Laserfiche WebLink
access to quality and affordable housing within livable and <br />attractive environments. Maintaining livability asthe City transitions <br />toanimfiU and redevelopment focus will require creativity and a <br />willingness to coordinate efforts. The qualities that make La Porte <br />on attractive place to live are also making La Porte an expensive <br />place to live. Increasing housing prices creates obstacles for low- <br />income households and threatens to push residents to <br />---�—unsatisfactory housing options. The inability tmfind housing locally <br />-- poses a hardship for households seeking an affordable home, as <br />well esemployers seeking employees, <br />1)Encour 8e life-cyc|e housing options in new developments that <br />will offer alternatives to existing and future residents. New <br />development and redevelopment should include more than one <br />housing type, with ordinance provisions for increased open space <br />as separation and buffering and other standards to ensure <br />compatibility. A combination of housing options and lot sizes will <br />resultinadiversityofhumsingchoices—oboicesthatvvU|beusefm| <br />in attracting and keeping singles, younger families, and older <br />residents. <br />Z)[mosider incorporating accessory dwelling units in the zoning <br />ordinance, along with appropriate provisions governing their use <br />� <br />and compatibility. They are common and increasing in popularity <br />in many communities to accommodate elderly parents or <br />relatives (i.e, "granny flats"), young adult family members <br />wanting tolive independently but close by, orstudents inneed *f <br />basic, low-cost housing. <br />3)Adoptdesign standards for high -density residential development, <br />which may include provisions for building form and scale, <br />articulated building walls, building orientation, architectural <br />detailing, roof types and materials, fa�ade enhancements, and <br />acceptable building materials, as well as site design standards <br />regarding landscape surface, parking location and arrangement, <br />bmfferymrds,and site amenities. <br />4)Esia6|ish an average, rather than minimum, lot size in the <br />residential districts whereby lot sizes are required to very in <br />width, with a certain percentage being narrower and the <br />remaining being wider than the average. For example, the <br />average lot size may allow uvariability uf1Gpercent (see inset on <br />next page). <br />5)|nappropriate locations where increased open space isdesired ur <br />needed to preserve resource features (e.g. wetland, tree stand, <br />drainage channel) or to protect compatibility between adjacent <br />developments, allow flexible site design and |ovv impact <br />development options that permit alternative treatment mfutilities <br />