Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2015 01 21

Home Browse Search

The property owners would like to install a new pool, but are faced with contradicting requirements. Section 17.16.170(B) states: Every swimming pool must be completely surrounded by a fence or wall not less than five feet in height with no openings large enough to permit children to pass through, other than gates or doors that can be fastened to protect against entry. A dwelling house or accessory building may be used as part of such required enclosure The property is also governed by the Centennial 7 planned unit development (PUD) which states fences "shall be 48 inches high California chain link between all lots and open space...." Because the property backs to the Harper Lake open space, the maximum allowed fence height along the rear lot line is four feet. The only way the property owner could comply with both requirements would be to build a second, five foot fence inside the four foot one. The second fence would need to comply with accessory structure setbacks, requiring it to be 10 feet from the rear lot line, effectively running through the middle of the back yard. The applicant is therefore requesting relief from the five foot fence requirement so the existing four foot fence may serve as the required fence around the pool. To ensure safety, the applicant proposes to install an automatic pool cover which would secure the pool at all times when it is not in use. Several other jurisdictions, including Cherry Hills Village and Greenwood Village, allow the use of pool covers instead of fences, as long as the pool cover meets ASTM standards, which the proposed pool cover does (see attachments). The City of Louisville's building code requires only a four foot fence around pools. REVIEW CRITERIA: The BOA has authority to hear and decide, grant or deny this application for a variance from Section 17.16.170(B) of the LMC by the powers granted the BOA in Section 17.48.110 of the LMC. The BOA may grant a variance only if it makes findings that all of the criteria, as established under Section 17.48.110.B.1 -6, have been satisfied, insofar as applicable: The applicant has provided a written analysis of the variance criteria, which has been included in the BOA packet materials. Following is a staff review and analysis of the variance criteria. 1. That there are unique physical circumstances or conditions such as irregularity, narrowness or shallowness of lot, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the affected property. The unique physical circumstance in this case is that the lot backs to open space and the PUD includes specific fence requirements that contradict the requirements of the LMC. Staff finds this criterion has been met. 2