Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Text Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Royal Oak planning staff urges rejection of garage‑width text amendment; commission votes to deny
Summary
The Planning Commission rejected a developer proposal to measure attached‑garage width solely by garage‑door openings, with staff warning the change would exclude many accessory floor areas and could allow garages to dominate front facades. Commissioners urged addressing the issue in the city’s comprehensive zoning rewrite.
The Royal Oak Planning Commission voted to deny a zoning text amendment that would have measured attached garage width based only on garage‑door openings, after staff told the commission the change would apply to only one kind of accessory structure and could let other attached floor area dominate a home’s primary facade.
Joseph Murphy, the city’s director of planning, outlined the ordinance’s existing rule that accessory structures may not exceed 50% of a principal building’s primary facade and described the 2017 Zoning Board of Appeals ruling that the width should be measured at the exterior wall of the primary facade. “We don’t support this text amendment due to its limited reference to 1 type of accessory structure,” Murphy said, explaining staff was concerned the petitioner’s language would leave side‑entry garages, wing walls, porte‑cocheres and other ancillary floor area uncounted.
Tim Loughran, vice president of land acquisition for Robertson Homes, told the commission the proposed change responds to functional requirements for modern garages on narrow lots, citing typical wing‑wall widths of about 2.5 feet and providing an arithmetic example: on a 50‑foot lot, “the garage door is 16 feet and the wing walls ... are 2 and a half feet” each, pushing the width calculation past the 50% threshold for a 40‑foot building envelope. Loughran said Robertson Homes supports the concept but expects staff to refine the language in ways that meet both builders’ needs and neighborhood character.
Commissioners questioned whether the sample houses shown were representative of Royal Oak’s smaller lots and whether piecemeal edits were appropriate ahead of the forthcoming comprehensive zoning rewrite. Several commissioners said they preferred to resolve the broader set of garage‑and‑setback issues as part of that rewrite rather than adopt a narrowly written text change now.
After discussion, Commissioner Brian Cooper moved — using resolution language provided in staff materials — to deny the petitioner’s amendment “in concurrence with the staff report.” The motion was seconded and carried. The staff recommendation and the commission’s comments make the element a likely candidate for study and possible revision when the city engages a consultant for the comprehensive zoning update.
Next steps: The denial will be forwarded in the commission’s packet materials and the issue will be considered as part of the forthcoming zoning‑code rewrite process.
