The Planning and Zoning Commission is scheduled to take up Tommy Spinosa's rezoning request for the Ford Property this afternoon and we still do not know where Mayor Kip Holden stands on the issue.
Does the mayor, who says he backs progressive developments and claims to have been wowed by the type of mixed-use projects he saw in Portland, support the high-density Rouzan? Does he side with those critics in Southdowns and elsewhere who call Spinosa's plans far too dense? Is he in the camp of those who believe a traditional A-1 residential subdivision is the best use for the 120-acre tract on Perkins Road near Lee Drive?
In other words, is Holden willing to back his words with action? As New England quarterback Tom Brady said last week, "Well done is better than well said."
It's no secret that I support Rouzan as proposed, and find it ironic that Spinosa was recently turned down for a special national program because the project lacks the required density by some 80 housing units. It's also clear there are many in Southdowns who believe the TND as proposed will negatively impact their neighborhood and further clog already congested streets in the area.
What we don't know is where the mayor stands on the project. If Holden saw fit to speak out against Green Trails and to crush the hopes of those who favored a downtown main library then it's clear the mayor needs to share his feelings on a project far more important to the future of this city than an in-fill development in Shenandoah and a technical designation for a library.
There are rumors circulating that Holden, upon learning Spinosa has the necessary votes to get Rouzan passed, told Roxson Welch, his appointee on the commission, to vote against rezoning this evening. Speculation in the development community is that Holden is avoiding a public position on this controversial project because he doesn't want to jeopardize a bond issue he will put forward next fall.
If true, that may be politically smart … but it's not leadership. Mayor Holden, be a leader and let this city and parish know where you stand on this critical project.
Comments
Posted by BR_Garden_Dis_Res on December 10, 2007 at 1:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree. The mayor makes himself visible and speaks out at odd times. Even if he is undecided, which he probably isn't, he should at least be speaking with citizens of the city about the whole issue. Creating a dialog allows for the opponents in particular to feel heard, even if they end up losing the battle.
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 10, 2007 at 1:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well said and well done as usual, JR.
Mr. Mayor?
Posted by Fred on December 10, 2007 at 1:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Couldn't agree more.
Mr. Mayor?
Posted by cmac on December 10, 2007 at 3:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It's a political game. Doesn't really matter what Kip's views are.
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 Andre on December 10, 2007 at 3:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sunday morning at St. Aloysius Church, a Southdown resident stopped me to sign the petition against Rouzan. When I told him that I was for it, he replied that I wouldn't be able to get to church any longer if Rouzan were approved. (I just smiled)
The intellectual dishonesty is getting laughable. The latest sign I saw was, "Stop the greed, Stop Rouzan" (Palm and Stuart).
Soon I'm expecting to see, "Stop the Buckeyes; Stop Rouzan"! At least that would be cute. But here are a few others that just might get posted any day now:
"Say no to global warning; Stop Rouzan"
"Protect our borders; Stop Rouzan"
"No to Chavez; No to Rouzan"
"Protect our children from pedophilia; Stop Rouzan"
"Save the White Rhino; Stop Rouzan"
"Remember the Alamo; Stop Rouzan"
The petitioner seemed to be having fun (and so was I just now). It has brought a lot of residents together. Who doesn't like camaraderie? In a way, I like the activism my neighbors are demonstrating. But I do want my mayor to take a stand. That's what leadership is all about.
Posted by cmac on December 10, 2007 at 3:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Andre, you won't have any trouble getting to church. Your fellow parishioners make their own rules. Ever drive down Stuart when the soccer moms are queuing? Could get interesting when they start approaching from even more directions. Did you hear about the pedestrian that got hit and the ambulance that couldn't get through?
Posted by richyb on December 10, 2007 at 3:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Another nice article JR!
Like it or not...This is the Future! Heaven forbid another hurricane hit SE La. the next ten years displace more NOLA Metro area residents. Why should they have to move to Dallas, Houston, Atlanta,etc?? This is critical infil for BR in the urban core! This property deserves something special! We can't stay an overgrown country town that some locals want to keep. BR has basically been an overgrown suburb.
Only in BR can you have hundreds of rural acerage virtually in the shadows of the 22-story Marriott; not just Ford Pasture either; check out Towne Center and the 500 acre Rural Life Plantation. The sprawl is out of control(ask Walker & Praireville). BR is really not very dense, but quite spread out!We need more connectivity!
I know all about re-zoning that effects neighborhoods! I only wish Fairwood CC had become a TND similar to Rouzan! Instead I get more of the same~one way in~ one way out crap that really screws up traffic!
Maybe if the city had more adequate turning lanes like on Perkins @ Acadian Thwy. things might flow better. Trust me, I work in the area.
More development is needed where the pedestrian is on equal ground w/ automobiles?? Imagine that? As nice as Southdowns is; there are NO sidewalks!!!(except Stuart Ave.median)How do you walk with your kids are ride bikes??
Thanks to Mr. Spinosa for developments like CitiPlace(mixed-use);Perkins Rowe(mixed-use)and Rouzan.He and others are trying to help BR to become a legit-mid size city! I only wish an overpass over I-10 @ CitiPlace would have been built to the other side to help alleviate the College Drive nightmare!
Posted by Tara on December 10, 2007 at 3:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"if greed weren't a major motivator I think more people would be willing to embrace it."
Puh-lease, cmac! Have you militant Born-Against associations resorted to communist rhetoric now?
Rouzan will happen.
All of the tacky-poster posters will benefit from it.
The question is....
Will they apologize and thank Tommy Spinosa?
Come to think of it....I'd like to ask Mike Wampold if they've apologized and thanked him for the MAGNIFICENT Crescent Condominiums on Stanford in place of the dump the associations fought to keep, but I have a feeling I know what the answer would be.
Posted by cmac on December 10, 2007 at 4:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Tara, for your infomation I'm not a member of the SSCA. If Mr. Spinosa truly wanted to create an ideal TND he wouldn't be trying to cram everyone in like sardines. There seems to be a major misunderstanding about why some of us oppose the currently designed development and it has nothing to do with being afraid of BR moving forward. It has to do with density ... too many people in too little space. That equals greed no matter how you try to spin it.
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 10, 2007 at 4:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think if more people who oppose Mr. Spinosa spent time in other, more progressive cities, they would see that what he's trying to do for Baton Rouge with Rouzan is in the city's best interest. And if his risk pays off for him too, then I wonderful - the American way!
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 10, 2007 at 4:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Meeting televised on Ch.21 at 5:00pm
Posted by Andre on December 10, 2007 at 5:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
cmac,
I agree with you completely that St. Aloysius regularly creates a traffic flow problem. I won't argue with you there. Thanks for the response. -Andre
Posted by cmac on December 10, 2007 at 8:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What a joke! Two voices of reason, the third bought by the mayor doesn't count. The rest just bent over.
Now watch what happens and be prepared to eat crow!!!
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 10, 2007 at 9:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
cmac,
Just how would you like that "crow" prepared?
How about by a nice cafe at Rouzan?
Posted by cmac on December 10, 2007 at 9:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sdwnsmom, you'll be lucky if you get that. And don't plan on walking to the store to pick up a quart of milk or a loaf of bread unless you plan on crossing Perkins or Lee or Stanford to get it.
Oh the tales they weave when first they practice to deceive. Tommy spun his web well and lined it with the almighty dollar.
Posted by Tara on December 10, 2007 at 9:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Now, now....let's be nice. I'm sure the members of the neighboring associations will be the first welcomed at the library and all of the shops!
I know I'll be there to welcome my neighbors!
Posted by Papadeaux on December 10, 2007 at 9:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow, just sat through the whole planning meeting. Good or bad Southdown homeowners do love their way of life, if only they knew how much better life could be.
One thing I got out of the discussions tonight is some of the proponents, most of the oponents, and most of the planning commissioners have no clue what a TND actual is. With so much misunderstand no wonder people are scared.
Posted by Twiggy225 on December 10, 2007 at 10:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It amazes me that people think that this development is too dense. Have you people who say it is too dense ever been out of BR? Have you ever been to what a "real" city is? Trust me when I tell you that 800 houses on this acreage is not as dense as you might think. Can one of you opponents honestly sit here and tell me that you would rather get in your car and drive to the nearest store or walk to it. I vote for walk. Maybe if this city wasn't so car driven or lazy you would see the possibilites in developments. Better yet go visit other cities and see what kind of developments they have, we are WAY behind the curve people.
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 10, 2007 at 10:04 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 cmac on December 10, 2007 at 10:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Twiggy wrote: "Can one of you opponents honestly sit here and tell me that you would rather get in your car and drive to the nearest store or walk to it. I vote for walk. Maybe if this city wasn't so car driven or lazy you would see the possibilites in developments."
Twiggy, what store do you think you're going to walk to from Rouzan? What has Spinosa promised?
Posted by Hidensity on December 10, 2007 at 11:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
cmac,
Why does it matter that JTS has not promised any particular stores?...Or why does his plan need to be more specific for you? His professional consultants - some of the best in the country - gave him the best plan for what will work on this property in this area. What do you think they left out? I sat through the entire meeting and saw that the opponents offered no valid objection. One person after another had either the same wining concerns or literally made rebuttals to their fellow opponents concerns.
Posted by Hidensity on December 10, 2007 at 11:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
By the way JR...thanks again for another great article.
Posted by Hidensity on December 10, 2007 at 11:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How about Frank stating how qualified he was to be on the board and how he knew more than any other board member but then voted against the project only because he had friends that lived on Sweetbriar? That was incredible.
Posted by por_deni on December 10, 2007 at 11:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Right on Commissioner Ellender! I didn't hear anything new in the opponents' arguments either.
Listen folks, if you want traffic to be alleviated, do it yourself. get out of your cars and start taking the bus to work and school. Walk to and from dinner at a restaurant.
Problems with sewer backups at the end of your street? Hold your councilperson's and the mayor's feet to the fire and demand they fund DPW better. Pay more in property taxes to do it. It is a terrible shame and embarrassment that property taxes are as low as they are. No wonder schools are failing and infrastructure is crumbling.
Problems in Pollard Estates with flooding? You built at the confluence of two bayous, duh. Caveat Emptor. Your fault, not a neighboring future developer's fault. Do your homework before you buy a house.
Worried about a future zoning change to neighboring property? Buy the land yourself and develop it the way you want--the way things have always been done. Don't be surprised when tastes change and you can't recoup your investment.
TNDs are not the fix to all of these problems, they are just a fad and will be outdated in fifty years. BUT, the existing TND zoning will be flexible enough to accommodate new trends in housing and live/work space.
The layout of the neighborhood encourages walking, so reducing traffic by just one car trip per person per day will help.
At least in the case of Rouzan, the high end residential units will generate a good chunk of tax revenue to pay for sewer repair and rebuilding.
The green space and absence of vast parking lots will reduce runoff.
I sincerely believe the Metro Council will approve anything, regardless of neighbor opposition, in the quest for the almighty tax dollar. So SSCA, pipe down and count your blessings. Rouzan is not perfect, but it is a heck of a lot better than another scrap yard or other heavy commercial alternative.
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 11, 2007 at 11:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Agree with both of you about Frank Muscarello and Ervie Ellender.
What a difference in character on display! No matter which side of the issue you were on, sadly, you couldn't help but notice that.
Posted by Gary on December 11, 2007 at 2:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
JR, I agree, but wonder if Kip isn't holding off on public announcements for some undisclosed concern. My perception has always been that he looks very favorably on this kind of development. Only my opinion, but I thought the only comments that carried weight at the council meeting were the professional statements from Boo Thomas, and Alec StAmant. StAmant was the attorney representing the people who are still residing on the property. He presented a case for UDC non-compliance. I must say, his argument gave me some pause about this passing Metro. I doubt JTS missed this, though. Anybody know if Spinosa is planning to file for transfer of ownership of those homesteads to JTS? Maybe that's why he didn't approach those folks about a buy-out. He doesn't need to buy them out, because he has a constitutional right to take it. In the Supreme Court's Eminent Domain Ruling of 2005, private developers were given the right to take private property (without compensation) for development, regardless of the condition of the property. That would be a downer for an otherwise nice development. It should be interesting to see what happens with those owners.
Posted by richyb on December 11, 2007 at 3:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I heard opponets saying this was BR's 1st TND; not true. There is Willow Grove and soon to be Arden. Someone else said "why not build at the old Wal-Mart" on Perkins. Too late lady, another innovative developer will re-develop the eye-sore into a nice mixed-use project called Acadian Village! It will look nice like Rouzan!
Wake up people! BR is becoming a city!
I saw a sign that said "High Rises" NO! Houses yes. How is 4-stories high-rise?? That does not even qualify for mid-rise.
Posted by backyardhell on December 11, 2007 at 5:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Just for clarity: (from Wikipedia)
High-rise buildings became possible with the invention of the elevator (lift) and cheaper, more abundant building materials. Buildings between 75 feet and 491 feet (23 m to 150 m) high are considered high-rises. Buildings taller than 492 feet (150 m) are classified as skyscrapers. The average height of a level is around 13 feet (4 m) high, thus a 79 foot (24 m) tall building would comprise 6 floors.
If anybody's concerned, apparently there are no limits on putting high rises next to residential homes in this parish. I know, I have an 8 story going up about 150 feet from my bedroom of my house separated only by the 3 story parking garage that is even closer. (yes, that's half the length of the field in Tiger Stadium)
Baton Rouge was already a city. It's just a city where people have differing ideas of what they want it to be and the struggle is apparently being won by the few with the most money. It's all fine and dandy to be a proponent of "high density living" when you have a multi-thousand square foot home along a lake. Just smacks of hypocrisy.
Posted by cmac on December 11, 2007 at 5:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Just smacks of hypocrisy."
Yes it does!
I love the building height limits that many cities are adopting for new construction. Helps keep harmony with nature. The Woodlands in Texas is a great example. I think the Covington/Mandeville area has adopted similar limits. It's almost criminal what Perkins Rowe has done to your subdivision. At the very least a tall wall should have been constructed along with a sizeable tree planting as a buffer, but there's no profit in that.
Posted by richyb on December 12, 2007 at 11:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks for the head's up. Emporis.com's defintion of a high-rise is 12 stories and above. And mid-rises are considered 6 to 11 stories.
Hey backyardhell, is the 8-story going up near you at Perkins Rowe??
The Woodlands has the 32-story Anadarko Tower that's over 400 feet tall. Is this a new height requirement?
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)