Should it count as lot coverage?

[michaelskis]

We have a situation that has sparked a bit of discussion in our office. It all deals with pergolas. We (although I don’t agree) consider them to be a structure, and lot coverage when they are attached to a house and need to conform to building setbacks. Yet decks and balconies have reduced regulations, and are not considered for lot coverage. Our ordinance limits lot coverage to 25%. I know of several cases where people have walk out basements along the lakes here, and the 1st floor has a balcony deck with a patio underneath. We give it the same regulations as regular decks (reduces the rear yard set back 10 feet, and not considered lot coverage). Yet, it was just a pergola above the patio, the pergola needs to conform to the regular building setbacks and is counted into lot coverage even though it is more open than a deck. I just don’t get it....

What are your thoughts? I will try to get some pictures to show you what I am talking about.

 

[Chet]

Been there done that. Counted them as part of "deck" at reduced regs.

 

[ludes98]

I would say reduced regulations also.

Some jurisdictions here count 50% of the area of any deck, patio, pergola, lanai, etc. toward lot coverage.

 

[michaelskis]

Well, we had a staff meeting this morning and our supervisor said that this is just how it is because of a 1978 ZBA decision. Our city is broken into 3 gographical sections for code enforcement. The section that I have (1/2 the city area and second dencest area behind masters...) has all the lakes. Let me just say that I am going to be the one that residents are going to get mad at. I would love to see it go back to the ZBA.

 

[The One]

Covered patio

Most of the jurisdictions I've worked in have been concerned with two things related to your issue:

1. Building coverage as it relates to mass and scale of the structure on the lot. Aesthetics of covering too much of the lot. (& Consistent Architecture)

2. Concern about increasing the run-off coefficient from each lot during a rainfall event and the corresponding effect that might have on the local drainage patterns. (Increased concrete patio area or building coverage creates a greater amount of run-off in the neighborhood (x200 or 300+ for whole subdivision- can make a major difference) A way of protecting the original drainage design for a neighborhood.

While the pergola itself may not create much more run-off and may even add to the appearence of the lot, the patio beneath will add to run-off. They tend to be considered a "structure" and require a permit. Sometimes they are attached to a home and sometimes they are detached.....on larger lots.... Whether or not they are considered for relaxed setbacks is up to the jurisdiction. Anyway, its a call made by staff, building code & community leaders.

 

[solarstar]

We would definitely count it as ISR. The only thing exempt are decks (uncovered), boardwalks, etc. with minimum 1/2-inch spacing so that rainwater can flow through. (Drainage is a huge problem here).

 

[michaelskis]

We would definitely count it as ISR. The only thing exempt are decks (uncovered), boardwalks, etc. with minimum 1/2-inch spacing so that rainwater can flow through. (Drainage is a huge problem here).

What about decks on a second floor with a patio below it? Would the deck count then?

 

[solarstar]

What about decks on a second floor with a patio below it? Would the deck count then?

Yes, since the patio is impervious and would be with or without a deck over it. If they put dirt underneath, and put 1/2 inch spacing on the deck, then it would be pervious. I've been informed by the building plans examiners that 1/2 inch isn't exactly the safest thing, but its the builders' choice on that. We're a bit strict about ISR, and even include A/C pads, trash can pads, etc. in ISR calcs since some of them are just plain huge.

 

[H]

what on earth is a pergola?

EDIT: okay I googled it. It should only count if it is above impervious surface.