Council holds public hearing on sub‑2‑acre wetland at 2447 East Lake Lansing Road and defers regulatory decision

The East Lansing City Council opened a public hearing April 8 to decide whether a sub‑2‑acre wetland at 2447 East Lake Lansing Road should be designated as "essential" and therefore regulated under the city’s wetland protection ordinance (Chapter 49). After hearing staff, the property owner and engineers, the council voted to defer the regulatory decision to April 22 to allow additional documentation and analysis.

Michelle Shalakas, the property owner and developer for the proposed Magic of Plea nature preschool, told the council her project team had obtained a jurisdictional determination from the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy (EGLE) on March 21 saying EGLE did not require a state wetland permit for the proposed preschool. She said consultants completed an on‑site delineation last summer and the city wetland consultant had confirmed the boundaries. "EGLE is not concerned about any damage to the wetlands from our project," Shalakas said.

City staff explained the council’s role under the city ordinance for wetlands below 2 acres: local regulation is allowed only if the wetland meets one or more of ten specific criteria in Chapter 49. Cliff Walls (DPW) noted the ordinance process is intended to be project‑agnostic but can inform site planning. The city’s wetland consultant concluded the parcel’s wetland did not meet the ordinance criteria; the consultant’s professional judgment and the ordinance text were discussed at length by councilors.

Engineer Greg Petrie of Kevs Inc. said the detention basin on the site was originally constructed to serve a previous development (Rite Aid) and that the basin was designed as stormwater detention; he described ongoing coordination with the Ingham County Drain Commissioner and minor design changes needed to meet the drain office’s standards.

Council members pressed staff on several points: whether the city engineer’s administrative authority under Chapter 49 allows conditions on approvals; whether permits or approvals from EGLE or the Drain Commissioner had been provided to the city record; and how the city consultant applied the ordinance’s ten criteria. Council member Ottman asked for a clearer, step‑by‑step accounting of every permit, approval and authority that can affect the parcel (EGLE, Ingham County Drain Commissioner, city engineering/planning, and any maintenance or easement agreements).

After public comment and staff responses, the council voted to defer the item to the April 22 meeting so staff could assemble the requested documentation and clarify how the consultant applied the ordinance criteria. The motion to defer was seconded by Council member Watson and passed unanimously.

Why it matters: the regulatory designation would determine whether the city’s wetland permitting process applies and what controls or setbacks could be imposed. If the wetland is not regulated locally under Chapter 49, other local permits and the county drain office could still limit certain changes to the detention basin or stormwater structures.

Ending: The public hearing was closed. Staff was asked to provide written permits or jurisdictional letters (EGLE, Drain Commissioner) and a clearer explanation of how the consultant evaluated the ordinance’s criteria before the council takes final action on April 22.