OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

New Orleans City Planning Commission Meeting – April 23, 2024

City Planning Commission — Tuesday, April 23, 2024
BodyNew Orleans, Louisiana
SessionCity Planning Commission
DateTuesday, April 23, 2024
StatusFILED
Video Record
Meeting Thumbnail
⇩ GET FROM SOURCE

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:06

Good afternoon, everyone.

0:07

We're gonna get started in just a couple of minutes.

0:09

Thank you for your patience, we have a good.

3:03

Okay.

3:06

So now we'll call roll Commissioner Josh Gupta.

3:09

Present.

3:10

Commissioner Flick.

3:12

Present.

3:12

Commissioner Johnson.

3:15

Commissioner Steve.

3:17

Here.

3:17

Commissioner Brown.

3:18

Here.

3:19

And Commissioner Whitry is here.

3:25

So the formal public hearing rules are as follows.

3:28

The City Planning Commission has established certain rules governing the procedures to be followed at public hearings.

3:34

Before speaking, each person shall give their name, address, and state whom he or she is representing.

3:41

Proponents for the proposal will speak first for a period of ten minutes.

3:45

Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes.

3:50

Opponents or other interested parties will speak second for a period of fifteen minutes.

3:54

Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes.

3:58

Proponents will be allowed a period of six minutes for a rebuttal.

4:02

Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes.

4:09

No material, written matter, photographs, maps, etc.

4:12

will be accepted by the commission or its staff at any time during this public hearing.

4:17

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

4:36

Commissioner Flickle make a motion for approval of meeting minutes from April 9th.

5:01

Sure.

5:08

Okay.

5:09

Is second.

5:14

Is there any further discussion?

5:19

All right.

5:20

Now we'll vote our machines.

5:25

And the meeting minutes are adopted.

5:29

First uh order of business is zoning docket item 03524.

5:34

Zoning docket 03524 is a request for a zoning change from an HURD to historic historic urban two-family residential district to an HUB1 Historic Urban Neighborhood Business District and a conditional use to permit a reception facility.

5:49

The subject property is bounded by Aidenberg Street, Eagle Street, General Ogden Street, and Palm Street.

5:54

The site is composed of one lot of record, which is lot 22, located in the Holly Grove neighborhood that contains a commercial structure that was last used as a bar.

6:03

The project is currently the project site is currently zoned HURD2, where reception facilities are neither permitted nor conditional use.

6:10

The zoning change to HUB1 to HUB1 would allow for the consideration of a conditional use to permit the reception facility.

6:17

While the zoning change requested meets almost all of the approval criteria, it fails to meet one of the spot zoning policy criteria because the requested zoning district is not the most restricted commercial zoning classification available.

6:30

The petition site is a standalone historic commercial building within a residential district.

6:35

The H2B1A district is designed for that specific situation while the proposed HUB1 district is intended for commercial corridors, extending multiple blocks.

6:44

For that reason, staff cannot recommend approval of the proposed zoning change and recommends instead that the proposed property be rezoned to HUB1A.

6:53

However, that zoning district does not allow a reception facility as a conditional use.

6:57

Therefore, staff recommends denial of the proposed conditional use.

7:03

Okay, we have uh a couple of cards in support.

7:06

First is from the applicant, Alex Henderson.

7:16

Good afternoon.

7:18

My name is Earl Earl Williams.

7:20

I reside at 9005 Olive Street, Zip Code 70118.

7:26

Speaking on behalf of Mr.

7:28

Alex Uh Henderson and the out the Henderson Event Hall.

7:33

I'm a member of Holly Grove Neighbors Association, and in this March quality meeting by a vote of 23 to nothing, the Holy Grove community expresses full support for Mr.

7:44

Alex Henderson and the conversion of a form they disrupted bar big time tips into an event hall to serve the Holyville community and beyond.

7:54

They also authorized me to speak on behalf of the community, as many are not able to attend today's meeting due to work and other obligations.

8:03

Mr.

8:03

Henderson is a lifelong resident of Holly Grove and is deeply invested in the community and enjoys great respect and admiration in the community.

8:14

He's already invested a considerable sum of money in renovating the property.

8:29

The property has remained vacant since the alcohol license of big time tips was permanently revoked and had become blighted.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████49%
Short Term Rentals█████████████14%
Urban Planning████████9%
Procedural██████7%
Public Transit█████5%
Affordable Housing█████5%
Public Engagement█████5%
Historic Preservation███3%
Community Engagement██2%
Summary of Proceedings

New Orleans City Planning Commission Meeting – April 23, 2024

The City Planning Commission met on Tuesday, April 23, 2024, beginning at 1:30 p.m. in Council Chambers. The meeting covered regular business items (zoning dockets, a subdivision docket, and subdivision ratifications) followed by 17 Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendment requests for Planning District 12. Commissioners voted on each item after hearing staff presentations and public testimony.

Consent Calendar

  • Adoption of Minutes: The minutes from the April 9, 2024 meeting were approved unanimously.
  • Subdivision Ratifications: The list of subdivisions eligible for administrative approval was ratified without objection.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Zoning Docket 035/24 (8801 Edinburgh St.): Earl Williams (Holly Grove Neighbors Association) spoke in support, stating the community voted 23-0 in favor and presented a petition with 83 signatures. Kim Alexander and Ivan S. Gordon Jr. also expressed support. No opposition was heard.
  • Zoning Docket 036/24 (710 Poland Ave.): Ron Lazel (Zach Smith Consulting) spoke in support, thanking staff. No other comments.
  • Zoning Docket 037/24 (2028-2030 Dumaine St.): Ron Lazel spoke in support, stating the operator lives on site. Two letters of opposition were noted in the staff report, but no one spoke in opposition.
  • Subdivision Docket 039/24 (3819 Patterson Dr.): Ron Lazel spoke in support.
  • FLUM PD 12-01 (2621 General Meyer Ave.): Rochelle Julik (City Office of Community Assets and Investment) spoke in support, noting it is a technical correction to allow redevelopment.
  • FLUM PD 12-05 (General Meyer Ave. commercial parcels): Henry Walther (City) spoke in support, calling it “minor future proofing.”
  • FLUM PD 12-07 (Bearman Highway near Rouse’s): Tyler Russell (City) spoke in support of the request from Council District C.
  • FLUM PD 12-09 (2501 Wall Blvd.): Tyler Russell and Joanna Farley (RTA) spoke in support for transit-oriented development.
  • FLUM PD 12-10 (vacant city lot): Tyler Russell spoke in support.
  • FLUM PD 12-11 (Edna Karr High School site): Gilbert Crowden (Tall Timbers Association) and Ann Maul (resident) spoke in opposition, citing lack of neighborhood notification, flooding concerns, and structural issues with the building.
  • FLUM PD 12-12 (General DeGaulle area): Henry Walther spoke in support of modified approval. Ann Maul spoke in opposition, citing traffic and proximity to single-family homes.
  • FLUM PD 12-13 (Tall Timbers/Bechtel area): Henry Walther spoke in support.
  • FLUM PD 12-14 (General Meyer Ave. corridor): Henry Walther spoke in support of modified approval.
  • FLUM PD 12-15 (General Meyer & Cable Dr.): Tyler Russell spoke in support of modified approval.

Discussion Items

  • Zoning Docket 035/24: Staff recommended denial because the requested HUB1 district is not the most restrictive commercial classification and recommended HUB1A (which does not allow a reception facility). The applicant sought HUB1 and a conditional use for a reception facility. Commissioners discussed the strong community support and the previous bar use. A motion to approve as submitted (HUB1 with conditional use) passed.
  • Zoning Docket 036/24: Staff recommended approval with provisos, including updating plans to show two off-street parking spaces and one EV charging station. The applicant agreed. Approved unanimously.
  • Zoning Docket 037/24: Staff recommended approval with provisos (record plans, clarify operator’s bathroom, restate use standards). Discussion focused on the floor plan and parking deficiency; several commissioners expressed discomfort because the owner’s bathroom was shared and the property had no off-street parking. A motion to deny was made and seconded. After further debate, the motion for denial passed.
  • Subdivision Docket 039/24: Staff recommended approval subject to one proviso. Approved unanimously.
  • FLUM PD 12-01: Staff recommended modified approval to Residential Multi-Family Pre-War (instead of Post-War). Approved as modified.
  • FLUM PD 12-02: Staff recommended approval to Residential Low Density Pre-War. Approved.
  • FLUM PD 12-03: Staff recommended modified approval to Residential Low Density Post-War to match adjacent area. Approved as modified.
  • FLUM PD 12-04: Staff recommended modified approval, removing properties east of Flanders St. and south of Magellan Canal. Approved as modified.
  • FLUM PD 12-05: Staff recommended approval to Mixed-Use Low Density. Approved.
  • FLUM PD 12-06: Staff recommended approval to Mixed-Use Medium Density. Approved.
  • FLUM PD 12-07: Staff recommended modified approval to Mixed-Use Low Density instead of Mixed-Use High Density. Approved as modified.
  • FLUM PD 12-08: Staff recommended approval to Residential Low Density Pre-War. Approved.
  • FLUM PD 12-09: Staff recommended approval to Mixed-Use Medium Density. Approved.
  • FLUM PD 12-10: Staff recommended approval to Residential Low Density Post-War. Approved.
  • FLUM PD 12-11: Staff recommended approval to Residential Multi-Family Post-War. After opposition and discussion about notification, a motion to deny was made and seconded. The motion passed; the item was denied.
  • FLUM PD 12-12: Staff recommended modified approval to Mixed-Use Medium Density (removing a small sliver). Approved as modified.
  • FLUM PD 12-13: Staff recommended approval to Mixed-Use Medium Density. Approved.
  • FLUM PD 12-14: Staff recommended modified approval to Mixed-Use Low Density. Approved as modified.
  • FLUM PD 12-15: Staff recommended modified approval to Mixed-Use Low Density. Approved as modified.
  • FLUM PD 12-16: Staff recommended approval to Residential Low Density Post-War. Approved.
  • FLUM PD 12-17: Staff recommended approval to Residential Low Density Post-War. Approved.

Key Outcomes

  • ZD 035/24: Approved (HUB1 zoning and conditional use for reception facility) – motion by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Flick, voted in favor.

  • ZD 036/24: Approved (subject to provisos) – motion by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Flick, unanimous.

  • ZD 037/24: Denied – motion by Commissioner Gupta, seconded by Commissioner Whitry, passed.

  • SD 039/24: Approved (subject to one proviso) – motion by Commissioner Flick, unanimous.

  • Subdivision Ratifications: Approved – motion by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Flick.

  • PD 12-01: Approved with modified staff recommendation (Residential Multi-Family Pre-War) – motion by Commissioner Gupta, seconded by Commissioner Brown.

  • PD 12-02: Approved – motion by Commissioner Flick, seconded by Commissioner Lund.

  • PD 12-03: Approved with modified staff recommendation (Residential Low Density Post-War) – motion by Commissioner Brown (withdrawn), then motion by Commissioner Whitry, seconded by Commissioner Lund.

  • PD 12-04: Approved with modified staff recommendation – motion by Commissioner Flick (with the carve-out), seconded by Commissioner Brown.

  • PD 12-05: Approved – motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Flick.

  • PD 12-06: Approved – motion by Commissioner Flick, seconded by Commissioner Brown.

  • PD 12-07: Approved with modified staff recommendation (Mixed-Use Low Density) – motion by Commissioner Lund, seconded by Commissioner Whitry.

  • PD 12-08: Approved – motion by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Whitry.

  • PD 12-09: Approved – motion by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Flick.

  • PD 12-10: Approved – motion by Commissioner Whitry, seconded by Commissioner Brown.

  • PD 12-11: Denied – motion by Commissioner Flick, seconded by Commissioner Stave (later seconded by others), passed.

  • PD 12-12: Approved with modified staff recommendation – motion by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Stave.

  • PD 12-13: Approved – motion by Commissioner Whitry, seconded by Commissioner Flick.

  • PD 12-14: Approved with modified staff recommendation – motion by Commissioner Whitry, seconded by Commissioner Brown.

  • PD 12-15: Approved with modified staff recommendation – motion by Commissioner Flick, seconded by Commissioner Stave.

  • PD 12-16: Approved – motion by Commissioner Gupta, seconded by Commissioner Whitry.

  • PD 12-17: Approved – motion by Commissioner Whitry, seconded by Commissioner Brown.

  • Next Steps: The remaining FLUM amendments for Planning District 13 (Lower Coast Algiers) will be scheduled for the next meeting (May 14, 2024) or possibly May 28, 2024, depending on docket load.

Meeting Transcript

Good afternoon, everyone. We're gonna get started in just a couple of minutes. Thank you for your patience, we have a good. Okay. So now we'll call roll Commissioner Josh Gupta. Present. Commissioner Flick. Present. Commissioner Johnson. Commissioner Steve. Here. Commissioner Brown. Here. And Commissioner Whitry is here. So the formal public hearing rules are as follows. The City Planning Commission has established certain rules governing the procedures to be followed at public hearings. Before speaking, each person shall give their name, address, and state whom he or she is representing. Proponents for the proposal will speak first for a period of ten minutes. Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes. Opponents or other interested parties will speak second for a period of fifteen minutes. Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes. Proponents will be allowed a period of six minutes for a rebuttal. Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes. No material, written matter, photographs, maps, etc. will be accepted by the commission or its staff at any time during this public hearing. This procedure shall be followed except at such a time when the presiding officer shall, with the approval of the commission members present, extend such time. Commissioner Flickle make a motion for approval of meeting minutes from April 9th. Sure. Okay. Is second. Is there any further discussion? All right. Now we'll vote our machines. And the meeting minutes are adopted. First uh order of business is zoning docket item 03524. Zoning docket 03524 is a request for a zoning change from an HURD to historic historic urban two-family residential district to an HUB1 Historic Urban Neighborhood Business District and a conditional use to permit a reception facility. The subject property is bounded by Aidenberg Street, Eagle Street, General Ogden Street, and Palm Street. The site is composed of one lot of record, which is lot 22, located in the Holly Grove neighborhood that contains a commercial structure that was last used as a bar. The project is currently the project site is currently zoned HURD2, where reception facilities are neither permitted nor conditional use. The zoning change to HUB1 to HUB1 would allow for the consideration of a conditional use to permit the reception facility. While the zoning change requested meets almost all of the approval criteria, it fails to meet one of the spot zoning policy criteria because the requested zoning district is not the most restricted commercial zoning classification available. The petition site is a standalone historic commercial building within a residential district. The H2B1A district is designed for that specific situation while the proposed HUB1 district is intended for commercial corridors, extending multiple blocks. For that reason, staff cannot recommend approval of the proposed zoning change and recommends instead that the proposed property be rezoned to HUB1A. However, that zoning district does not allow a reception facility as a conditional use. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the proposed conditional use. Okay, we have uh a couple of cards in support. First is from the applicant, Alex Henderson. Good afternoon. My name is Earl Earl Williams.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com