Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1606 <br />November 14, 1990 <br />Page 5 <br />Please review Exhibit H, the activities sited by the <br />applicant's representative. All activities cippear to be <br />consistent with the standards set forth in the^ Code. The <br />applicant has not provided information on the following. <br />A. Telephone service. In case of emergency, telephone <br />service must be provided on the island. <br />B. Per Sections 10.31, Subdivision 13, how is garbage <br />removal handled on the island? What steps are taken by the <br />applicant to insure garbage removal? <br />C. Review Exhibit F. Gafiron's inspection notice of 1982 <br />finds the existing septic system has the capability of <br />serving a 4—bedroom home. Gaffron has raised no rea <br />concern with the current proposal at 40 members <br />recommends that a complete septic review of the facility and <br />it's needs be completed sometime in the spring before the <br />day use recreation use opens for the 1991 season. There is <br />adeguate area to expand septic system if needed. <br />A cyclone fence has been installed along che steep banks of <br />the cliff to provide safety. The City would lave required this <br />if the application is approved. This would La consistent with <br />what was required with the Big Island day use recreation <br />conditional use permit. <br />As already noted above, the volleyball court is considered <br />hardcover and half of it encroaches within the 0-75' setback <br />area. Planning Commission must provide direction to applicant on <br />variance request. <br />It is obvious that we must table the application prior to <br />any final action. It would be appropriate to provide applicant <br />further direction on the following issues: <br />1. If an area variance is needed based on final survey <br />information, would Planning Commission members consider <br />granting an area variance? Can you make unique enough <br />findings to support approval (i.e. island area, contiguous <br />dry buildable area not adjacent to parcel but divided by a <br />wetland ard .4>e, the property is a peninsula)? <br />2. Will grant lakeshore setback variances for a <br />volleyball court, decking above the 929.4 elevation that <br />exceeds the allowed 4' width (refer to Exhibit P)? <br />3. In consideration of the intent of the RS Code, is ^ <br />legitimate application? Are you comfortable with the <br />controls already established in the Code for this use? <br />1 <br />111 wnjir T<1—---------------