited area.
Many zoning practices still in place today were developed using a coarse-grained approach—like a quilt made of large patches. The result is a homogeneous land-use pattern that encourages monotony and discourages diversity.
This coarse-grained approach represents one of the most significant shortcomings of 20th-century planning. Before post–World War II planning practices, cities functioned more like a finely woven blanket rather than a quilt of oversized patches. This integration of land uses distributed density and intensity of uses, instead of concentrating it.
Mixing housing types, sizes, and densities created more interesting, vibrant places. Integrating residential uses with ground-floor coffee shops, small grocers, and local services reduced the need to drive. This results in less traffic and one of the ideals of the American Dream – Independence.
Encouraging Missing Middle development is a critically important goal. It not only helps create more engaging and livable places, but it also disperses traffic, parking, noise, and other impacts that are often cited when residents oppose multi-family development. In doing so, it offers a more balanced, human-scaled approach to meeting our housing needs.
We’ll keep working toward a solution at Urban Landscapes and encourage you to do the same. If you see an opportunity, please reach out. The livability of our City will always remain paramount in the goals of Urban Landscapes.
Happy New Year!
-John Olson