Sterling Heights launches zoning overhaul after joint Zoning 101 briefing

Sterling Heights officials and volunteer board members held a special joint meeting to begin a comprehensive update of the city’s zoning ordinance, hearing a Zoning 101 presentation from consultants and early results of a community survey.

The session was presented by consultants from Giffels Webster and led in part by Dr. Jake Parcel, the city president, who said the city is making “a substantial investment” to align the zoning ordinance with the recently adopted master plan and the city’s climate and sustainability goals. "We are really excited about this project," Parcel said, describing plans for supplemental workshops and public materials to guide residents through the changes.

Consultant Jill Behm of Giffels Webster gave the Zoning 101 briefing, tracing the history and legal limits of land-use regulation and outlining the basic components of a zoning code: text, map and development-review procedures. Behm emphasized constitutional constraints—procedural due process, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments—and Michigan law, and cited the U.S. Supreme Court case Euclid v. Ambler Realty as foundational to modern zoning.

Behm told the assembled council, planning commissioners and zoning-board members that good zoning balances private property rights with community needs and that overly narrow exemptions or unclear standards invite legal challenge. "We don't want to favor one business or owner where we give special perks that might not be offered to others," she said, urging clearer standards for exceptions such as planned unit developments.

The consultants described several tools the city will consider during the rewrite: form-based codes that emphasize building form and public space rather than use separation; mixed-use zoning to encourage walkable districts; accessory dwelling units and "missing middle" housing types; parking reform and better standards for electric-vehicle charging and data centers; and overlay districts and density-bonus programs to achieve public benefits.

Jill Behm also outlined a zoning audit completed in 2025 and an updated 2026 draft that compiles staff comments and early survey feedback. The audit flags outdated language, conflicting provisions and formatting that residents and users find confusing.

Ava, the consultant who summarized the closed community survey (120 respondents), said respondents most often use the ordinance for residential questions and zoning maps and described usability problems: many found the language vague and the online formatting difficult. About 9% of respondents said they access the ordinance monthly or more. Survey suggestions included removing parking minimums, updating the floodplain overlay and creating clearer, user-friendly links in the document.

To improve public access, Parcel said Giffels Webster will deliver the updated code using a tool called Clear Zoning — a hyperlinked, graphic-friendly ordinance meant to be easier for residents, developers and staff to navigate.

Council and board members used the discussion to raise specific concerns and priorities for the rewrite. Several officials urged drafting flexibility into base zoning so property owners need fewer variances and to tighten PUD (planned unit development) criteria so the PUD process cannot be used to circumvent ordinary standards. Other suggestions included consolidating confusing commercial districts (C1–C4) into simpler categories, moving to a comprehensive table of uses, and shifting routinely approved items (for example, nuisance-mitigation plans or storage-container reviews) from public hearings to administrative review when appropriate.

The consultants and city staff plan a series of supplemental meetings on the fourth Wednesdays in February, March, May, July and August to review drafts and survey results. The planning commission will examine the full zoning audit and updated text in advance of formal public hearings.

Next steps: the planning commission will receive the zoning audit and survey materials for detailed review at upcoming supplemental meetings; any formal ordinance amendments will follow the public-hearing and approval process required under state law.