Ooops, sorry, I conveyed that really poorly. That initiative would make it so that cities and towns can't set a minimum lot size larger than 5000 square feet. Municipalities can set smaller minimum lot sizes if they want, and all the existing smaller homes are perfectly safe. This proposal would just be to tackle the problem of municipalities setting extremely large minimum lot sizes, like the many places that set half-acre or full-acre minimums. Hopefully one of the effects of this proposal is that someone sitting on a one acre property would be allowed to chop it up into eight smaller lots, if they want. I think this sounds great.The criminal stupidity of such a proposal is laid bare by the tens of thousands of preexisting SFH units in metro Boston that be suddenly rendered retroactively illegal. Vast swaths of Boston, Cambridge, Brookline, Quincy, Everett, Medford, Malden, Revere, Saugus--and probably even some of the more modest sections of Newton, Waltham, Dedham, etc. Tens of thousands of units that compose great, walkable, picturesque, complete urban neighborhoods. Making this a beautifully simple litmus test for one's feelings vis-a-vis urbanism. Hate urbanism? Support this proposal!
full text here: