Laserfiche WebLink
lllMll <br />UPtCHDnLm <br />• I Consideration of Amendment -December 21, 1989 Page 3 of 3Staff Recommendation -Planning Commission is requested to review and consider the intent of the lot coverage ordinance recently adopted, and determine whether its purpose was to merely limit visual density of above-grade structures, or whether it was intended as a further hardcover restriction for small lots. Staff would suggest that the two concepts not be intermingled in a confusing ordinance.Staff fails to see a distinction between grade level pool structures and grade level decks, patios, sidewalks, driveways, etc. in the context of visual density encroachments. If grade level pools are to be considered as lot coverage but grade level patios are not, then Planning Commission should clearly redefine the intent of the lot coverage ordinance, and consider whether the 15% limit is appropriate.Staff would also caution that the accessory structure code as it currently exists is not perfect, and is extremely detailed and not easily administered. Our accessory structure code, as <br />well as many of our other unique ordinances, are a tangled web <br />which is extremely confusing to the general lay person. <br />! 1 <br />WliK <br />Wl«il <br />.