Missing Middle Housing

The Missing Middle Housing Study seeks to support the availability of more kinds of housing types in Bloomington through the development of housing that is diverse in form and scale beyond what is currently offered on the market. Missing Middle Housing types are those compatible in form and scale with a single unit, detached home and include duplexes, triplexes, small multiplexes, townhouses and cottage courts. Missing Middle Housing types are important in a community like Bloomington as they offer solutions to meet the needs of all ages of residents and can better accommodate multigenerational living opportunities. Missing Middle Housing types may also reduce the cost of transportation when placed at areas that are accessible to pedestrian and transit networks and support for local businesses by enabling more customers to live in closer proximity to commerce. The Missing Middle Housing Study aims to understand the current barriers as they exist in Bloomington and inform future policies with inclusive community engagement strategies and evidence-based practices.

Promise to the Public: Staff is reaching out to the public to share information about Missing Middle Housing and collect feedback on experience, perspectives, and other information regarding the development of Missing Middle Housing broadly and in Bloomington. Staff will share project updates on this site, including information about key themes and learnings from the public, and how public input impacted the decisions.

2025 Update: Bloomington continues to have low vacancy rates for both renter and owner-occupied housing. The City also has an increasingly aging population and smaller average household size. This creates an opportunity to prioritize housing types that are for people at different stages of life and with different needs. Staff has conducted numerous public engagements over the past few years to inform the project. Summary reports are available on this Let’s Talk webpage (Public Engagement Summary).

This study is moving forward through two phases of City Code amendments. Phase I relates to amending existing standards related to accessory dwelling units (ADUs), duplexes and townhouses, which are already allowed in the City. These amendments are meant to make standards more flexible to continue production of these housing types. Phase I amendments will be presented at a public hearing to the Planning Commission on April 10th, 2025 and to the City Council on May 5th, 2025.

Phase II relates to creating new uses and standards for Missing Middle Housing types to expand housing production in the City. These amendments would add regulations for triplexes, fourplexes, multiplexes, and cottage courts in areas of the City guided for more housing. Phase II amendments are anticipated to be presented at public hearings in late summer 2025.

These proposed amendments were recently presented to the HRA Board, Planning Commission and City Council. You can see a summary of the proposed amendments on this Let’s Talk webpage (Staff Report from Council Study Session 121624).

Ask a question

Have a question about Missing Middle Housing in Bloomington? Submit your questions here. Staff will respond by posting the question and answer on this site.

Share Could the City look into something like a homestead tax savings to better promote individual homeownership instead of landlord-purchased housing? on Facebook Share Could the City look into something like a homestead tax savings to better promote individual homeownership instead of landlord-purchased housing? on Twitter Share Could the City look into something like a homestead tax savings to better promote individual homeownership instead of landlord-purchased housing? on Linkedin Email Could the City look into something like a homestead tax savings to better promote individual homeownership instead of landlord-purchased housing? link

Could the City look into something like a homestead tax savings to better promote individual homeownership instead of landlord-purchased housing?

Blooming Ton Minnie Sota asked over 1 year ago

Property classification for homestead or rental is a state classification. The homestead market value exclusion is determined by the legislature along with class rates. So unfortunately, the city has no control over the difference in taxes paid by an owner-occupied home and a rental home. Rates are also significantly different between owner-occupied and rental properties with owner-occupied rates lower than rental property rates. More specific information about rates and classification are below.
There is a difference in the class rate – a homestead property is class 1a and receive a 1.0% class rate for the first $500,000 in value, then a 1.25% class rate for everything over that threshold. A rental property is class 4b(1) and receives a 1.25% class rate with no lower rate for the first $500,000 in value.
Additionally, the homestead market value exclusion can exclude a maximum of $38,000 in value. This exclusion scales down as the value of a property increases towards $517,200 and disappears once the value surpasses that mark. This was increased in last year’s tax bill from a max $30,400 exclusion and top end threshold of $413,800.
So, there is already a sizeable difference in taxes paid between a homestead property and a rental property.
Share This is such an important topic! I wish the city would allow apartment buildings intermixed in purely residential areas, and not only on busier main streets like Lyndale or Nicollet, for example. Why can't a small apartment or condo with 4 or 8 units be built between two single-family homes? There is no reason other than its never been allowed, but that hardly is a reason not to allow it now. Minneapolis and St. Paul both do, and many of the apartment buildings hardly seem like apartments. We have to move away from the idea that apartments must be separate and that they must be near public transport (that should be a priority for all neighborhoods, but that is a different topic!). And then another thing to change is ordinances about lot size, set-back and minimum house size. If I have a large lot that can fit two smaller homes, I should be allowed to build two smaller homes and rent one or sell it. Why not? on Facebook Share This is such an important topic! I wish the city would allow apartment buildings intermixed in purely residential areas, and not only on busier main streets like Lyndale or Nicollet, for example. Why can't a small apartment or condo with 4 or 8 units be built between two single-family homes? There is no reason other than its never been allowed, but that hardly is a reason not to allow it now. Minneapolis and St. Paul both do, and many of the apartment buildings hardly seem like apartments. We have to move away from the idea that apartments must be separate and that they must be near public transport (that should be a priority for all neighborhoods, but that is a different topic!). And then another thing to change is ordinances about lot size, set-back and minimum house size. If I have a large lot that can fit two smaller homes, I should be allowed to build two smaller homes and rent one or sell it. Why not? on Twitter Share This is such an important topic! I wish the city would allow apartment buildings intermixed in purely residential areas, and not only on busier main streets like Lyndale or Nicollet, for example. Why can't a small apartment or condo with 4 or 8 units be built between two single-family homes? There is no reason other than its never been allowed, but that hardly is a reason not to allow it now. Minneapolis and St. Paul both do, and many of the apartment buildings hardly seem like apartments. We have to move away from the idea that apartments must be separate and that they must be near public transport (that should be a priority for all neighborhoods, but that is a different topic!). And then another thing to change is ordinances about lot size, set-back and minimum house size. If I have a large lot that can fit two smaller homes, I should be allowed to build two smaller homes and rent one or sell it. Why not? on Linkedin Email This is such an important topic! I wish the city would allow apartment buildings intermixed in purely residential areas, and not only on busier main streets like Lyndale or Nicollet, for example. Why can't a small apartment or condo with 4 or 8 units be built between two single-family homes? There is no reason other than its never been allowed, but that hardly is a reason not to allow it now. Minneapolis and St. Paul both do, and many of the apartment buildings hardly seem like apartments. We have to move away from the idea that apartments must be separate and that they must be near public transport (that should be a priority for all neighborhoods, but that is a different topic!). And then another thing to change is ordinances about lot size, set-back and minimum house size. If I have a large lot that can fit two smaller homes, I should be allowed to build two smaller homes and rent one or sell it. Why not? link

This is such an important topic! I wish the city would allow apartment buildings intermixed in purely residential areas, and not only on busier main streets like Lyndale or Nicollet, for example. Why can't a small apartment or condo with 4 or 8 units be built between two single-family homes? There is no reason other than its never been allowed, but that hardly is a reason not to allow it now. Minneapolis and St. Paul both do, and many of the apartment buildings hardly seem like apartments. We have to move away from the idea that apartments must be separate and that they must be near public transport (that should be a priority for all neighborhoods, but that is a different topic!). And then another thing to change is ordinances about lot size, set-back and minimum house size. If I have a large lot that can fit two smaller homes, I should be allowed to build two smaller homes and rent one or sell it. Why not?

KarenMpls asked over 1 year ago

Thank you for your comment, and we are so pleased to hear that you value diversity in the form and scale of housing. Much of the conditions you describe (i.e., why can’t small apartments or condos be built as infill development between two existing single-unit dwellings, why must multi-family apartments exist in such a small percentage of the land zoned for residential use in the City) are the result of, as you described, the mere fact that it represents a change from how the community developed in the Post-WW2 era expansion. The goal of the Missing Middle study is to determine the right balance of change using code changes, interdepartmental coordination efforts, wide- reaching outreach and education opportunities to ensure that high-opportunity areas increase their housing options. If you would like to stay in touch as this project evolves, please feel free to reach out to me (my contact information is provided under the heading 'Who's Listening') or you may sign up for periodic updates by subscribing to this project. Thanks again for your question! -Mallory

Page last updated: 11 Apr 2025, 06:29 AM

Missing Middle Housing

Ask a question

Could the City look into something like a homestead tax savings to better promote individual homeownership instead of landlord-purchased housing?

Who's Listening

Photos

Key Dates

Important Links

Documents

Follow Project