House Bill 6095, introduced by Neeley, would prohibit a local zoning ordinance from requiring more than 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit for a residential use of property. The number of parking spots mandated by the bill was included to be a “good partner” to some local governments who requested it, Grant said during Tuesday’s committee hearing, “but actually the standard is becoming much lower around the country … (and) the preface is we should not put parking ahead of someone having a roof over their head.”

Ann Arbor, for instance, in 2022 eliminated all parking minimums, according to news radio station WEMU. Now a developer can decide how much parking they may or may not need for their project. 

The parking situation in downtown Detroit has become a flashpoint, as well. A 2023 report found that around 30% of the city’s central business district is dedicated to parking, among the highest in the nation. 

Grant’s House Bill 6096 would “provide the exclusive conditions under which a local unit of government may require additional or revised studies or documents in connection with submission of a site plan,” according to a legislative analysis. 

The bill’s intent is to allow a developer “to get a clearer idea of how much the project will cost” by going through a simple review analysis, Grant said, adding that the proposed legislation asks “the local municipality to become a partner and work up front to determine what is needed to confirm the safety and viability of the project.” 

The bill analysis documents note that none of the four bills would have any fiscal impact to the state, but HB 6096 could “result in a nominal reduction of revenue to local units of government” should municipalities charge a fee for site plan submissions, which are typically $200-$600. 

Grant’s HB 6097 would require the state’s more densely populated areas to allow for denser housing types anywhere that single-family residential homes are permitted. 

Specifically, the bill states that duplexes would be more widely permitted and not subject to special permits in any municipality located within or adjacent to a metropolitan statistical area. The bill’s analysis says that would apply to several areas around the state, including much of metro Detroit, the Grand Rapids area, Lansing, Traverse City and elsewhere. 

The final bill in the package, Grant’s HB 6098, would amend the requirements for gathering signatures for “protest petitions” against housing developments requiring a local zoning ordinance amendment.

Specifically, existing residents opposed to a zoning change for new housing in their city or village currently must have 20% of the area of land (not including publicly-owned land) included in an area extending out 100 feet from the boundary of the land included in the proposed zoning change. The proposed legislation would extend that to 200 feet.

During committee testimony, Grant said the bill is in response to those not wanting housing “in their backyard,” commonly referred to as “Not In My Backyard” or NIMBYs.

“People should be able to engage, but it should be the people who are directly affected by the new project,” Grant said. 

Taken together, the four bills heard during committee testimony elicited strong responses from supporters and opponents alike. 

“The package … (is) a great start (and) helps remove certain arguments that have become stumbling blocks that hang up low- and mid-scale housing,” said Kent Wood, a policy advisor for Housing North, a pro-housing nonprofit operating in the northwestern part of the Lower Peninsula. “We know that duplexes won’t ruin communities or neighborhoods. It won’t bring down property values.”

But Zach Michels, a member of the Dexter City Council in Washtenaw County, said his city has allowed duplexes in single-family areas for several years and has yet to see any such building, noting that financing for such housing can be tricky. 

“I do have concern with how these (bills) are written and that they wouldn’t actually impact the affordability (of housing),” Michels said. 

But state Rep. Alabas Farhat, a Dearborn Democrat and member of the state House Economic Development and Small Business committee, said he felt opponents were not offering real solutions, noting that the bill package gets beyond just throwing money at the state’s housing issues. 

“This right here would cost us nothing as a state,” Farhat said of the proposed legislation. “That’s $7 million we can spend on roads or something else.”