10-19-2025 - Agenda Packet Planning Commission - PC Packet

Home Browse Search

LA25-000043 20 October 2025 Page 6 of 8 3. Designed by a registered engineer or landscape architect, depending on the project scope: The applicant has provided a licensed engineer’s letter attesting to the need for the new retaining wall. 4. Designed to be the minimum size necessary to control the erosion problem: The size increase of the proposed wall compared to the existing wall can provide better soil retention and help reduce the impacts of stormwater on the building. In addition to the conditions listed in Section 6.12.6240, Section 6.12.4090 provides a list of conditions supporting Conditional Use Permit (CUP) issuance. The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a CUP as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. Based on the application and the evidence submitted, the city must find that the proposed use at the proposed location is or will be: 1. Consistent with the community management plan: The walls are proposed to address existing and persistent slope stability and soil retention issues, an aspect consistent with the Plan. This criterion is met. 2. Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required by article V, division 3 of the City Code: Retaining walls within the lakeyard are permitted where they are deemed necessary to protect the integrity of a slope. The existing wall has deteriorated and the conditions of the slope are negatively impacting the building. This criterion is met. 3. Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management: The property meets this standard. 4. Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system: The property meets this standard. 5. Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost: This proposal is not anticipated to impact public services. 6. Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the future: The proposed wall is replacing a wall in poor condition and will better retain soil of the slope that sits above the channel between Maxwell and Stubbs Bays. The proposed wall is compatible with the area, and is better suited for the conditions of the slope than the existing wall. This criterion is met. 7. Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan: The proposed walls are consistent with the character of the surrounding area, as they are only extended to better address the conditions and drainage patterns of the slopes. The walls will be screened from the lake view as they are interior to the current embankment on the property. This criterion is met. 138