Commission discusses wide-ranging zoning ordinance clarifications, schedules further review and public hearing

Planning staff on Jan. 22 presented proposed clarifications and corrections to the City of East Lansing zoning ordinance packaged as Ordinance 1543, and the Planning Commission discussed the changes at length, but took no formal vote.

Staff said the package is intended primarily to clarify wording, relocate scattered definitions into a single definitions article, and correct inconsistencies discovered during administration of the code. The proposed edits span multiple articles and include adding or revising definitions (for example: accessory dwelling unit, exterior site boundaries, permeable paving, pool, and structure), relocating existing definitions into Article 1, and a host of renumbering and minor corrections. Staff said the edits are meant to ease administration and public understanding rather than enact policy changes.

Commissioners and the public asked detailed questions. On accessory dwelling units (ADUs), staff explained the definition would cover detached units, units over garages, basement conversions and similar forms, but that allowance of ADUs is currently limited in East Lansing to the new traditional neighborhood redevelopment overlay (Avondale Square). Staff confirmed there is one known accessory unit at 637 Virginia that pre-dates recent changes. Because the city’s rental housing ordinance contains related language, staff said they will align the ADU definition with the rental-housing ordinance before a final draft is published.

Other notable proposed edits discussed: - Exterior site boundaries: a clarification intended to resolve whether setbacks and lot coverage in large multi-lot projects refer to an individual lot or the larger project footprint. - Permeable paving: a definition drafted with guidance from the Department of Public Works, kept broad but tied to DPW standards. - Pool: defined as an outdoor water container deeper than 24 inches (consistent with building-code thresholds), with commissioners noting this could affect hot tub regulation and fence requirements tied to building code. - Structure: clarified to include buildings, decks, fences, walls, signs and other constructed items (questions included whether treehouses would be included; staff said yes).

Staff also proposed removing references that differentiate minimum lot area requirements by occupant type (for example, family versus unrelated individuals) in some multi-family districts; staff said state law and recent council discussion support treating lot-area requirements without discriminating by occupant relationship and that this change will be flagged for additional discussion.

Public commenters who spoke before the ordinance discussion included Matt Hagen of Hagen Realty and Nancy Meagher of Prime Housing Group; both said they are reviewing the proposed changes and flagged concerns about nonconforming rental properties and potential impacts on landlords where buildings had been labeled nonconforming under prior rules.

Staff said they plan a deeper review at the commission’s next meeting and expect to schedule a public hearing on the ordinance amendments in March; the commission agreed to continue discussion at the Feb. 26 meeting and to hold the family-definition public hearing that night.