[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6577837,"mediaKeyId","3091738-32e0f84739f755d8a9970aea096cf58d","parentId",3091738,"title","East Lansing council approves park plan, public-art changes and several procedural measures; wetland and a legal settlement resolved","audioSeconds",2970,"startMs",9206000,"endMs",12176000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3091738-32e0f84739f755d8a9970aea096cf58d&start=9206&end=12176","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3091738-32e0f84739f755d8a9970aea096cf58d/thumbnail_9206000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6577837/East-Lansing/Ingham-County/Michigan/East-Lansing-council-approves-park-plan-public-art-changes-and-several-procedural-measures-wetland-and-a-legal-settlement-resolved","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6577837-2ad7ba59c17b8e54af5bd2f041881fd3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771106307&Signature=GEuSMuTPxW0-U6iJ~BibUppW5pg-7~SzKZdFD3KUu69xhg3dY3T7Uz5uIuakhYcoh8QsOnGigf~TvmXgJHrC10LdI7v2ms1IR71C9S2sOrnJWkqFAP933KPyiJHfyMBJc3iIOFz~TRuezBFuo398-tUdd~vH4FJHjbSVM8Oo6Li2gMh8blEibQawwWBqpoNtR56y8OyjhtTrsNEa3wxSb~cAt6qRVgMvIln1o1JyzFrGkNbkqnGOuAciWIGYZdB6PaTfEyp~uxmhaTPiNaip9oG4OY3GOKRnb5h9Wa~RFJayEEQ142DjyIgWtIbljFXKP47WuVe~8Uow7h7VqYsiyw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","East Lansing, Michigan","date","2025-04-23T03:06:51.793Z","article","East Lansing — The City Council voted on multiple planning, administrative and legal matters at its April 22 meeting, adopting a downtown park master plan, changes to the public-art ordinance, a procedural policy on hearing scheduling, and a cost-share amendment with the Michigan Department of Transportation. The council also resolved the regulatory status of a small wetland and gave tentative approval to settle pending litigation in closed session.

Votes at a glance

- Valley Court Park and connectivity plan: Council approved the consultant-backed master plan for Valley Court Park and nearby corridors by a 4–1 vote. The adopted plan preserves a large central lawn, adds an oval walkway and a small performance pavilion, relocates the playground, improves crosswalks and proposes a centrally located restroom. Council members discussed vendor access for the farmers market, parking impacts and phased construction. (Outcome: approved; vote 4 yes, 1 no.)

- Ordinance 13-39 (public art): After amendments on what public money may fund, the council approved revised public-art rules (Ordinance 13-39) on second reading by a 4–1 vote. The ordinance’s final language keeps a broader definition of public art while rejecting some proposed limits the council considered. (Outcome: adopted; vote 4 yes, 1 no.)

- Policy resolution 2025-2 (streamlining scheduling of council public hearings for special land-use requests): The council adopted a policy resolution directing staff to schedule public hearings for special-use requests to shorten procedural timelines; the resolution passed 4–1 after discussion about delegation and the council’s statutory role. (Outcome: adopted; vote 4 yes, 1 no.)

- MDOT cost-share amendment for stormwater treatment: Council authorized the city manager to sign an amendment to the 2018 cost-sharing agreement with the Michigan Department of Transportation related to combined-sewer-area stormwater. City staff said the 2020 Michigan Avenue project reduced MDOT’s contribution by about $30,000. The resolution passed unanimously. (Outcome: adopted; vote 5–0.)

- Wetland at 2447 East Lake Lansing Road: After discussion and a consultant memo, council determined the 0.44-acre wetland (Wetland B) is not essential to preservation of the city’s natural resources and therefore not regulated by the city; the motion passed 3–2. The wetland consultant told staff the area likely formed after construction of a stormwater depression and contains many invasive species; staff cautioned the decision could affect future maintenance of the detention basin. (Outcome: nonessential / unregulated; vote 3 yes, 2 no.)

- Consent agenda and other routine items: The council approved a multi-item consent agenda that included appointments to boards and commissions, a contract change order for concrete work, engineering contracts for traffic signals, the draft comprehensive plan distribution for public review, and scheduling of future public hearings. The consent agenda passed unanimously. (Outcome: approved; voice vote unanimous.)

- Sidewalk hazardous-project public hearing (item 4.1): The council deferred the public hearing on this year’s hazardous sidewalk program after a question about whether property owners had received written notice of the hearing date; the council instructed staff to re-notice the affected property owners by first-class and certified mail and reschedule the hearing for May 1. (Outcome: deferred / rescheduled; voice vote unanimous.)

- First reading of Chapter 6 (building code edit): The council approved first reading of a red-lined Chapter 6 that extracts rental housing regulations into a new Chapter 7 (Ordinance 15-38), leaving building/regulatory material in Chapter 6. Council voted to approve the first reading unanimously. (Outcome: first reading approved; voice vote unanimous.)

- Tentative settlement in HEOS v. City of East Lansing: In closed session the council instructed the city attorney to negotiate toward a settlement amount presented in closed session and gave tentative approval subject to subsequent counsel review and formal agreement; the motion passed by roll call vote with unanimous support. (Outcome: tentative settlement approval; vote 5–0.)

Council discussion highlights and clarifications

- Valley Court Plan: Consultants and staff said public engagement included in-person feedback at three farmers’ market sessions and a community survey with roughly 700–800 responses. The plan’s preferred concept (an oval walkway, central lawn, and two performance areas) was selected after community dot-vote exercises; staff said the plan can be implemented in phases and that restroom access and improved drainage are priorities. Council debated loss of some contiguous parking near the current basketball courts; staff said actual parking losses would be minimal.

- Public art: Council debated whether public funding should pay for art located on private property and what kinds of public art (including interactive, premanufactured installations such as “sound garden” instruments) the city should buy or fund. Council adopted the updated ordinance while rejecting narrower amendments that would have restricted purchases.

- Wetland decision: A consultant (ASTI) advised staff that the depression at 2447 E. Lake Lansing appears to have developed after construction and, in its view, is low-quality habitat with invasive plants. Staff warned that regulating the area could complicate routine stormwater detention maintenance that an applicant or a county drain office typically performs; council nevertheless voted to treat the wetland as nonessential for city regulation.

What this means going forward

Several items adopted on April 22 will require follow-up by staff: phased implementation plans and grant-seeking for Valley Court Park, ordinance drafting to align Chapter 6/7/50 family-rules changes, and city attorney negotiations to finalize the tentative settlement. The wetland decision may require staff and the applicant to coordinate maintenance plans with county drain authorities to preserve stormwater function without triggering unnecessary permitting conflicts.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Regular Council - 22 Apr 2025","oneSentenceSummary","At its April 22 meeting the council approved the Valley Court Park and connectivity plan, amended public-art rules, a policy streamlining public-hearing scheduling, a stormwater agreement amendment with MDOT and a tentative settlement in local litigation; the council also determined a small wetland at 2447 E. Lake Lansing Road to be nonessential.","taxTitle","East Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan","taxId",55176,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6577842,"Public pushes East Lansing council to reject narrow zoning definition of “family”",1283,2967000,4250000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3091738-32e0f84739f755d8a9970aea096cf58d&start=2967&end=4250","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3091738-32e0f84739f755d8a9970aea096cf58d/thumbnail_2967000.jpg","/articles/6577842/East-Lansing/Ingham-County/Michigan/Public-pushes-East-Lansing-council-to-reject-narrow-zoning-definition-of-family","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6577842-99b1eb1e1db1f48273c81b94d0b8f117/orig.mp4?Expires=1771106307&Signature=T5LGHKKYcKABrbI1kHjpXB9l54NAYooUZr3RhT82uirzApFQNtMnP9f~voAH1rYY8q5SSbCCk6Ks1uk4qyK7-Bm7eGoR9shqixax4wE7yO9wRW2ILRxx7T5do3VLHmBn3BXTNhg7Yf6xONeq4u-lWf5TxjAMdDYtmTO~MwzYtQeX7ciHjpaNv~MGaY4kLUfmcsUbo4njw8b2jwurmOfh2y2CWO5ywQZECdHtZDhvkYBxc8~70SGaLfxVRldaV-HOCvHeO1zqddbRjEMEeRd8TxncQft0vP1ibMT5s2NUCF3peRf5kiBPDmmiqclYpupr2hLJE5YZh57wn4ZDq9FGqg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","East Lansing — The City Council held a public hearing April 22 on Ordinance 15-45, a proposed amendment to Chapter 50 of the city zoning code that would change the code’s definition of “family.” Speakers at the hearing urged the council not to reenact a narrow, categorical definition of family they said would be unconstitutional and would harm renters and residents who rely on nontraditional household arrangements.

Residents, university students and local lawyers told council members the existing proposal would exclude people who regularly live together but do not share the legal relationships the draft would list. Several speakers cited U.S. Supreme Court and Michigan Supreme Court precedent — including Moore v. City of East Cleveland and Delta Township v. Dinolfo — to argue that local zoning cannot adopt a restricted, enumerated list that excludes cousins, extended relatives or functional households.

Supporters of broader language told the council the issue matters to students, senior residents and multigenerational households. Mark Grebner, a longtime East Lansing resident who described past legal involvement on housing matters, cited federal and state case law and urged council members to avoid reenacting a definition that courts have found unconstitutional. Patrick Rose and others said the current zoning language excludes functional families and can expose residents to fines or enforcement.

The proposed ordinance, introduced Jan. 7 and referred to the Planning Commission, would add foster children, persons living with a dwelling-unit owner under guardianship and cousins to the list of relationships recognized as family within the zoning code. City staff told the council the Planning Commission and the Housing Commission had reviewed the amendment; the Planning Commission held public hearings Feb. 26 and March 12 and recommended the change. The city’s Age-Friendly Committee also provided comments at a recent meeting.

Several individual residents and student renters described housing conditions that they said make inclusive household definitions important. Barbara (Wallam) McClure, a lifelong resident, said she wants the ability to host and care for students and friends without those people being classified as tenants. Two Michigan State University graduate students, who identified themselves as members of the East Lansing Renters Rights Coalition, asked the council to prioritize renters’ ability to seek repairs and safe housing; they connected that request to the larger debate about who qualifies as household members.

Legal concerns dominated much of the hearing. Speaking from detailed review of case law, Grebner told council members that federal precedent bars narrow legal definitions that exclude extended kin and that Michigan law provides broader protection for “functional families.” A letter from retired judge James Giddings, read into the record by David Hopkinson, urged council members not to reenact language that “denies East Lansing residents constitutional rights to live with members of their family.” The letter also referenced Proposition 1, a recent charter amendment the speakers said protects some rights of residents and their guests; speakers said Proposition 1 did not amend the zoning code and that the city should ensure its zoning language conforms with both state and federal constitutional tests.

Council members asked staff procedural and substantive questions. Several councilors suggested considering Ordinance 15-45 together with related changes — specifically an ordinance moving some family-related language from Chapter 6 into Chapter 50 and the separate Chapter 7 rental code draft — so the body does not create inconsistent or incomplete rules. Council member questions also focused on enforcement: how the city would interpret terms such as “cousin” (first cousin, second cousin, once removed) and whether moving nieces and nephews from Chapter 6 into Chapter 50 would create unintended legal consequences.

City staff and the city attorney said the council could consider the three ordinances together at a future meeting. No final action on Ordinance 15-45 was taken April 22; the public hearing was formally closed. Council members indicated they would ask staff for additional memos — including a legal review of compliance with state and federal case law and clarification of how related ordinance changes would interact — before taking any vote.

What’s next: The council did not vote on Ordinance 15-45 at the April 22 meeting. Councilors asked staff to prepare follow-up materials and to consider bringing related zoning and rental-code items to a single future agenda for simultaneous action.

","At a public hearing April 22, dozens of residents, legal experts and student renters urged the City Council not to reenact Ordinance 15-45, saying the proposed zoning definition of “family” risks violating state and federal constitutional law and could leave vulnerable households exposed.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

East Lansing council approves park plan, public-art changes and several procedural measures; wetland and a legal settlement resolved

Public pushes East Lansing council to reject narrow zoning definition of “family”