East Grand Rapids — Initial plans for a six-building development in the Gaslight Village section of East Grand Rapids have been approved in a 4-3 vote by the Planning Commission. The development would bring 147 new residential units and additional commercial and restaurant space to the neighborhood popular for running, walking, or a quiet night out for dinner and drinks.
Opposition to the development has been vocal, with a group of residents suing to block the development. They argued in favor of requiring a supermajority of 5-2 on the commission instead of a simple majority. That litigation is currently pending, but the town’s lawyer has said that the process will still move forward.
Ward 1 City Commissioner Kate Skaggs argued to delay the decision, posting, “Good decisions take patience and community conversations. Taking the time to complete our master plan, finalize financial details, and engage residents meaningfully would produce a stronger, more community-driven outcome. That’s why I believe we should have waited before moving this plan forward.” Skaggs did not respond to my request for further comment.
The opposition to the plan reveals the dominant mindset when new housing comes in: Every decision needs to be made by the community collectively. Residents have complained that surveys haven’t gone out to the whole town to gauge support of the build. But processes like this can end up with everyone holding veto power and nothing getting built. As I have written, the reasons residents have to oppose a development are complex, but the outcomes rarely reflect the worst fears of naysayers.
Zoning laws have their place, and cities should be able to set basic building requirements. But when those rules can change suddenly based on a small number of vocal neighbors, they do not pass muster.
“Am I missing something? It’s a poorly lit parking lot with cracks and weeds.” That’s how East Grand Rapids resident Allison Tierney described the existing lot where the development will be built. She prefers the currently approved plans that lowered the total height of the buildings but supports new housing being built in the area.
I spoke with several residents who may not be as vocal as the opposition but are supportive of the development. Neighborhood resident Eric Kohn believes that the process has more than adequately weighed the pros and cons. As he stated, “The residents of East Grand Rapids are represented through the city council. They’ve voted to move forward with this development. When that happened, development opponents sought to get a referendum placed on a future ballot asking the public to approve or disapprove of the development. When that effort failed, they sued.”
He also highlighted the use of process to draw out the timeline of the development, saying, “I’m not sure that there’s anything the opponents of this development project would say ‘yes’ to.”
Litigation costs to the developer, both in courts of law and public opinion, can be enough to sink projects before they get off the ground. And this additional cost gets baked into housing prices. With housing affordability a top concern, more municipalities need to remove barriers. Even this affluent town, where the median income in 2024 was $166,610, needs to take affordability seriously.
Economist and East Grand Rapids homeowner David Hebert emphasized the positive effects of the project, “Neighborhoods change over time. It’s important that the buildings and infrastructure be allowed to change to suit the needs of the people who live there and who are likely going to be living there in the near future.”
Gaslight Village has suited several different needs over its history, including an amusement park, department store, and medical center, according to the town website. Built in 1881 and closing in 1954, Ramona Park featured a roller rink, derby racer, and miniature golf.
Residents at the time of the park close in 1954 could not have anticipated the great area that Gaslight Village is today. And residents today can’t anticipate exactly what the neighborhood will look like in 50 years. But the development provides several elements which are currently in demand—most importantly, housing in a walkable area—and the developers are on track to produce just that. Developers don’t know the future either, but they are putting their dollars on the line to provide something that people value.
When she sang about those who “pave paradise and put up a parking lot,” Joni Mitchell may have had in mind the stereotype of the rapacious developer. But in East Grand Rapids, those opposing the development, if they had their way, would end up preserving a parking lot.
Noah Gould is alumni and student programs manager at the Acton Institute and a contributing writer for Michigan Enjoyer.
