Planning commission advances zoning amendments on outdoor cafes, ground-floor housing and facade standards

The Coldwater Planning Commission voted to schedule a public hearing on a set of proposed zoning ordinance amendments that would add definitions and new uses for outdoor and sidewalk cafes, allow accessory residential units on the ground floor in some commercial districts (with exclusions), create voluntary parking-reduction options and set minimum facade transparency for new or substantially reconstructed commercial buildings.

The package, presented by staff planner Robert, would add definitions for “sidewalk cafe” and “outdoor cafe,” designate where each is permitted by district, and add design and setback standards for sidewalk cafes. It also would create a new section (4.23) on outdoor dining, allow accessory residential uses in the C-2 district (with an explicit exclusion along US‑12 and certain other streets during early drafts), add optional parking reductions tied to bicycle parking, on-street parking, bank parking or electric vehicle chargers, and require 60% ground-floor facade transparency for new or substantially reconstructed buildings in C‑1 and C‑2 downtown districts.

The amendments’ stated purpose is to broaden living and commercial options downtown, encourage pedestrian activity and align the city’s regulations with the Redevelopment Ready Communities (RRC) program administered by the Michigan Economic Development Corporation. Robert told commissioners the transparency standard and ground-floor doorway requirements are “to help promote businesses in the downtown district and give more welcoming facade appearances.” He said the accessory residential allowance responds to RRC requirements to permit certain uses by right and noted some district exceptions were included after staff discussions.

Commissioners discussed multiple details: which streets are excluded from ground-floor residential (the package as presented excludes US‑12; Monroe Street was discussed as a possible additional exclusion), whether ground-floor residential could front parking lots or rear alleys, the minimum unit sizes, and whether a 60% transparency requirement might discourage some businesses or be triggered only when an existing building’s facade is substantially altered. Staff said building-code requirements and a minimum ground-floor residential limit (no more than 40% of ground-floor gross floor area for residential in affected properties) would constrain how small or numerous ground-floor units could be and that the 60% transparency standard primarily targets new construction or projects that remove a substantial portion of an existing facade.

On parking reductions, commissioners asked whether counting electric‑vehicle charging stations as a ground for reduced required parking would meaningfully encourage chargers; staff said the provision is an incentive option and noted the RRC application requires jurisdictions to offer several alternatives. The commission also discussed how sidewalk-cafe standards would affect pedestrian clearances; staff confirmed a minimum 8‑foot pedestrian corridor is required where sidewalk cafes are permitted.

After questions and discussion, the planning commission voted to move the package forward for a public hearing. The vote was taken by voice; commissioners indicated approval and the motion carried.

If adopted after public comment and any changes, staff said the amendments would return to the commission for a final recommendation to city council and could be used to help obtain RRC certification.