The Shifting Dreams of Homeownership

For decades, the American Dream has been tightly woven with the idea of homeownership. A house with a yard, maybe a picket fence, and enough space to grow a family—that was the ideal for generations of Americans. But in today’s housing conversation affordability dominates, and the proposed solution is often "missing middle" housing: Duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, and small-scale apartment buildings. The assumption is that if we build more of these housing types, we’ll solve the affordability crisis.

But what if the real issue isn’t just affordability? What if the reason "missing middle" housing hasn’t taken off is because people don’t want it?

What People Want vs. What’s Being Built

When cities and developers talk about missing middle housing, they frame it as a way to create affordability without relying on high-rise apartments or massive suburban sprawl. That sounds great in theory, but the reality is that for most Americans – particularly families – the aspiration remains the same: A detached, single-family home.

A 2023 Pew Research study found that 57% of Americans prefer a community with larger homes, even if that means being farther from amenities. Only 42% preferred smaller homes in walkable areas. That statistic alone should make us question whether increasing density is truly the answer to the housing crunch.

It’s not that people don’t recognize the affordability problem. In fact, nearly 40% of Americans report feeling "stuck" in their current housing situation due to high costs. But when given the choice between a more affordable townhome and stretching their budget for a single-family house, many will still choose the latter. People are willing to make sacrifices – longer commutes and higher mortgage payments – if it means they get the home they truly want.

Generational Housing Expectations: What’s Changed?

Housing expectations have shifted dramatically over time, but they haven’t necessarily moved toward density.

After World War II the GI Bill and federal housing policies made homeownership more accessible, fueling the suburban boom. The 1950s and 60s cemented the image of the suburban single-family home as the ultimate goal. Even as cities experienced urban renewal efforts, suburban expansion remained dominant.

In the 1980s and 90s, McMansion culture took over, and Americans demanded even more space. Home sizes ballooned, and the idea of communal or multi-family living faded further from the mainstream. Despite affordability concerns, many Millennials and Gen Z buyers still aspire to single-family homes. The "return to the city" movement that gained traction in the 2010s, particularly among younger adults, largely fizzled out as soon as those same people hit their 30s, got married, and had kids.

Why? Because while dense, walkable neighborhoods may be appealing in your 20s, the priorities shift as people start families. Schools, safety, space, and stability become more important. The missing middle is often positioned as a compromise between single-family homes and large apartment complexes, but it rarely aligns with what families seek.

Is Remote Work Reinforcing the Dream of Space?

The pandemic changed the way we think about home. Suddenly, space wasn’t just about comfort – it was about necessity. With remote work becoming a long-term reality for many, people started prioritizing home offices, outdoor areas, and space away from crowded urban cores.

Instead of driving demand for more urban housing, remote work has done the opposite: It’s reinforced the suburban and even rural homeownership ideal. The ability to work from anywhere has led many to leave high-cost urban areas in search of more affordable homes—often in sprawling suburbs or even small towns where single-family homes remain the norm.

This shift complicates the argument that missing middle housing is the key to solving affordability. If demand is shifting toward more space, rather than less, then increasing townhome and duplex construction won’t necessarily meet consumer preferences.

The Problem of Supply vs. Demand

A major argument for missing middle housing is that we simply don’t have enough of it. Zoning laws in many cities have historically favored single-family homes, making it difficult to build duplexes or triplexes. The assumption is that if we remove these zoning barriers, people will flock to denser housing options.

This assumes the reason missing middle housing isn’t prevalent is purely regulatory. Even where these housing types are allowed, developers often find that they’re not financially viable. Land and construction costs are high, and since demand for single-family homes remains strong, developers often opt to build what sells: More single-family detached houses.

Even when missing middle housing is built, it doesn’t always end up being affordable. Look at newly constructed townhomes in many cities—they often come with hefty price tags, competing with – rather than undercutting – single-family home prices. Affordability isn’t just about building more units; it’s about what kinds of units people actually want to buy or rent.

What’s the Real Solution?

If missing middle housing isn’t the magic answer to affordability, what is? If density is to be a viable solution, it needs to be designed in a way that aligns with consumer preferences. That could mean:

• Focusing on family-friendly density, such as well-designed row homes or small-lot single-family homes rather than just condos and apartments.

• Ensuring missing middle housing is built in desirable locations – not just as a fallback option for people priced out of their preferred housing.

• Providing incentives for homeownership within these developments, rather than just rental units.

Conclusion: It’s About More Than Affordability

At the heart of the missing middle debate is a fundamental disconnect: Housing policy discussions focus on what’s financially feasible and urbanistically efficient, while most people’s housing preferences remain deeply tied to the traditional American Dream of homeownership and space.

Affordability is a crisis, but simply building more dense housing won’t fix it if that housing doesn’t align with what people want. Instead of just pushing missing middle solutions, we need to ask a deeper question: How do we make the homes that people aspire to own more attainable? Until we answer that, the gap between affordability efforts and consumer desires will persist.