City Planning Commission Special Meeting - January 7, 2025: Reconsideration of Future Land Use Map Amendments
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
City Planning Commission Special Meeting - January 7, 2025: Reconsideration of Future Land Use Map Amendments
The City Planning Commission held a special meeting on January 7, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. in Council Chambers to reconsider 29 Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendment requests sent back by the City Council. The meeting focused on items from Planning Districts 3, 4, 6, 8, and 9, with extensive public testimony, particularly on the proposed industrial use of a parcel in Holy Cross (PD08-05). The commission voted on several items, with outcomes including retaining existing designations, approving changes, and sending one item back to council without recommendation.
Public Comments & Testimony
- PD08-05 (Holy Cross industrial parcel): Over 20 speakers opposed the port's proposal to maintain the Industrial (IND) FLUM designation. Community members, including first-time homeowners, artists, and health advocates, argued that a grain terminal and rail project would harm property values, public health, and neighborhood character. The Holy Cross Neighborhood Association vice president confirmed a lawsuit against the port. The port's attorney stated the port had no intent to change use and that zoning changes would not affect maritime operations.
- PD03-01, PD03-03, PD03-05, PD03-07, PD03-10, PD03-11, PD03-12 (Tulane properties): Representatives from Tulane University (Lauren Jardell) and the Audubon Riverside Neighborhood Association (Tory Emmerling) clashed over Tulane's requests to change residential FLUM designations to Institutional. Emmerling argued against spot zoning and campus creep; Jardell explained the multi-step process needed for master plan updates.
- PD09-01, PD09-05, PD09-07, PD09-09 (New Orleans East): Residents Fran Bias and Don Abear urged retaining single-family and commercial designations, citing a need for more retail and services before additional residential density.
Discussion Items
Planning District 8
- PD08-02 (5300 block Tchoupitoulas): Staff recommended retaining the current General Commercial (GC) designation after zoning amendments allowed residential above ground floor. Commission voted unanimously to deny the reconsideration, upholding the original CPC recommendation for GC.
- PD08-04 (Earhart Blvd. corridor): Staff recommended retaining Neighborhood Commercial (NC). Commission denied reconsideration, keeping NC.
- PD08-05 (Holy Cross industrial parcel): After public testimony, Commissioner Johnson moved to reconsider the original failed motion (which had 4-1 for residential medium density pre-war) and then to approve RMD-PRE. The motion passed 6-0, recommending a change from Industrial to RMD-PRE.
Planning District 3 (Tulane University parcels)
- PD03-01 (5400 Tchoupitoulas): Approved reconsideration to retain GC (staff recommendation).
- PD03-03 (Earhart Blvd. near Monroe): Approved reconsideration to retain NC.
- PD03-05 (1300-1323 Broadway): Motion to deny reconsideration carried, upholding original CPC approval for Institutional (INS) designation.
- PD03-07 (2418 Calhoun): Motion to deny reconsideration carried, retaining Residential Low Density Pre-War (RLD-PRE).
- PD03-08 (6301, 6309, 6325 Freret): Motion to deny reconsideration carried, retaining RLD-PRE.
- PD03-10 (2210 Calhoun): First motion to deny reconsideration failed 4-2 (no recommendation); second motion to deny reconsideration also failed, so the item goes to council without recommendation.
- PD03-11 (6325 Clara): Motion to deny reconsideration carried, retaining RLD-PRE.
- PD03-12 (6320 Clara): Motion to deny reconsideration carried, retaining RLD-PRE.
Planning District 4
- PD04-06 (Square 507, Thalia/Gayoso/Washington): Motion to approve reconsideration to Industrial failed 4-2 (no recommendation). Commission had no recommendation from earlier hearing; item goes to council without recommendation.
Planning District 6
- PD06-02 (Allen Toussaint Blvd. area): Motion to approve reconsideration to Residential Low Density Post-War (RLD-POST) passed unanimously (6-0), maintaining the original CPC recommendation.
Planning District 9 (New Orleans East)
- PD09-01 (Dwyer Rd./Westlake area): Commission approved reconsideration to retain Residential Single-Family Post-War (RSF-POST), denying staff recommendation for Mixed-Use Low Density (MUL). Vote: 4-2.
- PD09-05 (13680 Lincoln Beach Blvd.): Originally voted to approve reconsideration to retain RSF-POST, but after clarification that the item was a technicality to fix a split FLUM, the motion was withdrawn. New motion to deny reconsideration (i.e., adopt staff recommendation for Neighborhood Commercial) passed unanimously.
- PD09-07 (7201 Dwyer Rd.): First motion to approve reconsideration (retain RSF-POST) resulted in a 3-3 tie, so no recommendation. The item goes to council without recommendation.
- PD09-09 (Lake Forest Blvd./Read Blvd. area): Commission was in the middle of discussion when the meeting was paused due to a potential loss of quorum. The transcript ends before a vote. The meeting was moved to the 8th floor to continue.
Key Outcomes
- Approved FLUM changes (denied reconsideration): PD08-02 (retain GC), PD08-04 (retain NC), PD03-05 (change to Institutional), PD03-07, PD03-08, PD03-11, PD03-12 (retain RLD-PRE), PD06-02 (change to RLD-POST), PD09-05 (change to NC).
- Denied FLUM changes (approved reconsideration): PD03-01 (retain GC), PD03-03 (retain NC), PD09-01 (retain RSF-POST).
- No recommendation: PD03-10, PD04-06, PD09-07 (tied votes).
- New recommendation: PD08-05 (change from Industrial to Residential Medium Density Pre-War by 6-0 vote).
- Ongoing: PD09-09 was deferred to later in the meeting (no final action recorded in transcript).
Meeting Transcript
Good afternoon, everyone. We want to welcome you all to the City Planning Commission special meeting. We're gonna just take a few minutes for everyone to get their cards in, and then we'd ask for everyone to take a seat. We have a lot of items to get through today, and we are on deadline, and so we need to make sure to make recommendations on all of these items. Thank you so much, good afternoon. Just in terms of time management, um, and to be able to go through the docket items. If you could just raise your hand if you're here for planning district three. Commissioner Flick. Commissioner Brown. Present. Commissioner Stewart. Commissioner Whitry. The rules and regulations. Before speaking, each person should give their name, address, and state whom her she or he is representing. Proponents of the proposal will speak first for a period of 10 minutes. Each speaker will be allowed a maximum of two minutes. Opponents or other interested parties will speak second for a period of 15 minutes. Each speaker will be allowed a maximum of two minutes. Proponents will be allowed a period of six minutes for rebuttal. Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes. Opponents will not be able to rebut. No material, written matter, photographs, etc. will be accepted by the commission or its staff at any time during the public hearing without suspending the rules. This procedure shall be followed except at such time when the preceding officer shall with the approval of commission members present extended time. At this point, I would like to suggest that we move our docket items out of order and hear planning district number eight, since the majority of the room here has risen their hand and said that they are here for planning district eight. What's up? Yes. Is there a motion on the floor, please? Commissioner Flick will make a motion to suspend the rules to begin with plan district eight, followed by plan district three as stated in the agenda. And Commissioner Johnson, you second. Wonderful. Um please go ahead and vote. Anyway. Roll call. Commissioner Johnson. Commissioner Josie Gupta? Yes. Commissioner Flick. Yes. Commissioner Brown? Yes. Commissioner Stewart. Yes. Commissioner Whittree. Yes. So that motion carries. What we're going to do then is go ahead and start with planning district eight. And this will also you all just please continue to fill out cards and then they'll bring them up here so that we can make sure to have all the public comment. Staff, are we ready to move forward with planning district eight? We can move forward.
openpublica.com