Laserfiche WebLink
FILE # LA24-000065 <br />18 February 2025 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />3. Designed by a registered engineer or landscape architect, depending on the project scope: <br />The proposed retaining walls were designed by the applicant, a professional landscaping <br />company, but certifications were not provided with the submittal. Staff finds the proposal to have <br />a minimal scope given the size of the proposed wall. <br /> <br />4. Designed to be the minimum size necessary to control the erosion problem: <br />The proposed retaining wall is designed to be minimal and will provide safe, level access to the <br />existing lake stair from the lakeyard. <br /> <br />In addition to the conditions listed in Section 78-1279, Section 78-916 provides a list of conditions <br />supporting Conditional Use Permit (CUP) issuance. The Planning Commission may recommend and <br />the Council may grant a CUP as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. Based on the <br />application and the evidence submitted, the city must find that the proposed use at the proposed <br />location is or will be: <br />1) Consistent with the community management plan: <br />The new retaining wall will provide slope stability and safe lake access for the owners of the <br />property, an aspect that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />2) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required <br />by article V, division 3 of the City Code: <br />Retaining walls within the lakeyard are permitted where they are deemed necessary to protect the <br />integrity of the slope. The existing lake stair is sited poorly into the slope and the proposed wall <br />would allow for a stable connection between the slope and stairs. <br /> <br />3) Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management: <br />The property meets this standard. <br /> <br />4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system: <br />The property meets this standard. <br /> <br />5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost: <br />This proposal is not anticipated to impact public services. <br /> <br />6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to <br />be used in the future: <br />The proposal to add a retaining wall is compatible with the surrounding area both presently and in <br />the future, as residential lake access for private property owners is not specific to this property. <br /> <br />7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for <br />in the community management plan: <br />The installation of a new retaining wall to support an existing lake stair is consistent with the <br />character of the surrounding area. <br /> <br />8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area, <br />unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan: <br />The retaining walls are proposed to be minimal in nature to provide a level entry to the lake stair <br />with a less than two (2) foot tall protrusion above the slope. <br />186