Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Front Setbacks Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission weighs changing East 14 Mile front setbacks and ground-floor parking in CMD district
Summary
Planners discussed aligning a small portion of the CMD district along East 14 Mile with downtown build-to standards (currently 45–65 feet front setback), and considered ground-floor parking rules, third-story allowances within existing height limits, and possible effects on parking supply and pedestrian character.
The commission discussed whether the stretch of Central Mixed-Use (CMD) zoning on East 14 Mile Road should keep its current 45- to 65-foot front setback or be amended so new development sits at the front lot line like the rest of downtown. That existing setback allows one or two bays of parking in front of buildings; staff said the standard originally reflected buildings already in place.
Staff noted the built character varies: “Billy's aft setbacks the Clawson Kitchen is back off of Main Street…Michael's party store is parking in front,” a commissioner said, describing the idiosyncratic pattern of front yards and parking in that area. Commissioners said moving buildings to the lot line could tuck parking to the rear and increase the pedestrian character of the street, but they also raised concerns about reduced visible parking and possible loss of on-site spaces that currently make locations convenient for older patrons.
Parking and pedestrian tradeoffs: staff emphasized the parking requirement for the specific use ultimately drives how much parking must be provided. “The parking standard itself really is gonna drive that,” staff said. A 45-foot setback provides space for one bay of parking; a 65-foot setback allows two bays plus maneuvering. Commissioners flagged the Old Port/14 Mile area as an example where visible front parking cues can signal available parking to potential patrons.
Ground-floor parking and building height: staff proposed permitting ground-floor parking in some cases and allowing a third floor within the existing height limit by lowering first-floor ceiling heights. That approach would add upper-floor capacity without changing overall building height. Several commissioners supported advancing ground-floor parking language first and revisiting floor-count and height rules later.
Next steps: staff will draft ordinance language that (1) would allow building fronts at the street while providing grandfathering language for existing buildings and (2) clarifies under-structure parking design and access so rear parking is usable. They will return with examples and proposed language for deliberation.
Ending: Commissioners asked staff to outline how changes would affect immediate redevelopment possibilities—especially the small vacant lot across from Old Port—and to provide model language for front setbacks and ground-floor parking.
