More than six months have passed since Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott’s signature housing legislation was introduced, but as the City Council stares down a vote on the final piece of the package, anxiety — and in some cases with misconception — abounds.

No, the bills won’t make homeowners and developers exempt from permits. They also won’t clear the way for parking garages to be built in residential neighborhoods, although both outcomes were lamented by residents at a recent hearing.

What the legislation would do is make it easier to build denser housing in the city, a move backers of the bills argue is necessary in a tight housing market where costs have surged for homeowners and renters.

Opponents, particularly those who live in neighborhoods where single-family homes are the norm, view more density as a threat to their way of life. Complaints about the legislation have ranged from the micro — threats of more trash and fewer parking spaces — to the macro — potentially handing over more power to developers in a city repeatedly burned by them in the past.

For those who haven’t been following the legislation closely (and even some who have), here’s what you need to know about the housing package.

What will the bills do?

Five bills were included in the original legislative package introduced at a City Hall news conference in May, and four have been signed into law.

One, proposed by Councilman Paris Gray, expands the area on a residential lot where owners can build. The legislation is intended to clear the way for small accessory dwellings that could, for example, house relatives of a property owner.

A second bill, championed by Councilman Zac Blanchard, lifts a requirement that new residential developments build off-street parking. The requirement, which bill sponsors argued made projects more expensive, was frequently waived before its repeal.

Councilman Ryan Dorsey sponsored a third bill repealing a requirement for new residential buildings between four and six stories to include multiple stairwells. The repeal came with new restrictions, including mandatory sprinklers and pressurized stairwells to ventilate smoke.

A fourth bill, introduced by Council Vice President Sharon Green Middleton, moved the city’s zoning administration, previously housed in the Department of Housing and Community Development, to the Department of Planning. Supporters argued that the move will streamline the zoning process because the Department of Planning is already responsible for writing zoning code.

All four bills were approved in October and signed by the mayor in early November.

What does the final bill do?

The most ambitious piece of the housing package is the last one left on the table.

Championed by Scott, the bill would allow up to four units per lot in all city residential districts. The number of units would be dependent on the square footage of available living space in a building — homes of at least 1,500 square feet could be split into two units, while homes of 3,000 square feet or more could be divided into up to four units.

Baltimore’s least-dense residential zones, which include neighborhoods like Roland Park, Lauraville and Ashburton, currently do not allow multi-family housing. Denser residential areas require owners to get approval to convert properties for multi-family dwellings. Scott’s legislation would allow such housing without zoning approval, though permits would still be necessary.

Supporters of the bill argue that it would create more available housing in the city and subsequently drive prices down. They also feel it will level the playing field, making development more affordable and an option for average city residents.

“Zoning has become so cumbersome that it favors experts like experienced developers, builders and their consultants,” Tim Keane, Baltimore’s planning director, told the city’s Planning Commission last month. “We need these experts, but we should also be making rules that more residents can use to build wealth and stay in Baltimore. I would suggest this bill moves us a step in that direction.”

Opponents argue that the legislation would swing the door open to developers who would maximize the number of units they build and charge top dollar for their offerings. Some residents also argue that the change would disrupt the character of single-family neighborhoods, introducing new trash and parking woes and overwhelming city service quality.

What’s not on the table?

Eliminating parking.

Although frequently brought up by residents opposing the housing bills, none would eliminate existing parking. Blanchard’s bill repeals a requirement for additional parking to be built with newly constructed buildings, but builders could still choose to build off-street parking to meet demand. Existing off-street parking could also remain.

The bill also does not specify price points or neighborhoods for added housing, which some critics, including City Councilman James Torrence, have cited as a weakness. Torrence argued that a better legislative package would have included affordability requirements, meaning that developers receiving more favorable zoning approvals would have been required to create housing at reduced price points.

Research shows that Baltimore could benefit from creating more housing supply in all areas of the city, and that creating more housing can help lower prices for everyone.

Baltimore has thousands of vacant properties. Why not rebuild those?

It seems logical: Baltimore has more than 12,000 vacant homes (and as many as 20,000 empty lots) so why not turn them into the needed new housing? Economics presents two challenges.

The first is something called an appraisal gap, which means that the cost of rehabilitating a vacant home, or building a new one on an empty lot, typically costs more than the home’s expected sale price. In other words, developers who take on vacant homes will lose money without public or private subsidies. That’s why loans are typically harder to come by for these properties.

There are millions of dollars in state money being deployed to help close the gaps. But the funding is finite.

The second challenge is that those vacant homes aren’t located in the places where people most want to live. Consumers increasingly want neighborhoods with amenities such as grocery stores, pharmacies and shops. Neighborhoods with high percentages of vacant properties often don’t have those resources.

Modifying zoning codes to open up more types of housing ― such as “granny flats” or multi-family homes ― means more people would be able to afford to live in more amenity-rich neighborhoods. It could also make neighborhoods with high concentrations of vacant homes easier to finance since more types of homes would be allowed, including smaller houses.

In cash-strapped places, zoning reforms are particularly attractive, said Kathryn Howell, director of the National Center for Smart Growth Research and Education at the University of Maryland, College Park. It’s one critical piece of alleviating the housing affordability crisis, she said, but not the only piece.

“From a government perspective, unlocking supply is a free action you can do,” Howell said.

Who is exempt from this legislation?

Dorsey, possibly the loudest cheerleader for the zoning package, acknowledged that some neighborhoods may be exempt from the legislation based on their covenants — legal documents that can be included in property deeds — or their community bylaws.

The city doesn’t enforce covenants, but that doesn’t mean another party won’t.

If, for instance, a covenant, bylaw or restrictive deed explicitly prohibits multi-family homes, a property owner might face a troubling legal proposition: proceed with getting a city permit, or face the potential ire of a neighborhood.

“If the permit is by right ... the city is allowed to permit it,” Dorsey said. “People can start suing their neighbors if that’s what they want to do.”

There may be one key exception to the covenant dispute.

Maryland lawmakers during the 2025 legislative session passed a bill that requires local governments to enable building “granny flats,” otherwise known as accessory dwelling units, in single-family zoned neighborhoods.

Gov. Wes Moore signed the bill into law in mid-April, and it took effect in October.

The bill states that local counties and municipalities must develop accessory dwelling unit policies by next October. It prohibits covenants, deeds and other local rules from limiting a property owner from putting one on their land.

This means that even in Baltimore neighborhoods where up-zoning is legally murky, accessory dwelling units may not be a problem.