Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landscape Open Space topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bloomfield Hills staff propose removing driveway and walkway credits from landscape open-space rules
Summary
City staff presented a multi-year review arguing two exceptions in the landscape open-space ordinance allow increased impervious surface and undermine stormwater management; the commission referred the walkway exception to the Planning Commission for detailed review and discussion.
City planning staff presented a proposal to eliminate two exceptions in Bloomfield Hills’ landscape open-space ordinance that staff say effectively increase impervious surface when properties are redeveloped.
Amy, a city staff planner, told the commission that staff reviewed projects from 2020–2024 and found the ordinance’s driveway and walkway/decorative-feature credits routinely give properties extra “credit” as if those paved surfaces were green space. “A driveway is not green space,” Amy said, noting that current wording lets applicants count a garage-bay pad and certain walkways toward required open space. Staff recommended removing those credits for single-family districts A1–A4 to better protect tree canopy and manage stormwater.
Commissioners and neighboring residents questioned the proposal’s effect on steep lots and buildability. One commissioner said including a driveway in the open-space calculation could make existing house plans unbuildable on curved or lengthy driveways in hilly areas; another argued removing the exceptions could unfairly penalize owners whose lots and driveways differ in configuration. Staff responded the exception always moves a lot toward more impervious surface and that eliminating the credits would simplify administration and reduce instances where applicants engineer around the ordinance with measures such as green roofs or creative hardscape designs.
During discussion, commissioners asked for more empirical data and examples; staff said three representative projects in the review would have dropped below district minimums once the credits were removed. Commissioner 5 moved to refer only the walkway exception to the Planning Commission for review to clarify the 30% credit calculation; the motion to narrow the referral passed on a voice vote. Mayor McCarthy and others said they did not intend to force existing homeowners to remove current improvements and framed the amendment as a long-term, redevelopment-time change.
The commission did not adopt ordinance language at the meeting; instead it narrowed the staff referral to focus on the walkway exception and requested the Planning Commission review the numerical calculation and practical impacts before any ordinance change returns to the city commission.
