It appears that the new code will prohibit free-standing, compact housing units—sometimes known in the U.K. as “granny flats”, by strictly requiring any dwelling units to be directly attached to the original home on a property. The new code also continues to require very large lot sizes. This may still be reflexive, based on the past 50 years of bigger and bigger US homes, a trend fueled by builders, who profit by adding square footage. In most big cities, builders and realtors have been behind such minimum size requirements, as they help fuel profits. As micro-home guru Jay Schafer has noted, the cheapest way to charge more for a house is to simply add square footage, whether useful or not.
So many aspects of modern life have become more compact—electronics, hotel rooms, appliances, even automobiles. In many cases, good design and compact size have become powerful marketing advantages. But lots and dwellings have been super-sized over the past half-century. It could be time for zoning codes to recognize that radically smaller spaces can work and of course, be much more green. It is interesting to note that small size does not automatically equate with deprivation. The wealthy have been enjoying compact, high-design, high-tech spaces for decades: compact luxury autos, private planes, train compartments, capsule designer hotels, boats and more. They know that a big, junky space is inferior to a small, beautifully-made one.
Allowing micro-housing could open the door to home ownership to an entire new group of Philadelphians. Secondary dwellings/offices could be used to help older homeowners generate income from big yards—and yes, my yard is 65 feet deep, and could easily take such a micro-home. Instead of the stress associated with high home costs, micro-housing could free millions of dollars into our local economy for other uses. Such spaces could also bring even more density to Philadelphia--the kind of density that makes transit more practical and makes urban cities the most energy-efficient places on earth.
At this point, it appears that the new code will still require large, inefficient dwellings, while banning micro-houses for all practical purposes. Will the ZCC re-consider the viability of micro-housing in Philadelphia and allow accessory, free-standing shed-working structures for home businesses, for studios, for dwellings? If this has truly been discussed and rejected, what factors have been considered in setting minimum sizes for lots, and for dwellings? Has the ZCC considered the benefits of allowing this housing and discovered problems that outweigh those benefits? It would seem that the issue is not yet on their radar and deserves proper examination and support.
Thank you for your attention.
For more information, please see:
http://www.tumbleweedhouses.com/
http://www.sustain.ca/
Living Smaller, an Atlantic article
Compact bicycles
Compact, folding furniture
Contact the author at mcget@aol.com
PlanPhilly: Planning Philadelphia's Future