Commission begins review of childcare zoning changes after county foundation audit

Planning staff opened a discussion on proposed zoning-text amendments intended to make Coldwater’s rules for family child care homes, group child care homes and child care centers consistent with state regulations and easier for prospective providers to understand.

“Family child care homes, by state statute, we have to permit in any residence within the city,” planning staff said, and presented recommended use-matrix changes and definition updates produced by McKenna through a grant to the Branch County Community Foundation. Staff said the recommended text aligns local definitions with the state Child Care Licensing Act (PA 116 of 1972) and with the Child Care Licensing Bureau’s (CCLB) rules, and included a clause stating nothing in the local ordinance shall prohibit an eligible licensed facility from increasing capacity as authorized by state law.

Erica Hemminger, executive director of the Branch County Community Foundation, described the regional effort behind the work, noting the foundation is part of a Region 8 collaborative with Pulse (WE Upjohn Institute) and funding from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation to address barriers to child care. Hemminger said the local implementation team includes representatives from the Economic Growth Alliance, the ISD, Great Start Collaborative and local employers; she said outreach to providers was limited by meeting times but that providers were engaged outside working hours.

Key proposed and discussed changes included making family child care homes explicitly permitted in single-family residential areas (consistent with state statute); adjusting allowable zones for group homes and centers; and reducing the required perimeter fence height from 5 feet to 4 feet to match state requirements so providers would not be noncompliant for front-yard fencing. Staff also presented a recommended matrix making child care centers permitted in many commercial districts and subject to special-use review in some residential districts; the draft retained the ability to limit locations where state licensing would deem a site unsuitable (for example, proximity to hazardous uses) because the CCLB retains discretion on site suitability.

Commissioners focused heavily on parking and neighborhood impacts. Under current local wording, group day care homes (7 or more children) require two parking spaces in addition to the two required for the residence; staff reported McKenna recommended removing that local parking surcharge to avoid creating a hardship on small lots and because on-street parking often meets pickup/drop-off needs. For child care centers, staff said the draft requires off-street parking at a ratio of one space per 350 square feet of usable space unless alternative arrangements are approved.

Commissioners raised a site-specific enforcement concern: a long-standing dispute on South Polk Street where a provider’s use and on-street parking have created conflicts with adjacent property owners; commissioners and staff said that narrow streets like Polk present unique safety and parking constraints and that, for narrow streets, on-street parking may not be an acceptable substitute for on-site parking. The commission asked staff to consider clearer language about when on-street parking may be allowed and when off-street parking must be required, and to return with revised text.

Other topics discussed included whether to allow family/group homes or centers in D1/D2 industrial districts (some commissioners favored allowing centers as accessory uses for employers but removing primary family-home uses from heavy industrial areas), and whether to waive or reduce special-use fees for providers (staff noted fee changes would require city council action).

Staff did not bring an ordinance to adopt; commissioners directed staff to refine the draft definitions, parking provisions and district matrix and return with a cleaner redline for further review. No vote was taken at this meeting.