Kelley v. Clackamas County
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtDe Muniz, P. J.
Respondent Kelley applied to Clackamas County for a variance to permit a pool house at a location in his front yard that did not satisfy the applicable setback requirement of the county zoning ordinance. After the variance was denied by county planning personnel and by a county hearings officer, Kelley appealed to LUBA. It reversed the county’s decision, and the county seeks our review. We reverse.
Section 1205.02(A) of the zoning ordinance allows the granting of a variance if
“[cjompliance with the applicable requirement or standard of the ordinance would create a hardship due to one or more…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Clark v. Jackson CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1994
- Bienz v. City of DaytonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1977
- Gage v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1994
- Reusser v. Washington CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
- deBardelaben v. Tillamook CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- 1000 Friends of Oregon v. Yamhill CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
- Cyrus v. Deschutes CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
- Beaver State Sand & Gravel, Inc. v. Douglas CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003