Dodds v. City of West Linn

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Municipal Law
  • Date Filed: 01-12-2017
  • Case #: 2016-071
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Opinion by Ryan
  • Full Text Opinion

Under CDC 55.130(B), which requires that grading and drainage plans be (1) submitted by a registered engineer, and (2) supported by factual data, it is insufficient for a party to argue that future, yet to be reviewed plans, will meet the code requirements.

     Petitioners appealed a decision approving a conditional use permit (CUP), design review, and variances to site an elementary school and associated facilities. Intervenor proposed to construct a new school east of the existing school, which would be demolished after completion and replaced with a play field, larger parking lot, and facilities. Both the planning commission and the city council approved the application with conditions.

     Petitioners first challenged the city’s findings regarding provisions of the West Linn Community Development Code (CDC) for the proposed stormwater infiltration pond. The petitioners specifically argued that the city council was required to “determine, based on the evidentiary record and the drainage and grading plan before it, whether the submitted drainage and grading plan complies with approval criteria.”  LUBA agreed with petitioner and found that under the CDC 55.130(B), a city determination that the code criteria are met must be supported by a grading and drainage plan that is (1) submitted by a registered engineer, and (2) supported by factual data. LUBA held it was insufficient that the future plans would meet the CDC requirements, and found remand necessary to address this issue.

     Petitioners then challenged the city’s approval on the ground of CDC 60.070(A)(3), which requires that the city determine that the grant of a proposal will provide a facility that is “consistent with the overall needs of the community.” LUBA denied petitioners’ challenge, finding that a reasonable decision maker could conclude that the intervenor had maximized recreational opportunities by expanding the playground and preserving as many significant trees as possible, considering development needs. REMANDED.