Laserfiche WebLink
FILE # 17-3949 <br />Meeting Date August 20, 2017 <br />Page 4 of 5 <br />preserve the property rights of the owner and supported by the vulnerable lake yard <br />slope on the property. <br />11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort <br />or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the <br />lakeyard setback variance allowing the retaining walls within the 75 -foot lake setback <br />will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any way be contrary <br />to the ordinances. <br />12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, <br />but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The applicant has demonstrated <br />practical difficulties which support granting the lakeyard setback variance to permit <br />the construction of the tiered retaining walls and in-kind replacement of the stairs <br />within 75 feet of the OHWL. <br />The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. <br />Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to <br />the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use <br />permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. <br />Septic System Status <br />The property is served by City sewer. <br />Practical Difficulties Statement <br />Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and <br />should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. <br />Practical Difficulties Analysis <br />Regarding the addition of retaining walls supporting the lake access stair and at the top of the <br />slope, staff finds practical difficulties exist in the existing condition, and the need to stabilize and <br />protect the slope from erosion. The portions of wall and the stairs are an in-kind replacement; <br />two additional retaining walls near the top of the slope are meant to better stabilize the slope; <br />the applicant also is proposing to construct one linear wall placed along the shoreline above the <br />riprap. <br />Staff conducted a site visit and based on the observed of the site conditions and the submitting <br />information in the applicant. Staff is suggesting approval of the project with screening of all of <br />the retaining walls be required to preserve the natural look of the shoreline when viewed from <br />the lake. <br />Staff has concerns regarding the linear retaining wall that runs along the shoreline that is <br />connected to the rip rap. Planning Commission is asked to discuss the necessity, plantings, and <br />screening of the proposed retaining wall. See Exhibit J from the applicant when discussing the <br />bottom retaining wall and Exhibit K from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. <br />Engineer Comments <br />The City's engineer has reviewed the proposed plan and requires engineered plans be submitted <br />with the building permit. A thorough grading review by the City's engineer will occur upon <br />submittal of the building permit for the walls. <br />