Beginning with the definition of such:

"Missing Middle” is a term that refers to the range of housing types that fit between single-family detached homes and mid-to-high-rise apartment buildings. Used in this context, “middle” references the size and type of a home, and its relative location – in the middle – on a spectrum of housing types. These housing types are commonly house-scaled buildings, yet with more than one unit. Examples include duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, and others that will be discussed in this report. The cost of these housing types varies based on style, size, location, and market forces. Missing Middle (MM) housing types do not always correlate with a specific income bracket but can be less expensive than other housing options that are larger and take up more land.

It is somewhat inaccurate to equate "missing middle" with middle-class housing (as I have done a few times), but the correlation with median income is not too far off the mark. Understand, much of this study involves "taking the pulse" of existing community members, and you will see a lot of common complaints (traffic, overcrowded schools, loss of green space and canopy). I won't say these are not legitimate complaints, but I will say that many citizens use them as a crutch when they are really concerned about "those people" moving in. Here are the main choices Arlington found to increase the missing middle:

Or even a particularly American problem:

Mumtaz Ahmed looks and sounds overwhelmed. For three weeks, she has been searching for an apartment to rent in the Somali capital, Mogadishu, for her young family of three. The few properties on the market are either too expensive or owners ask for a large deposit upfront.

“I’m looking for two to three-bedroom apartment in this area and it is proving impossible,” the mother-of-one told Al Jazeera as she sat in the waiting area of an estate agency in the Waberi district of the city.

This diary may seem like it's coming out of left field, but the truth is, I was always a center-fielder. See what I did there? I conflated baseball with misleading political rhet...Never mind. If you have to explain the joke, life is simply not worth living. Anyway, when I got deeper into this article, I was struck by the similarities between Mogadishu and Raleigh:

Not in my back yard, build it somewhere else:

“We built our brand-new home here because we worked hard to become residents of New Berlin — not because we got a handout, not because somebody paved the way for us,” one woman said.

One man described seeing an increase in crime when a “lower-income element” moved into his former Milwaukee neighborhood. “You put this low-income housing into this part of the city,” he said, and “I guarantee you this is what you’re inviting into our community.” At least one resident wrote a letter teasing at fears that her city would turn into the North Side of Milwaukee, which is predominantly Black.

I don't care what state you're living in, or if you're urban, suburban, exurban, or even (especially?) rural. Nothing brings out the NIMBY more than new development. I've been on our Town's Planning Board for about six years now. The first three years were non-eventful, we went about 5 months one time with no meetings. But the last three years have been nothing short of brutal. We've had citizens yell at us, glare at us, question our integrity, and throughout there has been a near-constant undercurrent of racism. It is often couched in "property value" arguments, but it is there, nonetheless. And none of our proposed developments received (or even asked for) government subsidies or other enticements:

As usual, Republican temper tantrums hurt the poor first and hardest:

"Funding these contracts is necessary to keep about 150, 000 deeply poor, mostly seniors and people with disabilities safely and affordably housed," said Diane Yentel, President and CEO of the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

Yentel worries that, with President Trump and Congressional Democrats at an impasse over border wall funding, the government will not reopen anytime soon. And that may force property owners to make business decisions that could adversely impact tenants. "Eventually these owners will have to resort to either significant rent hikes or evictions of these lowest-income renters," Yentel said.

Take a closer look at that map. North Carolina is literally blanketed with already expired or soon to be expired HUD contracts. Each dot represents dozens if not hundreds of folks who may be forced out of their homes because the Republican Party can't or won't keep their spoiled rich brat under control. More details:

But their definition of "'low-income" seems to be evolving:

Charlotte plans to use the 2.31 acres to build the low-income apartments on its own, or with a nonprofit company. But the new plan calls for all of the 80 apartments to be for people earning 80 percent of the area median income. That's about $43,000 for a family of four.

But the switch from very low-income housing to so-called workforce housing raises questions about whether the apartments are needed. Two consultants have told the city that Charlotte has a surplus of housing for people earning about 80 percent of area median income, and the city's biggest need is for apartments serving the city's poorest residents, who earn minimum wage or less.

Don't know all the ins and outs of this deal, but in the initial purchase (by the City) and sale back to the private sector, $4 million in taxpayer dollars was lost. And considering the City Council just had dozens of genuinely poor citizens drum up the courage to walk into the chamber and ask (desperately) for help with affordable housing, this decision seems to be about as tone-deaf as you could get. About the only citizen who appears to be "winning" in this deal-making is the developer himself: