The correspondence on microhousing is flowing hot and heavy these days. I got an e-mail from someone not happy with our support of microhousing. I responded by reminding the person that microhousing is a really good way of addressing increasing housing demand for people who don’t drive, want less space, and who want to live in neighborhoods that have lots of amenities within walking distance. But one thing I find so odd about the microhousing debate is the degree to which opponents don’t like it because the rooms are too small. So in my response I said this:

The idea that some people should decide where other people can and should live (provided it is safe and healthy) is strange to me. I could just as easily drive through Laurelhurst and blast an old couple working in the garden of their 9600 square foot lot and say, “that’s inhuman, those two people consuming all that space while other people are struggling to find a place to live for the next six months.”

It’s time to turn our expectations and our policies around; the health of our environment and our economy depends on it.

If we get our measuring tape and start asking what’s too small we can do the same in many neighborhoods, questioning the lifestyle choices people make their and the impacts those choices make. Microhousing is a low-impact, low-cost housing choice. Microhousing residents typically live in their units for more than a year and they choose to live their because it meets their needs. The idea that we should interfere with their choices make about as much sense as demanding that people in Laurelhurst give up their gardens and yards.