Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Royal Oak board approves covered porch variance for Midland Boulevard homeowner
Summary
The zoning board unanimously approved variances allowing a covered rear porch at 412 Midland Blvd, waiving rear‑yard, side‑yard and lot‑coverage limits; the homeowner must still secure building permits and comply with code.
The Royal Oak Zoning Board of Appeals unanimously approved a homeowner’s request to build a covered, unenclosed rear porch at 412 Midland Boulevard, granting variances for rear and side setbacks and a small increase in lot coverage.
Staff said the proposal requires three specific variances: a reduction from the 35‑foot rear yard setback to 24.5 feet, a waiver of 2 feet from the 5‑foot west side setback (allowing 3 feet), and a 2.5‑point increase to 32.5% total lot coverage (the ordinance allows 30%). The board discussed alternatives, including retractable awnings and modest footprint changes, but concluded the lot’s alley adjacency and narrow shape created a practical difficulty.
The homeowner (speaker 18) described the request as a privacy and usability improvement for a narrow lot adjacent to a public alley and said the porch would be constructed with a wood frame and shingles and would include lighting and a ceiling fan but no plumbing.
Board members noted the minimal visual impact and that notices had been sent to adjacent property owners. One member suggested the applicant could explore clipping a corner of the proposed porch to reduce the required relief; the homeowner said he was open to modest design changes if needed. The board moved to approve the variances and voted in favor without objection. Staff noted the homeowner would still need to submit building permits and comply with applicable building‑department regulations.
The variances affect only the parcel at 412 Midland Boulevard; the decision does not absolve the owner of permit checks or building code reviews. The board’s approval was recorded as a motion to approve the variances, carried by unanimous voice vote.
