Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Land Use Permitting topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lafayette design panel continues review of unpermitted driveway work at 3385 Woodview Drive, directs staff to prepare alternatives

3141928 · April 29, 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

The Design Review Commission voted unanimously to continue a matter about unpermitted retaining walls and a driveway extension at 3385 Woodview Drive to the May 27 meeting and asked staff to prepare alternative designs if the applicant does not provide full plans.

The Design Review Commission of the City of Lafayette voted unanimously April 28 to continue consideration of unpermitted retaining walls and a driveway extension at 3385 Woodview Drive and asked staff to prepare alternative design options for the commission to review if the applicant does not deliver final plans.

Commission Chair Lehi Cast opened the continued public hearing after staff said the applicant had not submitted required materials in time for detailed review. Planning staff told the commission the applicant "has responded saying that plans will be forthcoming" but had not provided a firm delivery date and that staff had not sent certain neighbor-submitted documents to the applicant (staff member Greg Wolf, referenced by a speaker, had indicated the city was not sharing design information directly with the property owner).

Why it matters: neighbors say the unpermitted work has affected their privacy and quality of life for about two years, and commissioners expressed frustration with the applicant’s delay. The commission sought to balance not becoming an obstacle to moving the project forward with ensuring the city’s standards for height and grading are met.

At the meeting, neighbor Alan Wandersford told the commission the property owner removed a fence and screening bushes nearly two years ago, leaving his patio exposed. "It's been almost 2 years ago, 2 years the end of next month, that the property owner removed the fence and the bushes that provided any privacy between the 2 yards," Wandersford said.

City staff and the city engineer, Matt Laitrop, said the city’s height standard for retaining walls requires measuring from native grade and that a maximum height of 6 feet applies in the situation discussed. Laitrop said the existing conditions meant the maximum allowable wall height would be about two feet lower than shown on the last drawings the commission had seen and that the type of retaining walls proposed "would be sufficient to hold back what's there" even without additional recompaction of existing material. Laitrop was introduced at the hearing as "the city engineer."

Commissioners debated whether the commission needs to see final applicant-produced drawings before acting. One commissioner said staff could take the applicant’s drawings and make the commission’s approvals conditional by outlining specific changes, allowing the item to move out of the Design Review Commission (DRC) stage while the applicant completes technical drawings for county permits.

The commission directed staff to collaborate with an interested neighbor (Glenn, named during the meeting) to propose conditions of approval and to bring the matter back at the DRC meeting scheduled for Tuesday, May 27, 2025, with the applicant encouraged to participate. A motion to continue the item with that direction passed unanimously; the commission voice vote recorded "Aye" by all members present (Chair Lehi Cast, Commissioner Travis Kauser, Commissioner John Grama, Commissioner Richard Stanton; Commissioner Ehrman was excused).

Discussion vs. action: The commission’s action at this meeting was procedural—continuing the item and directing staff to prepare alternatives and conditions of approval. No final design approval, variance, or enforcement penalty was adopted at this meeting.

Next steps: The commission expects either the applicant to submit full plans for the May 27 meeting or staff to present alternative designs and recommended conditions for approval. Neighbors were told there will be another public meeting where the public can comment on the plans or alternatives.