Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Retaining Wall topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Retaining-wall height and visibility raise conditional‑use questions
Summary
Board members debated whether a retaining wall and an above‑grade knee wall would trigger conditional‑use review: the retaining portion reaches about 8 feet in one corner while a knee wall or seating could make the visible structure about 10–12 feet.
Board members and staff discussed at length whether the proposed retaining wall adjacent to the tennis courts would trigger conditional-use review. Greg Dixon said the retaining portion where it meets the tennis-court grade is "almost exactly 8 feet," but added there would be a knee wall or fall-protection element above that and he expected the combined visible feature in that corner could be "somewhere between 10 and 11 feet higher than grade."
Members noted the development code treats an over-8-foot retaining wall (and an over-8-foot fence) as a feature warranting conditional-use review because of aesthetic and site‑impact concerns. The board directed that a certified structural engineer prepare and sign the wall design before a zoning permit is issued and indicated that, given visibility and safety features, the conditional-use criteria will be considered in the final decision process.
