11-20-1995 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #2082 November 14, 1995 Page 2 Discussioii On a routine inspection of the Oxford Road neighborhood, the Building Inspector discovered violations as noted above and asked that all work cease until applicant had applied for the necessary approvals from the City. The Zoning staff and Cit\' Engineer met with Mr. Stark at the site to review the specific violations and to review the aica originally designated as a conservation area in the 1978 plat. Review Exhibit L, the City wetlands map of the area dated approximately 1971. The subject wetland was defined as a marsh (MA). After inspecting the lakeshore yard, staff concurred that the original wetland designation may have been overly ambitious. The ^^plicant was advised to have a soil delineation made of the area to determine the exact location of the wetland. Review Exhibits F, H and J, the new wetland area is shown at less than half the area of the original conservation area. The City Engineer has reviewed the Westwood report and confirmed the findings. Applicant was encouraged to file the necessary vacation to allow for the redefining of the wetland area. Review Exhibit F, violations on the propert>' include the removal of trees, approximately ten within the 0-75' setback area, ten within the newly defined wetland area (designated as Area "A") a».d approximately twelve live trees located within the original designated wetland to the east of the newly defined wetland line (designated as Area "B"). Applicant asks the City to allow him to replace the ten trees within the 0-75’ setback area to be planted some time in the spring of 19% and to not require the replanting of trees within the remaining portions of the newly defined wetlands and within the wetland areas to be vacated to the east of the new wetland delineation line (Areas A and B). Statement of Hardships Please refer to Exhibit C-1-3, applicant noted he was never made aware of the existence of the conservation easement at the time of the sale of his property nor did his title company alert him to the existence of the easement. The document is filed on the Chain of Title of the property. He was ignorant of the requirements of the ordinance involving the lakeshore protected area and has agreed to replant the trees removed within the lakeshore protected area but asks that the City not require the replacement of trees within the remaining portions of the disturbed area (A and B). He notes the existence of several mature trees within the yard. He also asks Planning Commission to observe that the marsh-like area within 30-40' of the shoreline has not been disturbed and still retains original marsh-like vegetation. Refer to Exhibits G and N. At the time of the original inspection of the property by staff, the majority of applicant's lakeshore yard was absent of groundcover except for the 40-50' adjacent to the shoreline. Applicant was asked to immediately install erosion control, which Mr. Stark installed immediately. Once the soil delineation report was reviewed and approved by the City, Mr. Stark was