Laserfiche WebLink
Consideration of <br />December 21, 1989 <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />snt - <br />3. Pools, including pool basin and associated deck or <br />atio areas, regardless of whether such pool basin, <br />eck, or patio is enclosed with a fence. ~I <br />lUMificati<ms - <br />Staff would request that the Planning Commission seriously <br />ccnsider 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 Orono: <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 neighborhood, 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.