Mm.

Mais Good afternoon, everyone.

We're going to just start here in hopefully two minutes.

Good afternoon, and welcome to today's City Planning Commission Tuesday, June 9th.

We have updated software, but we don't have logins yet.

So we're going to have to um call vote by name.

Commissioner Pochet.

Commissioner Kepper.

Here.

Commissioner Abear.

Commissioner Flick.

Present.

Commissioner Jordan.

Present.

Commissioner Steag.

Here.

Perfect.

We have a full house today.

Welcome everyone.

I'm going to go ahead and read um the formal public hearing rules.

The city planning commission has established third rules governing the procedures to be followed at public hearings before speaking.

Each speaker will be allowed a maximum of two minutes.

Opponents will not be allowed to rebut.

No material, written matter, photographs, maps will be accepted by the commission or its staff at any time during this public hearing.

This procedure shall be followed except at such time when the presiding officer shall, with the approval of the commission members, extend such time.

Our first order of business is to adopt the meeting minutes from May 26th.

I'll make a motion to adopt a May 26th meeting minutes.

Thank you, Commissioner Jordan.

Is there a second?

Commissioner Flickle second.

Thank you, Commissioner Flick for making the second.

Any discussion, Commissioners?

If not, um, let's go ahead and vote.

Um, Commissioner Steek.

Yes.

Commissioner Jordan.

Yes.

Commissioner Whitry, yes.

Commissioner Flick, yes.

Commissioner Josie Gupta, Commissioner Abear, yes.

Commissioner Kepper, yes.

Commissioner Pochet?

Yes.

Commissioner Jackson.

Yes.

Alright, the meeting minutes have been approved from May 26.

The first um zoning docket is 050-26.

Zoning Docket 5026 is a request for a zoning change from an H U R D1 historic urban too family residential district to an H U R M1 multi-family residential district and a conditional use to permit a principal bed and breakfast.

Yeah.

This is a change from the original zoning request, which was to an H U B1A, historic urban neighborhood business district, as the applicant updated the request after learning that the H U R M1 district is the least intensive zoning district to achieve the applicant's goals.

The site is located at 1731 S18 Avenue and is currently licensed as an accessory bed and breakfast, which with an allowance of five bedrooms.

This request would allow the entire use of the site as a principal bed and breakfast, which would include seven bedrooms in addition to the operator suite.

A zoning violation letter was issued March 24th, 2026, reporting the illegal use of the site, operating with more than five bedrooms and advertised as a whole home rental.

The site has not been adjudicated as the applicant is pursuing the zoning change to rectify the situation.

Staff is unsupportive of this request as a conflict with the master plan and will create a sponsor.

Therefore, staff recommends denial.

Thank you.

We have one card in support.

Um, please take your time.

I would like to introduce you to my new hire, my son Cameron, who is with me for the summer while I am in this little wheelie.

And I do apologize for having a deferment previously on this one, but now I'm up and running around.

This has been a bed and breakfast since uh the 1980.

Through the years, there have been a variety of listings along with the amount of rooms on here.

Um there was the Euro Asian room, the European room, the Asian room, North American room, the Egyptian room, Middle Eastern room, and the South American room.

When our clients purchased this properties in 2015-2016, um, they had always intended to run it as a seven-bedroom uh bed and breakfast.

Uh however, there were violations that were noted in the report.

Those violations have all been abated.

Uh they were closed out while they became client under the current bed and breakfast for five bedrooms or or um or less.

Uh what we're asking for is for the two bedrooms that have always been kind of part of this uh bed and breakfast to be able to be used as a bed and breakfast.

Understanding the spot zone and and and concerns with a spot zone and also the conditional use on this.

This is not one that fits into a nice city planning commission box that's easy to um see a clear path on.

Uh but that being said, our our only goal is to try to get that back to seven bedrooms, um, and uh that's what our ask is.

So I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any other cards here to speak in favor?

If not, then we'll move to the opposition.

Ms.

Wanda.

Please remember to state your name and address.

Wanda Nazarethan, 1725 Esplanade.

I've lived in on the 1700 block of Esplanade for 34 years.

And I was going to say one thing, but now I've got to address what Ron just said.

I sold my bed at the bed and breakfast in question to Jess Beatty.

He's the one that named all of the rooms, the Eurasian room, the Oriental room, all of these names, but they were two room suites.

They weren't single bedrooms.

I think Jess was only licensed for four bed and breakfast, and then he then he renovated the um the milk house into a suite.

So he was either when I sold the property to him, it was only a two, two room suite bed and breakfast, and he converted it to like a three or four.

So it was never licensed as a seven-bedroom bed and breakfast.

And I'm aware of who he sold the property to and then who that guy sold the property to, and it's never been more than to the best of my knowledge, a four-bedroom bed and breakfast, but it may have been five.

Um my neighbor is here too.

She has lived on the block even longer than I have for 36, 37 years, and we are strongly opposed to further to allowing even more occupancy in the building than we have now.

Oh, 32 seconds.

There are there is never a group of less than 10 people at the property, despite the fact that they are advertising for five.

It's usually 15 or 20 people at one time.

When my recent tenant moved in, she thought it was a frat house.

There were so many men in and out, and then realized it wasn't a frat house.

Oops, that's me.

Realized it wasn't a frat house until the bachelorette party moved in with their 20 30 people.

So please, we strongly.

Miss Wanda, does your neighbor would she like to speak or no?

If she would like to speak, she has to fill out a card.

If she doesn't want to speak and seat your time to you, she can do that.

You can fill out a card after you speak if you'd like.

Oh, that might be best.

Okay, that's perfect.

So, Ms.

Wanda, if you have anything more to say, you can speak for another two minutes.

Well, we have been treated in a very a neighborly fashion.

Uh there has been encroachment into our into our yards without our permission, and the noise is absolutely crazy.

I do have two hotline numbers that Stalum has given me in order to call about the noise, but it is every weekend.

If it's not the pool, it's the hot tub.

So it's it's all seasons, all year, large parties and noise.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else here to speak on this matter?

Okay, if not, um Mr.

Ron, would you like to roll your no?

Okay, okay.

Then Commissioners, do you have any questions or any discussion?

The staff recommend recommendation is denial.

Uh I have a question for staff.

Yes, Commissioner Pochet.

This bed and breakfast is licensed or zoned as a an accessory bed and breakfast, which restricts it to five rooms.

Correct.

What is the difference between an accessory versus a primary bed and breakfast and why couldn't this be classified as a primary?

Do you mind using the principal?

Principal.

Excuse me, not primary, a principal bed and breakfast.

So the principal, well, let me get the exact definition.

Thank you.

So the accessory bed and breakfast has to have the operator on site.

And I believe the principal bed and breakfast that is not required.

Let me just double check.

Any other questions in the meantime?

Madam Chair.

Yes.

I'm going to move for um uh denial in accordance with staff recommendations, um, especially considering that this is a zoning change, it's not just a conditional use.

Um, so my motion is in accordance with staff recommendation.

Okay, do you oh, I second?

Okay, just thank you.

Let's go ahead and um try to answer Commissioner Pochet's question.

So an operator is required at both the accessory and the principal, it's just the number of bedrooms that are allowed with each.

So the accessory they can have up to five, a principal they can have up to nine.

So with this particular zoning, the principal is not allowed.

Commissioner Pochet, I apologize.

I thought she had finished with your question.

No worries at all.

So we have a motion on the floor um for denial um from Commissioner Steak, seconded by Commissioner Josie Kufta.

Any questions?

All right, then let's vote.

Uh Commissioner Jackson.

Yes.

Uh Commissioner Pochet.

Yes.

Commissioner Kepper, yes.

Commissioner Abear?

Yes.

Commissioner Josie Gubta?

Yes.

Um Commissioner Flick, yes.

Commissioner Witcher, yes.

Commissioner Jordan?

Yes.

Commissioner C.

Yes.

Okay.

So the motion carries um for denial.

We will move on to zoning docket uh 056-26.

Five, um, five eight.

Five eight-line six, yes.

All right.

Um, um, zoning dock at 058-26 is a request for conditional use to permit the conversion of an existing former office building into an eight-bedroom hotel in the H UMU historic urban neighborhood mixed use district located at 7979 Earhart and 3127 Short Street.

The structure contains over 5,000 square feet, which requires conditional use review in addition to the fact that hotels are conditional uses within the HUMU district.

The proposal includes a lobby, office, laundry room, kitchen, and dining area on the first floor with guest rooms on the second floor.

No parking is proposed or required aside from one required on-street parking space.

Parking space which has been provided.

The site is along an existing commercial corridor, and the conversion of the structure to a hotel is appropriate for both the zoning and the surrounding area.

Therefore, staff recommends approval of uh zoning docket 058-26, subject to the supervisors found in your staff report.

Thank you.

We have three cards.

Um, Mr.

Glenn Charles, and then Mr.

Dejon Davenport and Ms.

Danielle Rich.

Please remember to state your name and address.

Welcome.

Welcome.

I'm Deshaun Davenport.

I went first because I'm assisting the applicant with it.

Yeah.

Uh the owner is seeking to provide a safe and high-quality lodging options for guests who travel from out of state to dine at his multiple establishments in the middle of the experience the city.

After recently acquiring the property, owner recognizes that the site has great potential as well as a hospitality destination and a traditional office space.

Well to continued growth of boutique hotels throughout the city, the only beliefs that this property is well positioned to attribute positive to the local tourism industry.

He is fully committed to comply with all applicable city and state requirements, regulations, inspections, and permitting process necessary to operate this property as a hotel.

Approval of this project would provide benefits beyond the owner and its businesses.

The proposed improvements to the property would enhance the appearance and functionality of the site and can serve as a catalyst for additional investments in the surrounding area by encouraging neighboring property owners to pursue permits and improvements for their own properties.

The project has the potential to contribute to broader neighborhood revitalization.

In addition, the hotel would create new employment opportunities within the community through the hospitality maintenance management and guest service positions.

The owner has already demonstrated its commitment to the neighborhood improvement by directing the staff to regularly remove litter and assist with beautification efforts not only around his properties, but his adjacent properties.

Could you just state your address, please?

Oh, 73162 United Church Road in Coverton, Louisiana.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

If no one has any questions now, then they may after.

Okay.

And then we have two other cards to speak.

Would they like two?

Mr.

Glenn and Miss Danielle.

You can speak in either order.

I'm just pulling the cards as they come.

Hello, good afternoon.

My name is Glenn Charles, 622 Punch of Train Um Boulevard, New Orleans, Louisiana.

I'm the owner of Nice Guys Nola and Company.

We have a couple of locations here in New Orleans.

The one on Earhart, the this particular building is directly across the street.

It's been an eyesore for a while.

It's mostly vacant.

We had an opportunity to purchase it.

We purchased it.

We thought it'd be a great idea to do a small boutique hotel there because we service probably almost a hundred thousand tourists a year at uh nice guys that's across the street.

Uh think it's a great fit.

We also setting up tours to go downstairs.

We have a Burberry Street location and a purchase location right across the street with really good food in case y'all are interested.

Uh headquarters by nice guys.

Um, but yeah, that's basically it.

We we we got a good opportunity to uh help beautify the neighborhood, uh, create more jobs, and hopefully bring more businesses to the area.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Miss Danielle.

So I have nobody else here to speak in support.

I also don't have any opposition.

Okay.

Commissioners, if you have any questions for staff or um for our applicant, I don't know if approval and uh the staff recommendation.

Which is approval to provisos.

Correct.

And Commissioner Jordan, you'll second.

I'll second.

All right, any discussion?

If not, let's go ahead and vote.

Commissioner Steag.

Yes.

And I'm looking at your menu.

Commissioner Jordan.

Yes.

Commissioner Witcher, yes.

Uh Commissioner Flick, yes.

Commissioner Um Josie Gupta.

Commissioner Abair.

Yes.

Commissioner Kepper.

Yes.

Commissioner Pochet.

Yes.

Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

All right.

Um, you have nine yes.

The motion carries.

Good luck.

Thank you.

We'll have zoning docket 059-26.

Zoning docket 059-26 is a conditional use request to permit a commercial short-term rental in an HUMU zoning district.

The site is located at 1622 Toledano Street, adjacent to the McDonald's in St.

Charles in Louisiana.

Two non-residential properties fronting Toledano and two residential properties fronting Carondeley.

The property was formerly an office building that was demolished in 2023 and redeveloped into a three-unit townhouse style building.

Each unit of the property features a one-car garage and entrance from Toledano.

The applicant has already acquired a non-commercial short-term rental license for one of the units, and the applicant is seeking a conditional use to permit a commercial short-term rental in one of the other units.

The staff believes that the requested conditional use is compatible with the zoning district and the city's master plan.

Additionally, considering the existing low density of short-term rental units in the area.

Thank you.

Mr.

Dejan Davenport.

And then Mr.

Gregory Johnson.

Deshaun Davenport 73162 United Church Road, Coverton, Louisiana.

The owner developed a property under understanding that it was located on commercially zoned lot.

Based on that belief, he was respectfully requesting the opportunity to apply for commercial short-term rental licenses for the structures located at the property.

As part of this request, the owners willing to voluntarily relinquish the existing short-term residential license currently associated with the property and transition the site to a commercial short-term rental operation.

The request is particularly important given the increased cost associated when maintaining the owner's affordability housing portfolio.

Approximately 90% of the owners' properties are dedicated to provide an affordable housing opportunities to the residents in the community.

The ability to operate all three structures under the commercial short-term rental license would help generate revenue that could be used to offset the rising operation expenses and support the continued availability of low-income housings in its portfolio.

The owners committed to serving both residents and visitors by by providing quality accommodations for tourists and families visiting this great city while continuing his long-standing investment in affordable housing.

An approval of this request would assist him in preserving and expanding his efforts to provide safe affordable living options for members of the community.

Thank you.

Does Mr.

Gregory want to speak?

I'm here just to let you know that I'm not an absentee owner.

I'm in the area.

I am part of the area that I build houses in.

So I would appreciate your uh approval on the ask for the uh conditional use.

Thank you.

Do you all have any questions for Mr.

Johnson?

These are three units, correct?

Correct.

And there's parking below.

Yes, there is.

And then how many um remind me of how many bedrooms and baths there are?

Five.

In each unit?

In each bedroom.

Five bedroom, four bathrooms.

But you'd currently there's no certificate of occupancy yet, right?

It's still under construction.

Yes.

Okay.

Qualify.

There's no certificate no certificate of occupancy yet.

Okay.

I've finished hammering and nailing pretty much.

We're just finishing with HDLC.

Right.

Okay.

Are you putting a swimming pool back there?

Uh two on the end units.

Okay.

And they're small, so they're not uh, you know.

It's a hot tub.

Yes.

It's a luxury, uh they're luxury units, so uh it provides a cooling spot for our hot summers here.

And the property that was there before was demolished.

Did you demolish it?

I did.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Is there any opposition?

I don't have any cards on or anything else to speak.

I have a question for staff.

Um, just in light of the recent commercial STR document that went forward to city council, um, how would that apply to this particular docket item in the future?

Like as if it didn't get a conditional use because the conditional use lasts for the life of the property, right?

What would happen in the event that they just went with whatever the future commercial short-term rental guideline is?

Are you are you referencing the regulations that the council has put out but not yet adopted?

Correct.

Uh I don't know.

We haven't done a review against those proposed regulations yet.

Any other questions?

Comments?

Is that uh staff recommendation is approval with two provisos?

If not, then I'd be looking for a motion.

Uh a move approval in accordance with staff recommendation.

Thank you, Commissioner Sieg.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you, Commissioner Abear.

Any discussion?

Yes?

Yes.

I'm curious, is this you know uh we've had this conversation about the third tier of um commercial short-term rental uh status, and I'm just curious.

Like, does this create a provision where this property will be in that third tier that we talked about in the past?

We talked about uh units that have been grandfathered, now there's the interim, and then it's a question about where we're going to land in terms of permanent status.

That is correct.

There will be in all of the um commercial short-term rental applications that you've received.

Some of you have approved, some of you haven't approved since that ICD was put into place, would um basically grant conditional uses for those and they would be governed by the terms of the conditional use as opposed to the ones that are grandfathered, which would be governed under the regulations at the time they were approved, and the ones that would be approved forthcoming once new regulations are put in place.

Thank you.

Um Commissioner uh Steag made the motion, and Commissioner Abear seconded the motion, so yes, Commissioner Flick.

Sorry, just make sure I get this right.

So just to confirm if this is approved, it still has to comply with the future commercial STR regulations.

It would be governed no, it would it would in terms of the um entitlement, it would be subject to the terms of the conditional use.

Okay, thank you.

So the motion on the floor would be to permit to approve the conditional use of property.

All right, Commissioner Jackson.

Yes.

Commissioner Pochet?

No.

Uh Commissioner Kepper?

Yes.

Commissioner Abear?

Yes.

Commissioner Josie Gupta?

No.

Uh Commissioner Flick?

I'm gonna also have to vote no.

Commissioner Whitries, no.

Commissioner Jordan.

No.

Uh Commissioner C.

Yes.

So that is three yes, six nays.

Is there another vote?

Basic math I I need to do.

Yes.

So the uh motion does not pass.

I guess probably can move to.

So, sir, you'll have an opportunity to um present to city council.

Um, or someone could make a a new motion, it's not gonna change.

Okay, so the motion remains, or um, it is a motion to deny.

Yeah, it moves forward as a motion to denial.

So, sir, you'll be able to go to city council.

Um, okay.

It is a motion to deny, correct?

It is not a motion to deny it the effective, it is an effective denial because it did not carry.

It did not what?

It did not carry with my vote.

Oh, right, okay.

Okay.

So it is an emotion to effectively a it's a that's a motion I didn't carry.

So it's a it's a we haven't had this before.

So it's a motion that does not carry.

What is the exact language that I should use?

So the motion that was put forward and voted on was a motion for approval.

It failed, and so the effect of that is a recommendation of denial to the city council.

So it is a recommendation of denial to the city council.

An effective denial.

An effective denial.

Does it make a stronger case to make a move a motion to deny?

Without commenting on the effective, you know, yes, you can certainly do that.

Um, but I don't know, I don't speak for the council to be able to say whether that would have more weight or not.

Well, I'm gonna go for it.

I'd like to make a motion to deny whichever zoning docket we're on.

Sorry.

59.

Thank you.

59-26.

I second.

Do we need to do anything with the motion that did not pass?

No.

No.

Okay.

All right.

So we have a motion on the floor to deny by Commissioner Poche and seconded by Commissioner Josie Gupta.

So I have a question.

Um, so the re can you the reasoning behind your motion is you want to leave things until the uh the larger issue is settled.

Yes.

Yes, that's correct.

Um my personal position on this is that um if there's unless there's an incredibly compelling reason to consider an authorization of a commercial short-term rental while we're under the ICO, then I won't consider it.

And um a compelling reason is defined in in a handful of different ways, but it isn't my those standards aren't met for me here today.

I personally don't think I have a compelling reason to approve a commercial SCR until we have the regulations in place and has no bearing on the the owner here who's clearly a good steward of the neighborhood, and you will have an opportunity to go to go forward to city council.

Um but that's just how I personally feel about it.

Yeah, and it's a um fairly large commercial short-term rental, which also makes me think you know that we need to have the regulations in place that are going that are now being put forward and and framed as we speak.

So I think we need to wait wait on that before we make um special treatment approvals, all right.

Commissioner Steeg.

Um I'm convinced by Commissioner Poche's reasoning, and um and I I agree it's probably not a great idea to be creating an additional category.

So um I'm in favor of the motion.

I vote yes, Commissioner Dordan.

Yes, Commissioner Witcher, yes, Commissioner Flitt, yes.

Commissioner Dosy Gupta, uh yes, and Commissioner Abear, yes.

Commissioner Kepper, yes.

Commissioner Pochet?

Yes, Commissioner Jackson?

Yes, okay.

So the motion is to deny, and I had not had a vote like that before, so that's why we had to go ahead and um I needed a little coaching, but it is a motion to deny.

We have um as a commission here, we've done a lot of um discussions on short-term rentals and commercial short-term rentals, and there's still some grayness out there, and so we're not comfortable right now approving this.

But you will have an opportunity to go to city council um and to present your docket item.

Um, let me tell you, Commissioner, or uh, yes, I think I have a question for you uh for council probably.

Um even if the city council were to deny this conditional use, once the new regulations are passed, they would not be prohibited from reapplying under new regulations, they wouldn't be they'd be applying under a different legal um framework.

So are they precluded by a denial?

Are they precluded from reapplying within the two-year period?

If the law has changed and they're applying under a new law, um, so um I think it would be a call for safety and permits to make the um chief zoning official about how that would be interpreted in that situation, that it basically comes down to being an interpretation of the zoning order okay.

If you all have questions, I'm sure our executive director can answer them potentially.

Okay, thank you.

We're gonna oh go ahead, Commissioner C.

So sorry to be the dead horse.

Um Mr.

Rivers, can I I don't know if this is procedurally correct?

Can we ask either safety and permits or the law department for an answer to the question that I posed for this reason?

If we knew that we were that by applying for conditional use while the while the law was still in flux, that a denial would prevent them from applying under the new law for two years, we might uh it might affect our decision.

I don't know, I don't know, might affect mine at least.

So can we get some clarification on whether or not um uh that would preclude them or they could apply again under the new law having been denied under a previous version?

Absolutely, so do we need a motion to ask for that or great?

So I'd just like to think it'll we would all like to know that the building.

So I'm curious for council and director rivers, what would this do to our ability to I guess reconsider uh the zoning docket?

Could because that it seems like we need additional information, and now we voted in a direction, and so I'm just curious.

Oh I see, what are our next steps?

So under the CPC's rules, you can reconsider at this meeting or the following meeting.

Okay.

So if you wanted to wait for the following meeting based on new information that comes up between now and then, hopefully an interpretation, and then you could do so.

We would get a zoning interpretation from uh that would be the ask, yes.

Okay, so can they go to city council and this is clarified, can that be resolved at city council level, or does it have to be resolved at the commission level?

I'm sorry.

If once we get an answer, that does this have to to be resolved at the planning commission level, or can it be resolved at the city council level if it goes to city council?

So either, I think would be.

What I would suggest is if you all are considering rethinking the vote, um, would be to reconsider it and then defer it until the next meeting.

Are we on deadline?

Is because we have also denied many others on the same exact rounds in the past, and uh and we haven't asked for clarification.

So, again, what I would suggest is if there is a question about whether you would reconsider your vote, would you do so now?

Defer it to the next meeting.

What we can do also in between this meeting and the next meeting is go through all of the previous similarly situated initial use applications for commercial short-term rentals under the IZD and give you kind of the numbers about how those votes have broken down.

If that would help inform your decision.

Thank you.

I mean, there's two factors in this particular case is the density of this particular application.

It's a large commercial rental.

So which was again, you know, we're talking about a completely different um density and la different category.

That was one of the questions also.

So I don't know if we all feel comfortable about that.

So we could make a motion to retract our vote.

Just a new motion.

Yeah.

A new motion to reconsider.

And a new motion to reconsider.

Are we on deadline?

We're not.

No, the deadline is August 8th.

Okay.

So just to get it on the floor, I'm gonna make a motion to reconsider our decision of denial.

I know.

Yes.

And tell me if I'm procedurally doing this right.

Make a motion to reconsider our decision of denial.

And do I do it one at a time?

Okay.

Um with the intention to then introduce a motion for deferral.

But all this is is a motion to reconsider.

A second motion.

Okay, Commissioner Steag made a um a motion to reconsider.

And Commissioner Um Jordan has seconded.

Any discussion?

If not, then let's vote.

Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Commissioner Pochet?

No.

Commissioner Kepper.

Yes.

Commissioner Abear?

Yes.

Commissioner Josie Gupta.

No.

Commissioner Flick.

Yes.

Commissioner Whitries, no.

Commissioner Jordan.

Yes.

Commissioner Steag.

Yes.

Okay.

So we have three no's and it's the same man.

Six.

Six years.

So now I'm going to make a motion to defer to the next meeting.

Two meetings or one meeting.

I mean, how long will it take to get the decision from the law department, etc.?

Okay.

So I'm going to make a motion to defer for two meetings.

And my reasoning is so we can at least know the effect of our denial, even if we were if we were to do it, we would know whether it precludes them to reap from reapplying under the new law if it's passed when if and if it's passed or not.

So I've moved for deferral for two meetings.

I'll second.

I'm sorry, who was that?

Me.

Okay, Commissioner Kepper second.

Commissioner Sieg had made a motion on the floor.

And you're looking for information from a zoning determination and then also from the law department.

I don't know where it's coming from.

Um I want to know whether a denial under the circumstances before the new law is passed would preclude them from applying again under the new law.

The two-year prohibition of reapplying on the same matter, would uh would be in effect, or it wouldn't because it's under a new law.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioner Jackson.

Yes.

Okay.

Commissioner Pochet.

May I preface my vote with commentary?

I just want to indicate to the applicants, um, I'm I'm standing on a hard line here, not because I don't believe you're a wonderful community member or have good intentions for this property, but because the issue at hand here is incredibly complex.

And as one of the other commissioners mentioned, we've denied many applications for commercial short-term rentals while we wait in this interim time period to understand what the legislators in the city want to do moving forward regulating commercial short-term rentals.

Therefore, I'm staying consistent with my decisions across the board to deny any applications as such, and I hope that the legislation that is introduced regarding short-term rentals will address exact matters that you're facing right here in the event that you are denied fully today.

So my vote is no.

Thank you.

Commissioner Kepper?

Yes, Commissioner Abear.

Yes.

Yes.

Um Commissioner Josie Gubte.

Yes, again, I want to be consistent.

Um I've always denied commercial short-term rentals.

It's nothing to do with your particular case, you know.

It's just that this is a very um sensitive situation for many, many people, and we have denied it consistently, and I feel that by creating a special situation in this in this scenario, um, I would be going against what I've been voting for this whole time until this matter is dissolved.

Um so that's why I'm gonna vote no.

There was a no.

Thank you.

Um Commissioner Flick, yes.

Commissioner Whitry, no.

Commissioner Jordan?

Yes.

Commissioner Steag?

Yes.

Okay.

So we have six guesses and three no's.

What's the date?

The date for deferral.

And the date of deferral is August 8th.

Is that right?

July 8th.

14th.

July 14th.

I won't be here.

So we um you're gonna be a we're gonna get more information and then to be able to come back.

I just have one question.

Just one.

Yeah, just one.

Uh, our executive director can actually speak.

Just because the public portion has been closed, and so you're able to now come back um and see us.

Thank you.

We're gonna do the well, probably.

Before we proceed, can we can I get clarity on what we're asking of the different items that we're asking of safety and permits?

Yeah, you you're prohibited from making the same application for two years.

So if we were to deny and the city council were to deny, they couldn't come back for two years.

But somebody who waited and didn't ask for a conditional use and then the law changed, finally changed, and then they made the application under whatever the.

Um they they could they they could uh apply, and these guys would have to wait for two years, because they tried to get a conditional use uh on a uh before the law was settled.

Right, and the two-year-old who decided the two-year-old.

It's in the law.

It's not okay.

But the that's why it's nuanced because it may not be, they may not apply for conditional use, they may just apply for I see, you know, it depends what the law is.

Exactly.

So this is I think this is just something that's worth clarifying.

Even though we haven't addressed it before, but I think it's just we're like, wait a second, what is happening here, and what does this really mean?

Right.

Um, so I and the reason the reason that I made the the suggestion was that um it seems a hardship on them that they've they filed a legal procedure, you can ask for a conditional use, and then by doing that, then look maybe maybe if the law were to change and it would be easier for them, they're getting penalized, they have to wait two years.

Um, and they didn't do anything wrong.

They they tried to um uh ask for something they they have the right to ask for, maybe, and and if we turned it down under the old law, but if the new law made it easier for them, they'd be they'd have to sit on their hands for two years.

That's all.

And if they went to city council after a denial and they were approved, then they would have just been approved, correct?

Yeah, I suppose so, yeah.

Which is the process other people have gone through.

Right.

Correct.

Zoning docket 06026.

Zoning Docket 060-26 is a request for a conditional use to permit a standard restaurant in the HUB1 zoning district.

The subject property is developed as a mixed-use building with a restaurant on the ground floor.

The operator wishes for the restaurant to be reclassified as a standard restaurant to enable the sale of alcoholic beverages at the restaurant.

The existing site is classified as a specialty restaurant for zoning purposes, which allows limited food and beverage services and does not allow for alcoholic beverages.

This re this request for reclassification necessitates the conditional use approval due to the site's location in the magazine street use restriction overlay district.

Given the purpose of the zoning district to allow small businesses, including restaurants and the commercial use of surrounding properties, it is not likely that a standard restaurant with the sale of alcoholic beverages would result in any negative impact for the surrounding residents.

This is furthered by the use standards imposed on the standard restaurants and the provisos recommended by the staff.

The proposal meets the standards for approval in Article 4 section of comprehensive zoning ordinance and is consistent with the master plan.

Therefore, staff recommends approval of zoning docket 060-26, subject to three provisos.

Thank you, Mr.

Lizelle.

And I'm sorry about your accident.

I'm glad to see that you are up and moving.

I just get to spend more quality time with my son.

So Ron Lanzel 1000 South Norman C.

Francis, want to thank the staff, city planning staff on here.

This is a very small restaurant.

If you have not been to this SUSE restaurant, which holds 28 seats, it's not very large.

They bring in some amazing, amazing fish for SUSE trays.

Again, we have no problem with any of the provisos, and we thank staff.

Thank you.

I you're the only card I have to speak on this matter.

Is there anyone else here to speak on it?

Okay.

Staff recommendation is approval with three provisos.

Any questions?

I have um one point that I'd like to make for the record.

The second paragraph of the summary indicates that the restaurant is located in a corridor of magazine that's incorrect on the summary, so on the staff report.

So I'd just like to make a note of that.

It indicates it's on magazine between Napoleon and Jefferson in the Bullin neighborhood, and it is not between and Louisiana.

Okay.

Can you read a motion?

Okay, is there a motion?

Yeah.

I'll make I'll make a motion for approval of zoning docket item 06026.

Subject.

Three provisos.

Make a second.

Thank you.

There's a motion on the floor for approval with three provisos by Commissioner Jordan and second and by Commissioner Flick.

Um any questions?

Discussion?

Commissioner Steag.

Yes.

Commissioner Jordan?

Yes.

Commissioner Whitry, yes.

Commissioner Flick?

Yes.

Commissioner Josie Gupta.

Yes, that it is a very good tissue recipe.

Commissioner A.

Bear?

Yes.

Commissioner Kepper?

Yes.

Commissioner Poche?

Yes.

Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Alright, the motion carries.

We'll now move on to zoning docket 061-26.

Zoning Docket 6126 is a conditional use to request a neighborhood commercial establishment in an H U R D2 Historic Urban two-family residential district.

The existing mixed-use structure is located at 139 Broadway Street, which is the corner of Broadway and Camp Street.

The immediate past two's was a photography studio that operated there for 16 years until relocating in the summer of 2025.

The applicant proposes to find a new tenant and resume commercial operations as one of the seven permitted uses under the neighborhood commercial establishment category while maintaining the same footprint.

The proposed commercial use is allowable under the master plan, which allows for businesses to be re-established in non-residential structures.

Overall staff consider the reuse of this commercial space of this commercial space to be a reinvestment not only on the property itself but the quality of life for residents of surrounding properties.

Thank you.

I have several cards in support.

Ms.

Weber.

I missed Mr.

Morales both checked they were the applicant.

So good afternoon, Nicole Weber, 2131 BNville Street.

We do have Mr.

Morales here, the property owner, and I would just like to add that this property has been in commerce as a commercial use for over a hundred years and well documented, not only in a staff report, but also on its nonconforming use status.

We also have the future, if we get approved, future tenant who will operate a dog grooming business outside of uh this long standing commercial um commercial business or building, excuse me.

Um, because we have so many speaker cards in support, um, if you all are okay with it or the commissioners are okay with it, we do not have to have everybody come up and speak.

We would just like it noted that um these individuals are here in support of the neighborhood commercial establishment, and we're here to support the staff's recommendation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Morales, would you like to?

Sure.

Please remember to state your name and address.

Thank you, Chair, members of the committee.

My name is Joe Morales, and I'm the applicant for the neighborhood commercial establishment designation at 139 Broadway.

I want to begin by thanking staff for their thorough work on this case and for their recommendation of approval.

The research confirms that this property has functioned as a neighborhood business site for well over a century.

The building was constructed in 1912 with a storefront design intended for commercial use, and city directory records document a grocery operating there by 1916.

Since the mid-1970s, the property has continued to serve the neighborhood through small-scale community oriented uses, including an arts council, a long-running picture frame shop, an art gallery, and most recently a photography studio for the past 16 years.

My family has owned the property since 1923, and its role in the neighborhood has remained consistent across generations.

I grew up across the street.

I own property immediately adjacent, and I remain actively involved in this area.

I'm in New Orleans often to manage the property and to support my brother who lives nearby and has a disability.

This area has become increasingly vibrant with nearby destinations like Audubon Park, The Batcher, the Riverbend Area, Magazine Street, shops, and restaurants, and a range of residential developments, including high-rise and assisted living communities.

In that context, the continued use of the property as a neighborhood business will have a negligible impact on overall activity while contributing to the character of the neighborhood.

This request recognizes what has existed for generations and allows it to continue.

Thank you again for your time and consideration.

I respectfully ask for your approval to allow the property to continue doing what it has done for over a century quietly, consistently, and as part of the fabric of this neighborhood.

Thank you.

So I have five cards in support.

You all are welcome to speak, or you can just raise your hand and we can see that you're here.

Okay.

Would you like to come up and speak?

Is there any opposition?

Can I ask uh a quick rush?

So they lost their non-conforming use by being vacant for six months or not in use for six months.

Uh they so they do not currently have the neighborhood commercial establishment conditional use, and um I believe what they were grant founded for was specifically for photography studio, um, which obviously limits the um the um you know the possibilities.

Um, so the non conforming use was for a specific use, and then they and by getting the zoning the um commercial establishment uh would be broader or it will be a little bit broader.

It would allow uh essentially personal service establishment, um, retail, um, or specialty restaurants, but it would not allow anything like full-scale restaurants or bars or anything like that.

Good question.

Any other questions?

Not that there's a motion.

I'll move approval subject to uh report.

Second, Commissioner Poche.

Thank you.

We have a motion on the floor for approval from Commissioner Flick, seconded by Commissioner Poche.

Any questions?

If not, we'll vote.

Commissioner Jackson.

Yes.

Commissioner Pochet.

To the Morales, thank you for being such good stewards of this property over the time.

Um, I firmly vote yes.

Commissioner Kepper?

Yes.

Commissioner A Bear.

Yes.

Commissioner Josie Gupta, yes.

Commissioner, please go back into commerce.

I like seeing historic job, please go back into commerce and a viable use.

Commissioner Flick.

Yes.

Commissioner Whitcher, yes.

Commissioner.

Jordan.

Yes.

Commissioner C.

Yes.

Okay.

Glad to see you guys continue.

Motion carries, good luck.

We're gonna move on to 062-26.

Zoning docket 062-26 is a request for a zoning change from an H U R S historic urban single family residential district to an H U R D 2 Historic Urban Two Family Residential District.

This request would enable the applicant to develop a two-family dwelling on a currently vacant parcel.

While the zoning change would expand the permissions of the site, the proposal would not, from a land use perspective, generate negative impacts on the surrounding residential properties, which are a mix of two and single-family dwellings.

The proposed HURD2 district allows two-family developments by right.

Staff finds that while the proposed zoning change would not conflict with the future land use map and is compatible with the surrounding current and historic uses, it would ultimately result in a spot zone and does not meet the historic non-conforming use policy, which requires a history of non-residential use.

In conclusion, staff recommends denial of the requested zoning change from an H URS historic urban single family residential district to an H U R D2 historic urban two-family residential district.

Thank you.

Mr.

Beard.

How you doing?

Will you say your address too, please?

26 57 2659 Treasury Street.

First off, it's not my first time I've built a home in that area.

And I'm also a um uh lives in that same area, so I'm never gonna do anything to mess that area up, and I'll take good care of it.

Um it was once before uh when there was a structure on there, it had a multifamily on there.

So I'm just kind of trying to reverted back to that, and I honestly think that me reverting it back to that would also encourage other people to also build in that same area because there's a lot of empty lots in that area, and since like 2010, there's never been nobody's building that area.

And if there's somebody to see one, you'll start encouraging bringing more affordable homes for people to live more in New Orleans.

So that's about it.

Sir, can you tell us on your um on your actual street?

Are there any current doubles?

There's only one on my extra street.

There's only one home, period.

Yeah, so there's this lots.

Okay.

Yes.

So there's nothing.

I saw in the zoning map yesterday.

I couldn't it was hard to tell.

Yeah, okay.

There's also like um uh conditional use, like one corner, one block away from it, so and that's for a double.

No, it's not for a double, it's for um a big um factory or something over there.

Thank you.

If you don't mind just filling out a card too, because I don't think I got one.

Is there anyone else here to speak in um support?

If not, I have three cards in opposition.

Um Miss Desiree Washington.

Good afternoon.

My name is Desiree Washington.

My address is 30122 Hill Street, New Orleans, Louisiana, 7012.

Our community is a very small community.

There's no double houses, it's single homes.

We have a lot of elderly people stay in our community.

When it's hurricane time, we have a difficult time getting out because it's a one-way in, one way out.

We have on the corner, there's this club, and it's horrible.

They party and cars all around the way, all over the place.

We don't have anything against him building, but we asked that to not change the zone for a double or single or how many complex because it's it's horrible.

And it's dangerous here in the world, and we have a lot of elderly people in our community.

And we would like to keep it that way.

If you can build a single home, that's fine.

We all agree with that, but not a double, not a complex, not stacked on top of one another in this small property.

So that's what we asked for.

So let's see how it is the conditional use that he uh the um applicant was mentioning.

Is that the club?

No, the club is actually on um on Franklin.

Oh, okay.

And when it's football time, when it's night time, it's no way in.

So can you imagine if we build this full complex and I often would be with them mixed up with the other crowd?

So I mean it's fine if you build a home.

I want to see people come home and live, but not to change our zone to something different right now.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Miss Priscilla Lapis.

Good afternoon.

Thank you guys for hearing our petition this afternoon.

I'm Priscilla Lopez, I'm president of Angel House Association.

Um, my address is I have several houses out there.

I was but been out there since um I was a child, raised my kids and everything.

Um my mother, mother-in-law, owned on, so it really really means a lot to me when these different investors come in.

Because we have seen investors come in on in buses, because they knocked down a lot of our old historic houses.

Our homes were built, and when beginning part of historic, um World War II, and it was built for military.

Just the doubles that was in the front.

But afterwards, they put them back because that little community is like a cul de sac, and they put it back to singles.

Um we did have a lot of single um widows, and we have a lot of people, seniors in in that neighborhood.

Um, and is it'll be very devastating because you is they can't get in and out, they can't get out.

Now, what she was saying about the um about the the the bar, um, it's called Culture Club, and it's on Franklin in abundance.

And they, for some reason, I don't know how they got a police.

They got police escorts, scoring the traffic, and they don't have the parking.

So, but that would that, you know, even for people to get out.

We have had problems with seniors with Amalance, not able to get in.

It's just a lot of a lot of things going on in that little community.

We the commercials all around.

We are like a little hole, like a little bowl, um, in that community because we got big sewage and waterboard on one side and they're continually growing, and then we got all these here other infrastructures kind of squeezing us out.

So we are asking in and and not to change the zoning for the H U R S to H U R D2 because that'll thank you.

Um, would you like to continue to speak?

Yes, Commissioner Jordan's gonna ask it again.

Yeah, you might continue.

Just finish your comment.

Uh oh, sorry, the mic uh is it?

Oh, it's just a little bit of a gotta be.

Is it possible to reset it?

Well, I could say I could speak loud.

Oh, there you go.

It's working out, I think.

The mic gets shut off temporarily.

Well, well, we asked that, but one of the problems that I have is that we had now, as you can see, this is a notice meet February the second, okay, but then we had the NPP, um, March to 6.

We were notified, we sent in our opposition then, we sent in all the paperwork then.

We have not, at least I have not um association president to receive the notification um from the zoning um about this.

Now they say they melted, but we we got several houses and several, we had one person received notice um about this meeting.

So you have quite a few people, was not able to get the opposition in.

But after I had talked to several people and my council person or whatever, they did send something June the first, but opposition was ending June the first.

So we, you know, I just I'm just bringing it to your attention.

So we we the next time that it's so many months away from February 2nd all the way to June.

I don't understand why it takes so long, you know, for to get a get to get the zoning meeting.

Um, because you're dealing with seniors.

I mean, really, they're like 90, 80, 70 years old in that in that area, and we need notice to be able to um give our opposition, which is, you know, I think everybody should be able to do that in communities.

But thank you guys for listening to us.

Um I did write everything down.

If you didn't get a copy, let me know.

I could give you, you know, so will you make a copy?

Because it is quite long.

Um just have just let us know.

I don't know if you need to make changes about these NPP meetings because the thing is if you have an NPB meeting, a person should know within a month, no later than two, whether or not they're gonna go ahead on with what they're gonna do.

They should have to wait four and five months.

So, I mean, that's the only problem the situation that I have.

Thank you guys.

You've been very kind.

Thank you.

We appreciate that.

We've we've definitely had discussions about NPP process and how to better utilize it.

Mr.

Brian Lapez.

Yes, ma'am.

Good afternoon.

My name is Brian Lopez, 36 16th Deer Street, New Orleans, Louisiana, 7012, too.

That neighborhood that we discussed, and I've been back there since 1970 on property back then.

My mother owned a property.

I own four properties back up into that neighborhood and other people.

I heard him, the uh Mr.

Barrett say that there's no single houses on Treasure.

There's one on the corner of Treasure and Deer.

There's another one on the corner of Treasure and EAS.

So there's single dwelling homes being built.

They got a brand new home being built on Sage Street, single dwelling home.

So they have a lot of single dwelling homes in that area.

Ms.

Jezeree, she built her brand new home right on Deer Street, right behind this property he's talking about across the street from there.

They have another brand new home that was built there up on uh stairs.

You know, they built them up off the ground higher.

But I'm in opposition of changing any zone to that community because I believe once you change zoning that allow other people to come into the community and build other type of projects, because we looked at that letter that when you're gonna when you're gonna change it to that zoning that he's designed to do, you were able to put town home town homes in that six units townhome.

And they got a lot of vacant properties in this in this area at this time here.

For my understanding, I know it because I bid it on some properties.

Noah was selling these properties for $4,000.

These can these people who purchased these properties, supposed to have put buildings on these properties within the year.

All these properties are still vacant.

I believe they're waiting to change the zoning in our area and start putting these type of uh I call them townhomes because they got them across the bridge.

I looked at them.

They're trying to put these into this community.

We wanted to stay in the years.

Thank you, sir.

Is there anyone else here to speak in opposition?

If not, then Mr.

Beard, you have a um a chance to come up and rebut.

I'm gonna keep it short.

Um, SJ maybe.

Oh, could you speak into the mic?

We want to be able to hear you.

Now we can hear you.

One of the points about um the exit to the streets.

There's also another exit on a people street where um you can leave um vacant that um neighborhood from there, but a lot of times I think we have spoke about this before that it's often a train track is blocking it, and I spoke about it where it's more so it's not a city issue, more so a train track issue where you have to contact those people to get them to stop um leaving a tracks blocking that area.

So I've already spoke to them about um helping them out with that.

Um when it comes to um what I'm trying to do, I'm just trying to build um three bed three bedroom, two-family homes.

I'm not trying to do nothing else and nothing more.

That's all I'm just doing.

But as a double, correct?

That's a that's a double, that's correct, ma'am.

Thank you.

Any questions for that?

I have a question.

Oh, go ahead.

Yeah, go ahead.

Ms.

Abear, Commissioner Abe.

I have a question, Mr.

Beard.

Have you considered building a single family home in that community?

I considered it, but I don't think that would be the best thing for that area.

Why not?

Well, because uh one housing right now is just extremely expensive.

So for me as an investor, if I'm building a single family house, I gotta think about who's gonna be my buyer.

So my buyer generally with the cost of material and labor, et cetera, such as like that, and a surplus of a lot of housing supply, it's gonna be very difficult for somebody to afford housing right now.

So, in my opinion, if you want to do a housing for the person that wanna buy a house, it's best to buy a house with get some supplemental income alongside of that.

So I'm not just thinking about just what I want to build stuff like that.

I'm thinking about my buyer also, if that makes sense.

So if you had a a double, would it be rented out?

You say that again?

Would you rent the double out if it's a two-story?

If I so it's too well, if it's a double from building, I'm just gonna build a multifamily, a double, like you said, and just rent it out.

I currently have one in that area.

That's um across the street from Franklin, and that's one also rent out um for uh for um at affordable um affordable on rent, too.

So you wouldn't consider building a single family and renting it out?

Uh no, ma'am.

No, okay, I have I have a question for staff.

Yes, please.

So, what's the maximum number of dwelling units that can be built in H U R D 2?

Two.

Okay, and that's what I just wanted to get that on the record.

So that was the easy question for you.

Um, and in the the lot size of this, uh, so he's proposing to build a three-bedroom, two bath on each side.

Is can you calculate the number of maximum number of bedrooms, et cetera, that could be put in a double?

The number of bedroom, that would be hard to uh calculate.

We could calculate um, yeah.

Yeah, okay.

But the the limit is is two dwellings.

Two dwellings, yeah.

Okay.

You're saying if he adjusted his plans, then he could potentially build what he wanted.

No, he wants to build a double, and if the zoning would allow him to build the double, but not more.

So I mean I've been hearing a lot of discussion about a project and a and a and a uh etc.

And but he's limited to two to two dwellings.

Right.

Any other questions?

If not, is there a motion?

No, so just to clarify, so does that mean he can still do what he wants?

Well you cannot.

Okay, no, Commissioner Steag was mentioning if we had approved the zoning docket item, it would limit them to to two dwellings.

Is there a motion on the floor?

So I'll go ahead and make a motion, which I fully expect to be defeated.

Um, so I'm gonna make a motion against staff recommendation for approval, uh, because the most he can do is build um uh two dwellings and I um I hear the neighbors I hear the neighbors but it seems to me that the bulk of your the problems are coming from this nightclub not from adding one extra family on the street I mean he's limited to to two families and he could do it for one family he could build a big house that had you know more bedrooms so I just don't see the addition of one extra family um the I don't see the effect on the neighborhood so I motion is to um approve the zoning change is there a second all second thank you commissioner kept for so there's a motion on the floor to go against staff recommendation and to approve the zoning change questions I'm sorry the public portion is closed so we can only converse with the commissioners right now.

I don't write the rules like changing the zoning of this one block I mean wouldn't it be spot zoning and special treatment just for this property um I'm not understanding why creating a single family home is not viable in this neighborhood.

Yes Commissioner so the vote is to approve a double to do a zoning change in this particular plot yes okay so it would be just a spot change in between the yellow I guess.

Yeah so I'll I'll jump in here and just say you know since we're in discussion portion I'm gonna unfortunately vote um I would I would be uh in opposition um to the approval to go against staff recommendations only for the sake of the zoning change I do I do hear the developers desire and understand that actually he's very valid and the cost of construction in order to get a single family home right now is you it requires very deep subsidy to make a whole bunch of homeowners right now and the market is insane and a lot of the issues that have been brought up today are really about transportation and about roadway access than they are about the development I do hear the the density challenge but what I want staff to make a note about is as we go through future um land use considerations obviously very soon we'll go into um in the next year so go into master planning that this be a consideration this location be a consideration um to kind of figure out how we deal with other conditions like this won't go away so your vote is a no yes okay um commissioner which tree I am a no as well commissioner flick no commissioner josie guupta commissioner abear no um commissioner kepper yes commissioner pochet today I'm gonna vote no on this motion um but I also would like to speak uh to the applicant in that I I'd encourage you um as this goes in front of the city council to really research and understand what spot zoning means and when it might be appropriate to advocate for a spot zone because as Commissioner Steag mentioned the opposition presents challenges that aren't necessarily exacerbated by the property that you're proposing um whereas if you could demonstrate the inherent value according to the community, then you may be able to with some more votes on your side if you'd like.

Whereas today I'm gonna align um with with the motion here and vote, or sorry, I'm gonna vote against this motion.

No.

So we have seven no's two yas.

The motion does not carry.

It's an effective denial.

So we can move forward at that point, or there can be a new motion.

Okay.

Thank you.

The zoning docket 063-26.

Zoning Docket 063-26 is a request for conditional use to permit a bed and breakfast accessory at 1428 Coronel A Street, located within the HUMU Historic Urban Neighborhood Mixed Use District and the Transient Lodging Interim Zoning District.

The subject property is an existing two-family residential dwelling that the applicant proposes to convert into a single-family residence.

The applicant would like to operate a bed and breakfast accessory with a total of four guest rooms.

Bed and breakfast are conditional uses in the HUMU district and remain as conditional uses in City Council Motion M-25-530.

The proposed use will operate within the existing structure involving only modifications to the facade.

Three off-street parking spaces are required, two off-street parking spaces are provided in the garage, and the applicant is requesting a waiver for one off-street parking space.

Staff finds that the proposed use meets the approval standards of Article 4, Section 4.3.F of the comprehensive zoning ordinance.

The use is consistent with the intent of the master plan and the HUMU zoning district, complies with the applicable use standards subject to recommended provisos, and is compatible with their surrounding neighborhood.

The proposal is not anticipated to adversely impact long-term housing ability or availability, excuse me, public health, safety, or welfare, and is located within close proximity to public transit.

Accordingly, staff recommends approval of zoning docket 063-26, subject to one waiver and four provisos.

Mr.

Davenport.

The Sean Davenport 731629 Church Road, Coverton, Louisiana.

The owner is seeking to provide a safe, comfortable, and highly quality lodging experience for guests traveling from outside the state.

In support of this goal, Mr.

Wells has made the personal decision to open this home to visitors, offering a unique, unauthentic experience that allow guests to experience a side of New Orleans that many tourists never have had the opportunity to see.

As a lifelong resident with deep roofs in the community, Ms.

Wells is passionate about sharing the culture, history, and character of the city he loves.

He is actively involved in several businesses throughout the New Orleans area and believes that combining lodging and a local experience with amenities can create a valuable package for visitors while contributing positive positively to the city's tourism industry.

Guest stand with Mr.

Wells will have access to various amenities and local recommendations that reflect the authenticity, New Orleans experience.

Few people are better positioned to serve as ambassadors for the city than individuals who were raised in the community, continue to live there and remain invested in the city success.

Mr.

Wells has demonstrated his commitment to New Orleans through his businesses, investments, community involvement, and ongoing efforts to support economical growth.

He has a willing to continue to do this part to help strengthen a local economy, attract visitors, invest in the future of the cities.

Mr.

Wells respectfully requests the consideration and support of this application.

He believes his personal proposal aligns with the city's goals of promoting tourism, supporting the local businesses, and encourage responsible investment in the community.

Approval of this request would allow him to continue contributing to the city's economic vitality would provide envisagors with a safe, welcoming and unique New Orleans experience.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else here to speak?

And I have no opposition.

Okay.

Any questions?

This is a similar application to before, except this is an accessory bed and breakfast, whereas the other one was not.

And the clients aware of the waiver improvisos.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you.

I'll move approval of joining docket 63 26 subject to one waiver and four provisions.

Is there a second?

I'll second.

Right?

We have an approval on the floor by Commissioner Flick, seconded by Commissioner Kepper.

Any discussion?

Questions?

Yeah, I just wanted to ask if the owner operator is going to be living on site.

Yes, ma'am.

This is his personal residence.

And he is going to be the siding mayor.

Yes, ma'am.

That was part of provisions from this where he's already at license and everything's in his name there.

So he currently resides.

Thank you.

Um just uh question or question to Commission Commissioner Flick if you can just just give uh a little bit more context to your motion, just move it in favor.

In terms of the reason for moving in favor, um, you know, basically the applicant is already at the property.

There's no reason to not move forward with that.

Given the location, I don't see any issue.

Is there something?

No, no, I'm just curious.

Thank you.

Any other discussion?

All right, I think it's a little bit different because the owner operator is living on site and it is a bed and breakfast and not a commercial short-term rent doll.

I think that's the differentiating factor from the previous.

Alright, we have a motion on the floor, and I'm going to ask for a vote.

Commissioner C.

Yes.

Commissioner Jordan?

Yes.

Commissioner Whitchery, no.

Commissioner Flick?

Yes.

Commissioner Josie Gupta?

Yes.

Commissioner Abear?

Yes.

Commissioner Kepper?

Yes.

Commissioner Poche.

Just to be clear, this is a motion for approval.

Correct.

Yes.

And Commissioner Jackson.

Yes.

Okay.

The motion carries.

Good luck.

Next will the last order of is subdivision ratifications, Mr.

Kroll?

There's just these four that are displayed on the screen for your consideration.

Okay, definitely.

So moved.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Thank you.

A second.

Commissioner Flick made the first.

Commissioner Jordan made the second.

Um any discussion?

Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Commissioner Pochet?

Yes.

Commissioner Kepper?

Yes.

Commissioner Abear?

Yes.

Commissioner Josie Gupta?

Yes.

Commissioner Flick?

Yes.

Commissioner Whitry is a yes.

Commissioner Jordan?

Yes.

Commissioner Sieg?

Yes.

Okay.

And then I'd be looking for no other order of it.

Motion to adjourn.

Thank you.

All in favor?

Thank you.

Everyone have a great afternoon.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Okay.