06-21-1999 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

V I ; #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED Phil Reznlck, Attomey-at-Law, was present. ' •• • • • • Weinberger staled the Applicants are requesting variance and conditional use permit approvals for lakeshore land alteration, including grading and construction of retaining walls v^thin 75* of the lakeshore and within a bluff impact zone; and further request an after-the-fact approval, including approval of a restoration plan, for intensive vegetative removal within 75 feet of the shoreline and within a bluff impact zone. No restoration at this time has been completed. Weinberger noted that the members of the Planning Commission have had an opportunity to look at the property. Staff has concerns regarding the removal of the trees within 75 feet of the shoreline due to possible erosion into the lake. The Applicant is proposing to construct a four foot retaining wall to extend along the slope. Staff has issues regarding the proposed landscaping plan as it does not contain any provisions for replacement of the trees that have been removed. Staff is requesting that reforestation be required as part of this application. Wally Case, Landscape Architect, has had an opportunity to review the landscaping plan and is recommending that this property be reviewed by a forester to determine what trees would be best for this type of soil. City Staff Is recommending denial of the proposed landscape plan.and requests that the Applicant submit revised plans. Currently the stumps have not been removed. Staff would also like to have the opportunity to review this application over time to insure that proper restoration of this area is achieved with similar trees. • Reznlck Inquired whether the City was requiring a replai iling of mature trees approximately the same size removed or if the Applicant could replace this type of trees with a smaller size tree. Weinberger stated that the City is requesting that the Applicant replace the trees with fairly mature trees, noting that it is not possible to replace some of the larger trees. Reznlck expressed a concern regarding the cost of replacing the trees and suggested that the City look at what Is right for the property rather than punishing the property owners. Reznlck noted that the Applicant has been charged with a misdemeanor. The Applicants are willing to cooperate with the City to accomplish the restoration, but they would like to keep this property in line with the other surrounding properties. Reznlck presented photographs to the Planning Commission and noted that the other properties do not have the lake hidden from their view. Reznlck requested that the Planning Commission address the house plan, noting that the Applicants would like to start work on this property In the near future. Reznlck Indicated that they would like to remove the stumps and replace with some shrubbing, and expressed a concern that the equipment that would be needed to replace the trees could cause the soil to be disturbed further. Hawn indicated that she would like to see this property restored as quickly as possible to prevent erosion. Hawn noted that the City has allowed rift-raft in cases where erosion has occurred, but that the retaining walls are probably not going to be looked upon favorably by the Planning Commission. Hawn staled that the Applicants will need to gel together with the City foresters to determine what Is most feasible for this property. Luzaich staled that he Is fine with restoring the property, noting that he has spent money trimming ■ and pruning the other frees on his property and had merely removed what he thought was old Page 8