Jennings considers requiring commercial parking lots to have concrete, asphalt or approved decorative paving

The Jennings City Council is considering amending its zoning ordinance to require commercial property parking lots to have concrete, asphalt or state approved decorative paving.

The ordinance would not affect residences or existing parking lots, according to Mayor Henry Guinn. It would apply to new construction or reconstruction only, including properties owned by the city or the parish.

Council members discussed changing the ordinance Tuesday, but tabled the measure for 90 days to allow for further discussion and review of the ordinance and its impact on business owners.

“I think we just need some time to review all the implications of this and make sure that we’re clear about how this would affect, whom this would affect and what is the impact of local businesses,” Councilman Clifton Lejeune said. “…I agree with the intent of making the city commercially viable and what’s best for our roads and highways, but I just think we have to consider all of the impact this would have on people that may not be aware of this.”

Delaying its introduction would give the council time to review, discuss, get more information and receive feedback before making a final decision, Lejeune said. The council also needs to consider the financial burden the ordinance could place on businesses, he said.

Residents Angela and Chris Lehman also expressed concerns about the ordinance’s language and its potential impact on local businesses.

The council needs to be more specific with the ordinance so that people will understand how the change is going to impact them, according to Angela Lehman.

“…With any ordinance that is getting introduced, it needs to be as specific as possible,” she said. “It needs to refer back to whatever standards are and it needs to be really clear how it’s getting implemented. I think a generic ordinance, no matter how you change the language, it’s really important that people understand how they are going to be impacted.”

The city recently began considering the parking lot requirements after Bumper to Bumper, a local automotive store, removed all of its concrete parking lot at the front door and replaced it with stone aggregate.

Councilman Johnny Armentor said the concrete was removed because of ongoing problems with roots from a nearby oak tree breaking the surface. Nobody will accept ownership of the tree which is located between the curb and the street, he said.

“They have patched that paving three times and they cannot get it to hold because of the root system of the oak tree,” he said.

The new parking lot does not tie into the street, but into a limestone alleyway, which is owned by the city, Armentor said.

Guinn said the city is trying to set a “bare minimum” on what is and isn’t allowed in the city on commercial properties. Without an ordinance in place, a business could legally put in a dirt parking lot, he said.

“…Without having a clear and concise code that sets the base layer, or a bottom layer, that is acceptable, you could essentially have every business in the city go back to the stone ages,” Guinn said. “The intent from my office to change the code would set a base layer for every business to operate off of.”

“We don’t want to go backwards,” he continued. “We want to continue to move forward and that’s going to take specific language.”

The ordinance allows for a property owner to appeal the decision to a board of adjustments based on undue hardship.