HomeMy WebLinkAbout_10 13 2025 PCM Agenda Packet _FULL
Phone 952.447.9800 / PriorLakeMN.gov
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Monday, October 13, 2025
City Council Chambers
6:00 p.m.
1. Call Meeting to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of the September 22, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
4. Public Hearings:
A. PDEV25-000017 – 3950 Green Heights Trail SW – Variance – Lakers Holdings, LLC is requesting
variances regarding location and height of a proposed retaining wall. The applicant is proposing
to remove an existing tiered retaining wall along the western property line and replace it with a
single big block retaining wall. (PID 251020221)
5. Old Business:
6. New Business:
7. Adjournment
1
PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Monday September 22, 2025
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance:
Chair Ringstad called the Monday September 22, 2025 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting
to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners: Dan Ringstad, Michael Tennison, Christian Fenstermacher,
and Kate Yurko. Absent: Jason Tschetter, and Doug Johnson. Also, present were Community
Development Director McCabe, Planner Paul Moretto, Assistant City Engineer Luke Schwarz,
and Development Deputy Clerk / Administrative Assistant Megan Kooiman.
2. Approval of Monday September 22, 2025 Agenda:
MOTION BY TENNISON SECONDED BY FENSTERMACHER TO APPROVE THE MONDAY
SEPTEMBER 22, 2025 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA.
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tennison, Fenstermacher, and Yurko.
Motion carried 4 -0.
3. Approval of Monday, September 8, 2025, Meeting Minutes:
MOTION BY YURKO SECONDED BY FENSTERMACHER TO APPROVE THE MONDAY,
SEPTEMBER 8, 2025, PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES.
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tennison, Fenstermacher, and Yurko.
Motion carried 4 -0.
4. Public Hearing
A. PDEV25-000018 – 4730 140th St NE– Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit
Development – The developer and owner, KJ Walk Inc., are requesting a consideration for a
Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan for the subdivision of 11
single-family detached residential lots on approximately 5.38 gross acres 4.13 net developable
acres to be known as the Stone Path. (PID 259260050)
Planner Moretto: Introduced item 4A as a public hearing to consider a request for a Preliminary
Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development for KJ Walk Inc. Moretto explained the current
circumstances, physical site characteristics, and the variance criteria. City staff are
recommending approval of the variance.
Commissioner’s Questions:
None
Applicant:
Warren Israelson of KJ Walk Inc.: Commented that he is looking forward to this project in Prior
Lake and offered to answer any questions the commission may have.
MOTION BY TENNISON, SECONDED BY YURKO TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM
4A AT 6:08 P.M.
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tennison, Fenstermacher, and Yurko.
Motion carried 4 -0.
Public Comment:
None.
MOTION BY FENSTERMACHER, SECONDED BY TENNISON TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC ON
ITEM 4A AT 6:09 P.M.
2
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tennison, Fenstermacher, and Yurko.
Motion carried 4 -0.
Commissioner’s Comments:
Ringstad: Believes that this will greatly benefit the public. Will vote in favor of this tonight.
Tennison: Staff and the developer did a great job with the details of the plan. Will vote in favor.
Fenstermacher: This plan makes a lot of sense. Wil be in favor of this tonight.
MOTION BY FENSTERMACHER, SECONDED BY TENNISON TO RECOMMEND CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PRELIMINARY
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOW AS STONE
PATH AT 4730 140TH ST NE.
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tennison, Fenstermacher, and Yurko.
Motion carried 4 -0.
5. Old Business:
None.
6. New Business:
None.
7. Announcements & Adjournment:
Announcements:
McCabe: Announced that there will be a meeting on October 13th.
MOTION BY FENSTERMACHER, SECONDED BY YURKO TO ADJOURN THE MONDAY
SEPTEMBER 22, 2025, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 6:11 P.M.
VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tennison, Fenstermacher, and Yurko.
Motion carried 4 -0.
Respectfully submitted,
Megan Kooiman, Deputy Clerk / Administrative Assistant
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 13, 2025
AGENDA #: 4A
PREPARED BY:
PRESENTED BY:
JAKE SKLUZACEK, PLANNER
JAKE SKLUZACEK
AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING VARIANCES TO
ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RETAINING WALL EXCEEDING FOUR
FEET IN HEIGHT WITHIN THE FRONT, SIDE, AND OHWL STRUCTURE SET-
BACKS ON A PROPERTY IN THE R-2 SD (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
SHORELAND) ZONING DISTRICT
DISCUSSION: Introduction
Lakers Holdings, LLC is requesting variances to allow for a retaining wall exceeding 4
ft. in height within the front, side and OHWL (Ordinary High-Water Level) structure set-
backs. The subject property, Lot 19 of Green Heights 1st Addition, is located at 3950
Green Heights Trl SW, PID: 25102221. This is a riparian lot. The requested variances
are listed below:
• A variance to allow for a retaining wall exceeding four feet in height within the front,
and side yard structure setbacks. (Subsection 10-605, (3))
• A variance to allow for a retaining wall exceeding four feet in height within the av-
erage OHWL structure setback. (Subsection 10-435, Subd (7) b.)
Regulation Requirement Proposed Variance
Front Yard Structure Setback 25’ 20’ 5’
Side Yard Structure Setback 10’ 2’ 8’
OHWL Structure Setback
Averaging or
50’ whichever
greater (50’)*
20.5’ 29.5’
* Property to the west, 3904 Green Heights Trl SW OHWL Structure Setback =44.2’
* Property to the west, 3894 Green Heights Trl SE OHWL Structure Setback = 52’
* Average OHWL Setback Determined to be 48.1’ based on existing surveys of adjacent prop-
erties. Average setback can be no closer than 50’ without a variance.
History
The property is zoned R-2 (Medium Density Residential) and is guided R-MD (Urban
Medium Density) on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The property is in
the Shoreland Overlay District of Prior Lake. The existing commercial building and ex-
isting retaining wall were originally constructed in 2015.
Current Circumstances
The existing tiered retaining walls are experiencing failures and the applicant is pro-
posing to replace the existing tiered retaining walls with a single taller large block re-
taining wall in an effort to prevent future failures and erosion to both the property and
an adjacent residential property to the west. The neighboring vinyl fence owned by the
2
neighboring property owner to the west is proposed to be removed during construction
and reinstalled by the applicant following construction. In addition to the proposed new
retaining wall, the applicant is also proposing to re-align stairs on the site to create
landings to provide relief of the current twenty-four-step stairwell. The property’s use
as a restaurant is considered legal-nonconforming and is governed by City Code Sub-
section 10-349 – Expansion of a Nonconforming Restaurant Use.
Prior Lake City Code defines a structure as anything constructed or erected, the use
of which requires a location on the ground. Structures include, but are not limited to,
advertising signs, billboards, towers and fences greater than six feet in height, pavil-
ions, gazebos, pergolas, trellises, reta ining walls greater than four feet in height, and
swimming pools. The existing tiered retaining walls did not require a variance for a
structure setback as they are less than four feet in height.
Front and Side Structure Setbacks: Subsection 10-605(3) illustrates the following
minimum requirements which govern the use and development of property in the R-2
zoning district:
Land Use Lot Area
(sq. ft.)
Lot Width
(ft.)
Lot Depth
(ft.)
Front
Yard (ft.)
Rear
Yard (ft.)
Side Yard
(ft.)
Other
Uses
15,000 100 150 25 25 10
OHWL Structure Setback: Subsection 10-435(7) b. states, On shoreland parcels that
have two adjacent parcels with existing principal structures on both such adjacent par-
cels, any new residential structure or any additions to an existing structure may be set
back the average setback of the adjacent structures from the ordinary high-water level
or 50 feet, whichever is greater, provided all other provisions of the shoreland overlay
district are complied with. In cases where only one of the two parcels adjacent to an
undeveloped shoreland parcel has an existing principal structure, the average setback
of the adjacent structure and the next structure within 150 feet may be utilized.
In this case, only one of the two adjacent parcels is developed, so the average set-
back was determined using the closest two parcels to the west. The subject lot cur-
rently has an average OHWL setback of 48.1 ft.; however, setback averaging cannot
be used to construct a structure closer than 50 ft. from the OHWL without a variance.
The applicant proposes decreasing this setback to 20.5 ft. which is a variance of 29.5
ft.
ISSUES: This project includes requests for variances. Section 10-906 states that the Board of
Adjustment may grant a variance from the strict application of the provisions of the
Zoning Ordinance, provided that:
1) Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general
purposes and intent of the Zoning Code.
The proposed improvements are consistent with the general purposes of the City’s
Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances. The retaining wall will restore slope stability,
mitigate erosion, and protect both the subject parcel and neighboring property.
The granting of the variances is in harmony with the general purposes of the Zoning
Code. The purpose of the Zoning Code is to “Promote the most appropriate and
orderly development of the residential, business, industrial, public land, and public
areas”.
3
2) Variances shall only be permitted when they are consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed improvements are consistent with the general purposes of the City’s’
Comprehensive Plan. The redesigned stairway enhances public accessibility and
safety, reflecting the City’s goal of ensuring safe and functional infrastructure for
residents and visitors. By combining structural stabilization with safer pedestrian
circulation, the project demonstrates a holistic approach to responsible land use
and public welfare.
The granting of the variances is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and its
goal to maintain and improve physical character and identity. This is accomplished
by achieving compatible relationships between different types of land use by
utilizing design standards, appropriate buffers, land use transitions, and high-
quality design.
3) Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes
that there are practical difficulties in complying with the Zoning Code.
“Practical difficulties,” as used in connection with the granting of a variance,
means the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable
manner not permitted by the Zoning Code, the plight of the landowner is due
to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and
the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
The owner of the property is faced with significant challenges due to the failure of
the existing retaining wall, originally constructed to approximately four (4) feet in
height, has proven inadequate for long-term stability. The resulting wall failure has
caused substantial erosion and threatens both the subject property and
neighboring parcel. Additionally, the existing stair alignment consists of
approximately twenty-four (24) consecutive steps without landings or intermediate
platforms, creating a steep and hazardous path for pedestrians to navigate from
the sidewalk to the restaurant entrance. Strict compliance with the ordinance’s
height limit would not permit a wall capable of resolving the slope stability or safely
accommodating improved pedestrian access. The proposed design addresses
these practical difficulties by incorporating a taller, engineered retaining wall system
along with a reconfigured stair alignment that introduces two landings, breaking up
the long run of steps and reducing risks to public safety.
Reasonable Use Consistent with Neighborhood:
Granting these variances will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
The proposed retaining wall uses large-block construction consistent with durable,
engineered solutions commonly found in similar commercial and residential
settings. The blocks to be used are on the MNDOT (Minnesota Department of
Transportation) approved product list and similar products are installed throughout
the city of Prior Lake already. The stairway redesign enhances the character of the
property by improving public access in a safe, attractive, and functional manner.
Rather than posing a detriment, the project will improve public welfare by reducing
fall risks, eliminating erosion hazards, and ensuring that the site remains safe and
useable for the community.
The applicant is seeking to construct retaining walls exceeding four feet in height
within required structure setbacks, a common residential redevelopment project
along the City’s lake shores.
4
Not Self-Created:
The challenges presented are due to unique circumstances specific to the property
and not the actions of the current owner. The lot’s slope and the limitations of the
four-foot wall design created conditions that have resulted in failure and erosion.
Similarly, the long, uninterrupted stairway alignment was pre-existing site condition
that does not meet contemporary safety expectations. These factors are tied to the
site’s topography and historical construction, not to the preferences of the property
owner. The requested variances are therefore necessary to remedy conditions that
are both unique and problematic, rather than a matter of convenience.
The unique constraints of the property, including the slope, topography, and
historical construction were not created by the applicant and predate their
ownership. These factors result from historic platting and development patterns that
do not align with current zoning standards.
No Alteration to Neighborhood Character:
The variances will not result in any use of the property that is inconsistent with its
zoning designation. The property will remain in commercial use as a restaurant with
supporting infrastructure. The proposed retaining wall and stairway improvements
are accessory features necessary to preserve stability and ensure safe public
access. The request pertains solely to structural height and safety improvements
and does not extend beyond the uses already permitted in the zoning district.
The proposed structure is consistent with the residential character and scale of
surrounding properties, and it would not alter the essential character of the locality.
4) Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
Economic considerations alone are not the reason for the variance request.
Conclusion
City staff believe these variances are warranted and necessary to allow for construction
of the proposed retaining wall due to the failure of the existing four-foot walls, slope
present on site, site topography, and historical construction. Other neighborhood
homes surrounding the subject property have similar OHWL setbacks on shallow lots
and most homes in this neighborhood have similar limitations related to steep slopes
and rough topography.
If the Board of Adjustments finds the applicant has met all necessary criteria and sup-
ports approval of the variances, then staff recommends the following conditions:
➢ The applicant shall provide a grading plan confirming all stormwater drainage from
the development will be managed on their property.
➢ The variance resolution shall be recorded at Scott County.
➢ A building permit shall be obtained from the Building Department prior to the com-
mencement of construction.
➢ A visual barrier shall be required for the proposed retaining walls exceeding four
feet in height.
If the Board of Adjustments finds the applicant has not met all necessary criteria and
would like to see further revisions to reduce the variance requests, staff would recom-
mend providing direction to the applicant related to reasonable setbacks and table the
item for consideration at a future meeting.
5
ALTERNATIVES: 1. If the Board of Adjustment finds the requested variances are warranted in this case,
a motion and a second to adopt a resolution approving the variances requested for
3950 Green Heights Trl SW with the listed conditions or approve any variance the
Board of Adjustment deems appropriate in the circumstances.
2. If the Board of Adjustment finds the requested variances are not warranted in this
case, a motion and a second to deny the variances requested because the Board
of Adjustment finds a lack of demonstrated practical difficulties under the zoning
code criteria and direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial for consideration at
the next Board of Adjustment meeting.
3. If the Board of Adjustment would like additional information from the applicant about
the requested variances or would like to see further plan revisions to decrease the
variance requests, a motion and a second to table or continue discussion of the
item for specific purposes as directed by the Board of Adjustment.
RECOMMENDED
MOTIONS:
Alternative No.1
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map
2. Applicant Narrative
3. Survey – Existing Conditions
4. Survey – Proposed Conditions
5. Resolution 25-09 PC
Narrative Response to Variance Criteria
3950 Green Heights Trail SW, Prior Lake, MN
Page 1 of 2
GeoWall Designs, LLC
Savage, MN & Commerce City, CO
Office: (952) 303-4190
geowalldesigns.com
The following is a narrative response to the request from the city of Prior Lake for the proposed
retaining wall project for the property above.
1. Practical Difficulties in Complying with the Ordinance
The owner of the property is faced with significant challenges due to the failure of the existing
retaining wall, originally constructed to approximately four (4) feet in height. This height was most
likely selected to avoid variance requirements, but it has proven inadequate for long-term stability.
The resulting wall failure has caused substantial erosion and threatens both the property itself and
neighboring parcels. Additionally, the existing stair alignment consists of approximately twenty-four
(24) consecutive steps without landings or intermediate platforms, creating a steep and hazardous
path for pedestrians to navigate from the sidewalk to the restaurant entrance. Strict compliance
with the ordinance’s height limit would not permit a wall capable of resolving the slope stability or
safely accommodating improved pedestrian access. The proposed design addresses these practical
difficulties by incorporating a taller, engineered retaining wall system along with a reconfigured stair
alignment that introduces two landings, breaking up the long run of steps and reducing risks to
public safety.
2. Harmony with the Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan
The proposed improvements are consistent with the general purposes of the City’s Subdivision and
Zoning Ordinances and the Comprehensive Plan. The retaining wall will restore slope stability,
mitigate erosion, and protect both private and neighboring properties. The redesigned stairway
enhances public accessibility and safety, reflecting the City’s goals of ensuring safe and functional
infrastructure for residents and visitors. By combining structural stabilization with safer pedestrian
circulation, the project demonstrates a holistic approach to responsible land use and public welfare.
3. Unique Circumstances of the Property
The challenges presented are due to unique circumstances specific to the property and not the
actions of the current owner. The lot’s slope and the limitations of the original four-foot wall design
created conditions that have resulted in failure and erosion. Similarly, the long, uninterrupted
stairway alignment was a pre-existing site condition that does not meet contemporary safety
expectations. These factors are tied to the site’s topography and historical construction, not to the
preferences of the property owner. The requested variance is therefore necessary to remedy
conditions that are both unique and problematic, rather than a matter of convenience.
Narrative Response to Variance Criteria
3950 Green Heights Trail SW, Prior Lake, MN
Page 2 of 2
GeoWall Designs, LLC
Savage, MN & Commerce City, CO
Office: (952) 303-4190
geowalldesigns.com
4. Essential Character of the Neighborhood and Public Welfare
Granting the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The proposed
retaining wall uses large-block construction consistent with durable, engineered solutions commonly
found in similar commercial and residential settings. The blocks to be used are on the MNDOT
approved product list and similar products are installed throughout the city of Prior Lake already.
The stairway redesign enhances the character of the property by improving public access in a safe,
attractive, and functional manner. Rather than posing a detriment, the project will improve public
welfare by reducing fall risks, eliminating erosion hazards, and ensuring that the site remains safe
and usable for the community.
5. Use of Property within Permitted Zoning
The variance will not result in any use of the property that is inconsistent with its zoning
designation. The property will remain in commercial use as a restaurant with supporting
infrastructure. The retaining wall and stairway improvements are accessory features necessary to
preserve stability and ensure safe public access. The request pertains solely to structural height and
safety improvements and does not extend beyond the uses already permitted in the zoning district.
Respectfully,
Kyle Huerd, PE (Owner/Founder)
GeoWall Designs
1
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RESOLUTION 25-09 PC
VARIANCES TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RETAINING WALL EXCEEDING
FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT WITHIN THE FRONT, SIDE, AND OHWL STRUCTURE SETBACKS ON A
PROPERTY IN THE R-2 SD (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SHORELAND) ZONING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, The Prior Lake Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustment, conducted a
public hearing on October 13, 2025, to consider a request from Lakers Holdings, LLC
requesting variances to allow a for retaining walls exceeding 4 ft. (four feet) in height
within the front, side, and OHWL structure setbacks on a property located in the R-2
SD (Medium Density Residential Shoreland) Zoning District at the following property,
legally described as:
LOT 19 AND ALL THAT PORITON OF LOT 20, GREEN HEIGHTS FIRST ADDTION,
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA, EASTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED
LINE: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 20, FIFTY
FEET FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF; THENCE IN A
NORTHWESTERLY DIRECTION THROUGH A POINT TO THE SHORE OF PRIOR
LAKE AND THERE TERMINATING, SAID POINT DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS
COMMENCING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 20; THENCE
NORTH 28 DEGREES 48’20” WEST ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 2 A
DISTANCE OF 182.4 FEET; THENCE NORTH 56 DEGREES 05’40” EAST 63 FEET
TO SAID POINT. (PID 251020221)
Address: 3950 Green Heights Trl SW, Prior Lake, MN 55372; and
WHEREAS, Notice of the public hearing on said variance requests was duly published in
accordance with the applicable Prior Lake Ordinances; and
WHEREAS, The Board of Adjustment proceeded to hear all persons interested in these variance
requests, and persons interested were afforded the opportunity to present their views
and objections related to the variance requests; and
WHEREAS, The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for the variances as contained
in Case #DEV25-000017 and held a hearing thereon on October 13, 2025; and
WHEREAS, The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variances upon the
health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property
values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variances on the
Comprehensive Plan.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF PRIOR
LAKE, MINNESOTA as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein.
2. The Board of Adjustment hereby adopts the following findings:
2
a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general
purposes and intent of the Zoning Code.
The granting of the variances is in harmony with the general purposes of the Zoning Code.
The purpose of the Zoning Code is to “Promote the most appropriate and orderly
development of the residential, business, industrial, public land, and public areas”.
b. Variances shall only be permitted when they are consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan.
The granting of the variances is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and its goal to
maintain and improve physical character and identity. This is accomplished by achieving
compatible relationships between different types of land use by utilizing design standards,
appropriate buffers, land use transitions, and high-quality design.
c. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there
are practical difficulties in complying with the Zoning Code. “Practical difficulties,”
as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means the property owner
proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning
Code, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not
created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the locality.
Reasonable Use Consistent with Neighborhood: The applicant is seeking to construct
retaining walls exceeding 4 ft. (four feet), a common residential redevelopment project along
the City’s Lake shores.
Not Self-Created: The unique constraints of the property, including the steep slopes, rough
topography, and historical construction were not created by the applicant and predated their
ownership. These factors result from historic platting and development patterns that do not
align with current zoning standards.
No Alteration to Neighborhood Character: The proposed structures are consistent with
the residential character and scale of surrounding properties, and it would not alter the
essential character of the locality.
d. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
Economic considerations alone are not the reason for the variance request.
3. Based upon the findings set forth herein, the Board of Adjustment hereby approves the following
variances to allow the construction of retaining walls per the proposed survey in the R-2 SD
(Medium Density Residential Shoreland) Zoning District:
a. A variance to allow for a retaining wall exceeding four feet in height within the front, rear,
and side yard structure setbacks. (Subsection 10-605-R-2, (3))
b. A variance to allow for a retaining wall exceeding four feet in height within the average OHWL
structure setback. (Subsection 10-435, Subd (7) b.)
4. The variances are subject to the following conditions of approval:
a. The applicant shall provide a grading plan confirming all stormwater drainage from the
development will be managed on their property.
b. The variance resolution shall be recorded at Scott County.
3
c. A building permit shall be obtained from the Building Department prior to the commencement
of construction.
d. A visual barrier shall be required for the proposed retaining walls exceeding four feet in
height.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025.
_______________________________
Dan Ringstad, Commission Vice-Chair
ATTEST: _________________________________
Casey McCabe, Community Development Director
VOTE Ringstad Johnson Fenstermacher Tennison Yurko
Aye ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Nay ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Absent ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Abstain ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐