Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Retaining Wall Grading topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission orders changes to retaining wall and grading at 2476 Diamond after neighbor objections
Summary
After neighbors challenged new perimeter concrete walls and regrading at 2476 Diamond, the Planning Commission took discretionary review and approved a compromise requiring the sponsor to lower portions of the wall, choose neighbor-agreed facing materials, and add landscaping; motion passed unanimously 7-0.
The Planning Commission reviewed a discretionary request concerning grading and a new perimeter retaining wall at 2476 Diamond Street and approved a modified outcome that requires the project sponsor to reduce certain retaining-wall heights, coordinate fence and cladding materials with immediate neighbors, and add landscaping or other treatments to soften the wall.
Neighbors said the poured concrete perimeter wall created a visually dominant barrier that cut off access to a mid-block open space and cast year-round shade into adjacent rear yards. "This concrete wall should go back to the original grade," one neighbor said, arguing the construction and change in grade were implemented without adequate neighborhood participation. Neighbors presented photos and a redline showing the original grade and the current wall, and urged the commission to use discretionary review to require modifications.
Project architect Jeremy Schaub and project attorney Ryan Patterson described the site constraints (substantial slope across the lot) and noted that the sponsor had repeatedly met with neighbors and made concessions, including reducing perimeter wall volumes and offering to sheathe remaining concrete in neighbor-approved materials and to add transparent or slatted fencing above a reduced wall. The sponsor proposed lowering portions of the concrete by roughly two to three feet where feasible and installing neighbor-approved cladding and a four-foot open fence or trellis above the reduced wall; the sponsor also offered to coordinate planting/greenery or other treatments to mitigate the perceived massing.
After extended questioning about which portions of the work required permits, structural versus planning review, and the limits of administrative review for fences under six feet, the commission voted unanimously 7-0 to take discretionary review and approve the staff-recommended corrections together with the sponsor’s proposed design modifications and to require coordination with neighbors on final fence/cladding and landscaping details.
Why it matters: The decision resolves an immediate neighborhood dispute over a substantial concrete wall and clarifies that even where some elements of a project are technically within building-division thresholds, the commission may use discretionary review to secure concessions that address neighborhood impacts.
What’s next: Staff will incorporate conditions into the corrective permit to reflect the reduced wall heights, required cladding/landscaping, and neighbor coordination; the sponsor must implement the agreed modifications as part of the permit correction.
