Laserfiche WebLink
FILE # LA23-000062 <br />16 Jan 2024 <br />Page 4 of 5 <br /> <br /> <br />Conditional Use Permit Analysis: <br />Analysis of an after-the-fact condition is not ideal as some of the factors for evaluation can be <br />missing or altered. In this situation, the applicant has provided photos and a survey showing some <br />detail about the slope and pre-existing walls before their removal. The proposed new wall <br />installation appears to be more substantial than the previously existing walls. The complete <br />denudation of the slope with the removal of all vegetation, including the root structures, and all of <br />the structural elements holding the slope has resulted in the creation of a more vulnerable slope. <br />However, the Code requires the applicant to demonstrate that the existing wall and/or slope is <br />failing as well as confirmation from a licensed professional stating the proposed solution is <br />appropriate and sized correctly. This has not been provided. <br /> <br />Further, the proposed landscape plan consists primarily of low to mid-height grasses, perennials, <br />and shrubs with a few hydrangea trees scattered throughout. The stripping of the slope exacerbates <br />the proximity of the home to the lake. <br /> <br />Public Comments <br />To date, no public comments have been received. <br /> <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. Does the Planning Commission find that the property owner proposes to use the <br />property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br />2. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions to mitigate the impacts <br />created by the granting of the requested CUP? <br />3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br /> <br />Planning Commission Consideration <br />The following items were not submitted and should be provided by the applicant: <br />1. The required statement of need and reasonableness about the slope stability and the <br />currently proposed wall plan from a licensed professional; and <br />2. A revised landscape plan including a mix of mid-height, deep-rooted perennials, native <br />shrubs, and native coniferous and deciduous trees to provide a natural-looking, year-round <br />screening of the proposed walls and the mass of the home. <br /> <br />Options for Motion: <br />1. Deny the application as applied*; or <br />2. Move to table the application and direct the applicant to provide the requested information <br />for Planning Commission review on the February agenda; or <br />3. If the Commission is generally comfortable with the proposal, move to approve the CUP <br />with conditions and direct the applicant to provide the requested information to be <br />reviewed by staff before placement on a City Council agenda for consideration. <br />*Because the application is after-the-fact, if the application is denied, the Commission should <br />identify the next steps for the applicants. Staff recommends the applicants be required to restore <br />the slope and stabilize the slope with nonstructural, vegetative solutions. A reasonable timeline for <br />compliance should be provided. <br /> <br />Planning Staff Recommendation <br />Because the existing conditions have been altered, Staff recommends the Planning Commission <br />TABLE this item until the following items are submitted for review to ensure the new proposed plan <br />14