02-26-1990 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

*2 f21, 1989 ' 3 latloa -lent -ping ComnUaai-- i.««n“ce° mmHJ,"'* ®o»«ider the•|rMe etruc?u “Sr o^V.”' l"‘.r-ln,aed«nd /rade^revJi^^Hri"®*^®" between «,. ^» context of viLf Patloa, afdew/iV.® pool “ •PPropt^tV*’* ««"«ce, “^ouid also iv; «"«««eod. Y of our other un*< acceasory atrii*?*^^ *^etailed co„fS;r„"«|« ordl„.„c.7/a/: a "/• «<*•. «9 to the general liy ''•'> i e » y">ep^-i •J Z /C-23'101989.1»- /)L--Mayor and Cix”’ 'ouncil Mark E. Ber City AdministratoriOctober 19, 19v "Tv-a i^C 0I. VOversized Accessory Structures Ordinance - Regulation'of Pools i J VAttachment: Oversized Accessory Structure Memo Dated 7/21/89B August 14, 1989 Minutes (Excerpt) ISSUE - Presentation to Council on background regarding the exclusion of pools in determining accessory structure allowances. INTRODUCTION - On September 25, 1989, Council discussed reconsideration of the issue of pQols being included as accessory structures for the purpose of determining "percent of lot coverage by buildings", only when such pools have a fence that exceeds six feet in height. DISCUSSION - Prior to the introduction of the accessory .structures’ ordinance, any pool under 1,000 square feet that met the applicable setbacks could be constructed in a yard without any variances. The oversized accessory structure ordinance recently adopted contains a number of specific regulations pertaining to pools as follows: A. Any pool of basin structure greater than 1,000 square feet must meet minimum setback requirement greater than the normal 10 foot setback. B. For all lots under 2 acres in area there is a 15% maximum limit on lot coverage by buildings, which include both principal and accessory structures. Any lot regardless of size would be allowed a minimum of 2,000 square feet of buildings. Pools and tennis courts with fences over six feet high would be considered as accessory structures for purposes of this calculation. As noted in Attachment A, the issue raised at the August 14, 1989 meeting involved whether the regulation of these accessory structures was one of visual density or mass, or if in fact it was on a different basis than being total structural foot print of a lot. As noted above the exceptions in the accessory structure ordin nee were for tennis courts, pools and patios and other open strc'tures, including paddocks and arenas, with fences no higher than six feet in height. These represent a diverse range of "structures". A swimming pool is the most substantial of the abr*e items considered as a structure, as opposed to a paddock or arena which is not so much a structure as an area that