Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Partition Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tentatively approves appeal to allow extra driveway access at 2830 Coeur D'Alene Drive
Summary
In a tentative quasi‑judicial decision, the West Linn City Council voted to approve an appeal that would allow a partition of 2830 Coeur D'Alene Drive and grant a Class 2 variance permitting access for a fifth lot from a 20‑foot private driveway; council directed staff to return formal findings May 12.
The West Linn City Council made a tentative decision April 14 to approve an appeal of the planning commission’s conditioned approval of a three‑parcel minor partition at 2830 Coeur D’Alene Drive, overturning a requirement that neighboring property owners sign off on extra driveway access.
Planner Goodell told the council the application requests a partition and a Class 2 variance because five lots would use an existing 20‑foot private driveway; under city code a private shared driveway may serve four lots by right. Staff and city legal counsel recommended modifying — not removing — condition number 2, which required neighbor signatures, while explaining the board must apply the variance criteria in the Community Development Code. Goodell said the final decision deadline was June 14, 2025.
Appellant Gary Alston, the property owner, told the council he seeks the partition to fund retirement and described site constraints that make using the alternate Track C access “not doable” without demolition and major grading. He told the council the additional private‑drive access is the least disruptive option for his lot. "We're not changing the access at all," Alston said, arguing that Track C would require removal of an existing detached garage and extensive work.
Neighbors Carmen and Rufus Timberlake and David and Sarah Baker opposed removing condition 2. Timberlake cited a 2011 shared access and maintenance agreement and Teresa’s Vineyard plat notes that, in her view, limit the private drive between Lots 22 and 23 to providing access to a maximum of two future lots. Attorney Kyle Grant, representing the Bakers, argued the variance fails the “minimum necessary” test because Track C could provide alternative access for future lots and because the applicants were involved in prior subdivision development.
After more than two hours of public testimony and council questioning of staff about easement width, code standards, and alternatives, Councilor Bryke moved a tentative decision to approve the appeal and remove condition number 2, finding the applicant met the variance requirements and directing staff to prepare formal written findings for adoption on May 12. The motion passed on roll call. The decision is tentative until the council adopts findings; the council president noted parties may appeal the final decision to the Land Use Board of Appeals.
The hearing was quasi‑judicial: the city attorney instructed speakers that testimony must be directed to the code criteria in CDC chapters on residential zones, access and circulation, variances, land divisions, required improvements and quasi‑judicial procedures. The council closed the hearing and will return in May with written findings to finalize the decision.
What happens next: staff will prepare draft findings and conditions for the council’s May 12 business meeting; parties wishing to challenge the final decision must use the Land Use Board of Appeals process.
