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

Council continues quasi‑judicial appeal on partition and variance at 2830 Coeur d'Alene Drive to April 14

January 06, 2025 | West Linn, Clackamas County, Oregon


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Council continues quasi‑judicial appeal on partition and variance at 2830 Coeur d'Alene Drive to April 14
The West Linn City Council continued a quasi‑judicial public hearing on Jan. 6, 2025, regarding a land‑use appeal for a proposed three‑parcel minor partition and a Class 2 variance at 2830 Coeur d'Alene Drive.

The appeal (AP‑24‑02; underlying MIP‑24‑02 and VAR‑24‑05) concerns a proposed 3‑lot minor partition and a Class 2 variance to allow five single‑family homes to take access from a 20‑foot shared private driveway. Kevin Harker, attorney for appellants Gary and Susie Alfson, asked the council for a 120‑day continuance to explore legal and application options, including seeking a judicial determination about a conflict between a plat note and a recorded easement or withdrawing and resubmitting an application to add a parcel for potential multifamily use.

After brief discussion about scheduling, the council moved to continue the hearing to April 14, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. The council also left the record open for additional written testimony until noon on April 14. The motion passed on a roll call vote.

At the start of the hearing a council member disclosed a potential perceived conflict of interest based on friendships with parties involved and vacated their seat for the proceeding; that disclosure and the member’s temporary absence were recorded on the hearing record. City staff also reviewed the applicable review criteria on the record, citing relevant sections of the community development code, including residential zoning (R‑7), access and circulation, variances and special waivers, land division provisions, required improvements, and quasi‑judicial procedures.

No final decision on the partition or variance was made; the council’s action was procedural, setting the new hearing date and testimony deadline. The council’s statement that the appeal is a de novo hearing emphasized that new evidence may be submitted during the reopened record.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Oregon articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI