Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

City Planning Commission Meeting Summary (2025-11-11)

City Planning Commission — Tuesday, November 11, 2025

BodyNew Orleans, Louisiana

SessionCity Planning Commission

DateTuesday, November 11, 2025

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 1:23:25

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

0:00

Here.

0:02

Uh Commissioner Stewart's here.

0:04

You just stepped out.

0:04

Commissioner Flicks.

0:05

President Commissioner Jordan.

0:07

Here.

0:07

Commissioner Whittree.

0:08

Nope, not here.

0:09

Commissioner Josh Gupta.

0:10

Here.

0:11

Commissioner Kepler.

0:12

Kepper.

0:13

Here.

0:13

Thank you.

0:14

Commissioner Pochet.

0:15

Here.

0:16

Great.

0:17

Before we get started, we're going to read the formal public hearing rules.

0:21

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

0:26

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

0:33

Proponents of the proposal will speak first for a period of 10 minutes.

0:37

Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes.

0:39

Opponents or other interested parties will speak second for a period of 15 minutes.

0:44

Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes.

0:47

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

0:51

Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes.

0:54

Opponents will not be allowed to rebut.

0:57

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

1:00

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

1:04

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

1:25

Thank you, Commissioner Jordan.

1:26

Is there a second?

1:28

Make a second.

1:31

Commissioner Josh Gupta.

1:33

Seconded.

1:36

If there's no no discussion, we'll vote on machines.

1:48

I'm down here.

1:49

Sure.

1:49

I think Commissioner Siegs having a technical difficulty.

1:52

Couldn't you?

1:54

Commissioner Steg, your vote for the meeting minutes.

1:57

Aye, he says.

2:01

And Commissioner Whittree is not present.

2:03

She'll she'll be absent.

2:07

Okay, motion passes.

2:09

To start things off, we'll start with uh property acquisition zero three twenty-five law.

2:15

Property acquisition zero three twenty-five is a request for a property swap between the city and the New Orleans Redevelopment Authority, whereby the city would acquire five properties and dispose of one parcel to allow for the development of a public park at the corner of Mira Avenue and Homer Street.

2:33

The request came up at the last CPC meeting where it was recommended for deferral to allow time to receive the environmental phase two assessment and review it.

2:42

The city has received a partial environmental assessment that indicates additional sampling is needed on the site to determine concentrations of lead in the soil.

2:50

Because we are still awaiting the full scope of the environmental assessment, the CPC staff recommends another deferral to the December 9th CPC hearing.

2:59

This deferral would be in conflict with the City Planning Commission's rules and regulations, which state that the City Planning Commission shall render a decision within 45 days of its first consideration.

3:11

The CPC first considered this item at its October 14th hearing.

3:16

45 days from that date is November 29th, making today the deadline for the CPC to render a decision.

3:23

If the CPC defers this item to the December 9th CPC meeting for staff's recommendation, the CPC will need to suspend the rules so it can be acted on 45 days after its first consideration.

3:38

Thank you.

3:39

So you're looking for a motion for the December 9th meeting.

3:43

And a waiver CPC rules and regulations.

3:57

No.

3:58

Okay.

4:03

The motion for deferral and the date is December 9th.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Zoning And Land Use██████████████████████████████████34%

Affordable Housing███████████████████████████████31%

Procedural███████████████15%

Office Conversion████████8%

Economic Development████4%

Public Engagement███3%

Energy Management███3%

Historic Preservation██2%

Summary of Proceedings

City Planning Commission Meeting Summary (2025-11-11)

The City Planning Commission convened on November 11, 2025, to address property acquisitions and dispositions, zoning requests, a reconsideration of a previously denied gas station application, and a market feasibility study regarding Mandatory Inclusionary Zoning (MIZ) and office-to-residential conversions. The meeting featured presentations from HRNA Advisors, public testimony from community members and applicants, and significant procedural discussions regarding rule waivers and reconsideration petitions.

Consent Calendar

Ratification of Subdivisions: Approval of eight subdivision items for ratification was granted with a unanimous vote (7-0).

Public Comments & Testimony

Edgar Chase: Stated as the applicant for Zoning Docket 6125, Mr. Chase expressed full agreement with the staff's recommendation for approval and confirmed his acceptance of the seven proposed provisos.
Ms. Gretchen Chase: Expressed strong support for the staff's recommendation to approve Zoning Docket 6125.
Maddie Charleston: Representing the applicants for Zoning Docket 5325, Ms. Charleston detailed that she was the victim of an assault and robbery and required surgery during the previous hearing, preventing her attendance. She requested reconsideration of the previous denial to withdraw the application, engage with the community to develop a better plan, and refile the project later.
Betty Perez: Representing her family and as President of the Holy Cross Neighborhood Association, Ms. Perez expressed steadfast opposition to the gas station proposal on St. Claude Avenue. While acknowledging the developers' desire to include fresh produce, she stated that the community has "done enough" gas stations and will never accept another in the area. She noted that previous discussions with the owners suggested interest in a coffee house, though she clarified that her opposition remains active regardless of the owners' potential withdrawal.
Jordan Rogers: Speaking on behalf of Housing NOLA, Rogers expressed disappointment regarding delays in executing the MIZ program but expressed strong support for the proposed adjustments to the policy. Rogers emphasized the need for continuous market monitoring and warned against allowing homeowners to convert single-family homes into commercial short-term rentals without homeownership components.

Discussion Items

Property Acquisition & Disposition (0325 & 00125): Staff recommended deferring both items to the December 9th hearing to allow for the completion of a full environmental assessment regarding lead concentrations. Commissioners noted that deferring the items would require suspending commission rules regarding the 45-day decision deadline.
Zoning Docket 6025 (Old Land Orleans LLC): Discussion focused on a request for a conditional use for an outdoor storage yard. Commissioners reviewed four specific provisos regarding site plan approval, parking compliance, screening standards, and lot subdivision before approving the request.
Zoning Docket 6125 (Edgar Chase): Discussion centered on a proposal to operate a drive-through facility in a formerly vacant Burger King building. The applicant and staff confirmed alignment with seven provisos.
Zoning Docket 5325 (Gas Station Reconsideration): A lengthy deliberation occurred regarding a motion to reconsider a prior denial for a gas station on St. Claude Avenue. Commissioner Josh Gupta advocated for reconsideration to allow the applicant to withdraw the application voluntarily, thereby avoiding a two-year refile prohibition if the application were denied or withdrawn while pending before City Council. Commissioner Flick expressed concern regarding procedural fairness and the burden on the community. Staff clarified that a voluntary withdrawal after reconsideration would lift the two-year restriction, whereas a withdrawal after the application moves to City Council would still trigger the restriction. Commissioner Steeg made the motion to reconsider.
2025 Mandatory Inclusionary Zoning (MIZ) Feasibility Analysis: HRNA Advisors presented findings indicating the current mandatory MIZ policy (10% at 60% AMI) is not feasible due to macroeconomic headwinds (interest rates, construction costs) and a local softening market. They recommended shifting to a voluntary approach (5% at 80% AMI) and reducing the fee in lieu. The presentation also analyzed Office-to-Residential conversion, finding significant feasibility gaps that could only be partially mitigated by tax abatements and historic tax credits, necessitating public-private partnerships and pilot programs similar to those in DC and Boston.
Subdivision Docket 9625 (Community Solar): Staff noted a procedural error where this item was not properly noticed for a vote as it exceeded the two-acre threshold. The item was reviewed for informational purposes, and no formal action was taken to avoid legal complications regarding notice.

Key Outcomes

Property Acquisition 0325: Motion to defer to the December 9th meeting, including a waiver of the 45-day rule, passed.
Property Disposition 00125: Motion to defer to the December 9th meeting, including a waiver of the 45-day rule, passed.
Zoning Docket 6025: Approved with four provisos.
Zoning Docket 6125: Approved with seven provisos.
Zoning Docket 5325: Motion to reconsider passed; the applicant, Maddie Charleston, subsequently withdrew the application, allowing for a potential new application without the two-year prohibition.
MIZ Feasibility Study: The Commission adopted the market feasibility analysis presented by HRNA Advisors and voted to transmit it to the City Council, with a motion to amend the underlying regulation to include a mandatory reassessment every three years rather than two. (Note: A discrepancy exists in the transcript where a vote count of 7 yes is recorded despite mentions of a chair change and a commissioner leaving, but the motion is recorded as carrying).
Subdivision Ratification: The eight subdivision items for ratification were approved (7-0).

Note: The record indicates that Commissioner Jordan stepped down as Chair during the MIZ vote, with Commissioner Whittree assuming the role, coinciding with the finalization of the vote count.

Meeting Transcript

Here. Uh Commissioner Stewart's here. You just stepped out. Commissioner Flicks. President Commissioner Jordan. Here. Commissioner Whittree. Nope, not here. Commissioner Josh Gupta. Here. Commissioner Kepler. Kepper. Here. Thank you. Commissioner Pochet. Here. Great. Before we get started, we're going to read the formal public hearing rules. 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 of the proposal will speak first for a period of 10 minutes. Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes. Opponents or other interested parties will speak second for a period of 15 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. Opponents will not be allowed to rebut. 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 and accept except at such time where the presiding officer shall, with the approval of the commission members present, extend such time. Thank you, Commissioner Jordan. Is there a second? Make a second. Commissioner Josh Gupta. Seconded. If there's no no discussion, we'll vote on machines. I'm down here. Sure. I think Commissioner Siegs having a technical difficulty. Couldn't you? Commissioner Steg, your vote for the meeting minutes. Aye, he says. And Commissioner Whittree is not present. She'll she'll be absent. Okay, motion passes. To start things off, we'll start with uh property acquisition zero three twenty-five law. Property acquisition zero three twenty-five is a request for a property swap between the city and the New Orleans Redevelopment Authority, whereby the city would acquire five properties and dispose of one parcel to allow for the development of a public park at the corner of Mira Avenue and Homer Street. The request came up at the last CPC meeting where it was recommended for deferral to allow time to receive the environmental phase two assessment and review it. The city has received a partial environmental assessment that indicates additional sampling is needed on the site to determine concentrations of lead in the soil. Because we are still awaiting the full scope of the environmental assessment, the CPC staff recommends another deferral to the December 9th CPC hearing.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com