O-1987-1501 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

,Cnairman Wilsom and imbers of the Commission . City of LaPorte e Page l6 certain homes dictate the location of this within the side yard. The Des ign of modern residential developments tends to provide for this contingency, by staggering or al ternating the location of air conditioning equipment so that said equipment is not located next to or close to adjoinging residential structures. However, it should also be noted that placement of said units in a side yard tends to discourage access from a front yard to a rear yard, particularly in cases of dense development. Finally, it should be noted that this section applies only to accessory uses or equipment being located in required side yards. There- fore, if an individual has a side yard in excess of the basic requirements, the said cooling structures or equipment can be, located in the side yard, to the extent that the required setback is maintained from the cooling structure equipment to the property line. ANALYSIS: Amend this section to allo\'1 air conditioning cooling structures and condensers in required side yards. 31) Section 10-603: Citizen comments indicates that this section, which generally requires a submission of Certified Site Plan drawings in case of building and zoning permits, but also further particularly "en- courages" developers to submit a Certified Site Plan in case of resurfacing of an existing parking lot, be amended to not encou- rage the submission of a Certified Site Plan in case of the re-surfacing of an existing parking lot. The intent of this section is to encourage re-surfacing of an existing parking lot in compliance with the new parking standards as established in this ordinance, which also would mean adherance to new and appro- priate standards regarding maneuverability and parking lot design, together with drainage improvements that might be necessary to alleviate flooding. It should be noted, however, that any exi- sting parking lot is a legally established pre-existing use under the terms of this ordinance, and complaince with this section cannot be mandated, without radically changing the treat- ment of pre-existing uses in the ordinance as a whole~ In fact, strict application of this section might encourage a developer to actually not resurface an exiting parking lot when re-surfacing is actually called f~r for basic safety and maneuverability reasons. ANALYSIS: Remove the language in this ordinance section encoura- ging the applicant to submit a Certified Site Plan that adheres new design standards for parking lots that are to be resurfaced. 32. Section lO-605: Citizen comment indicates that this section, which prescribes design standards or requirements assessory to parking under this