My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2017.06.05 CC Packet
Hugo
>
City Council
>
City Council Agenda/Packets
>
2017 CC Packets
>
2017.06.05 CC Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2017 9:10:14 AM
Creation date
6/2/2017 9:00:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Document Type
Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
6/5/2017
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
129
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Page 3 <br />1. Thirty (30) foot rear yard setback. <br />2. Ten (10) foot side yard setback. <br />3. Six (6) feet from any principle structure or frost footing (i.e., deck). <br />d. Large Above -Ground Swimming Pools: <br />i. Building permit is required (submittal requirements within the ordinance) <br />ii. Fencing is required (fencing requirements within the ordinance) <br />e. Small Above -Ground Swimming Pools: <br />i. Above ground swimming pools of this size that are not surrounded by a <br />fence must have a removable ladder that is removed at all times when the <br />swimming pool is not in use. <br />4. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE CITY: <br />Staff has discussed how the swimming pool ordinance will effect residents that already have <br />established swimming pools. From conversations with our Building Official, all permitted <br />swimming pools would have had to meet the requirements of the building code, at that time. <br />The swi mmi ng pool ordi nance wi I I be i n effect for al I swi mmi ng pool s constructed or i nstal I ed <br />subsequentl y to the adopti on of thi s ordi nance. <br />6. CONCLUSION: <br />The ORC agreed that the swi mmi ng pool ordi nance i s necessary to have the Ci ty' s requi rements i n <br />one I ocati on f or cl ari f i cati on and ease of resi dent use. <br />The ORC di scussed pri or requi rements, sped f i cal I y rel ated to setbacks, and bel i eved that i n -ground <br />pools did not create the same visual impact that an accessory structure does, therefore, was <br />comfortabl e wi th reduci ng the rear yard setback requi rements. The ORC bel i eved I arge and smal I <br />above -ground pool s di d create the same vi sued i mpact of accessory structures, therefore, di d not <br />change the rear yard setback requi rements. The ORC made sped al provi si ons for al I not se maki ng <br />mechani cal equi pment to hel p further reduce the i mpact of swi mmi ng pool s to adj acent property <br />owners. <br />7. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: <br />The Planning Commission agreed that the swimming pool ordinance was a good place where <br />residents can find all requirements in one location. The Planning Commission recommended <br />approval to the City Council. <br />8. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: <br />Staff recommends approval of the swimming pool ordinance. <br />ATTACHMENTS: <br />1. Section 90-279: Swimming Pool Ordinance. <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.