Grand Rapids Builders Respond to Land Use Report - 4/19/2004 - Home Exterior Environment Landscaping

Grand Rapids Builders Respond to Land Use Report

The report contains more than 100 recommendations on issues such as regional and multi-jurisdictional planning, increased densities, purchase/transfer of development rights, taxpayer-funded transit systems and the environment.

While the Home and Building Association of Greater Grand Rapids said that it agreed with much of the report, there were some parts that raised concerns.

“Our members recognize the need for increased density and creative zoning, and are open to other perspectives,” said Judy Barnes, the association’s executive vice president and CEO. “That’s why we’ve issued our position on the recommendations. Our public officials will soon see draft legislation that will impact how our state will grow, so we appreciate that they have asked for our imput.”

“This report uses words like ‘land use’ and ‘multi-jurisdictional planning,’ so it can be a little overwhelming to the average person,” said Brian Bosgraaf of Cottage Homes, Inc., who is president of the association.

“But if these recommendations become law,” he said, “it could change where and how we live in Michigan. Michigan is growing and we should grow the right way. Builders respond to the needs of the market, so we must be involved in the process.”

Mick McGraw, of Eastbrook Homes, who is a two-time past president of the association and a member of the governor’s council, participated in the review of the report.

Among the local builders’ positive responses to the report:

• Alternative wastewater disposal systems received strong support because “they are healthier for our environment and provide for a wider range of land use.” It was noted that “the approval process should be fast and efficient."
• A proposed state and local government review of regulatory barriers to the production of affordably priced housing was strongly supported.
• A proposal for minimum allowable densities of four single-family houses per acre and 10 multifamily units was supported because “this is the best and most cost-effective way to improve housing affordability, reduce consumption of land and curb urban sprawl.
• New standards for narrower residential roads and rights-of-way were strongly supported.

The builders noted their opposition to purchase of development rights and transfer of development rights programs advocated in the report; shoreline protection efforts that could compromise private property rights and raise concerns over exclusionary zoning and government takings; and bonds for farmland preservation.