Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Dwelling Units topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board backs state 'stationary plan' approach for detached ADUs, seeks local flexibility and new housing partnership funding
Summary
Board members told staff to develop a stationary-plan style proposal requiring cities to adopt detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinances with state objectives and local flexibility, while exploring a new state partnership ("MIHP 2") to fund tactics that increase homeownership.
League staff told the board that advisory-group polling favors a state-directed “stationary plan” approach that would require municipalities to adopt detached ADU ordinances while leaving many design and implementation details to local governments.
Alexa (staff member) presented survey results showing that 59% of MIHP cities allow detached ADUs on lots greater than 7,500 square feet and that 80% allow them on 10,000-square-foot lots. The advisory subgroup ranked an approach that requires cities to have an ordinance, while preserving local flexibility, as more acceptable than a simple toolkit or voluntary best practices.
Staff said state parameters would include a parking-maximum standard (to prevent ordinances from adding unlimited parking) and other baseline objectives; local governments would determine setbacks, heights and similar design details. Board members emphasized that cities already implementing ADU ordinances should receive “credit” for existing work and that the statute should not force identical outcomes across municipalities.
Mayor Walker said he could accept the stationary-plan approach if it comes with state funding: “I like the idea that they're gonna give me some money to do it,” he said. Several members pressed for protections to allow cities to deny ADUs in locations where infrastructure cannot support added density, and for owner-occupancy provisions tied to local priorities.
Staff also asked whether a future state housing partnership — discussed as “MIHP 2” in the meeting — should be designed as new targeted funding to reward local actions that demonstrably increase homeownership and affordable ownership opportunities. The board signaled support for developing a proposal linking new state dollars to tactics that evidence shows increase ownership (for example, planning, infrastructure partnerships, or other incentives) while “holding the line” against diverting existing local revenue streams.
What’s next: staff will prepare draft stationary-plan language and take it to the League Policy Committee (LPC) the following week. The board asked staff to draft options that would either apply to all cities or only to municipalities above 5,000 population and to preserve local discretion where infrastructure constraints exist.
