Jan 22, 2024 Planning Commission

[00:00:05]

OKAY, SET.

COMING TO YOU IN FIVE SECONDS.

LET'S DOWN TO THREE ONE.

GOOD EVENING EVERYONE, AND THANK YOU FOR JOINING US FOR TONIGHT'S PLANNING AND

[ROLL CALL]

CHAIRMAN WASHINGTON.

HERE, VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT.

HERE.

COMMISSIONER ADDISON.

COMMISSIONER BANKS.

HERE.

COMMISSIONER BOYD? HERE.

COMMISSIONER ELLEN.

HERE.

COMMISSIONER FOWLER HERE.

AND COMMISSIONER SCROGGS HERE.

WE HAVE A QUORUM.

THANK YOU.

DIRECTOR HOLCOMB.

BEFORE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, I'D LIKE TO JUST TAKE A MOMENT TO WELCOME THE NEWEST COMMISSIONER, UH, BLAKE FOWLER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

WELCOME ABOARD BLAKE.

THANK YOU.

GLAD TO BE HERE.

AT THIS TIME WE'LL

[1. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN ]

FIRST I'LL READ IN THE RULES.

UH, WE'LL TAKE ELECTION OF THE CHAIRMAN FIRST, FOLLOWED BY THE VICE CHAIRMAN.

UH, AFTER WE'LL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR A NOMINATION, COMMISSIONERS WILL VOTE IN THE ORDER.

THEY'RE NOMINATED, FIRST PERSON TO RECEIVE FIVE AFFIRMATIVE VOTES, WINS, AND COMMISSIONERS CAN VOTE FOR THEMSELVES.

AT THIS TIME, WE'LL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR NOMINATIONS FOR THE CHAIRMAN.

I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE, UH, ROSSI, WASHINGTON FOR CHAIRMAN.

DO WE HAVE ANY OPPOSED, ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? CONGRATULATIONS, CHAIRMAN ON THANK YOU BEING REELECTED.

THANK YOU EVERYONE.

THIS TIME WE'LL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR NOMINATIONS, UH, OR FOR VICE CHAIRMAN I'LL NOMINATE, UH, CLIFF CORRE.

ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? ANYONE OPPOSED? CONGRATULATIONS.

CLIFF GROUT.

I'M BEING REELECTED TO VICE CHAIRMAN.

WE

[2. APPROVAL OF 2023 ANNUAL REPORT ]

THANK YOU.

DIRECTOR HOLCOMB COMMISSIONERS.

IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT AND APPROVE THE 2023 ANNUAL REPORT? MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCRAGG? SECOND BY VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT.

ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS? SEEING NONE, THAT ITEM IS APPROVED.

WE'LL NOW MOVE ON

[3. APPROVAL OF 2024 CALENDAR ]

IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE 2024 CALENDAR? EXCUSE ME.

THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR BY COMMISSIONER BOYD, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SCROGGS.

ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS? SEEING NONE, THAT ITEM IS APPROVED.

[4. APPROVAL OF 2024 WORK PROGRAM ]

IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION WORK PROGRAM? MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCROGGS? IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOYD.

ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS? SEEING NONE.

THAT ITEM IS APPROVED.

WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO

[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? EXCUSE ME.

IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 11TH MEETING? MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SCROGGS SECOND BY VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT.

ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO APPROVING THE MINUTES? SEEING NONE, THESE ITEMS HAVE BEEN APPROVED.

AT THIS TIME

[RULES FOR CONDUCTING PUBLIC HEARINGS]

RULES FOR CONDUCTING PUBLIC HEARINGS.

THIS IS A PUBLIC MEETING.

ANY INTERESTED MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO COMMENT ON AN ITEM FROM THIS AGENDA MAY COMMENT IN PERSON AT CITY HALL 2 2 2 ST.

LOUIS STREET, THIRD FLOOR ROOM 3 38.

3 48.

DURING THE MEETING, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DESIRING TO SPEAK ON A PARTICULAR ITEM SHOULD REFER TO A MEETING AGENDA AND COMPLETE NECESSARY INFORMATION PRIOR TO THE MEETING BY FILLING OUT A REQUEST TO SPEAK CARD INDICATING WHICH ITEM YOU WISH TO ON WHICH YOU TO SPEAK AND PLACE IT IN THE DESIGNATED LOCATION PRIOR TO THE MEETING.

APPLICANT AND APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVES FOR THE PROPOSAL WILL SPEAK FIRST FOR A TOTAL OR COMBINED PERIOD OF NOT TO EXCEED 15 MINUTES.

PROPONENTS WILL SPEAK AND THEN THE OPPONENTS.

EACH SPEAKER WILL NOT BE ALLOWED MORE THAN THREE MINUTES.

SPEAKERS ARE REQUESTED TO LIMIT THEIR REMARKS BY AVOIDING DUPLICATION IN THEIR PRESENTATIONS.

APPLICANT WILL BE ALLOWED A TOTAL OF FIVE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL.

OPPONENTS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO REBUT ITEMS PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

STAFF WILL NOT HAVE TIME ALLOCATED FOR SPEAKING UNLESS THERE IS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC AT THE MEETING WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM.

IN SUCH CASE, THE PROPOSAL WILL FOLLOW THE STANDARD PROCEDURE.

[00:05:01]

WE CAN NOW MOVE

[CONSENT AGENDA]

MR. BALDWIN CONSENT ITEMS FOR WITHDRAWAL.

THERE ARE NONE.

UM, CONSENT ITEMS FOR DEFERRAL.

ITEM 12, PAGE 6 24, 76 0 5 AND 76 0 7 TOM DRIVE THERE REZO PROPERTY FROM HEAVY INDUSTRIAL M TWO TO LIGHT COMMERCIAL ONE LC ONE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TOM DRIVE EAST OF WOODDALE COURT DEFERRED TO FEBRUARY 19TH.

CONSENT ITEMS FOR APPROVAL.

ITEM SEVEN, CASE 1 24 11 8 5 8 SOUTH HARRELL FERRY ROAD, THE REZONE PROPERTY FROM LIGHT COMMERCIAL TWO LC TWO TO HEAVY COMMERCIAL ONE HC ONE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HU SOUTH HARRELL FERRY ROAD, WEST OF EASTGATE DRIVE.

ITEM EIGHT, CASE 2 24 55 23 HIGHLAND ROAD TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM LIMITED RESIDENTIAL A 3.1 TO NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE O LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HIGHLAND ROAD, EAST OF MCDONALD AVENUE.

ITEM NINE, CASE 3 24 30 86 NORTH FOSTER DRIVE TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL A 2.7 THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL NC LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF NORTH FOSTER DRIVE SOUTH OF GENE STREET.

ITEM 10, CASE 4 24 8 5 8 51 MONTEREY BOULEVARD TO REZO PROPERTY FROM LIGHT COMMERCIAL C ONE OFF STREET PARKING B AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

A ONE TO LIGHT COMMERCIAL ONE LC ONE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF MONTEREY BOULEVARD NORTH OF FLORIDA BOULEVARD.

ITEM 11, CASE 5 24 58 71 SOUTH SHERWOOD FOREST BOULEVARD TO REZONED PROPERTY FROM COMMERCIAL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE BAR AND LOUNGE, CAB TWO AND HEAVY COMMERCIAL C TWO.

THE HEAVY COMMERCIAL TWO HC TWO LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH SHERWOOD FOREST BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF WENTLING AVENUE.

ITEM 13 RV 3 23 FRISCO STREET REVOCATION PROPOSED REVOCATION OF A PORTION OF FRISCO STREET RIGHT OF WAY LOCATED BETWEEN SPANISH TOWN ROAD AND GRACIE STREET EAST OF NORTH 16TH STREET.

ITEM 16, CSS 1 24 RIVERSIDE LODGE PROPOSED FLAG LOTT MINOR SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON THE EAST END OF SOUTH HAR FERRY ROAD EAST OF RIVER BREEZE DRIVE.

ITEM 17, CSS 2 24 ALLEN PINE ACRES PROPOSED FLAG LOT MINOR SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF GREENWELL SPRINGS ROAD SOUTH OF STONY POINT BIRCH ROAD.

ITEM 18 S 1 24 THE OAKS ON MOSS SIDE.

SUBDIVISION PROPOSED MAJOR RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION WITH PRIVATE STREETS LOCATED SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF MOSS SIDE LANE AND PEGGY STREET.

ITEM 19 SS 1 24 LEON R KLON PETER SENIOR ESTATE PROPOSED ROAD EXTENSION OF REER ROAD OVER THE WARD CREEK DIVERSION CANAL LOCATED EAST OF PICO LANE NORTH OF INTERSTATE 10.

ITEM 20 SP 1323 THE NEUTRON GROUP.

PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF AIRLINE HIGHWAY WEST OF BARRINGER FOREMAN ROAD.

ITEM 21 SP 1 24 A WC INCORPORATED FACILITY EXPANSION.

PROPOSED WAREHOUSE EXPANSION LOCATED ON THE SOUTH END OF REVENUE DRIVE SOUTH OF MERCANTILE DRIVE.

PLANNING COMMISSION.

STAFF CERTIFIES THAT ALL OF THESE ITEMS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE UDC.

WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE MESSAGE IN OPPOSITION TO ITEM EIGHT, CASE 2 24 AND HAD A REQUEST TO PULL THAT ITEM FROM THE CONSENTED AGENDA.

IN ADDITION, WE'VE HAD A REQUEST FROM THE PUBLIC TO PULL ITEM 19.

CASE SS 1 24.

THE LEON KLINE PETER ESTATE PROPERTY FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THANK YOU COMMISSION MEMBERS.

YOU HAVE HEARD ALL THE ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT ARE TO BE TAKEN WITH ONE VOTE.

ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHO HAVE AN ITEM ON CONSENT THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE PULLED TO BE HEARD AS PART OF THE REGULAR AGENDA? DO WE HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC PRESENT WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? SEEING NONE, IS THERE A MOTION MOVED BY VICE CHAIRMAN GROUND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SCROGGS? ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO ACCEPTING THE ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? JUST TO BE CLEAR, JUST TO BE CLEAR, ITEM EIGHT, CASE 2 24 HIGHLAND ROAD WILL BE PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA IN ADDITION TO ITEM 19.

CASE SS 1 24.

THOSE TWO ITEMS WILL BE HEARD IN THE REGULAR AGENDA ORDER.

THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION DIRECTOR HOLCOMB, ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO ACCEPTING ANY OF THOSE THE REMAINING ITEMS? SEEING NONE THOUGH THESE ITEMS HAVE NOW BEEN APPROVED AND WE CAN NOW MOVE ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA.

WE'LL BEGIN WITH ITEM NUMBER SIX.

PLAN

[6. PA-17-23 6800-6900 Burbank Drive]

[00:10:02]

THE APPLICANT IS CHARLES GLADNEY JR.

THE CURRENT FUTURE BI LAND USE DESIGNATION IS RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE REQUESTED FUTURE VR LAND USE DESIGNATION IS COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMERCIAL PA 17 23 6800 TO 6,900 BURBANK DRIVE.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PLAN AMENDMENT BASED UPON EXAMINATION OF THE AREA.

AT A FURTHER LEVEL OF DETAIL IN COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING USES, THE PLAINTIFF COMMISSION OFFICE HAS RECEIVED TWO MESSAGES IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU COMMISSION MEMBERS.

AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK TO SPEAK FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 15 MINUTES.

GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING.

BO BOOTY CENTER LINE ENGINEERING, SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE DEVELOPER.

AS UH, WAS JUST MENTIONED, WE'RE HERE FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE AMENDMENT FROM RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD TO BOTH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

SHOULD BE NOTED THAT, UH, THE SURROUNDING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS IN THIS AREA, UH, DO HAVE COMMERCIAL, DO HAVE COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD IN THIS AREA ALSO, UH, THE PLANNING STAFF, UH, HAS CERTIFIED THAT THIS REQUEST MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR PLAN AMENDMENT AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

I HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER CARD FOR, UH, CHARLES.

GLAD ANDY WISH TO SPEAK.

OKAY.

WE HAVE TWO SPEAKER CARDS THAT ARE IN OPPOSITION.

THE FIRST IS FOR SARAH TIPTON.

BE ON THE FLOOR FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU.

GOOD EVENING.

I'M A MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELOR IN BATON ROUGE PRACTICING FOR 10 YEARS.

I'M ALSO A LANDLORD OWNING FIVE BUILDING BUILDINGS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHLAND ROAD.

THIS REZONING WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION BY SEVERAL OF MY TENANTS, FELLOW MENTAL HEALTH CLINICIANS, DOCTORS WHO ARE VERY CONCERNED.

THIS CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL WOULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT OUR BUILDINGS, WHICH ARE JUST NORTH OF BAYOU FOUNTAIN AND A STONE'S THROW FROM THE LAND AND DISCUSSION.

WE'RE FOREMOST CONCERNED ABOUT THE REAL EFFECTS ON FLOODING RUNOFF, SEWAGE DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY THAT THIS CHANGE WOULD IMPOSE.

UH, AT PRESENT I HAVE THREE BUILDINGS IN FLOOD ZONE AE THAT ARE RAISED TO ACCOMMODATE THE ALREADY SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF FLOODING THAT OCCURS AFTER A HARD RAIN WHEN ELBOW BAYOU AND BAYOU FOUNTAIN BACK UP AND DRAINS SLOWLY.

IF THIS CHANGE IN LAND USE GOES THROUGH, I FEAR THAT THE FLOOD MAPS WOULD CHANGE AND LANDOWNERS ON BURBANK AND HIGHLAND WOULD SEE AN INCREASE IN FLOODING.

PRACTICALLY FOR ME, THAT MEANS BUILDINGS THAT I HAVE THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN FLOOD ZONE X COULD THEN NOW BE IN FLOOD ZONE AE I WOULD INCUR ADDITIONAL COSTS TO AGAIN GET FLOOD INSURANCE FOR THOSE TWO BUILDINGS AS WELL AS EFFORTS TO MAKE THEM FLOOD SAFE.

THE DRAINAGE ISSUE WE HAVE IN OUR AREA SUBSTANTIAL AND I ASK THAT WE PROCEED WITH IMMENSE CAUTION IN CHANGING THE USE OF FLOODPLAIN INTO A COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD.

WHILE I BELIEVE IT IS NOT STANDARD PROTOCOL TO CONSIDER THE UDC AT THIS STAGE OF THE PLANNING PROCESS, SINCE BUSINESSES AND HOMES ALONG THE BURBANK HIGHLAND CORRIDOR HAVE EXPERIENCED SIGNIFICANT FLOODING ISSUES OF LATE, I URGE YOU TO CONSIDER THE IMPLICATIONS THIS LAND USE CHANGE WOULD HAVE ON FLOODING AMONG OTHER THINGS, SPECIFICALLY CHAPTER 15, FLOODWAYS FLOODPLAINS DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY SECTION FOUR STATES, NO STRUCTURE OR LAND SHALL BE, SHALL BE LOCATED, ALTERED, OR HAVE ITS USE CHANGED WITH WITHOUT FULL COMPLIANCE WITH TERMS OF CHAPTER 15 AND OTHER APPLICABLE REGULATIONS.

CHAPTER 15 FURTHER REQUIRES A NUMBER OF ASSESSMENTS AND PERMITS REGARDING HOW THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS BUILT SHOULD BE BUILT.

AS YOU ALL KNOW, HAS A TRAFFIC STUDY OR DRAINAGE STUDY BEEN CONDUCTED FOR THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? AND IF SO, I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW WHERE I CAN FIND THAT INFORMATION, THOUGH THIS IS EARLY IN THE PROCESS.

I ALSO URGE YOU TO CONSIDER CHAPTER FOUR OF THE UDC, UM, THAT SAYS ANY PROPOSED SITE PLAN NEEDS TO HAVE CONDUCTED STUDIES ON HOW THESE BUILDINGS, UH, ARE IN THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST AND DOES NOT RESULT IN UNDUE CONGESTION OF STREETS, OVERCROWDING OF LAND, OVERBURDENING OF PUBLIC FACILITIES, INCLUDING AMONG OTHERS, SEWAGE SOLID WASTE, DRAINAGE, ET CETERA.

ADDITIONALLY, WHILE EACH INDIVIDUAL PROJECT OR SITE CONSTRUCTION OR BURBANK MAY NOT MAY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS STATED IN PAGE FOUR DASH FIVE AND FOUR DASH SIX OF THE CODE, MY CONCERN IS THAT NO STUDY HAS BEEN DONE TO DETERMINE WHAT THE EFFECTS OF ALL THESE GREEN-LIGHTED PROJECTS HAVE IN THE AGGREGATE.

SPECIFICALLY WHEN TAKEN AS A WHOLE ARE OUR WATERWAYS, SEWAGE RUNOFF, TRAFFIC AND WATER AFFECTED SUBSTANTIALLY AGAINST THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST.

LASTLY, I ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, WHICH INDICATES THIS VERY ATTRACTIVE LAND BE USED IN THE FUTURE AS RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND NOT COMPACT OR COMMERCIAL.

THE LAND USE PLANNERS WHO COMPLI, WHO COMPILED

[00:15:01]

THANK YOU FOR DELAYING THIS PROPOSITION UNTIL FURTHER RESEARCH HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED ON THE EFFECTS TO US THE PUBLIC.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

OUR NEXT QUARTER IS FOR HEIDI BURNS.

AYE.

HI.

UM, I DO NOT HAVE A DOG IN THIS FIGHT.

I AM JUST A NEIGHBOR.

UM, AND, UH, I'M A HOMEOWNER IN SOUTH BATON ROUGE, BUT I STARTED MY CAREER AS A COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE APPRAISER IN TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA, AND I HOLD A CERTIFIED GENERAL APPRAISAL LICENSE IN FLORIDA.

SO THAT'S KIND OF THE LENS AND THE BACKGROUND THAT I'M COMING HERE WITH THIS AS WELL AS JUST CONCERN.

UM, WHAT I LEARNED EARLY ON IN APPRAISING VARIOUS TYPES OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT, UM, THERE IN FLORIDA, WAS THAT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT WAS SOMETHING FLORIDA TOOK VERY SERIOUSLY.

SO AFTER MOVING BACK TO LOUISIANA MANY YEARS LATER AND SEEING OUR GROWING FLOOD PROBLEMS, I REALIZED HOW DIFFERENTLY DEVELOPMENT SEEMS TO HAPPEN HERE.

UM, BUT YET OUR WEATHER AND OUR LANDSCAPE ARE VERY SIMILAR TO FLORIDA'S.

SO AFTER SEARCHING FOR SOME ANALYSIS OF THE DIFFERENCES IN OUR APPROACHES ONLINE, UM, I SAW THAT ON THE FRONT PAGE OF LOUISIANA STORMWATER.COM.

THEY ALSO HOLD FLORIDA UP AS THE STANDARD FOR HOW THINGS CAN BE IMPROVED.

UM, IT SAYS THEY'RE A LEADER IN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE FOR LOUISIANA BECAUSE OF SIMILAR STORMWATER DYNAMICS, TOPOGRAPHY AND PRECIPITATION LEVELS.

OVER 30 YEARS AGO, FLORIDA DEBT DECLARED STORMWATER A UTILITY TO REDUCE LITTER ON THEIR STREETS.

IT GOES ON TO SAY, UH, THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF WHAT BEGAN AS A LITTER REDUCTION PROGRAM ARE TODAY CALLED FLOOD PREVENTION AND WATER QUALITY PROGRAMS. IT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL.

ALSO, KEEP LOUISIANA BEAUTIFUL.ORG HAS A STATEMENT REFERRING TO FLORIDA'S EXAMPLE AND HOW TALLAHASSEE SPECIFICALLY IMPLEMENTED ONE OF THE FIRST STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS IN REVERSE SIMILAR PROBLEM FLOODING PROBLEMS. SO MY STATEMENT HERE IS THAT THE BURDEN SHOULD NOT BE ON CITIZENS AND HOMEOWNERS AND NEIGHBORS TO COME TO THESE MEETINGS AND BEG FOR MERCY, UM, IN AREAS THAT HAVE NEVER FLOODED BEFORE, SUCH AS MAGNOLIA WOODS, SOUTH DOWNS, WALDEN POLLARD, UM, THESE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE, THAT ARE NOW HAVING PROBLEMS, UM, WE SHOULD BE GOING ABOUT OUR BUSINESS AND AND RELYING ON THE FACT THAT WE HAVE CODIFIED REGULATIONS THAT WILL PROTECT US FROM ANY NEW RUNOFF, FROM NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, UH, CONCRETE ASPHALT THAT ARE ARE BUILT BY THESE DEVELOPERS.

UM, I REVIEWED APPENDIX K BRIEFLY OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH IS TITLED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BEST PRACTICES, AND I SEE THAT IN THE CODE THERE ARE, UH, PRACTICES THAT ARE PREFERRED AND THEY REFERENCE APPENDIX K, BUT THERE AREN'T THAT MANY THAT SEEM TO BE REQUIRED.

UH, FURTHER APPENDIX K WAS COMPLETED IN 2007, WHICH PREDATES A LOT OF THE ISSUES WE'VE BEEN HAVING.

SO WHAT I'M ASKING YOU IS CAN WE UPDATE APPENDIX K INCORPORATE MORE OF THE BEST PRACTICES AS REQUIREMENTS IN THE CODE? YES, THEY MAY BE MORE EXPENSIVE FOR DEVELOPERS AND CUT INTO SOME SHORT-TERM PROFITS, BUT THEY ARE GOING TO CONTRIBUTE TO OUR LONG-TERM STABILITY.

UM, I'M A PROPONENT OF GROWTH AND INVESTMENT.

GO AHEAD.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

I'M SORRY, YOUR TIME IS UP.

THANKS.

AT THIS TIME I'LL INVITE THE APPLICANT BACK FOR A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL.

THANK YOU.

I'LL JUST TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF THINGS.

UH, WE ARE HERE JUST FOR A, UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN USE AMENDMENT, WHICH IS, UM, IN LINE WITH, WITH THE PLAN STAFF CERTIFIES AS ACCEPTABLE FOR THIS AREA.

WE WILL STILL HAVE TO COME BACK FOR REZONING AND WE'LL, WE WILL HAVE TO SUBMIT ALL STUDIES AT A PROPER, AT THE PROPER TIME.

I WILL ALSO SAY THAT, UH, I HEARD CHAPTER 15 MENTIONED CHAPTER 15 HAS SINCE BECOME, UH, MORE STRINGENT, UH, TO TOWARDS DRAINAGE AND, AND MITIGATION AND, AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS THAT WE WILL HAVE TO ADHERE TO WHEN DEVELOPING THIS PROJECT.

SO I JUST WANT TO PUT THOSE COUPLE THINGS OUT THERE.

THANK YOU AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU.

COMMISSION MEMBERS.

AT THIS TIME I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, UH, REGARDING THIS ITEM.

ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OF MO? UH, MOTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER ALLEN? YEAH, I'M NOT GONNA MAKE A MOTION, BUT JUST, UH, I'M

[00:20:01]

I, I KIND OF THINK THAT THE CURRENT CURRENT ZONING ACTUALLY DOES FIT IT JUST BASED ON LOOKING AT THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF BURBANK AND AREA TO THE NORTH.

UH, FROM WHAT I'M SEEING IS, IS IN THE SAME ZONING.

SO, UM, NOT REALLY ON BOARD, I GUESS FOR, FOR SUPPORTING THE CHANGE.

UM, BUT I'LL LISTEN TO A FEW OTHER COMMENTS, BUT RIGHT NOW I JUST KIND OF KNOW WHERE I'M AT.

THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER ELER.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION.

JUST A POINT OF CLARITY.

THERE HAS BEEN SOME, UH, WORDS USED IN INTERCHANGE, UH, THROUGHOUT THIS CONVERSATION.

AS THE APPLICANT STATED, THIS IS A PLAN AMENDMENT.

UH, THERE HAS BEEN A COUPLE REFERENCES TO REZONING.

UH, THERE IS NO REQUEST TO REZONE THIS PROPERTY AT THIS TIME.

UM, THIS IS A FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

AMENDMENT IS WHAT IS BEING, UH, REQUESTED.

IT DOES, UH, REQUIRE COUNCIL APPROVAL, UM, THE FOLLOWING MONTH IF THIS WERE TO BE SENT ON TO COUNCIL AND, UM, THE APPLICANT TO REZONE THIS PROPERTY, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AT A LATER DATE FOR TWO ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARINGS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL.

AND IT WAS STATED, UM, THE CITY PARISH THROUGH THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION HAS, UH, UPDATED CHAPTER 15, THE STORMWATER REGULATIONS, UH, SUBSTANTIAL REWRITE OF THAT ENTIRE CHAPTER.

IT'S ONE OF THE STRONGEST IN THE STATE IN THE SOUTHEAST UNITED STATES.

UM, AND THERE IS, UH, EXTENSIVE MODELING THAT IS REQUIRED FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT, UM, THAT'S IN A, IN A FLOOD ZONE.

JUST WANTED TO, TO STATE THAT.

THANK YOU.

DIRECTOR HOLCOMB.

COMMISSIONER LANDER.

SO WE'LL SEE THIS.

IF IF THIS THIS PASSES AND GOES PAST COUNSEL, WE WOULD SEE IT AGAIN AS A REZONING.

THAT'S CORRECT.

THERE'S, THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS.

UH, IF THIS WERE TO BE APPROVED, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK FOR REZONING, UH, TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY AND THEN ADDITIONALLY SUBMIT SITE PLANS AND STUDIES, UH, THAT WOULD BE THE FOLLOWING STEP AFTER A POTENTIAL REZONING IN THE FUTURE.

AND IT'S, AT THAT POINT THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THE, UH, ENGINEERING AND AND WHATNOT TO RECEIVE THE APPROVEMENT APPROVALS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT MEETING THOSE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.

THAT'S CORRECT.

THANKS.

COMMISSIONER SCROGGS, I, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM COMMISSIONER SCROGGS TO APPROVE THIS ITEM.

IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION AS A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER BOYD? ANY OBJECTIONS? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, THIS ITEM IS APPROVED AT THIS TIME.

[8. CONSENT FOR APPROVAL Case 2-24 5523 Highland Road]

HIGHLAND ROAD.

PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HIGHLAND ROAD, EAST OF MCDONALD AVENUE COUNCIL DISTRICT 12 ROCKA.

THE APPLICANT IS AJ NOLA.

FUTURE VR LAND USE DESIGNATION IS RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE EXISTING ZONING IS LIMITED.

RESIDENTIAL A THREE ONE WITH A REQUESTED ZONING OF NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE CASE 2 24 5 5 2 3 HIGHLAND ROAD.

STAFF CERTIFIES THAT THE PROPOSED REQUEST MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING USES AND CONFORMING TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS.

WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE MESSAGE OF OPPOSITION TO THIS REZONING REQUEST.

THANK YOU COMMISSION MEMBERS.

AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 15 MINUTES.

IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YOU'RE THE APPLICANT FOR THIS, FOR THIS, UH, CASE? YES SIR.

YOU HAVE 15 MINUTES TO, UH, MAKE WHATEVER COMMENTS YOU, YOU LIKE TO BE CONSIDERED.

YES.

I'M AJ NOLA.

I LIVE ON MCDONALD STREET.

UH, BEEN THERE ALL MY LIFE.

MY FAMILY OWNS 10 PROPERTIES ON MCDONALD.

UM, I'M TRYING TO, I I I HAVE A RENT A DUPLEX ON THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW AND I'M TRYING TO AVOID RENTING THE COLLEGE STUDENT FROM TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM THAT AND DO A, UM, LIKE A NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE IS WHAT I'M WANT TO DO.

SO, UM, THAT'S THE PLAN AND HOPEFULLY IT'LL PASS, UM, NO

[00:25:01]

UM, IF THAT'S THE CASE.

UM, AND THAT'S ABOUT IT.

I MEAN, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ALL I COULD REALLY OFFER.

THAT'S WHAT I WANNA DO.

A A NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE.

OKAY.

YEP.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR HEARING.

THANK YOU.

MM-HMM, .

WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER CARD, UH, THAT IS IN OPPOSITION FOR RUSSELL HODGES.

MR. HODGES, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU.

MY NAME'S RUSSELL HODGES, PO BOX 4 4 0 6 BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA, 7 0 8 2 1.

UH, I COME HERE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS MATTER CURRENTLY BEFORE THE ZONING COMMISSION.

IT'S AN EFFORT TO REZONE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 55 23 HIGHLAND ROAD FROM A LIMITED RESIDENTIAL TO A NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE, OR TO PUT IT MORE PLAINLY FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL.

I NOTE THAT THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN STATED BY THE STAFF TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING USES.

HOWEVER, THERE ARE NOTHING BUT HOMES FOR 1.2 MILES ON BOTH SIDES OF HIGHLAND ROAD SOUTH OF THIS PROPOSED SITE UNTIL YOU REACH ANOTHER COM COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, THERE WAS ONE SINGLE PROPERTY, A LITTLE BANK THAT'S BEEN THERE SINCE THE EARLY SIXTIES, THEN IT GOES BACK TO RESIDENTIAL UNTIL YOU GET TO THE SPILLOVER OF COMMERCIAL FROM THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHLAND AND LEE, THIS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA.

IT BEHOOVES NO ONE EXCEPT THE APPLICANT.

ISLAND ROAD IS A SPECIAL PLACE THAT'S RETAINED ITS BEAUTY THROUGH THE CENTURIES.

IT'S ONE OF BATON ROUGE'S BEST THINGS.

THIS HOUSE IS, THIS PROPERTY'S BEEN HIGHLAND ROAD, HAS BEEN SETTLED BY PEOPLE ON, FROM SE ALL DATING BACK TO SPANISH LAND GRANTS.

IT'S A RURAL HIGHWAY FLANKED BY HOMES.

IT'S RESIDENTIAL ASPECTS IS WHAT HAS ALLOWED HIGHLAND ROAD TO RETAIN ITS HISTORICAL BEAUTY.

YOU ONLY HAVE TO GO DOWN TO STATE STREET ON HIGHLAND ROAD AND DRIVE TO THE SUBSTATION TO SEE WHAT UNLIMITED COMMERCIAL ABUSE CAN DO TO A ONCE BEAUTIFUL ROAD.

I INHERITED THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY.

MY PROPERTY'S AT 55 44 HIGHLAND ROAD.

I DON'T WANT A BUSINESS WITH CUSTOMERS AND AMAZON AND UPS PULLING INTO A DRIVEWAY, MAKING IT HARDER FOR ME TO GET OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY ON A HIGHLAND ROAD BY APPOINTMENT ONLY.

THAT'S A NICE IDEA, BUT WHO'S GONNA BE ENFORCING THAT? NOW? EVERY BUSINESS TODAY WANTS TO HAVE A BIG SIGN.

IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO HAVE JUST A SIGN.

YOU WANT A LIGHTED SIGN.

IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO HAVE A LIGHTED SIGN.

YOU WANT TO HAVE ONE THAT LIGHTS UP AND SAYS WORDS.

REMEMBER US ON FACEBOOK.

THESE THINGS TAKE AWAY AND DETRACT FROM HIGHLAND ROAD AND AS A RESULT, WE LOSE SOMETHING IN THIS CITY.

SO I WOULD SUBMIT THAT THIS WOULD ONLY BEHOOVE THE APPLICANT AND IT WOULD HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON ALL OF US HERE IN THIS CITY.

THIS IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I WOULD ASK YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME I'LL INVITE THE APPLICANT BACK FOR A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL IF YOU CHOOSE.

YES, I DO.

OKAY.

I DO WANT A REBUTTAL.

SO I'VE BEEN APPROVED, UH, WAY BACK AND I DON'T KNOW EXACT THE DATE, BUT THERE'S, THERE'S, UM, ON MY PROPERTY, THERE'S UM, BEEN APPROVED FOR 11 APARTMENTS ON THAT PROPERTY.

SO WHETHER IT BE A NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE OR 11 APARTMENTS.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S ALL I COULD TELL YOU.

THAT'S THAT.

UH, AND, AND IT'S KIND OF STRANGE THAT IT'S BEEN APPROVED FOR 11 APARTMENTS THOUGH.

THAT'S WHAT I WANNA SAY.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE, UH, REQUESTING COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONER.

I'LL ASK DIRECTOR HOLCOMB TO CLARIFY, THIS IS CURRENTLY ZONED A 3.1, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

IT'S, IT'S CLASSIFIED AS A 3.1, WHICH IS LIMITED RESIDENTIAL.

THE ZONING DISTRICT IS, UH, PRIMARILY USED FOR MULTIFAMILY AND APARTMENTS SO THAT, THAT EXISTING ZONING IS ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY RIGHT NOW AND HAS BEEN FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

UH, THIS EXISTING ZONING WOULD ALSO ALLOW, IN ADDITION TO MULTIFAMILY, IT WOULD ALLOW A FRATERNITY,

[00:30:02]

AND THAT'S IN ITS, UH, CURRENT, CURRENTLY APPROVED ZONING, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR REZONING FROM A 3.1 TO NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE, WHICH IS SMALL SCALE NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE.

WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE COULD BE CONSIDERED LESS INTENSIVE THAN ITS CURRENT ZONING? THAT'S CORRECT.

CHAIRMAN WASHINGTON, UM, WE WOULD CONSIDER THIS A A DOWN ZONING.

THEY'RE, THEY'RE ACTUALLY RESTRICTING THE AMOUNT OF USES, UH, ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.

IF THE ZONING WERE TO BE APPROVED, UH, THEIR, THEIR EXISTING ZONING WOULD ALLOW MORE USES THAN, THAN WHAT THE APPLICANT'S ASKING FOR.

SO YOU'RE CORRECT, THERE'S, THERE'S USES THAT WOULD BE TAKEN AWAY.

UH, THE MULTIFAMILY OPTION, THE FRATERNITY AND SORORITY OPTION WOULD BE OFF THE TABLE IF THIS WERE TO BE APPROVED.

THANK YOU.

DIRECTOR HOLCOMB QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION? THANKS CHAIRMAN.

GROP.

HEARING, HEARING WHAT, UH, THE DIRECTOR SAID? UH, I THINK THIS IS A, A POSITIVE MOVE.

UH, I, I THINK IT, IT DEFINITELY IS A LESS INTENSE USE.

UH, I WOULD RATHER HAVE, UH, ONE OR TWO, UH, PRIVATE BUSINESSES, UH, AS OPPOSED TO 11, UH, APARTMENTS.

UH, THE TRAFFIC THERE WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE.

SO I THINK THIS IS A, A POSITIVE MOVE.

AND, UH, I'M, UH, I'M, I MAKE A MOVE THAT WE, UH, UH, UH, THAT WE RE I'M, I'M RE I'M RECOMMENDING THAT, UH, WE APPROVE THIS.

OKAY.

THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM VICE CHAIRMAN GR.

I BELIEVE THAT MOTION RECEIVES A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER ELLEN.

ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, THAT ITEM IS APPROVED.

WE'LL

[14. MCUP-3-23 39500 Greenwell Springs Road]

GREENWELL SPRINGS ROAD.

PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF GREENWELL SPRINGS ROAD, SOUTH OF LEE PRICE ROAD COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE NOLL.

THE APPLICANT IS CRAWFORD AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A SAND AND GRAVEL MINING OPERATION ON THE SITE.

FUTURE BR LAND USE DESIGNATION IS AGRICULTURAL RURAL M CUP 3 23 3 9 5 0 0 GREENWELL SPRINGS ROAD.

STAFF CERTIFIES THE PROPOSED REQUEST MEETS THE MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR A MAJOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING USES AND CONFORMING THE UDC REQUIREMENT PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICE HAD PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED TWO MESSAGES IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ITEM.

I DO NEED TO POINT OUT THAT THE APPLICANT REQUESTED A DEFERRAL AT THE LAST MEETING IN AN EFFORT TO, TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE COMMENTS OF CONCERN, UM, AND OPPOSITION.

THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED.

15 MINUTES.

15 MINUTES.

OKAY.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE IT ALL.

ALRIGHT.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

I'M MELISSA DE DEGENERES AND I LIVE AT 29 23 MCCARROLL DRIVE IN BATON ROUGE.

I'M A LIFETIME BATON ROUGE END AND I'M DELIGHTED TO BE BACK WORKING IN EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH.

I'M A THIRD GENERATION MINER AND I'VE WORKED IN THE FAMILY BUSINESS FOR 31 YEARS.

WE HAVE BEEN WORKING IN ST.

HELENA, LIVINGSTON, AND EAST FELICIAN PARISHES OVER THE LAST FEW DECADES.

THIS OPPORTUNITY PROVIDED BY THE LANDOWNERS OF THE LEE BROWN LEGACY STARTED A JOURNEY THAT HAS BEEN OVER TWO YEARS IN THE MAKING WITH LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS.

WE HAVE NOW REACHED THE FINISH LINE OF THIS PROJECT.

OUR ENGINEERS HAVE WORKED ALONGSIDE EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH PLANNING AND ZONING TO ENSURE THAT ALL REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET.

IT IS OUR SINCERE MISSION TO BE THE BEST NEIGHBOR AND THIS AT A GOOD STEWARD OF OUR LEASED PROPERTIES.

OUR FAMILY BUSINESS OF 71 YEARS LIVES BY OUR REPUTATION.

PRIOR TO THIS MEETING, WE RECEIVED AN OPPOSITION LETTER FROM A NEIGHBOR.

I REACHED OUT TO THE NEIGHBOR TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS.

THERE WERE FOUR, THE FIRST CONCERN, A SOUND WALL BE INSTALLED.

WE WORKED WITH OUR ENGINEERS IN PLANNING AND ZONING AND UPDATED OUR PLANS TO ACCOMMODATE THIS REQUEST.

TWO, MAKE THE AREA A NO ENGINE BRAKE ALLOWED.

AS WITH ALL OF OUR OPERATIONS, WE HAVE SIGNAGE THAT STATES NO JAKE BRAKES ALLOWED THREE LIMIT THE HOURS OF OPERATION TO NO WEEKENDS OR HOLIDAYS.

WE WILL BE FOLLOWING THE EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH REQUIREMENTS OF OPERATIONS FROM SEVEN TO SEVEN AND SEVEN TO 12 ON SATURDAYS WITH NO OPERATIONS ON SUNDAY.

THE FOURTH ISSUE, THEY ASKED IF IT WAS A WETLANDS

[00:35:01]

SINCE THEY HAD PALMETTO PLANTS GROWING ON THEIR LAND, WE HAVE PERFORMED A WETLANDS DELINEATION AND HAVE RECEIVED A US CORPS OF ENGINEERS APPROVAL FOR THE OPERATION.

ALTHOUGH IT WAS NOT LISTED, A NUMBERED CONCERN FOR THEM WAS TRAFFIC.

WE WILL RECEIVE, WE HAVE RECEIVED APPROVAL FROM THE DOTD FOR OUR ENTRANCE.

OUR OPERATION WILL NOT INCREASE THE NUMBER OF TRUCKS ON THE ROAD.

WE WILL BE ADDING A DESTINATION, NOT ADDITIONAL TRUCKS.

WE WILL ALSO PUT UP FLASHING LIGHTS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD AND A SIGN THAT SAYS PLANT ENTRANCE.

IN CONCLUSION, WE ARE A WELL-RUN OPERATION THAT WILL BE AN ASSET TO OUR EAST BATON ROUGE COMMUNITY.

WE WILL BE A REVENUE GENERATING BUSINESS IN THE PARISH WITH SALES TAX, PROPERTY TAX, SEVERANCE TAX REMITTED TO THE PARISH.

PLEASE VOTE YES FOR OUR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PLEASE.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

WE HAVE A COURT FOR MIKE MANINO.

DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK SIR? YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR THREE MINUTES.

I'M ACTUALLY REPRESENTING THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS.

I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS, SO IT'S PARTY APPLICATION, BUT I WON'T TAKE THAT LONG.

OKAY.

UH, MY NAME IS MIKE MANINO.

I LIVE AT AD ON, UH, BLACK ORDER ROAD 12 2 21 IN CENTRAL.

I'M A FORMER P AND Z MEMBER FROM CENTRAL.

SO I, I CAN APPRECIATE WHAT Y'ALL GO THROUGH HERE.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE HAD THE MOST COMPLAINTS ABOUT WAS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

MASSIVE SUBDIVISIONS THAT CREATE MORE TRAFFIC AND LOWER QUALITY LIFE FOR RESIDENTS.

ONE OF MY BIGGEST CONCERNS WHEN I WAS ON THE PNZ WAS I WAS VERY COGNIZANT OF THE EFFECT OF NEW DEVELOPMENT ON EXISTING LANDOWNERS.

SO I ALWAYS WOULD WORK WITH PEOPLE TO FIND OUT WHAT THEIR CONCERNS WERE AND IF IT WAS REASONABLE TO ADDRESS.

THIS DOES NOT ADD TO TRAFFIC.

THE EXISTING TRAFFIC WILL BE CUSTOMERS THAT IS AT TRUCKS ALREADY.

UH, SO-CALLED SHOPPING THERE 'CAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY PASSING THIS AREA.

IT DOESN'T ADD PERMANENT OR ADDITIONAL ROOFTOPS.

SINCE THIS CONDITIONAL USE REQUIRED IN DIFFERENT, UH, ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE, IT ADDS TO EBR TAX BASE THROUGH PERMITS, FEES, TAXES, AND JOBS.

WE'VE MADE SURE THAT WE MEET OR EXCEED EBR ORDINANCES ON SETBACKS DISTANCES, WHICH HOMES AND OF COURSE COMPLY WITH ORDINANCES ON NOISE AND, UH, ALZO OPERATION.

IN FACT, WE'VE FURTHER WENT FURTHER THAN REQUIRED FROM HOU FROM HOUSING FOR THIS VERY REASON.

WITH ADDED ENGINEERING CONTROLS SUCH AS BURNS TREE LINES AND FURTHER REDUCE THE NOISE IF NOT ELIMINATED, ALL STATE AND FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS HAVE ALSO BEEN MET IN ADDITION TO SITES OVER ONE AND A HALF MILES TO THE MEET RIVER FROM GREENVILLE SPRINGS ROAD, LA 37 WE'RE 300 FEET OFF THE ROAD WHERE THE OPERATION WILL START AND EVEN FURTHER FROM THE CLOSEST HOUSE.

THIS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH TRADITIONAL LAND USE IN THE AREA.

THESE TOP OP TYPE OF OPERATIONS ARE NEXT DOOR TO THIS SITE AND MANY OPERATIONS SCATTERED ALONG THAT ROUTE.

WE ALSO HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN MAKING THIS A SAFE COMMUNITY, UH, FRIENDLY OPERATION.

SO WE, SINCE WE MAY BUILD ACROSS THE STREET ON ANOTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY CONNECTED TO THIS TRACK, ALL OPERATIONS ARE CONDUCTED UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF MICHE, WHICH IS OSHA FOR, UH, MINING.

AND THEY HAVE MUCH TOUGHER SAFETY AND HEALTH, UH, REQUIREMENTS.

AND OSHA DOES.

WHEN THIS IS FINISHED, THE LAND'S GONNA BE RETURNED TO SANCTUARY FOR WILDLIFE, DEER, AND ALL OTHER WILDLIFE AND TREES REPLANTED.

IT'LL BE A BEAUTIFUL UNSCORED PRESERVE FOR OUR GRANDKIDS TO ENJOY, NOT DEVELOP SUBDIVISION, NOT ADDING TO, UH, ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC.

AND CLOSING.

I WANNA MENTION THAT WE ARE A LOCAL OPERATION.

THIS IS NOT AN OUT OF TOWN COMPANY.

IT'S A, UH, COMPANY THAT'S DEALT WITH THIS TYPE OPERATION FOR YEARS.

IN FACT, A COUPLE GENERATIONS NOW, AND WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE OR FOR ANY OPPOSITION TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THEY MAY HAVE.

WE APPRECIATE Y'ALL CONSIDERATION FOR THIS APPROVAL.

THANK YOU.

UH, WE HAVE THREE ADDITIONAL MESSAGES.

I'M SORRY, UH, SPEAKER CARDS THAT ARE IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM.

WE DO NOT HAVE ANY CARDS THAT ARE IN OPPOSITION TO IT.

UH, BUT IF THE SPEAKERS THAT ARE IN FAVOR STILL WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, YOU CERTAINLY HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY.

UH, RANDALL WITHERS.

YOU FINE.

OKAY.

DIANA

[00:40:01]

OKAY.

AND RICKY GALLOWAY.

OKAY.

AT THIS TIME, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR MOTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

MOTION TO APPROVE FROM COMMISSIONER SCROGGS.

SECOND, SECOND FROM VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT.

ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS, ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, THAT ITEM IS APPROVED AND WE WILL MOVE ON

[15. PUD-1-23 Benton (formerly The Village at Magnolia Woods), Final Development Plan Revision]

PUT 1 23 BENTON, FORMERLY THE VILLAGE AT MAGNOLIA WOODS FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVISION PUD 1 23 BENTON, FORMERLY THE VILLAGE AT MAGNOLIA WOODS FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

REVISION PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF HIGHLAND ROAD, EAST OF MAGNOLIA WOOD AVENUE COUNCIL, DISTRICT 12 RACA.

THE APPLICANT IS MATT OPAL.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A PLAN DEVELOPMENT REVISION CONSISTING OF 69 LOAD DENSITY, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, SIX TOWNHOUSE LOTS, AND 24,386 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE COMMERCIAL BUILDING SPACE.

FUTURE VR LAND USE DESIGNATION IS RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.

PUD 1 23.

BENTON FORMALLY THE VILLAGE AT MAGNOLIA WOODS FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

REVISION STAFF CERTIFIES THAT THE PROPOSED REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN AND MEETS A MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING USES AND CONFORMING TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICE HAS RECEIVED TWO MESSAGES IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 15 MINUTES.

GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.

I'M MATTIS AL, 83 77 BACARDI AVENUE.

I'M THE, UH, ENGINEER OF RECORD.

BASICALLY THIS FDP REVISION IS JUST TO ALIGN WITH THE RECENTLY APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN FOR OUR OUTFALL IN THE NAME CHANGE.

AND I'M, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS Y'ALL MIGHT HAVE.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

WE HAVE A SPEAKER CARD FOR JANICE DENO.

YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR THREE MINUTES.

OKAY.

UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

I'M JANICE DENO.

I RESIDE AT 88 60 HIGHLAND ROAD.

I RUN THE STOCKADE BED AND BREAKFAST ON THAT PROPERTY.

I ALSO HAD FRAMEWORKS GALLERY AT 85 0 1 HIGHLAND ROAD, WHICH WAS PART OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S, UH, BEING REDEVELOPED AT THIS TIME.

SO I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT, UM, FOR 47 YEARS I'VE BEEN WATCHING ALL OF THIS LAND AND I AM THE STEWARD OF THE LAND THAT I NOW OCCUPY AND I HEARTILY, UM, APPRECIATE WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE PROPERTY.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU TO, I KNOW IT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED, BUT MOVE IT ALONG AND LET THEM GET THEIR PERMITS.

I THINK IT'S BEEN HELD UP FOR A GOOD LONG WHILE AND WE'RE TIRED OF LOOKING AT THE DIRT PIT, SO IF WE COULD, UH, YOU KNOW, JUST GET, GET IT GOING, I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT AS A, A LONG TIME RESIDENT AND PROPONENT OF THIS, UH, DEVELOPMENT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU.

WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER, COURT AND OPPOSITION FOR SAM MARTIN.

YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR THREE MINUTES, SIR.

THANK YOU.

MY NAME'S SAM MARTIN.

I LIVE AT 82 35 MENLO DRIVE, JUST DOWN THE STREET FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT.

I'VE LIVED MY ENTIRE LIFE HERE IN BATON ROUGE AND I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO BE ABLE TO SAY THAT.

UM, YOU, YOU GUYS ALREADY KNOW THAT THE EXISTING NEIGHBORS DON'T WANT THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC DRAINAGE AND OTHER ISSUES THAT WILL COME FROM CONNECTING THIS OVERLY DENSE DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS ITS OWN DISTINCT CHARACTER WITH THEIR EXISTING STREETS.

MAJOR POINT OF CONTENTION THAT HAS LED US TO THIS POINT IS WHAT I SEE IS A PERCEIVED AS THE PERCEIVED REQUIREMENTS OF THE UDC FOR, FOR CONNECTIVITY, NOT THE ACTUAL REQUIREMENTS.

THE UDC DOES NOT EXPLICITLY REQUIRE CONNECTIVITY, HOWEVER, IT DOES STATE, AND I'M QUOTING THE ARRANGEMENT OF NEW STREETS AND NEW SUBDIVISIONS.

AND IN NEW SITE OR TRACK DEVELOPMENTS SHALL MAKE PROVISIONS FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE EXISTING STREETS IN ADJOINING AREAS ON EACH SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ENSURE ACCESS THROUGHOUT THE PARISH.

THAT'S YOU, THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT MAKES A DECISION ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE NECESSARY OR NOT.

THE PROPOSED ARRANGEMENT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW, UH, FOR THIS PUD DOES NOT CONTINUE ANY STREETS, ANY EXISTING STREETS AND MUCH LESS ON EACH SIDE.

AND THIS VERSION OF THE UUDC

[00:45:01]

THIS VERSION OF THE UZC ALSO SPECIFIES STREET STANDARDS THAT WOULD FACILITATE THIS CONNECTIVITY IN A SAFE MANNER.

STREET STA STANDARDS THAT DON'T APPLY TO OUR EXISTING STREETS AND THAT THEY DON'T MEET.

IF THESE PLANS WERE PART OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT WITH STREETS CONFI CONFIGURED EXACTLY AS MAGNOLIA WOODS ARE NOW, IT WOULD NOT BE APPROVED.

AND THIS IS FOR GOOD REASON.

THE EXISTING STREETS ARE INADEQUATE FOR THE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEING SOUGHT.

IF IT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR IMAGINARY STREETS, IT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR REAL STREETS WITH REAL PEOPLE.

THE UDC ALSO STATES THAT IN GENERAL, PROVISIONS SHOULD BE MADE FOR THROUGH STREETS AT INTERVALS, GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THOSE SHOWN IN TABLE 13 A OF REQUIRED STREET CONNECTIONS.

THE UDC REQUIRES THAT THESE THROUGH STREETS AND PROVISIONS FOR THEM ARE GENERALLY CONSISTENT.

THIS IS IN THAT TABLE WITH A QUARTER MILE SPACING FOR SUBURBAN AREAS SUCH AS MAGNOLIA WOODS THROUGH STREETS ARE NOT PROVIDED BY THE PLAN OF THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT.

THERE'S JUST A LITTLE STUB THAT COMES OUT AND EXIT ONTO A ROAD THAT WAS BUILT AS A NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND WILL BE, BUT NOW WILL BE FORCED TO ACT AS AN ARTERIAL.

FINALLY, THERE ARE OVER 700 HOUSEHOLDS WHERE PEOPLE HAVE INVESTED THEIR LIVES AND LIVELIHOODS IN MAGNOLIA WOODS WILL BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED BY ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC BROUGHT ON BY THE DEVELOPER ZEAL TO EXTRACT AS MUCH MONEY AS FROM THIS ENDEAVOR AS POSSIBLE.

AND THAT'S NOT TO MENTION THE PEOPLE WHO EVENTUALLY MOVE INTO THIS EXCESSIVELY DENSE BENTON DEVELOPMENT.

THANK YOU.

I HOPE TO TAKE IT UNDER CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME I'LL INVITE THE APPLICANT BACK FOR A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL.

UM, WE'RE, WE'RE HERE TONIGHT JUST TO DO THE NAME CHANGE AND TO ALIGN WITH THE CONCEPT PLAN.

THAT'S IT.

THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR MOTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION.

VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT, I SEEM TO BE DOING A LOT OF TALKING TONIGHT.

UM, I I AM GOING TO STATE RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT NOW THAT ONE OF THE REASONS I AM ON THIS COMMISSION WAS BECAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC IN THIS COMMUNITY IN BATON ROUGE.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE DO NOT HAVE IS CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOODS AND PARTICULARLY ON HIGHLAND ROAD.

YOU HAVE TO GO OUT ONTO HIGHLAND ROAD TO GO DOWN THE STREET TO GO VISIT YOUR NEIGHBOR OR YOU HAVE TO GO SOME OTHER WAY, BUT YOU CAN'T GO FROM NEIGHBORHOOD TO NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO THE IDEA THAT THAT INTERCONNECTIVITY AND STREET CONNECTIONS ARE A GOOD IDEA OR SUGGESTION, I THINK IT IS ESSENTIAL.

I GREW UP IN A CITY WITH A GRID SYSTEM.

I LIVED IN BOSTON WITH A GRID SYSTEM, ALTHOUGH IT WAS RATHER BIZARRE, BUT YOU COULD GET FROM POINT A TO POINT B SEVERAL DIFFERENT WAYS.

THAT IS THE REASON FOR INTERCONNECTIVITY.

THAT'S THE REASON THAT YOU CONNECT THESE STREETS.

THAT'S THE REASON THAT WE WANT THEM.

OKAY.

PERSONALLY, I WOULD'VE RATHER, AS THE GENTLEMAN SAID, EXTEND A NORMAL STREET AND I WOULD'VE EXTENDED CASTLE KIRK INTO THAT.

I KNOW THAT WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTED, BUT THE IDEA THAT WE ARE CONNECTING, UH, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I'M QUITE FINE WITH THAT.

I'M, I AM ACTUALLY A PROPONENT OF DOING THAT MORE AND MORE.

AND AS SOMEONE SAID THAT IT, WE HAVE A DEVELOPER ZEAL.

PEOPLE NEED TO REMEMBER THAT IT WAS DEVELOPER ZEAL THAT BUILT YOUR NEIGHBORHOODS.

NOW I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF ALL DEVELOPERS, BUT WE NEED TO BE COGNIZANT THAT THIS LAND EXISTS AND THIS IS GOING TO BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY.

THIS BRINGS IN COMMERCIAL, THIS BRINGS IN RESIDENTIAL AND IT CONNECTS AND THAT'S IMPORTANT.

SO I MOVE THAT.

WE GO AHEAD AND, UH, I, I'M, I MO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM COMMISSIONER GROUT TO APPROVE THIS ITEM.