Cascade planning commission recommends draft zoning ordinance update, advancing form‑based village code and 28th Street overlays

Cascade Charter Township’s planning commission voted to forward a draft comprehensive zoning ordinance to the township board after a public hearing that drew residents, business owners and housing advocates.

The commission’s recommendation, made at the end of a long presentation by planning consultant Chris Corey of McKenna and a public comment period, asks the township board to consider the August 7 draft with three housekeeping edits (restore current R‑district side‑setback language; require covered enclosures for chickens in R1/R2; clarify fence location language). The vote was taken by voice; the transcript records an affirmative voice vote but does not supply a roll‑call tally.

The draft rewrites how parts of Cascade will develop. Consultant Chris Corey told the commission the ordinance is aimed primarily at developers and redevelopment — not routine single‑family alterations — and is intended to align zoning with the township’s 2024 master plan. “We want development in this community to be high quality,” Corey said, describing a package of interventions: a village form‑based code that creates four village districts, mixed‑use overlays focused on the 28th Street corridor, stricter site and architectural standards, and a purchase‑of‑development‑rights program to discourage sprawl.

Why it matters: township leaders framed the rewrite as a way to concentrate growth where infrastructure already exists and to preserve rural character east of Buttrick Road. Supervisor Grace, speaking before the presentation, said Cascade’s tax base is heavily residential — she told the room 72% of the township’s tax base comes from residential property, and only about 6% from industrial sources — and argued zoning must support the community’s long‑term vision rather than recreate the patterns of neighboring corridors.

Key changes and limits

- Village form‑based code: The draft creates new zoning districts for the village core, village fringe, Thornapple Center and Old 28th Street corridor with detailed architecture, site and road standards designed to keep development to a “village scale.” Corey said the village code is a rezoning (not an overlay) and imposes a 35‑foot maximum building height with no discretionary height increase in the current draft.

- 28th Street overlays and PUD interaction: The draft would apply mixed‑use overlays to large parts of the 28th Street corridor to replace a patchwork of planned unit developments (PUDs) and create consistent rules. Existing PUDs remain in force, but amendments and most new PUDs would be guided to comply with overlay standards.

- Private roads and rural protection: The ordinance generally prohibits new private roads, with exceptions for certain overlay contexts and private roads that serve four or fewer homes. The document also establishes a purchase‑of‑development‑rights tool that could let owners monetize development value without subdividing or selling land.

- Housing and unit standards: The draft limits accessory dwelling units (ADUs), defines dwelling units to require cooking facilities (a stove or permanent cooking device and a permanently installed sink) and sets minimum sizes (multifamily units 800 sq ft; single‑family units 1,100 sq ft, up to 1,300 in R1/R2 in the draft). In select overlays, base densities are specified (for example, Corey cited 6 units/acre in Centennial and 8 units/acre in Glenwood), with bonuses available for developer actions such as green‑space dedication, owner‑occupancy set‑asides and stormwater improvements.

- Accessory buildings and waterfronts: Single‑family properties may include a garage up to 65% of the house area without counting toward accessory‑building caps; waterfront rules allow up to four waterfront lots to share a single dock but generally restrict off‑site docks and prohibit new boathouses that extend over the water (existing boathouses are grandfathered).

Public reaction: Supporters and concerns

Housing advocates praised the draft’s ability to concentrate growth near existing infrastructure. “This is a good step forward,” Calvin Tran of Abundant Housing Michigan told the commission, urging the township to consider removing minimum lot sizes and reducing parking minimums to expand housing options.

Numerous small business owners and long‑standing commercial tenants on Old 28th Street voiced concern that more stringent façade and site requirements, combined with increased residential density, could make it difficult for small businesses to remain viable without additional supports. “It seems that your plans don’t include my business,” said Ted O’Neil, a longtime Old 28th Street owner, noting recent property acquisitions nearby and worries about traffic, parking and relocation.

Staff responses and clarifications

- Building materials and design standards are spelled out in the draft (referenced during the meeting as section 8.4(c)) and apply to commercial, mixed‑use and multifamily development inside overlays and the form‑based code; they do not apply to single‑family homes outside those districts.

- The ordinance defines dwelling units to prevent hotel rooms being treated as permanent residences; staff said a hotel room lacking required kitchen facilities does not qualify as a dwelling unit under the draft.

- Several changes in the August 7 draft reflect public input from earlier July drafting, including removal of the proposed increase to single‑family side setbacks.

Next steps

Staff said the version under consideration is the August 7 draft and that an updated version would be posted to the township website; if the planning commission’s recommendation moves forward, the township board will hold a workshop (no vote) next week, followed by a potential first reading on Aug. 27 and final adoption on Sept. 10, subject to change.

The planning commission’s motion to recommend the draft (case 25‑3892) included three technical edits described in staff’s presentation; the motion passed by voice vote and will be forwarded to the township board for deliberation and public comment at the board level.