Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA approves variances for narrow Coolidge Highway lot to allow rear-entry garage
Summary
Royal Oak Zoning Board approved two variances for a 51-foot-wide lot on Coolidge Highway, allowing a 1-foot north-side encroachment for a garage and a 13.2-foot reduction to the rear-yard setback to permit a new single-family house with rear-entry garage.
The Royal Oak City Zoning Board of Appeals on Tuesday approved two dimensional variances for a property on Coolidge Highway so the owner can demolish the existing house and build a new single-family dwelling with a rear-entry garage. The board voted to waive one foot of the five-foot north side-yard setback for a garage and to reduce the required 35-foot rear-yard setback by 13.2 feet to allow a 21.8-foot rear yard.
Staff planner Alex told the board the lot is 51 feet wide, about 103 feet deep and totals 5,253 square feet, and that a 20-foot easement from a vacated public alley and overhead DTE utility lines cross the property. Those easement and utility constraints, he said, limit the buildable area and do not change the size of the requested variances but clarify where structures can be placed. The easement was shown on the petitioner’s revised site plan to help the board evaluate impacts and DTE clearance needs.
Architect Joe Roman, presenting for the homeowner, said roughly 58.7% of the parcel is buildable after removing the abandoned alley and utility setbacks, and that the encroachment is limited to a narrow first-floor garage bay. Roman said DTE planners had reviewed certain minor structures proposed inside the easement — a pergola and stair structure — and raised no objections. He said the requested extra foot would allow a functional two‑car garage apron and provide safe off-street parking for the homeowners.
During deliberations, board members cited the graphic showing nearly half the lot is unbuildable and agreed the combination of easement and utility constraints created a practical difficulty. One board member noted a neighboring house on the block also has a nonconforming rear-yard condition. After discussion, a motion to approve the two variances was made by Mister Clatt and seconded by Mister Line Webber; members voiced support and the motion carried.
The board’s approval does not alter requirements from engineering or DTE: Roman and staff noted that if the petitioner intends to modify the public right-of-way or remove existing retaining features to create rear access from Mandalay Avenue, the petitioner must obtain the necessary permits from the city engineering division.
The board’s action allows the petitioner to proceed with building-permit applications reflecting the approved setbacks; the petitioner must still secure any required engineering approvals and utility clearances.
