Laserfiche WebLink
Consideration of Aaendoent - <br />December 21* 1989 <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />3« Pools# including pool basin and ^ «st fiated deck or <br />atio areas# regardless of whether su*oQl basin# <br />eck# or patio is enclosedwith a fence.S <br />Raaifications - <br />Staff would request that the Planning Commission seriously <br />consider the original intent of the lot coverage code revision. <br />It is staff's impression that the Planning Commission wished to <br />limit the visual density of development on small properties by <br />limiting the percent of above ground structural encroachments. <br />There are typically two types of pools constructed in Oronot <br />1. In-ground# below grade pools# typically a hole in the <br />ground lined with concrete and surrounded by grade level <br />patios. Typically this type of pool has permanently affixed <br />diving boards# and often is surrounded by a fence ranging <br />from 3* to 6* in height at a distance of 4* to 20* from the <br />pool water surface. <br />2. Above-ground pools, typically with a wood superstructure <br />containing a 3' high plastic-lined steel basin# which may be <br />partially below grade at one end to provide a deeper diving <br />area. The decking around such pools is typically at a <br />height 4* above grade# and may be surrounded with an <br />additional 4' to 6* fence outside the deck area# hence a <br />total pool and fence height approaching 10'. <br />Prior to adoption of the current ordinance# staff felt it <br />was Imperative that# if a lot coverage ordinance was to be <br />adopted# the items to be included or excluded from calculation <br />should be strictly defined. Since a side and rear yard fence <br />height of 6' is normally allowed in any non-lakeshore district# <br />staff felt that on small lots# any upward encroachments higher <br />than 6' would be considered as visual encroachments contributing <br />to visual density of a neighboihood# hence "tennis courts# pools# <br />patios# decks and other open structures partially or fully <br />surrounded by fences more than 6' above grade" were considered as <br />being visual obstructions subject to the lot coverage <br />limitations. <br />The idea that ^1 pools should be considered as lot coverage <br />by structure# without regard for the actual height above grade <br />that the pool extends# would seem to be in conflict with the <br />perceived "visual density" intent of the lot coverage ordinance.