Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Potter Driveway topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board approves front‑yard driveway variance for 306 Potter Avenue with conditions to shift and lengthen parking

Royal Oak City Board of Zoning Appeals · August 15, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Royal Oak’s Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance allowing a front‑yard driveway at 306 Potter Avenue conditioned on moving the parking to the north side of the lot and increasing the parking length to 18 feet; petitioner withdrew the secondary variance after approval.

The Royal Oak Board of Zoning Appeals approved a varianced request to allow a front‑yard driveway at 306 Potter Avenue, a narrow 30‑foot lot, but attached several conditions designed to reduce safety and circulation concerns.

Staff described the property as nonconforming in width with an existing shared driveway and a detached rear garage. Petitioner Chase Sperry, who said he purchased the property in February, described repeated incidents of cars becoming wedged in the narrow alley and raised safety concerns for children and the desire to install an at‑home electric vehicle charger.

In deliberations members proposed an alternative that would shift the proposed parking area to the north side of the front yard, lengthen the space to 18 feet and eliminate the need for the second variance (number of driveways). Board Member Lineweber moved to approve variance A (allow a driveway in the front yard) conditioned on shifting the parking to the north and increasing the parking length to 18 feet; the motion passed and the petitioner then withdrew variance B during the meeting.

The board noted the narrow lot width and constrained shared driveway as contributing to practical difficulty. The approval is conditioned on the changes agreed at the hearing; the petitioner said the alteration would not prevent installing an EV charger and agreed to adjust landscaping as needed for the new parking layout.

With the withdrawal of variance B and the conditioned approval of variance A, the petitioner may proceed with revised permit drawings conforming to the board’s conditions.