Build smaller houses, for starters

I was delighted to read that the county is proposing design standards for new housing. Regarding the comment about adding cost, that’s easily solved. Just build these so-called McMansions smaller. Smaller is better, and more economical. It uses less energy and is more affordable. When I was growing up in the late ’40s and ’50s, the average house size was less than half of today’s for the average family. Garages were typically in the back, detached, or accessible via an alley, where garbage cans (and other stuff you don’t want in front of your house) could reside. With a garage in the back, a longer driveway is added with ample room for the fleet of cars most households have these days. Alley access might mean fewer cars. Oh, too bad.

Houses today look like garages with houses attached. Some fragment of living space peeking out from behind a three-car garage. Is this developers/builders meeting public demand, or is it clever marketing to the American wrong-headed notion that bigger is better?

Suburban housing has lost its neighborhood feel, filled with cul-de-sacs and curving, winding roads. It has become easy to get lost in a large suburban development due to this layout. Just compare this to Central and North Everett, where the grid is straight streets, tree lined, with fewer garages hanging out front. More like a neighborhood.

No doubt developers, real estate dealers and builders will whine about this, but I think it’s a step back to a more pleasant way of life.

Mike Dahlstrom