Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council approves pool setback variance for Park Lane property constrained by wetland buffer

New Prague City Council · September 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The council approved a variance (B8-2025) allowing a ground pool at 1109 Park Lane SE to be sited as close as 4 feet from the house, down from the standard 10-foot setback, after the planning commission cited a wetland easement that limits placement.

The New Prague City Council approved a variance (B8‑2025 / resolution 25‑09‑02‑02) allowing applicants Ben and Anne Sheffler to locate an in‑ground pool closer to their home at 1109 Park Lane SE than the ordinance's typical 10‑foot setback. The planning commission had recommended allowing a reduced setback of up to 4 feet because a wetland easement along the property's north edge restricts placement farther from the house.

Background and staff recommendation: Planning staff explained that the property borders Settler's Park to the north and that a delineated wetland and associated easement created a 30‑foot buffer on the north side of the lot. The applicants initially obtained a building permit and then applied for the setback variance after determining on‑site constraints. Building official Scott told the council the International Code Council building code does not mandate a minimum setback for ground pools and recommended a 4‑foot minimum to avoid excavations next to foundations.

Council discussion and applicant input: Applicants Ben and Anne Sheffler attended and answered procedural questions. Council members asked about fencing and safety; staff confirmed ground pools require a full perimeter fence and that an approved hot‑tub cover is allowed for tubs but not for free‑form pools. Planning staff and the commission noted that the pool contractor had not produced a final engineered drawing, so final placement could shift slightly.

Outcome: The council moved to adopt the resolution approving the variance and the motion passed (meeting record announces the result as "passes 4-0").