Proposed city house size rule is not needed
A plan to put minimum size rules in place for homes in the city of Medford is a solution in search of a problem.
The city’s planning commission has been considering language to set the minimum width of any new homes at 26 feet wide with a minimum of 500 square feet of first floor space.
The proposal is at best an unneeded hassle for prospective homeowners and developers and at worst an attack on the rights of existing property owners, hampering their ability to develop or redevelop lots.
The city of Medford requires any new residential lot to be at least 10,000 square feet in size. What size home the property owner or developer chooses to put on the parcel is dictated by need, market demands and price.
People with more modest needs and means tend to favor smaller homes while those with greater needs and economic means may choose to build larger homes.
The three-legged stool of need, demand and cost has worked well since the first homes were built in the area more than 150 years ago in what would become the city of Medford. Over the years, Medford has welcomed a vast diversity of housing from small bungalows to grand houses with servants' quarters. House styles have also varied from rectangular ranch-style homes to others that are L-shaped or cross-shaped or even circular in shape.
While some developments may have deed restrictions adding additional requirements, Medford has largely avoided having streets and cul de sacs filled with cookiecutter homes. The diversity of housing size and style is one of the things that makes Medford a vibrant and living community.
If someone buys a lot and builds a home on it, the city’s role is to ensure the home is safe for current and future residents and that it is compatible with the use in the area — such as not putting a multi-family unit in the middle of a single-family home area. Safety limitations include having adequate setbacks to allow access for emergency vehicles or to serve as fire breaks.
Beyond those common sense limits, the city should back off and not pile on restrictions based on biases against smaller homes or the people who might choose to live in them. It should not be the city’s role to dictate size of homes or arbitrarily set home sizes. The market forces of need, demand and finances already do a very good job of limiting the outliers when it comes to home construction. Interfering with these by imposing additional arbitrary restrictions would be disruptive and detrimental to the long term full development of the city.
