Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pool Safety Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board permits pool cover instead of fence at 405 Saddle Path Lane with health‑department conditions
Summary
The Board approved VA‑26‑017 to allow an automatic pool cover in place of a 5‑ft fence at 405 Saddle Path Lane, conditioned on amending permits within three months and addressing Licking County Health Department comments about septic/well separation.
Get email alerts on the Pool Safety Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Pataskala Board of Appeals on July 14 approved VA‑26‑017, allowing an automatic pool cover rather than the 5‑foot fence normally required around swimming pools, subject to conditions that the applicant amend permits within three months and satisfy the Licking County Health Department.
Planning staff described the property at 405 Saddle Path Lane as roughly 5.87 acres and rural residential. The applicant proposed a pool approximately 12 by 30 feet and stated the automatic cover meets an ASTM standard; staff noted the pool location is shown about 10 feet from the septic tank on the site plan but that the well location was not shown. Section 12.97.02(b)(4) requires swimming pools to be enclosed by a fence at least five feet high with a self‑closing, locking gate; the applicant asked to substitute an ASTM‑rated automatic cover on the basis that the property’s setback distances, wooded buffer and private setting reduce the likelihood of unsupervised access.
Applicant Andrew Young (405 Saddle Path Lane) told the board the well is on the other side of the house and the pool location was chosen to avoid cutting trees; he also said a family member recovering from knee surgery will use the pool for therapy.
The board approved the variance with two conditions: the applicant must amend the pool permit through planning and zoning within three months and must address all comments from the Licking County Health Department related to septic and well separation. The board noted staff had not independently verified the ASTM certification the applicant referenced.

