Michigan HOA ADUs & Modifications

Section 1: Overview — ADUs and modifications in Michigan

Start with what changed. In 2024, Michigan passed the Homeowners' Energy Policy Act, and it does something new: it bars an association from banning solar energy systems and most energy-saving improvements, and it lays down a detailed compliance regime to back that up. One large question hangs over the statute—whether it reaches condominium associations—and I will come back to it. Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) follow a different track; they remain a matter of municipal zoning and the declaration, with no statewide rule that preempts an association at all.¹ For most other modifications, Michigan puts the declaration first. The threshold question is structural. Condominiums and site condominiums answer to the Michigan Condominium Act (MCL 559.101 et seq.) together with the master deed and bylaws, while non-condominium subdivision associations answer to their recorded declaration, to the Nonprofit Corporation Act if they incorporated, and to common law—because Michigan has no comprehensive planned-community statute.² The Energy Policy Act (2024 PA 68, MCL 559.301 et seq.), effective April 2, 2025, voids any provision in a "homeowners' association agreement" that prohibits or requires approval for solar and energy-saving improvements, requires each association to adopt a written solar energy policy, and puts application decisions on a clock.³ Whether an owner may build an ADU turns on municipal zoning under the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act (MCL 125.3101 et seq.) plus the governing documents, and no Michigan statute overrides an association's declaration on ADUs.⁴ Four federal overlays bind every association no matter what state law says: the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005, the FCC OTARD rule (47 C.F.R. 1.4000) for antennas, the Fair Housing Act reasonable-modification provision (42 U.S.C. 3604(f)(3)), and ADA Title III for common-area facilities that are public accommodations.⁵ The sections that follow set out the framework, the compliance obligations it creates, and recent activity.

Section 2: The legal framework

2A. The Condominium Act, site condominiums, and subdivision associations

The Michigan Condominium Act, MCL 559.101 et seq. (Public Act 59 of 1978), is the dominant common-interest statute in the state.² For a condominium, the master deed, the attached bylaws, and the condominium subdivision plan form the framework for architectural control, and the bylaws govern how the project is administered (MCL 559.153).⁶ Section 47 of the Act (MCL 559.147) forbids a co-owner from changing the exterior appearance of a unit or any other portion of the project except as the condominium documents allow, and that is the statutory anchor for architectural review in condominiums.⁷ Here is a defining Michigan feature: the site condominium. Many detached single-family communities that would be planned-community HOAs elsewhere are organized as condominiums under this Act, so the Condominium Act reaches far more developments than the word "condominium" suggests. A site condominium looks and functions like a subdivision—each owner has a home and a yard—but it is legally a condominium, with the unit often defined to include the home and the surrounding site.⁸

Non-condominium subdivision associations work differently. Michigan has no comprehensive planned-community or UCIOA-style statute. A subdivision association takes its authority from its recorded declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions; from the Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act (MCL 450.2101 et seq.) if it incorporated as a nonprofit; and from common law. Architectural authority in a subdivision comes from the covenants, not from a statute.⁹

The standard a reviewing court applies reflects how Michigan treats restrictive covenants. Michigan courts enforce clear restrictions as written, but they construe restrictive covenants strictly against the party seeking to enforce them, and they resolve doubts in favor of the free use of property.¹⁰ When an association fails to establish the body its documents require—say, an architectural control committee that it never actually constituted—or when it ignores its own process, courts are reluctant to fill the gap, and the restriction may prove unenforceable.¹¹

2B. The Homeowners' Energy Policy Act

The Energy Policy Act is a separate act within Chapter 559 (2024 PA 68, MCL 559.301 to 559.317). It is not part of the Condominium Act; the two share the chapter but stand apart.³ Governor Whitmer signed it on July 8, 2024, and it took effect April 2, 2025—ninety days after sine die adjournment. The Michigan Legislature's official compilation states "History: 2024, Act 68, Eff. Apr. 2, 2025"; some early practitioner sources, including the Michigan Community Association Law Blog and Szura & Delonis, PLC, reported the effective date as April 1, 2025.¹² Section 5 (MCL 559.305) makes invalid and unenforceable, as contrary to public policy, any provision in a "homeowners' association agreement" that prohibits—or requires association approval for—a member replacing, maintaining, installing, or operating an energy-saving improvement or modification, or that requires approval for the auxiliary changes needed to install one. Section 7 (MCL 559.307) applies the same void rule to any provision that prohibits, or has the effect of prohibiting, installation of a solar energy system.¹³

Now the open question. Whether the Energy Policy Act applies to condominium associations under the Condominium Act is unresolved, and you should treat it that way. The Act does not define "homeowners' association" and never references "condominium association," and the Michigan community-association bar is split on whether it reaches associations organized under the Condominium Act. Szura & Delonis, PLC notes that because "the legislature did not define 'homeowner association,'" there is "uncertainty about whether the Act applies to condominium associations governed by the Michigan Condominium Act (MCL 559.101 et seq.)."¹⁴ As of mid-2026, no Michigan court decision, Attorney General opinion, or cleanup legislation has answered the question, no one has filed a HEPA lawsuit, and practitioners advise condominium associations, cooperatives, and summer resorts to comply voluntarily to avoid liability.¹⁵ The Act clearly reaches subdivision associations and site condominiums—detached homes with their own roofs—and it clearly excludes shared roofs and common areas: Section 13 (MCL 559.313) provides that the act does not apply to energy-saving improvements or solar energy systems in a common area or on a shared roof, which it defines as a roof serving more than one home or unit.¹⁶

Within those limits, the Act is a can-not-ban regime, not an unqualified solar right. Under Section 9 (MCL 559.309), any standards an association enforces may not cut the solar energy system's estimated annual electricity production by more than 10% or raise the member's total installation cost by more than $1,000. The policy may not bar elements from a roof face, and it may not require a specific technology such as solar shingles. Each association must adopt a written solar energy policy statement within one year of the effective date—which set a deadline of April 1, 2026—give members a copy within 30 days, and post it online if it maintains a website.¹⁷ An association may still deny a solar application on the grounds Section 9 enumerates, including that a court found the installation violates a law, that the installed system does not conform to the approved application, or that it fails specified roof and ground-mount aesthetic standards—for example, extending more than 6 inches above the roof, not conforming to the roof slope, or carrying a frame or visible wiring that is not silver, bronze, or black.¹⁷ Under Section 11 (MCL 559.311), the association must approve or deny a written application within 30 days—or within 120 days if the member applies before the association has adopted its policy. Miss the deadline or fail to adopt a policy, and the member may proceed, and the association may not fine or penalize the member.¹⁸ Section 15 (MCL 559.315) lets a prevailing member recover damages, reasonable attorney fees, and costs.¹⁹

EV charging sits inside the Act's scope. The definition of "energy-saving improvement or modification" in Section 3 (MCL 559.303) expressly lists electric vehicle supply equipment, along with clotheslines, heat pumps, insulation, rain barrels, reflective roofing, energy-efficient appliances, solar water heaters, and energy-efficient windows. For those items, the Section 5 prohibition-is-void rule applies, so an association may not ban them or require approval—subject to the shared-roof and common-area exclusion.²⁰

2C. ADUs and federal overlays

Michigan has no statewide statute that voids association covenants on ADUs. Whether an owner may add one is a two-layer question. The first layer is municipal zoning under the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act (MCL 125.3101 et seq.), which delegates land-use control to counties, townships, cities, and villages; there is no uniform statewide ADU standard, so the rules vary by locality. Grand Rapids, for instance, permits one ADU on lots that meet the district minimum; under its zoning ordinance the ADU "shall not exceed forty (40) percent of the gross floor area of the primary dwelling unit, but in any case shall be at least four hundred (400) square feet and not larger than eight hundred fifty (850) square feet," and a recorded deed restriction must bar the ADU from being conveyed separately from the primary dwelling.²¹ The second layer is the governing documents. Even where a municipality permits an ADU, the declaration or the master deed and bylaws can prohibit or restrict it, and within an association the recorded restriction is the binding constraint. This is the opposite of the HOA-preemption model in states such as California (Civ. Code 4751) and Colorado (HB 24-1152), which bar associations from effectively prohibiting ADUs; Michigan has no such statute reaching association documents.²²

Four federal overlays bind every Michigan association no matter the state framework. The Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005 (4 U.S.C. 5) bars an association from prohibiting a member from displaying the U.S. flag, subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions; for condominiums, MCL 559.156a separately protects display of a single U.S. flag up to 3 feet by 5 feet.²³ The FCC OTARD rule (47 C.F.R. 1.4000) prohibits restrictions that impair installation, maintenance, or use of covered antennas and satellite dishes one meter or less within an area under the owner's exclusive use or control, and it does not reach common elements.²⁴ The Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3604(f)(3)) requires an association to permit reasonable modifications of existing premises, at the disabled person's expense, necessary for full enjoyment; the Michigan Condominium Act reinforces this for condominiums through Section 47a (MCL 559.147a), which lets a co-owner make disability-related modifications notwithstanding contrary condominium documents, requires the association to act on a request within 60 days, and forbids denial without good cause.²⁵ ADA Title III applies to common-area facilities that qualify as public accommodations.

Section 3: Compliance obligations created by the framework

A. Architectural review process obligations

Board authority to review exterior modifications comes from the master deed and bylaws for condominiums and site condominiums (STATE STATUTE plus governing documents; MCL 559.147 and MCL 559.153) and from the recorded declaration for subdivision associations (DECLARATION).⁷ Associations should exercise that authority through the body and the process their documents specify; Michigan courts will not enforce architectural restrictions where the required committee was never constituted or the association ignored its own procedure.¹¹ Boards should issue written decisions and keep records throughout, and for condominiums the Act requires books and records to be available for co-owner examination (STATE STATUTE, MCL 559.157).²⁶

B. Modifications the association must permit

An association may not ban solar energy systems or the listed energy-saving improvements, including EV supply equipment, and it may not subject them to a prohibition-equivalent approval requirement, for covered communities (STATE STATUTE; HEPA, MCL 559.305 and 559.307)—subject to the unresolved condominium-application question and the shared-roof and common-area exclusion (MCL 559.313).¹³ This bars prohibition, not reasonable regulation: an association may enforce standards within the 10%-production and $1,000-cost limits and may deny on the enumerated grounds (STATE STATUTE, MCL 559.309).¹⁷ The association must permit the U.S. flag, subject to reasonable restrictions (FEDERAL, 4 U.S.C. 5; for condominiums also MCL 559.156a). It must permit covered antennas and dishes in exclusive-use areas (FEDERAL, 47 C.F.R. 1.4000). It must permit reasonable disability modifications at the resident's expense (FEDERAL, 42 U.S.C. 3604(f)(3); for condominiums also MCL 559.147a). And ADA Title III reaches qualifying common-area public accommodations (FEDERAL).⁵

C. ADU obligations and limits on HOA authority

No Michigan statute imposes an association-level duty to permit ADUs; there is no state preemption reaching governing documents. Municipal zoning under the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act binds the locality, not the association (STATE STATUTE, MCL 125.3101 et seq.). Within an association, the declaration or the master deed and bylaws govern whether an ADU is allowed (DECLARATION or governing documents). An association may lawfully prohibit an ADU that the municipality would permit.²²

D. Enforcement, dispute resolution, and appeal obligations

For condominiums, the Act supplies enforcement remedies and lets a person adversely affected by a violation of the act, the rules, the agreement, or the master deed bring an action (STATE STATUTE, MCL 559.215), and disability-modification denials carry the Section 47a process (MCL 559.147a).²⁷ For subdivision associations, notice and an opportunity to be heard come from the declaration and the Nonprofit Corporation Act (DECLARATION and STATE STATUTE). HEPA supplies its own remedy: a member may sue and recover attorney fees and costs (STATE STATUTE, MCL 559.315).¹⁹ Trial-level disputes proceed in the Michigan Circuit Courts, appeals go to the Michigan Court of Appeals, and the Michigan Supreme Court holds discretionary review. Michigan has no dedicated HOA regulator and does not license community association managers; members and the courts do the enforcing.²⁸

Section 4: Recent legislative and judicial activity

A. Recent and pending legislation

Four measures frame the current picture: two enacted laws, one repeal bill that went nowhere, and a housing package still working its way through committee.

B. Recent appellate rulings

One recent ruling shows how Michigan's appellate courts read architectural-approval requirements.

No Michigan appellate court has yet interpreted HEPA. As of mid-2026 no one has filed a HEPA lawsuit, so there is no judicial guidance on the statute or on whether it reaches condominiums.¹⁵

C. Active legislative debates

The live debate is the Housing Readiness Package (HB 5529–5532 and HB 5581–5585), a bipartisan set of zoning-preemption bills. Among other things, they would define ADUs and allow them by right in residential zones, cap minimum lot and dwelling sizes, and limit parking mandates. Municipal and township groups oppose the package as an intrusion on local control, and it remains in committee. No pending measure would settle whether HEPA reaches condominium associations.³³

Section 5: National positioning and related coverage

As of 2025, Michigan sits toward the protective end on solar and energy improvements. HEPA voids association bans and imposes a written-policy and application-clock regime, while it leaves ADUs and most other modifications to the declaration—all on a condominium-act framework notable for its heavy use of site condominiums and the absence of a planned-community statute. On ADUs, Michigan is the opposite of HOA-preemption states such as California (Civ. Code 4751) and Colorado (HB 24-1152): its declarations still control, and ADU permissibility remains a municipal-zoning question. On solar, Michigan now belongs with the regulate-within-limits states that bar prohibition but allow reasonable standards. For a multi-state operator, the practical implication is direct: in Michigan an association must adopt a solar energy policy and cannot ban solar or most energy improvements—subject to the unresolved condominium question—while ADUs remain a zoning-and-declaration matter the association can still restrict.

The federal frameworks—the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act, OTARD, the Fair Housing Act, and ADA Title III—apply to Michigan associations regardless of the state framework.

1. Homeowners' Energy Policy Act, 2024 PA 68 (full enacted text), Michigan Legislature ↩
2. Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.101, Condominium Act short title, Michigan Legislature ↩ ↩
3. Homeowners' Energy Policy Act, 2024 PA 68 (History: 2024, Act 68, Eff. Apr. 2, 2025), Michigan Legislature ↩ ↩ ↩
4. Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, 2006 PA 110, Mich. Comp. Laws § 125.3101 et seq., Michigan Legislature ↩
5. FCC, Over-the-Air Reception Devices Rule, 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000; 42 U.S.C. § 3604, Fair Housing Act, Legal Information Institute ↩ ↩
6. Condominium Act, 1978 PA 59, Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.153 (bylaws governing administration), Michigan Legislature ↩
7. Hirzel Law, MCL 559.147: How to Handle Unauthorized Co-Owner Modifications to the Common Elements (quoting Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.147) ↩ ↩
8. Michigan Community Association Law Blog, The Michigan Condominium Act (definitions of condominium unit and site condominium) ↩
9. iPropertyManagement, Michigan HOA Laws (no single statute; non-condominium HOAs governed by the Nonprofit Corporation Act and governing documents) ↩
10. Dalton & Tomich, Michigan Court of Appeals "Restricts" Restrictive Covenants (Mazzola v. Deeplands Development; strict construction favoring free use) ↩
11. Michigan Community Association Law Blog, Can an HOA Enforce Architectural Rules Without an ACC in Michigan? (Stuart v. Chawney, 454 Mich. 200) ↩ ↩
12. Szura & Delonis, PLC, Michigan's Homeowner Energy Policy Act: What Every HOA Board Needs to Know in 2026 (reporting April 1, 2025 effective date; signed July 8, 2024) ↩
13. Homeowners' Energy Policy Act, 2024 PA 68, §§ 5 and 7, Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 559.305, 559.307, Michigan Legislature ↩ ↩
14. Szura & Delonis, PLC (uncertainty over application to condominium associations under Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.101 et seq.) ↩
15. Michigan Community Association Law Blog, 2025 Michigan Condo and HOA Legislative Update (Jan. 14, 2026: no definition of "homeowners association"; no lawsuits filed; voluntary compliance advised) ↩ ↩
16. Homeowners' Energy Policy Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.313 (shared-roof and common-area exclusion) and § 559.303 (definitions), Michigan Legislature ↩
17. Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.309, written solar energy policy statement; 10% production and $1,000 cost limits; denial grounds, Michigan Legislature ↩ ↩ ↩
18. Homeowners' Energy Policy Act, § 11, Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.311 (application clock and proceed-without-penalty provision), Michigan Legislature ↩
19. Homeowners' Energy Policy Act, § 15, Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.315 (civil action, damages, attorney fees and costs), Michigan Legislature ↩ ↩
20. Homeowners' Energy Policy Act, § 3, Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.303 (definition of "energy-saving improvement or modification," including electric vehicle supply equipment), Michigan Legislature ↩
21. City of Grand Rapids Zoning Ordinance, ch. 61, § 5.9.03, Accessory Dwelling Unit ↩
22. Tishkoff PLC, Accessory Dwelling Units in Michigan: A Legal Overview (no uniform statewide standard; local control under the Zoning Enabling Act) ↩ ↩
23. Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.156a, displaying the United States flag on a condominium unit, Michigan Legislature ↩
24. FCC, Over-the-Air Reception Devices Rule, 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000 (does not reach common elements) ↩
25. Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.147a, disability-related improvements or modifications by a co-owner; 60-day and good-cause provisions, Michigan Legislature ↩
26. Condominium Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.157 (books, records, contracts, and financial statements available for examination), Michigan Legislature ↩
27. Michigan Courts, Condominiums bench book (Mich. Comp. Laws § 559.215, action by adversely affected person; Janini v. London Townhouses Condo. Ass'n, 514 Mich. 86 (2024)) ↩
28. iPropertyManagement, Michigan HOA Laws (no dedicated HOA regulator; no CAM licensing; enforcement by members and courts) ↩
29. H.B. 4524, 2025 (2025 PA 13), Marketable Record Title Act amendment, Michigan Legislature ↩
30. H.B. 4363, 2025, repeal of the Homeowners' Energy Policy Act (last action: re-referred to Committee on Energy, Oct. 21, 2025), Michigan Legislature ↩
31. H.B. 5585, 2026, accessory dwelling units and mobile homes (in House Committee on Government Operations), Michigan Legislature ↩
32. Michigan Community Association Law Blog, Does Fixing an HOA Violation End a Lawsuit in Michigan? (Dearborn Hills Civic Ass'n, Inc. v. Bittar, Nov. 20, 2025, Docket Nos. 367782 & 367857) ↩
33. Michigan Townships Association, Housing Preemption (HB 5529–5532 and HB 5581–5585; ADUs by right; opposition on local-control grounds) ↩