The cows will be gone soon, and they’re not coming back.
Fran Calhoun knows this. She grew up on Sweetbriar Street, which dead-ends inside the old Ford pasture that Tommy Spinosa wants to turn into the Rouzan development, and bought her own home there 25 years ago.
“I love living on a dead-end street,” Calhoun says. “But we accept the fact that the cows are gone. We’re going to have neighbors.”
But she’s afraid Rouzan will attract way too many neighbors.
As envisioned, Rouzan would be the first so-called traditional neighborhood development in the Baton Rouge city limits and contain a mix of single- and multi-family homes along with retail, offices, a Montessori school, a church and a branch of the East Baton Rouge Parish Library. To build it, the zoning of the 119-acre plot on the south side of Perkins Road between Southdowns and Pollard Estates will have to be changed from single-family residential to a TND zone.
Planning and zoning is scheduled to take up the issue Dec. 10, although the topic has already been pushed back twice. Mayor Kip Holden has offered himself as a mediator between Spinosa and Rouzan’s opponents, but it’s unclear how much room there is for compromise.
The debate over the development has pitted neighbor against neighbor, and in some cases it’s gotten nasty. Calhoun has seen these kinds of neighborhood debates before, and she doesn’t lose sleep over any of it. But she has a strong opinion, saying that an A1 subdivision, with connecting streets to the other successful A1 subdivisions, makes a lot more sense than what she sees as an unproven TND concept. Taking a chance on a TND would be laudable in north Baton Rouge or another area of the city in need of revitalization, but not in a place that’s already bustling, she says.
Advertisement | Advertising
Whatever’s built there will add to the area’s drainage and traffic problems, she says. But Calhoun says a TND with nearly double the number of residences than a conventional subdivision zoning would permit on the same site would be a lot worse. She understands the commercial elements are supposed to “capture” the residents’ trips, cutting down on car traffic, but doubts those elements will be significant enough to make a big difference.
“I think south Baton Rouge is a jewel. Not conceptually, but really. What the TND is offering is conceptual,” she says.
Not everyone is approaching this debate in as civil a fashion as Calhoun, however. Ask Beth Tomlinson. She is a member of the American Planning Association who lives on the portion of Sweetbriar surrounded on two sides by the farm. She’s also a former board member of the Southside Civic Association, which has for years opposed any zoning change for the Ford property. Tomlinson and her husband were part of a group of Rouzan proponents who put up about 150 "Yes to Rouzan for a Better Community” on Nov. 9 in part to counter opponents’ claim that “no one wants Rouzan,” she says. Signs were posted from Glasgow to Christian Street and north of Perkins to Hyacinth, Meadow Lea and around the lakes. Tomlinson says she was careful not to obstruct views of the opponents’ signs. By the next afternoon, all but two signs had been removed and replaced with various “reject Rouzan” signs.
Tomlinson says she has heard about residents being harassed or intimidated for refusing to sign the anti-Rouzan petition, but has not seen it happen or been personally subjected to it, although she and her husband have been insulted by some of their neighbors.
“Opponents to a project always make more noise than proponents and this is often due to fear and a lack of information. Fear is a strong motivator,” Tomlinson says. “I hate that my neighbors are experiencing so much fear and anxiety when there is no need.”
Tomlinson says the combination of medium density near the town square and low density near the existing residences is part of what makes the TND concept work. Some density is critical to supporting the retail, creating a sense of community, and mitigating sprawl and the negative effects on the environment caused by vehicles. The least successful TNDs are those that are so watered down they’re unrecognizable as such, because all the elements work together, she argues.
Both sides in the debate have taken to cyberspace, although no one takes responsibility for either site by name. The administrator of for-rouzan.org says by e-mail that he lives in Southdowns and the site represents the opinions of “an independent group of neighbors,” but refused to identify those people and implied that he feared retaliation from neighbors who opposed Rouzan.
Photo by Marie Constantin
A phone number listed on stop-rouzan.com belongs to Peter Ricca of Aberdeen Avenue, and visitors to the site are invited to drop by his home to sign an anti-Rouzan petition. Ricca deferred questions to Southside board president Chris Kisling, referring to Kisling as the group’s spokesman. Kisling did not return multiple phone calls seeking comment.
Stop-rouzan.com refers to several anti-Rouzan signs that “were deported and massacred by cowards in the night.” Most famous of those was a large wooden sign saying, “Don’t make a racetrack of Hyacinth,” which Rouzan opponents say was hacked down with a saw. The cops were called, and Kisling told WBRZ-TV that he happened to drive by just in time to see a vandal throw one sign into some nearby bushes before jumping into a waiting getaway car.
Metro Councilman Mickey Skyring, who represents the area, has largely been supportive of Rouzan, especially the library and the connection of the development to surrounding neighborhoods.
Skyring says he has “no clue” how Holden plans to go about settling the argument. He says constituents who have taken an interest in the project can’t be neatly divided into supporters and opponents; rather, there’s a range of opposition among the detractors, and the opponents become more vocal the closer they are to the planned development. Neither Holden nor City Planning Director Troy Bunch could be reached for comment.
“There’s a group that wants it to stay a farm,” Skyring says. “It will never be a farm again.” There’s also a group strongly opposed to the library. But he says there is room for compromise with some opponents, and says some have fairly specific concerns that can be addressed.
“Some people just want sidewalks on their blocks, instead of walking in the streets. I hope there’s a way we can do that,” Skyring says. “There’s a number of people who want the entire property to stay A1. That just can’t be.” Perkins Road is so busy that no one is going to want to build nice houses along Perkins, he says. Commercial is the only viable option there, he says; with the TND ordinance, the city at least has the ability to control what sorts of businesses are appropriate. South Baton Rouge just isn’t the country or quiet, leafy suburbia any more.
“Those days are gone,” Skyring says. “It’s an area in transition. There’s nothing we can do about that.”
Comments
Posted by BR_Garden_Dis_Res on December 4, 2007 at 1:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The "Don't Make a Racetrack" sign always makes me laugh when I drive by it as I cut across from Lee to Acadian (a shortcut I've used for years). Hyacinth has been a busy street for years. It's a little too late for wishing it was a quiet country road. News flash: You live in the city.
Posted by Imby on December 4, 2007 at 5:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hyacinth is a speedway and cut thru, no doubt. But wait a minute, maybe we can help the situation with a little urban design. What about sidewalks and jogging paths along Hyacinth? And crosswalks with pavers to alert and calm traffic. And, uh,...yes! where is a lot of that traffic coming and going, could it be LSU students, faculty and employees? What about a bike path along Bayou Duplantier from Lee Dr. to Stanford, and connecting into BR Beach and the existing bike/walking/jogging trails to the campus? Maybe that would help lessen some of the existing commute traffic from the apartments and residences along the Lee Dr. area to LSU on fair weather days. Oh, and if we could extend the bike path and belt park further eastward along Bayou Duplantier you could possibly connect the residential areas of Kennilworth, Pollard Est., and the proposed TND - Rouzan! Would a "web of connectivity" help lessen some of the "speedway" problems?
Posted by Hidensity on December 4, 2007 at 7:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I love how the guy who is leading this charge against Rouzan has to drive his car across perkins to Spectrum Southdowns every morning...and he parks in handicap and he doesn't have a handicap permit! HA!
Posted by Dot on December 4, 2007 at 7:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Now, here I go again ...
I'm happy to see that Mr. Skyring is communicating with journalists, because doesn't return calls or mailings from this constituent (and I campaigned and voted for him!) His suggestion that anyone seriously expected the plantation tract to remain a farm after the JTS purchase is comical, at best. I think it's an indication of how little consideration he's given to the valid concerns of surrounding residents. Does he not realize that this area IS one of the last bastions of "leafy" in town? To hear my own Councilman say "those days are gone ... and there's nothing we can do about that" is disheartening. Well, Mickey, since we're transitioning, the Heberts should buy as much property as they can afford to CLEAR, 'cuz we're de-leafing, by golly. There are plenty of ways to "economically revitalize" during this transition ... What does solid live oak timber sell for, anyway?
Fred-for-rouzan needn't worry about retaliation for his support for the development. I've talked with dozens of neighbors about this issue, and we have no ill will toward Rouzan supporters. Most of us simply differ on our concerns regarding population density, and a grossly failing drainage and sewerage system. We love our neighbors, ALL.
I do want to say I find reckless the implication that Southside Civic Association president Chris Kisling imagined a specific vehicle, and a specific license plate number. I know Chris, and can tell you that he would not contribute a false report to an officer of the law. That's a crime. You could be walking a slippery libel slope if you begin to imply that a named person lied to the police. Don't forget what you learned in from "Ethics in Journalism." Any reasonable person reading this article could infer that you believe Mr. Kisling did not actually "happen to be driving by" at that time (10:15, big deal!), and that perhaps he conjured up a story to set (somebody he doesn't know) up. I suppose you could also suggest that the reputable attorney (who lives at the house where police responded) was sawing down his own sign as part of a conspiracy to set (somebody) up. Apparently, it did not occur to you that other people saw exactly what Mr. Kisling saw, but declined to get involved because they just didn't feel this was a serious infraction of the law. I understand Chris felt that way, and initially was not going to do anything with the vehicle/tag description. I believe he decided to go ahead and pass along the information when he saw the police responding on his return home. At that point, Chris had no way of knowing if they were (only) vandalizing signs, or if they had gone further. I think that's the reason he decided it was important to give the police the plate number. He's a good guy, and a great neighbor for doing such. You may not want to discourage that brand of civic responsibility by implying otherwise.
... continued ...
Posted by Dot on December 4, 2007 at 7:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Also, I'd like to address your publisher, Rolfe McCollister. In the December 3 editorial Rolfe writes in 2008 that the city WILL have:
"Growth. Despite the NIMBYs of Southdowns, Baton Rouge makes progress and Rouzan begins construction, including a Southdowns library. There will be many other new developments in East Baton Rouge as well as all the surrounding parishes. While some complain, take a drive to New Orleans and consider the alternative. (In fact, if you don't like Baton Rouge, move to New Orleans. Many of their streets are very quiet with no one around to bother you.)"
Mr. McCollister, you've published a fine Report over the years. Now that the BRB Report has reached earned and lauded success, it will now resort to tabloid tactics? The editor and even the publisher referring to residents of this city as "NIMBYs" (and even jihadists)? What is going on here? It's the Baton Rouge Business Report, for crying out loud. If we want RedSchtick, we'll read RedSchtick.. I cannot help but observe that Mr. McCollister doesn't include the many Rouzan opponents of Woodchase or Pollard in his NIMBY-calling. Is it only because the NIMBYs lining Woodchase Boulevard are associates in business and government, and he doesn't wish to offend them? Nice. NIMBY is commonly known to be an inherently contentious pejorative. I can think of a pejorative of my own: HYPOCRITE.. That may be the person living in a single-entrance subdivision while touting the advantages of "smart" growth – no matter how DENSE the growth (pun). If the city were to plan to widen Highland Road to four lanes ...or run a bridge over from Lee Drive, connecting all of those single-entrance neighborhoods, you can bet there would be some folks with their knots frayed. If the city decided to fill the LSU Lakes, and plan "Smart" development for it, it'd be a huge problem for the residents surrounding the lake. It's easy for someone to name call from an encased neighborhood. How many car trips grace Rolfe McCollister's street every day? 20? C'mon!
Finally, I'm missing your point regarding New Orleans. In fact, New Orleans was planned as very much a "mixed use" city, and served the true definition of a traditional neighborhood development, since it depended on a trolly system for any extended travel throughout the city. So, what IS your point?
Regardless, your apparent cavalier attitude for Louisiana's beloved New Orleans residents is shocking. Reading your sarcastic quip about the "quiet streets with no one around to bother you" was like a punch in the solar plexus (and I've never even lived there.) "Their" streets are OUR streets, Rolfe. You're steering the transition team for the Governor of LOUISIANA, man. Again, niiiiice. You've demonstrated a gross lack of empathy – even a cruel streak. It's a side I never thought I'd witness in a man with such a fine reputation. Honestly, I'd rather not have known it about you.
Posted by Dot on December 5, 2007 at 8:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Another post summed up Rouzan's future with precision ...
Posted by kniesk on December 4, 2007 at 2:22 p.m. on the "A Better Idea" thread:
Perhaps in a more removed location I might buy-in to a reduction of traffic based on residents staying in the community. But this doesn't add up. First, the church is non-denominational, so I doubt many will switch from their own church. Second, the school will only support 100 children. Also, if it’s public, many will send their children out of the neighborhood to a private school. Third, a library is great, but unfortunately most of our traffic problems are not residents beating a path to libraries. And finally regarding shopping, where do they think most people will shop? A small local store or Walmart or Office Depot etc. The smaller retailers simply cannot compete with a big national store on price for the necessities. Maybe a specialty store for example a jewelry or gift store might do well, but the residents will constantly travel down Hyacinth, up Stuart to the more popular retail areas.
Due to the close proximity of better competition, I still believe A-1 housing is the way to go for this location. The A-1 zone will decrease the number of these residents traveling to their real church, school and grocery store. Or if that stuff is so important add the park, school, church, library and center the single home dwellings around a town square and allow multiple entrance/exits, but by keeping the dwellings single family, we will keep the density down. And that is the real reason for these perks. JTS wants to increase density to increase sales. They know without the perks they won’t get it through. Even though realistically, the residents will travel as much as ever."
Posted by urbnplnnr on December 5, 2007 at 10:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The statements of the Rouzan opponent interviewed above perfectly reflect those opinions of the opponent group that I have heard and read. They are a perfect example of the misinformation and lack of information the opponents seem to be working with. First, TNDs are not unproven concepts as many people posting to these articles have pointed out again and again. Second, I have heard so many opponents say they are "not against the TND concept" but against the "density, drainage problems and traffic" it will supposedly bring. However, if they truly understood the TND concept (as many claim they do)and planning procedures in general, they would understand that density does not equal traffic problems (separation of uses does) and that the TND is currently the only development option that can succesfully address these problems.
In addition, they would know that DPW and the city planners have already taken all of this into consideration and still have recommended approval for the zoning change. Why? Because they are the engineers and planners who understand how the numbers translate into reality and because the developer always has to address these problems in order to get a permit in the first place - no matter who is developing, where they are developing and what they are developing, not just for their development, but for any possible impact on existing development. This is basic development/planning procedure, true for any town or city with a DPW and developed planning office. They also FULLY understand the TND concept and how the principles involved address these problems. So, basically, while the SCA is proclaiming their war cry of "density, drainage, traffic" - the city already knows those arguments don't hold water. (No pun intended.)
Also, I've been wondering, if the SCA board can rally some of the neighbors to fight developments, and spend so much time and effort doing so, why haven't they done the same to get their sewage, drainage, and speeding problems we've been hearing so much about fixed?
Posted by Gary on December 5, 2007 at 11:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Urbnplanner, you probably already know this, but a civic association can't do a thing about sewage and drainage problems. The EBRP Sewerage Commission depends on revenue bond issues to finance improvement of existing sewer and drainage. After years of EPA citations, inertia and a plan for nothing but "evaluation" the city parish plan was revised in 2005 to concentrate on rehabilitation of existing lines. Lots of people who live in District 12 and elsewhere have contacted DPW countless times to clear sewer overflow from their property. DPW shows a speedy response in blowing the lines, but the problem always "resurfaces" shall we say. When cammed, the existing lines are often disintegrating or infiltrated by tree roots. When flouresced, you can watch the sewer water drain into open ditches and bayous. While I don't have a problem with development, I think the City has demonstrated for over 20+ years that it can not respond to this long-standing problem, or to the demands of the Environmental Protection Agency. I lived it, and I've worked it.
-Gary T.
Posted by cmac on December 5, 2007 at 2:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Mr. McCollister, are you sitting behind a walled enclave in a one-way-in one-way-out and dictating how we lowly NIMBYs should live? Shame on you!
This whole process has been very enlightening. I'm a 26-year resident of Southdowns, but haven't been a member of the SSCA for a number of years now. More specifically since the old board was systematically ousted in one fell swoop by those whose only apparent interest has been in the eventual development of the old Ford farm. They happily collect money for membership, but provide no information on the association's neighborhoods other than news on JTS. Very self-serving. I do understand their concerns in regard to traffic and drainage. And I don’t for a minute believe the rhetoric from urbnplnnr. The reality is as Gary stated, “the City has demonstrated for over 20+ years that it can not respond to this long-standing problem, or to the demands of the Environmental Protection Agency.” Ask any resident in BR who deals with the problems of a dilapidated sewer system. Come visit my backyard in Southdowns and take a deep breath on one of the days the neighbor’s sewer overflows into their backyard. It’s oh so fragrant! And like Gary said, DPW is pretty much Johnny-on-the-spot, but their little fix is akin to putting a Band-Aid on a festering wound.
Posted by Jon_Deaux on December 5, 2007 at 3:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
In a sense urbanplanner is right…it is because we don’t understand the motivation behind their rationale what is in reality clearly illogical is somehow logical to them. TND’s and Smart Growth are rooted in the concepts and principles of New Urbanism. This school of thought centers on the most extreme and egaderated assumptions in the environmental movement. Their enemy is what sits in your garage. If this movement is successful and our “infill” is populated with developments of this type there will be such a degree gridlock created that individual vehicular modes of transportation will be made impractical (forced Mass Transit..no option). While we logically view the infrastructural constraints prohibitive for such a development they on the other hand see the “bigger picture”. If this is the route that our city chooses that’s fine but it should not be determined by the actions a few. We need to speak up as a city and let our City Council know exactly how we feel. Research and decide for yourself…
Two points I’d like to make:
1. As stated by kniesk the amount external travel necessary for the residence of this development (and other like developments) will be basically the same as other subdivisions.
2. Even in development of this type people do not, will not and should not sacrifice their vehicles. The automobile has brought a tremdous degree of independence & opportunity and has enhanced the quality of life greatly.
Having said that, there is very little that is modern about the automobile. Apart from a sleeker appearance and a few engine modifications, that is basically you grandfathers vehicle. I am neither classily liberal nor conservative and blame every administration from “Peanut Man” to “Peanut Brain”. Whether for Environmental or Economical/Defensive reasons as a nation we should have broken the dependency on foreign oil a long time ago. Now we have no choice and are forced to do what we should have done willingly. There are technologies already created that once perfected well end the damaging affects of carbon based fuel. (Hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles for one.) The irony in their arrogance is that to view our existence without the vehicle completely lacks vision and is not progressive in thought!!
Posted by Tara on December 5, 2007 at 4:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Funny... "back in the day" when Woodchase was scheduled to be developed, Pollard and Southdowns NIMBY's fought that tooth and nail too! Just "born against" I guess.
Posted by Fred on December 6, 2007 at 6:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Dot, your right the vast majority of people who live in Southdowns are wonderful people and I’m glad to live amongst them both those for and against Rouzan. There is also a relatively small group who are against Rouzan that are very frustrated about the current situation and lash out at anyone who opposes their view.
The “fear and smear” campaign by some who claim to represent Southdowns has only helped to ignite these frustrations (Tuesday’s editorial in the Advocate is one example). If they put the same effort into getting our traffic and drainage systems fixed these problems would have been addressed years ago, but that would take away their primary defense during their “fight for the neighborhood” campaigns.
Posted by Dot on December 6, 2007 at 8:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I was reminded by Deslatte's report in The Advocate yesterday that Tommy Spinosa's JTS received $250 million of "GO Zone" low-cost bonds to finance the Perkins Rowe project. The "Gulf Opportunity Zone Act" provided hurricane recovery funding for developers after Katrina/Rita. The Rowe project was planned long before the hurricanes. Kathleen Blanco, and the Bond Commission were flatly irresponsible to initially free that money up on a "first-come, first-served" basis. Several developers took advantage of that funding before the procedure changed and of course, Spinosa jumped all over it.
It's not illegal, but it sure appears to be unethical, doesn't it? I have to wonder how many people who lost housing and jobs as a result of those hurricanes will be afforded a home in Perkins Rowe. Yeah.
There are ethical developers out there, however. They deliver detailed project plans before projects begin, and include responsible practices in building. You just have to know who they are.
There is some fantastic news for people who were affected by the hurricanes, though! Some of the best and brightest from around the world are working on rebuilding generational housing for those in need in New Orleans. The developers (here's an idea) worked with the property owners and neighbors to determine the appropriate housing elements for the area. Can you imagine that? The "Make it Right Project" was kicked off by Brad Pitt's foundation one year ago. It's the ultimate in development ethics, and there's a bonus: Brad Pitt, easy on the eye. Tommy Spinosa, not so much.
www.makeitrightnola.org
P.S. - our sweet neighbor's "We Love Southdown's" sign was stolen last night (along with several other higher profile ones) Again, the guys were witnessed by several folks. It's not nice to take other people's stuff, son. Who is your role model, anyway?
Posted by danholliday on December 6, 2007 at 3:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dot, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make regarding the GO Zone financing for Perkins Rowe. Mike Wampold (like many other developers in South La.) received GO Zone financing for his new building in downtown BR. This building was in the planning stages long before the storms. So what?
Posted by Dot on December 7, 2007 at 8:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Dan, I'm saying that some things are legal, but not ethical. If people affected by the hurricanes benefit from the projects built by GOZone funding, that's an ethical and legal use of funds. If GOZone funding is used to fund projects that will accommodate unaffected urban professionals with luxury condominiums and boutique shopping, that could be considered a legal but non-ethical use. Baton Rouge got a huge economical boost from the hurricane fallout, so I guess the people who profit most will use it as they see fit.
Prentiss Riddle wrote: "I wish that a little of the civic excitement going into ultra-high, ultra-hip, ultra-dense housing for the ultra-rich would be channeled into some semi-high, semi-hip, semi-dense housing for the semi-scraping by."
Dan, where taxpayers subsidize development, they'd simply like some input.
Now, if I'm ever going to get that 12 hundred square foot, $500K townhome in Rouzan, I'd better get back to work.
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 7, 2007 at 9:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Careful Dot, your class envy is showing.
Posted by bigmike101 on December 8, 2007 at 8:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Dot, I don't mean any disrespect, But people like you NAGGGGGGG to much. You spend tons of money to take trips to Fla,Atlanta,L.A.,N.Y.,TX, and places like that..Why?? Because Baton Rouge has nothing to offer. But hey blame yourself. When they try to get things into Baton Rouge yall are always Against them. This is the CITY now, we are in the 20th century .Quit Living in the 80's. The cities with developments like this are the top cities in the country. Why not wan't your city to stand out, give your kids places to go hang out, Open more jobs..Your neighborhood is a few blocks away from the interstate what do u expect living there?? And it makes us look bad when college students from out of town come here and be like they want to go home because it's nothing to do here. And it also hurts when people say i don't want to go to Baton Rouge It's to country
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 8, 2007 at 9:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I couldn't agree with you more BigMike.
It's the mentality of those stuck-in-the-muds that have kept Baton Rouge from being a city that our children can and want to live in after they graduate from college.
Posted by bigmike101 on December 8, 2007 at 2:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Your Right SDwnsMom.. and those are the same people that talk down on louisiana and say Baton Rouge/Louisiana isn't a good city/state to start a career because they don't offer much.
Well im taking a stand...IM ALL FOR Rouzan & Many other developments!!!!!
I wan't My children to be proud of Baton Rouge and the progress we have and the things we will have to offer in the future
Posted by Dot on December 8, 2007 at 3:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What a beautiful day today! Did you folks take advantage of the Market? Heiffer, International was there with cows, goats and chickens!
BigMike -- it's the 21st century, not the 20th, as you accidentally typed.
BigMike, and SDwnsMom, neither of you live in Woodchase, Pollard or Southdowns, so plunking a high-density development next door is not an issue for you. If you'll read the post from "Gary" above, you'll understand that there are REAL infrastructural issues (primarily severe sewerage line problems) that tax-paying citizens deserve to have addressed in this area before more sewerage is pumped in. Also, when tax money subsidizes development, we deserve a voice in development. That's the egalitarian way of a constitutional republic, correct?
More with the name-calling? Now, let's see ... so far I've been called a traveling, naggy, stuck-in-the mud, class-envying, NIMBY jihadist..
I adore attention.
Travelling. BigMike, the only places I've traveled as an adult are Alabama and Florida. While there are a multitude of things in Baton Rouge for a lover of the arts and history, it is true – there is no Gulf of Mexico. Climatological models have Baton Rouge on the Gulf soon, though. YOU are the one saying there's nothing to do in Baton Rouge. You are the one saying it needs to change, and that is why you support Rouzan. What, exactly will people be DOING so differently in Rouzan? Create jobs for Baton Rouge? For whom, specifically? Non-resident brick-layers (because dollars are worth a lot more across the border for them, and the labor is Union-free cheap for developers.) If your talking about creating careers, JR Ball's recent article "All in the Family" addresses the fact that the families who move and shake the economy are moving to the SUBURBS. In Louisiana, they're flocking to St. Francisville and Ascension Parish with their children – to get AWAY from the CITY! If you haven't read it, do:
http://www.businessreport.com/news/2007/...
Okay, back to the name calling. I do adore attention, but I feel sad when you say I'm ...
a "NIMBY"? Anyone residing in JTS-adjacent area would be. "JIHADIST"? The last holy thing I did was in 1970. "STUCK-IN-THE-MUD"? Hey, you're slinging it at me! "CLASS-ENVYING"? SDwnsMom, I earn what I earn, fair and square. I'm in the "class" that TEACHES YOUR CHILDREN! Based on your tone, an increase in my income would mean a loss of class, if anything. Will you be at Mass on Sunday, gentle soul?
Rouzan will join historic Southdowns eventually -- and I know you want "change." Well, if you are a fair representation of Rouzan's future residents, things here will most certainly change.
"NAG?" Okay, I'll give you that one. In fact, I nag so much I could easily be confused with an old female horse.
Now, let me give you a hug, neighbor!
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 8, 2007 at 3:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Just one other thing Dot...
I'm certainly not Angelina Jolie, and maybe you're not the "Dot" pictured in the photo attached to this article, but I don't think whether a developer looks like Brad Pitt matters to people who want what's best for Baton Rouge.
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 8, 2007 at 3:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dot,
Although you like to claim you know it all, I DO live in Southdowns on Sweetbriar St. along with my cousin, around the corner from my brother and other cousin and have for years. I also taught school, public school, for many years.
Posted by Dot on December 8, 2007 at 6:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
SDwnsMom, that was TWO other things – and I still feel hurt when your write to me. I don't think I'll be posting much after Monday! I'm here more for kicks and chat than substance at this point, anyway. Anyway, all of this sound reasoning has changed my mind. I'm going to start campaigning FOR Rouzan!
I promise you, I've never claimed to know everything. I'm sure I know very little about very little. One useless factoid I do know is that Tommy Spinosa gave (your) Sweetbriar Street the concession of no through-way extension through Rouzan. If I were you, I'd be thanking Pam Perkins for her dogged diligence regarding that issue.
It is BigMike who lives outside of Southdowns/Pollard. I was obviously wrong to post that you did not live in Southdowns. I apologize. You just didn't really sound like a neighbor.
I have other relatives in Southdowns, too. You taught in public schools. I feel your pain.
I chose the posting name "Dot" in homage to my grand-aunt. No, I'm not the Dot in the photo, so I hope she hasn't taken any heat on my account. I did once meet her at a neighbor's party, though. She's a missionary who travels extensively for volunteer work, and seemed quite religious. As I wrote, I'm not a traveler, and I'm a lousy Catholic.
I look nothing like Angelina Jolie, but am often mistaken for Jennifer Anniston.
I was just saying that Brad Pitt's mug is a bonus, SDwnsMom. It was just a poke at Tommy, and shame on me for poking Tommy. Of course it doesn't matter what a developer looks like. Cooperative and fair building practices (like the ones found on the makeitrightnola.org site) really do matter to many people who want the best for Baton Rouge. But, Lord, Pitt's is fine, isn't he? And, (though we disagree on the Rouzan development) JR Ball is hot too.
ONE MORE THING: Why is the
Rouzan.com
site in Arabic?
I'M KIDDING! I'M KIDDING!
One more chance ... I mean it, now ... GIVE ME A HUG!!!
Posted by Tara on December 8, 2007 at 7:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dot,
I agree with you on one thing - JR Ball appears to be quite handsome, though I've never met him in person.
I wonder, however, if you and your fellow assoc. members would fawn as much over Brad Pitt and his group if they decided the best place for the former 9th Ward residents was next to Southdowns on the Ford Property (all A-1 zoned, of course).
I bet you all would be BEGGING the likes of Tommy Spinosa to convince the powers-at-be that the property should be TND!
Posted by bigmike101 on December 9, 2007 at 1:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
1st DOT..you are right i was thinking about something and typing different
But back to the fact have you ever pictured that..it's not just Southdowns but the WHOLE Baton Rouge is going through a change??? Zachary never was that fast paced now look at it. & your saying everybody is Moving to the Burbs..well hmmmmm if you move to the burbs now, when the LOOP is finished , the undeveloped land in (THE BURBS)...will soon feed and grow off the loop ...like (HOUSTON)..Half of that city is The Burbs..But i mean do you have any clue what u have??? you speak of southdowns History..But it's not like they tearing it down..they are just adding to it to assist local residents and attract visitors.and your property Value will double and won't cost u a penny..who would hate that???
Posted by Papadeaux on December 9, 2007 at 8:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Sweetbriar Street dead ends at Dauphine. Per the plan to be presented on December 10, 2007 to the PC, Dauphine will be connected to the development. Per the UDC all existing roads have to be connected, neither Ms. Perkins nor Mr. Spinosa can make this change. Only the PC and Metro Council have the authority to approve this type of waiver.
Posted by cmac on December 10, 2007 at 2:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Gee Dot, don't leave now it was just getting entertaining. And that's a welcome relief at this point.
Would love to see the Planning Commission and Metro Council put the brakes on this puppy. The concept is great and if greed weren't a major motivator I think more people would be willing to embrace it. But Spinosa only sees dollar signs. He waxes eloquent about the idyllic lifestyle one would embrace living in Rouzan, but pretty much ignores the reality that its residents and their neighbors would have to deal with on a daily basis. Some of his comments in today's Advocate article are very revealing.
Here's hoping the Metro Council hasn't already been bought!
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 10, 2007 at 10:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Scared of the new and unfamiliar? That was the old, backward, Baton Rouge. We're moving forward, and taking them with us!
Posted by LBK on December 11, 2007 at 12:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dot, you're nothing more than one of the anti-Rouzan idiots I encountered last night at the PC meeting. After one of the supporters spoke, a man said, and I quote.. "Shoot her, shoot her!" Typical closed-minded, red neck, anti-progressive Baton Rougean who needs to find a small shack in the woods somewhere in Mississippi to reside. And no need to ask for a hug. They are reserved for those of us who won last night ;)
Posted by oldBR on December 13, 2007 at 4:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What does "Rouzan" mean, literally? I have yet to find a clear description or source of this name. I find it curious and have seen no telling of its symbolism, origin or appropriateness for a community that belongs in the heart of my lifelong hometown.
Posted by Tara on December 13, 2007 at 10:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow, 30 more days of interest payments on $15 Million for Tommy Spinosa to pay when he's already met all of the requirements of the government and the planning commission to develop his property.
I think he should sue. Seriously, I hope he looks into it.
Posted by Christopher on December 13, 2007 at 11:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I made this comment on Mr. Ball’s column.
The name calling I hear and the disdain I read on this issue leads me to believe that this is deeper than some Rouzan project.
Why do you all feel that you need to call someone names to get your point across? If this is how the communication process has occurred between the proponents and opponents of Rouzan, then I see why there is such a divide.
Tara, what grounds would Mr. Spinosa have to sue? The reason I ask is because I am not sure why you would recommend such an action when there seems to be no grounds for this action? Then you are just recommending threats of a suit. The law is not made to threaten.
I don’t know Mr. Spinosa, but I have a neighbor who speaks highly of him. I also know that anyone can be made to look like a saint or the devil and I don’t get into making comments on individuals I don’t know. Mr. Spinosa bought a large piece of property as an investment. That property is zoned for a certain type of building project, he wants to put a project, called Rouzan, that is not currently allowed on the property he purchased, therefore he has to go through the proper channels to get the area re-zoned to accommodate his vision of a TND. The channels he has to go through and the procedure is being followed. There is in-depth discussion and opinion on both sides. This will take time. Why would you threaten a law suit?
Do you think this type of “speak” is going to accomplish anything productive? Is it your goal to see Rouzan succeed or do you simply enjoy the fight that is going along with the process.
I think this issue would be much better served if name calling ceased and we all stop thinking about helping “our team” win and begin to focus on how we can create a positive environment for Southdowns with Rouzan (or something like it).
I am neither in support nor against Rouzan. I hope Rouzan is successful AND my alternative desire is that a project the size of Rouzan might bring positive change to Southdows. I wish there was more intelligent mature conversation that might bring the two sides together to focus on how to create a win win situation. One where Rouzan is able to succeed and Southdowns is able to flourish. I have a vision where Rouzan also puts its girth behind supporting enhancements to all of Southdowns which would only give Rouzan a better chance of long-term success.
But if this is how the communication is going to continue with a “we win, you lose” attitude . . . everyone loses.
Posted by Tara on December 13, 2007 at 1:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Christopher,
I thought it was pretty obvious from my post, but I'll spell it out for you - because he has met all of the legal requirements to re-zone his property, the commission recommended that it be re-zoned, and the City delayed without good cause costing him a great deal of money in interest payments. He would win if he sued, that's what I meant. The metro council is betting our tax dollars that he won't.
Posted by Christopher on December 13, 2007 at 2:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you for spelling it out for me.
And I still see your tactic as flawed since it wouldn’t accomplish anything productive.
It seems to me the Mr. Spinosa is a (yes) patient, but also smart business man who is willing to work for the greatest long term success of this project which does seems to be very important to him. The narrow idea of a law suit would only postpone his vision longer and would not help the long term success of this project.
Again, my prayers go out to the advisory group and I hope the best for all parties and the success of Rouzan and Southdowns.
4 lanes on Lee . . . yes!
Posted by jrball (JR Ball) on December 13, 2007 at 3:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Good luck on the Lee Drive issue. I have long submitted the ideal solution would be to add a third lane on Lee Drive, dedicated for left-hand turns. This proposal has not been well-received by those in Southdowns who believe Lee should remain two lanes. I just don't understand how someone living in Southdowns could object to the addition of a lane that will eliminate the traffic backup caused by people waiting to turn left in that area. Study after study has shown the most effective road width for moving internal traffic is a three-lane road. Oh well.
Posted by du4jay on December 18, 2007 at 5:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The people directly on Lee robably don't want it because it would probably involve reducing the size of their yards. For the surrounding parts, they might see Acadian/ Stanford as the future. In the case of transportation, Baton Rouge is almost like the Northsore of Lake P. The city has outgrown a lot of it's circulation. One side of town, you have arteries like Perkins, College, Acadian, but the only way they link up to the ones on the West side are through the neighborhoods like Southdowns, University Hills (or whatever that is at the end of Stanford).
The first line item I would suggest to remedy the problem is to get a desirable transit system up and running. I mean state of the art, on time and reliable, which they should be anyway to where people would actually want to use it rather than sit in traffic in their own individual cars.
This Rouzan might be a lot more palatable if everyone in the surrounding area did not know, for certain that every resident of that development is going to have a car for their mama, pappa, grama, 2 year old, family dog and maid.
The whole thing might be palatable if there were a traffic study done. How about an environmental impact study? How about some text to go with the vague diagram on the website?
A project that involves a zoning change that drastically changes the given area, is going to raise eyebrows anywhere. People are not stupid enough nowadays in our democracy to give developers a carte blanche pass to do whatever they want to maximize profit without integrating into the community.
Posted by cmac on December 24, 2007 at 8:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"People are not stupid enough nowadays in our democracy to give developers a carte blanche pass to do whatever they want to maximize profit without integrating into the community."
DJ, you forget you're talking about BR. Stupid is as stupid does.
Leisurely Lee and Historic Highland both need to be widened! If you've traveled either on a regular basis recently you know what I'm talking about. There should be no difference between a cottage on Lee and an estate on Highland when it comes to progress in the 21st Century. ;)
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)