Though it appears developer Tommy Spinosa had the votes to get his rezoning request on the Ford Property approved, the Metro Council last night ultimately decided to defer a vote on Rouzan until its Jan. 23 meeting.
In the meantime a so-called "Blue Ribbon Advisory" panel was appointed to try and hammer out a density compromise between Spinosa and neighboring residents who object to the TND as currently proposed. Spinosa's smart growth development on 119 acres along Perkins Road calls for 800 residential units and 100,000 square feet of office and retail.
While Rouzan's concept plan is in line with every major smart growth principle, opponents from Southdowns and other neighboring subdivisions object, saying the project is too dense and will make worse already bad traffic and sewer problems in the area.
What will be interesting is to see what the advisory panel can accomplish between now and the Jan. 23 council meeting. The panel consists of representatives from three neighborhood associations, Spinosa, Metro Council member Mickey Skyring and urban planner Boo Thomas. Previously Mayor Kip Holden attempted to broker a compromise but failed when opponents came back with a plan that called for 536 residential units and 50,000 square feet of retail and office. Spinosa never countered, saying the gap was too wide.
With that said, the question comes down to this: How much is Spinosa willing to compromise and will those numbers satisfy those opponents who only object to the proposed project over the question of density?
I have no idea of the answer, but my guess is Spinosa won't go below 700 residential units. As for retail and office, what's an acceptable square footage compromise is even murky.
It's clear those who are speaking out against Rouzan are not united on their opposition. Some argue an A-1 project is the only satisfactory option, others don't want connectivity, and a handful would prefer the Ford Property remain undeveloped. One resident at Monday's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting asked for Baton Rouge to purchase the property from Spinosa and turn it into a community garden. Those people are almost assuredly not going to get their wish, as it appears clear the Council will ultimately approve Spinosa's TND zoning request.
Quick observations:
• It was interesting listening to Councilman Pat Culbertson say A6 representative Michael DiResto had no legitimate reason to speak in favor of Rouzan since the political wonk lives in University Hills, a single entrance subdivision on Highland Road. Quite a point coming from Culbertson, who lives in the Country Club of Louisiana, a gated, single-entrance subdivision with armed guards at the gates.
• I have no inside sources on this, but considering Spinosa had the votes to get his rezoning request passed, I'm guessing this blue ribbon panel idea was developed before the meeting began last night and is designed to 1) allow area residents to feel more included in the process and 2) provide political cover for Skyring, whose district includes Southdowns and the proposed Rouzan development.
• Throughout this process, I have really come to respect Dr. William Gladney. The neurosurgeon, who objects to Rouzan as proposed, has been a voice of reason and has seemingly worked hard to broker a compromise. While Gladney and I may disagree on several points, I salute his passion and well-reasoned positions.
• Kudos to Councilman Wayne "Spider" Carter, who during the meeting asked if Holden was still in the room so that he could hear the mayor's position on Rouzan. Told that Holden was gone, Carter asked Walter Monsour to reveal the mayor's feelings. Monsour, the mayor's chief administration officer, declined to comment.
• As interesting as the Rouzan debate as been, equally interesting will watching how the Southdowns neighborhood moves forward. There have been some nasty words uttered and ugly tactics displayed by both sides, and how this fractured neighborhood attempts to heal will be fascinating to watch.
Comments
Posted by OrchidStForRouzan on December 13, 2007 at 10:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
JR,
I have enjoyed reading your point of view on this topic the last few weeks. My wife and I live in Southdowns and fully support the Rouzan development. The Southside Civic Assoc does NOT speak for everyone in Southdowns. They have only changed their point of view in the last week to rethink Rouzan because they knew they could not stop it completely. I was at the planning commission meeting and was appauled at some of the comments I heard from those against the project. One woman stated another person speaking should be shot! I can not believe that these people can be so ignorant that they should be the end all say all in this development. Mr. Spinosa has adhered to the TND zoning ordinaces that are on the books and is in the middle of the road on the desity issue. Now with a "blue-ribbon" committee to look at this issue will more than likely not result in much change. To put three people with the same point of view, I feel, is unfair to Mr. Spinosa. They should have one representative speak on their behalf, one on behalf of JTS, and the rest should be made up of QUALIFIED individuals. Dr. Gladney was the best representative for their position. Well thought out and not off the handle like some of the others. If they have a problem with TND zoning, these people need to try to change the zoning. You can not tell someone what to do with their property if he is following what the Planning Commission has approved for a TND. Another aspect that I have heard nothing about is the amount of tax revenues that this project will bring to our area. From property to sales to development taxes, this is a huge bump to our tax base in Baton Rouge. I hope that Rouzan will be approved on Jan 23rd. I am ready to put my deposit down and rent out my house in Southdowns! I am sure they will try to stop me from renting my house out also. Where in the world was Kip Holden? Run and hide Kip.
Posted by Papadeaux on December 13, 2007 at 12:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Orchid, right on with the comments... I live in Southdowns too. Where were the SCA board members up to just a few weeks ago? Oh, I remember, hanging anti rouzan signs in their yards, spreading disinformation, interrupting JTS neighborhood meetings, creating a stop rouzan web site, sending hate mail to Mr. Skyring. With all other options off the table, now they want a TND… but lets build it with density similar to A-1.
As far as density, if JTS agrees to 700 that's a density of 5.8, which is almost the minimum. The lowest he could go and still be within the TND ordinance is 608 units. I still would like to know what makes the members of the neighborhood boards qualified to determine what the density should be? Most of them don’t even understand the concept.
Also, who speaks for the numerous neighbors who want this TND? Bo Thomas? She clearly stated that these were not her opinions, but that of CPEX. Ms. Thomas publicly stated she fears losing friendships that are important to her if she personally backs Rouzan.
Posted by BackFromLafayette on December 13, 2007 at 12:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As a Baton Rougean who lived in Lafayette and has returned home, I am amazed and appalled at the big fuss I see over Rouzan. There is a development in Lafayette called River Ranch, which is larger than Rouzan with well over 1000 units and is tied into the older neighborhoods surrounding it. River Ranch is considered the crown jewel of the city by a majority of people. The traffic is dispersed into so many areas that it just isn't a problem. It's a much more liveable and exciting area than the type subdivisions that have been built since the second world war. You can walk down to the corner book store or coffee shop and you feel as if you live in a real city instead of a collection of disconnected caves. I would love to see Baton Rouge go in this direction. The people who are so adamantly against Rouzan shold take a look at River Ranch, because right now they seem like a bunch of cave people fighting against the advent of a real city. All of the progressive city planning that I've read about points in the directions of traditional neighborhood developments. Please, Baton Rouge, let's not cut ourselves off again into a backwater deadend. This project affects more than Southdowns, but the entire future character of Baton Rouge. Let's start building the liveable people-friendly city of the future. There is something better than Southdowns. Please don't let Southddowns ruin it for the rest of us. Please take a look at River Ranch and see what can be.
Posted by TheMule on December 13, 2007 at 12:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The opposition to Rouzan has not taken into account the economics of TNDs versus a single A neighborhood. Rouzan, under Spinosa's plan, has 23 acres of greenspace, which would be available to the folks who live in Southdowns.
If he reduced density and eliminated retail, he would eliminate his profit. That would make another single-a subdivision his only option to earn money.
If so, the people would get no greespace, as well as straight roads that spark speeding through Southdowns instead of curved ones in a TND that slow cars down.
Under Single-A, there would be no school, no library, no church, no local cafe or deli. Does the opposition really want that?
This is Councilman Skyring's fault. He flipped last night after clearly stating even before his election that he would prefer a TND there.
Culbertson should retire to his house in CCLA and never emerge.
Carter deserves no praise, for he has been an embarrasment to his constinuents ever since he was elected. He couldn't even beat Bob Odom, the worst politician since Edwin Edwards.
Posted by Christopher on December 13, 2007 at 1:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am beating a dead horse here obviously.
Here are four comments in support of Rouzan and I think that is great. Go back and read all of my posts and I hope Rouzan is successful AND I hope we can use the power of Rouzan to enhance Southdowns and its infrastructure, but two out of the four comments chose to call names of those who think differently from them.
I wish the advisory group the best.
I hope and pray that positive, progressive, and creative enhancements are found so that Rouzan is able to seek long-term success and the surrounding community is able to benefit from this project as well.
I have not followed this as well as I wish I would have. I have done my research on the benefits of a TND and I am excited about the possibilities, however I have also seen existing community achievements outside of the TNDs that showed such success. There sits my concern and I think my concern may be relieved in the near future and I am optimistic about the next 30 days.
Lets’s stop the name calling. Stop the degradation of those who may have differing opinions than us and find a means to create and exciting project in and around Rouzan.
And lastly I will put my two cents in for the following:
1. A well organized and safe trail system for jogging/walking/riding throughout Southdowns which can connect so many wonderful resources such as the LSU campus, The Lakes, and Rouzan.
2. NO CASINO ON River Road.
Win Win, it is possible
Posted by Tara on December 13, 2007 at 1:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Mr. Spinosa must really care about Baton Rouge and must really be patient. A less patient man would have shown these "people standing in his way" (how's that Christopher?) just what government project-type develpment he can slap up in "their backyards" by now.
Posted by KateMcLean on December 13, 2007 at 2 p.m. (Suggest removal)
4-lane Lee Drive, someone, PLEASE.
Posted by jrball (JR Ball) on December 13, 2007 at 2:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Here are two additional observations: 1) Some opponents argue the project is great but should not be built in the heart of the city, but rather way out in the suburbs like other TNDS. Other opponents suggest TNDs were designed for blighted inner city areas and Rouzan should be built downtown or in Mid City. Which is it? I might suggest The Ford Property is best, in the spirit of compromise, because it's between downtown and the suburbs! 2) The reason so few TNDs are built in already developed areas is because it's almost impossible to find the undeveloped land. Check out how many large and/or mid-sized cities in this country have undeveloped 120-plus acre tracts sitting around in the heart of a city. Oddly, Baton Rouge has two... The Ford Property and Phil Witter's land, much of which is just now being developed. The good news, from where this humble columnist sits, is that it seems clear a TND will be allowed on the property... the only question is its density--and that's a fair point to debate.
Posted by blue_ink_pin on December 13, 2007 at 3:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am in SUPPORT of Rouzan. I have lived in Southdowns for the last seven years and I love the area. I think this type of project is great for Baton Rouge, great for Southdowns, and a change in the way we think about development. Perkins Rowe is not a TND but a type of urban retail center that is going to be an absolute juggernaut for retail in the best way possible. If someone in our city has a vision like Perkins Rowe and wants to put their vision to use for a TND in the middle of south Baton Rouge, I am on board. The sewage and Lee Dr. problems were a problem before the TND proposal and will be after the TND proposal, regardless of the outcome. That is the city's fault. Not Southdowns. Not Mr. Spinosa. But the city. The problem associated with this is the fact that a change in Lee Dr. will provoke even more negativity than this project has sparked. Personally, we need this TND to force a change because we know that it won't be accomplished any other way, which I find quite sad.
The negative campaign that I've had to drive through everyday is ridiculous. Can I go thirty yards without having a "Don't Make Hyacinth a Racetrack" sign? Give me a break people. The fact of the matter is you want growth but not our neighborhood. It's that lack of understanding for the overall community that drives us back. Let's move forward in expressing our disdain for the sewage and Lee Dr. and then we can have a great project in Baton Rouge like Rouzan move forward.
Posted by tlclsu on December 13, 2007 at 5:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As a Lee Dr. homeowner, I am always both worried and amused by the calls to widen it (and destroy the character of the street by taking out all of our oaks). I would understand, however, if I thought it would help. But whenever I am backed up in Perkins Road traffic (which seems to be worse than Lee), very few of the cars are turning on to Lee - most are continuing on Perkins or turning on to College. I really do not thing adding lanes to Lee would move people any quicker.
On the immediate issue, I am concerned, but not opposed to Rouzan. Examining the very real issues of traffic and sewers, however, just makes sense. It was clear listening to the meeting last night that most opponents have thoughtful concerns about the impact of this "Traditional Neighborhood" on our truly traditional (for B.R.) neighborhood. No - the name calling is not useful. (Neither, btw Mr. Ball, is labeling people NIMBYs in order to easily dismiss their concerns.)
I hope the committee will begin a truly constructive dialogue to address some of the traffic/sewer issues. It was the wisest move for the Council to make last night. No, Mr. Spinoza should not have to wait forever to begin his development; but another month will not hurt a bit and may make things best for residents of Rouzan and the existing neighborhoods after he leaves to go count his profits.
Posted by Tara on December 13, 2007 at 5:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
tlclsu,
I'd like a "blue-ribbon committee" to study just how many oaks on Lee Dr. would be taken out by a turning lane. And if the traffic isn't turning onto Lee Dr, then JR's point that a turning lane is needed because the backup is caused cars waiting to turn left is even more valid!
Also, if another month of interest on $15 Million dollars is "no big deal", then I'm sure the city would have no problem picking up the tab since they required it, right? That would be your tax dollars and mine, tlc.
Posted by ColonelHenryJohnsonRetired on December 13, 2007 at 6 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What a piece of work is mister jr ball. Why don't we put one of mister spinosa's tnd's in mister ball's backyard and listen to old jr squeal like a pig (a la Deliverance).
Of course, mister ball's business acumen is renowned across the parish. It seems that i recall when the administration was consdering the makeup of the East Baton Rouge Parish Mortgage Finance Authority several years ago, the learned "executive editor" of Baton Rouge's "premier" business publication responded that he'd never heard of a mortgage finance authority!
Don't worry folks, there's a lot less there than meets the eye. Don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain.
Colonel Henry Johnson (retired)
henryjohnson@cox.net
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 13, 2007 at 6:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It must get pretty tiring for Mr. Ball to keep repeating that he's moving to the first-available TND in Baton Rouge, Willow Grove, wasn't it? and that he'd have moved to Rouzan if it had been available at the time. I understand retirement can bring its limitations Mr. Johnson.
Posted by cmac on December 13, 2007 at 6:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Colonel, it's not just Mr. Ball. Seems his boss who referred to a contingent of Southdowns' owners as NIMBY's lives in one of those one-way-in one-way-out SDs and is moving to an even bigger one at the CCLA. How's that for irony!
Posted by GlasgowMom on December 13, 2007 at 6:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
At last night's Metro Council meeting, a lady identified herself as a Southdown's resident and parent of a Glasgow Middle student, claiming the school provided no information on the Rouzan issue. As the mother of a Glasgow 6th grader, I can attest that her claim is simply untrue. Not only was this special meeting of the PTO well publicized via email, the school sent out an automated call alerting parents this special meeting had been called. After a presentation and lengthy Q&A session, the PTO voted unanimously to support Rouzan. She had ample opportunity to attend the PTO meeting and voice her dissent.
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 13, 2007 at 6:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
and everyone knows cmac has his facts straight, right?
Posted by Jon_Deaux on December 13, 2007 at 7:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
JR, I’d almost agree that the blue ribbon panel meeting seemed prearranged but Mr. Skyring’s vacillating was not an act….that was legitimate floundering. When he realized he didn’t have an overwhelming majority he conveniently compromised. An overwhelming majority might have been a political save for him.
Although I wished Ms. Taussin would have spoken more (or any at all in the Planning Commission meeting) I do respect the fact that she didn’t vacillate. Regardless of the view, all the others that spoke were clear and straightforward. (little confused by Mr. Kelly) I think Mayor Holden is a great mayor but you are right JR, we deserve to know his position on this...either way.
JR, you said:
• “Some opponents argue the project is great but should not be built in the heart of the city, but rather way out in the suburbs like other TNDS. “
• “Other opponents suggest TNDs were designed for blighted inner city areas and Rouzan should be built downtown or in Mid City.”
“Which is it?”
Posted by Jon_Deaux on December 13, 2007 at 7:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Naturally I can’t speak to the mindset of other opinionates but it’s twofold for me.
• A community integrated development of this size in Mid-City would be Boo Thomas’s dream come true. Mr. Spinosa along with other developers of his caliber, in a joint venture, partnered with the city and organizations like CPEX and BR Chamber could revolutionize that area. Community Development could be involved to insure that all citizens are handled fairly. Buyout a warehouse area like (13th to 15th between North Blvd and Government) as your TND city center, working your way out to the residential. Revitalization this area would benefit the Garden District, Mid-City and Downtown. Why not bring new life to an existing Traditional Neighborhood.
Although my idea is undeveloped a Pioneer Developer (Visionary) would think in these terms. If you simply consider return on investment, a developer knows that located between Southdowns and Pollard Estates, Rouzan is no gamble. The area is universally accepted as one of the most desired sections of town. That makes Mr. Spinosa a good businessman (which is great) but it doesn’t make him a pioneer.
• A TND in the suburbs is simply a supply/demand issues. Because of the abundance of land the infrustrual burden can be absorbed. It’s not only ok, they’re pretty awesome looking. One article that I read said it’s a new phenomenon called “New Urbanism Sprawl”.
If you do a word count on this entire series the two most used words will probably be compromise and density. Questioning the individual opponents would also yield the same results (naturally with exceptions). This is exactly the place where a TND of this population density will potentially do the most harm. I do agree that for social/economic reasons we need to attract our population back to the city core but I also feel this development is too extreme (unnecessary). In its present form this development does not fit the area and is unfair to impose on its neighbors. In 20 years from now who cares about an I-told-you-so. I want what’s best for our city and I respectfully acknowledge that so do the proponents. We just disagree.
Posted by Dot on December 13, 2007 at 7:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Jon_Deaux -- eloquent, thought-provoking, and diplomatic -- as are all of your posts. You've said it all. (Raising my glass to you.)
Posted by richyb on December 13, 2007 at 7:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hopefully opponets will have a realistic compromise. Spinosa seems to have a bend, but-dont-break attitude.
The Ford Pasture deserves something special. Rouzan is just will be just that! This is critical in-fil near the urban core. Amazing the capital city has to look at a more progressive city like Lafayette for tips. River Ranch is in-fil for those who do not know. BR's 1st TND Willow Grove(still being built) is between two neighborhoods and will be successful! Other TND's are in the works like the 200 acre Arden(north of Bonne Carre); also critical infil.
So true, no city the size of BR has the amount of large undeveloped tracts of land in the middle of the city; the sprawl has been out of control. BR has seems to have more suburban characteristics than urban. 4-story buildings in the village section around the library near Perkins should not be a problem!
Please not another boring single entrance cookie cutter subdivision. That's been the problem all along; making for overburdened feeder roads like Perkins. This property is too special for that!
A walking path/bike trail would be a great idea along the Bayou Duplantier urban watershed! Run it from University Lake/BR Beach behind Southdowns and Rouzan out to Olympia Park on Kenilworth!
I am thankful for innovative developers like Spinosa and Wampold who for many years diligently persued something special eventhough the neighborhood association fought him tooth-n-nail; the Crescent condo's at University Lake take BR to another level and give the city a new look it deserves!
Posted by mdavis03 on December 13, 2007 at 8 p.m. (Suggest removal)
BackFromLafayette - do you happen to live in the Southside area? If not, are you planning on renting one of the apartments in Rouzan so that you can walk to the corner bookstore and coffee shop? Or will you be part of the overwhelming majority of people who will drive their cars to this so-called "crown jewel" of the city thus adding to the already nightmarish traffic congestion? Perhaps you're one of the many who already use our NEIGHBORHOOD streets as cut-throughs only to ignore posted speed limits and stop signs, and desire a destination other than LSU, Tigerland, IVARS and The Caterie?
I keep hearing (and reading) it said that the desire should be for Baton Rouge to resemble Austin, Nashville, Portland, Atlanta and now, Lafayette. But if these cities are so wonderful, why do people like you come home to the dreary cave that is Baton Rouge? I know there are improvements that could be made, but we shouldn't start by tearing down one of the few wonderful areas in which to live in Baton Rouge. And it just occurred to me - you're all the same people who want to tear down Baton Rouge High in the name of being progressive, aren't you?
Posted by richyb on December 13, 2007 at 8:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hopefully opponets will have a realistic compromise. Spinosa seems to have a bend, but-dont-break attitude.
The Ford Pasture deserves something special. Rouzan will be just that! This is critical in-fil near the urban core. Amazing the capital city has to look at a more progressive city like Lafayette for tips. River Ranch is in-fil for those who do not know. BR's 1st TND Willow Grove(still being built) is between two neighborhoods and will be successful! Other TND's are in the works like the 200 acre Arden(north of Bonne Carre); also critical infil.
So true, no city the size of BR has the amount of large undeveloped tracts of land in the middle of the city; the sprawl has been out of control. BR has seems to have more suburban characteristics than urban. 4-story buildings in the village section around the library near Perkins should not be a problem!
Please not another boring single entrance cookie cutter subdivision. That's been the problem all along; making for overburdened feeder roads like Perkins. This property is too special for that!
A walking path/bike trail would be a great idea along the Bayou Duplantier urban watershed! Run it from University Lake/BR Beach behind Southdowns and Rouzan out to Olympia Park on Kenilworth!
I am thankful for innovative developers like Spinosa and Wampold who for many years diligently persued something special eventhough the neighborhood association fought him tooth-n-nail; the Crescent condo's at University Lake give BR the city look it deserves!
Posted by Philip on December 13, 2007 at 8:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am impressed with the knowledge and communication skills of the many persons that have commented on the Rouzan project. Some of them even live in Southdowns. By now, it should be ovbious that Mayor Kip Holden is pulling his strings behind the scenes and being the career politician he has become. Isn't it strange that he attended the council meeting to assure passage of the new garbage tax and his ever-increasing budget, yet felt it unnecessary to stay for the Rouzan meeting. This project has been a front psge story for the past two weeks, but apparently Mr. Holden is disinterested or doesn't want to risk offending any voters. Isn't that the difference between being a politician and a leader in public service. A few weeks ago, he said he is going to include two bond issue proposals on the ballot next year when he is up for reelection. That's convenient, as I can vote against all three at the same time. Perhaps it is time to start thinking about someone else for mayor, and surely there are many persons that would make a wonderful candidate. Two names that come to mind are Mark Drennen (former Commissioner of Administration and architect of the beautiful State Capitol complex) and Camm Morton (president of the Commercial Properties Realty Trust of the Baton Rouge Area Foundation). Whoever become available, maybe we could being preparing for the election now, starting with a bumper sticker that reads, "SKIP HOLDEN." Any other suggestions?
Posted by lagirl on December 13, 2007 at 9:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Despite the ugliness, it is good to see that we are all so passionate about urban planning...good and bad planning affects us every day of our lives and getting it right or fixing wrongs (sewer and traffic...can't the city find a way to fix all these problems for Southdowns??) is absolutely critical. I am especially heartened by the passion shown for Baton Rouge. It's good to have this discourse, though I can see both sides of the issue.
I hope all of you vocal, passionate, articulate Southdowns people won't be completely worn out by the Rouzan issue and will still have some fight left in you come February when it's time to rally the troops against the Pinnacle casino project on River Road. That is something I think most smart, civic minded, progressive thinking people could find little about which to disagree. It is something that will affect all of us in this parish, through the loss of historic (and rarer by the day) rural space, traffic, crime, declining property values, etc. etc. Talk about the wrong project in the wrong place...why not downtown?? Why on earth would Baton Rouge need another casino, and on historic, pastoral, beautiful River Road??? With the only roads by which to reach the casino being traffic logged already? Besides, there is NO guarantee a plush "resort" will ever be built once Pinnacle gets the approval by the voters to build a casino...remember Pinnacle is based in Las Vegas...what accountability to the community do they have? At least Spinosa lives here and has to face his opposition every day. The Advocate has taken a stand: "We know little about what the casino project will bring to benefit Baton Rouge, but there is no doubt about what it will take away" (I am paraphrasing). Please JR and Business Report...get involved in this one too. It has wide ranging negative effects for our whole parish, not just the Bluebonnet/Highland/Burbank corridor. NO CASINO on River Road!!!
Posted by TigerVillain on December 14, 2007 at 10:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree, NO new Casino. Infill is the key, but the Pinnacle project simply perpetuates the problem of sprawl. More on this, too, Mr. Ball and Business Report.
Posted by blue_ink_pin on December 14, 2007 at 10:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
He can build almost 500 homes in the available space on Ford Pasture. But will there be a church? An elementary school? 100,000 sq.ft. of retail? A library? 13 acres of community green space? No. It will be 500 homes that contribute to the traffic and sewage without anything else of note for the community. This TND affords the citizens an opportunity to utilize this space in a fashion that is different from any other place in Baton Rouge. Once again, my support remains. I have yet to hear evidence that this isn't just a set few Southdown residents fighting to stop growth. From my perspective as a southdowns resident that's all it appears to be. This entire ordeal is so ridiculous.
Bad schools? Poor infrastructure? Litter problems? No, those aren't the pressing matters for the Southdowns Civic Association. Rather, they're concerned about houses, a church, an elementary school, a library, retail, and green space. Good job Southdowns residents. I hope this project moves forward just as planned and I hope that you move to Zachary where growth is met with equal resistence each day.
Posted by urbnplnnr on December 14, 2007 at 11:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Three comments:
Mr. Ball - I disagree that density is a fair debate point. Spinosa hired some of the best and most experienced TND planners - they came up with the density. They know that too much density will not work, but also that with too little the whole thing begins to fall apart and we lose the environmental, community, and economic benefits a TND brings. Rouzan's overall density is on the low-end of density of comparable developments AND of our own TND ordinance! The number is well within the ordinance - why is this even an issue?!
Next, it is beyond me why a special committee is necessary and why Gladney is being praised. Gladney is an SCA board member and he and other board members have been fighting against Rouzan for over two years. Any concerned neighbor has had the opportunity to be negotiating with Spinosa since he first put up that huge sign with the contact info for JTS in 2005. What has happened to personal responsibility? There are many of us who have taken it upon ourselves to be meeting with JTS for over two years. If SCA had not wasted their two years insisting on A1 only and refusing to compromise, they could've been spending all that time working with Spinosa and we wouldn't be in this position today. It is only since they knew they would lose that they have decided it is time to negotiate (at the 11th hour). And their compromise offer is ludicrous. It again shows how the opponents do not understand what a TND is all about. And reading the comments above by opponents still shows me that the opponents do not understand the concept. It is not enough to know what the elements are, you need to understand why they are there and what they do.
Next - re Camm Morton. Camm Morton was a huge part of the Smart Growth Task Force so when Commercial Properties bought the old Wal-Mart site on Perkins a lot of us were very excited. That is until Camm presented his development plan - a typical strip mall with a restaurant at the front. And then he refused (at a public meeting with press there) to hold any charrettes with the neighborhood - tenet number 10 of the Smart Growth principles - ensure stakeholder involvement. He claimed they were a waste of time. Something to think about. At least he is no longer at the helm deciding what happens to that property. By the way, the SCA was not involved in trying to work with the developer on that project either, despite its implications for our neighborhood. SCA has so much potential for good . . .
Kudos to all you proponents out there who actually understand what this all about and understand the implications for the rest of our city.
Can anyone tell me why (given that the civic association reps on the committee do not represent all of the neighbors) that the Council has not allowed any neighborhood proponents to be on this "blue ribbon" committee? . . .
Posted by jrball (JR Ball) on December 14, 2007 at 11:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
To ticlsu: I agree adding a third lane (for left turns) won't do much for traffic on Perkins. My point is traffic on Lee Drive gets backed up waiting for people to try and cross traffic and make a left. I travel on Lee Drive every day and it's rare on weekdays when I don't have to wait in a line of traffic while someone struggles to make a left. As for Col. Johnson, I am planning to move into a TND (Willow Grove). As for the Mortgage Finance Authority... the issue wasn't its existence but rather who the mayor and Walter Monsour were attempting to appoint—a former business partner and friend of Mr. Monsour's. There were also charges that the administration wanted to use authority money for reasons the management group at that time did not agree with.
Posted by jrball (JR Ball) on December 14, 2007 at 11:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The plan for the old Wal-Mart site on Perkins has changed considerably since that meeting at the Baton Rouge Area Foundation several years ago. The latest renderings I saw included far more mixed-use and discussions were ongoing regarding residential. As for urbnplnr's point that density is not up for debate... I will be happy to discuss that with him or her in another forum. Considering Mr. Morton brought us Bon Carre, the Cap House restoration, One Eleven, The Brownstones and the (likely not to be built for financial reasons) Smiley Heights (now called Arden) mixed-use project, it's wrong to be happy that he's leaving Commercial Properties.
Posted by BR_Garden_Dis_Res on December 14, 2007 at 4:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
FYI: I heard from a former state representative whose ear I bent about this issue that a compromise on the density could be a little iffy -- here's why. If Mr. Spinosa agrees to get the permit for a density of 700 units, the regulations still allow for a plus or minus 15%, which would allow wiggle room back up to 805! Be aware of this when the compromise meetings begin. I'll have to do more research on this regulation before I comment further. Just wanted to put that bug in your ear.
Posted by Fisheye on December 14, 2007 at 4:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What now? 30 days of "blue ribbon bullsht", that's what. These "blue ribbon" panelists don't really know where, what or why they stand. I hear from the Fourm circle that Southside Civic Association president Kisling was always for TND development, but caved after being annoyed by the pressure of thousands of born-against resident calls. He was voted in as president pretty recently. If more proponents of smart growth would have spoken up, Kisling and the ssca might be representing proponents. The Woodchase Association president has a laundry list of questions that she won't get answered. The answers to those questions belong to the person who OWNS that property, and to the PROFESSIONALS who are planning for it. Just like Mickey Skyring said, this panel cannot dictate to this developer. You people can't dictate to Skyring either. Tommy Spinosa will not break. As far as bending, I wouldn't worry. He won't compromise anything. He already has the council votes, people. This is a waste of Tommy's time and money. All you fools will come to beg to buy into Rouzan and that wasted money will only be reflected in increased sales costs. I can't wait to hear what these "blue-ribbon" morons think they have to contribute over the next month. The only thing they are qualified to discuss is how they feel about the appearance of Rouzan. Who cares if Rouzan doesn't blend with surrounding architecture. Southside architecture is old and ugly, and Woodchase is boring.
Posted by Fisheye on December 14, 2007 at 4:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am sick of this. This is a CITY. If you want to do with your life is look at trees, move to California and watch 'em burn. The publisher could not have said it any better than in his December 3 "Beware of the year-end actions" article. If you have a problem with dense development in Baton Rouge, then
"MOVE TO NEW ORLEANS. MANY OF THEIR STREETS ARE VERY QUIET WITH NO ONE AROUND TO BOTHER YOU"
I'll second that. You don't need to apologize to the holier than thou "Dots" out there, either. These are the same whining NIMBYS who want to "restore" New Orleans to all of it's so called glory. After God sent hurricanes to clean out that city, they whined to restore crumbling New Orleans shotgun shacks because they're "historic". Now they want to call Southdowns shacks historic. Ridiculous. If anybody deserves to be shot, it's the beaten horse of preservation. People, this is a new century with new building concepts. Progressive planners and builders like JT Spinosa will drag you pea brains, kicking and screaming out of your 100 year old shotgun houses. They will hopefully raze them (like they SHOULD have done with every damaged house in the cesspool that is and was New Orleans) and they will revitalize this community. If Wampold and Spinosa move into the New Orleans market, they'll bring a whole new breed of people with them, and they'll be appreciated. I see a family who has the foresight to purchase 50 some odd houses is being brought to judgment now too. I hope they buy enough houses in Southdowns to expand into commercial themselves. Smart Growth and gentrification are not a four letter words, people. It creates revenue, also not a four letter word. If you have a problem with Rouzan not blending in with your ugly Southside shack, then PACK YOU BAG AND MOVE! You won't be missed. Your shack will be gone in another 10 years too, and it'll be a lot easier to fix that sewer system once it's flat land.
Posted by fourx5 on December 14, 2007 at 6:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"This is a CITY. If you want to do with your life is look at trees, move to California and watch 'em burn. "
I hate to tell you, but we have some pretty dense cities here in California. Our pet TND in this corner of San Jose? Santana Row. Google it. People are begging to get in. Shops, nice restaurants, coffee houses, bars, plenty of parking. There are plenty of others around town, but Santana Row could be considered the flagship for what TNDs should be - and could be in Baton Rouge.
Apparently those are things Baton Rouge folks don't want. Because they like being stuck on I-10 with the commuters, I guess.
Posted by Hidensity on December 14, 2007 at 6:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Land swap Pinnacle and Rouzan
Posted by cmac on December 14, 2007 at 7:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Fisheye, happy hour start early?
Posted by Dot on December 14, 2007 at 7:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Okie dokie, Fisheye.
I was apoplectic.
I am now laughing uncontrollably ... Thank you, cmac!
Posted by cmac on December 14, 2007 at 7:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dot, my pleasure! And thank you for the word du jour. ;)
Posted by Jon_Deaux on December 14, 2007 at 7:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow…fisheye hit every single person in the city with that venomous rant. They say in those TND’s you have to be nice…Dude, I don’t think they’d let you in. You would disturb the intrinsic harmony. LOL
Dot, thank you for the kind words. I’m sorry you had to suffer that abuse from fisheye…it’s just words.
BR_Gar_Dis_Res, that kind of info is great.
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 14, 2007 at 9:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Fisheye,
The intelligent people in this area who have spent any significant time in REAL cities feel your frustration and share it. Keep your chin up. We're in good company; did you know a version of the Born-Against's in BR even fought the building of Tiger Stadium?!?!
Read the books 'Fighting Tigers I' and 'Fighting Tigers II' (available at Cottonwood Books on Perkins) and it's all there, the ancestors of the present day NIMBY's were defeated after a long battle, Thank God and go Tigers!
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 14, 2007 at 9:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I really should have typed "the previous generation of NIMBY's", because the present-day NIMBY's may have had actual ancestors who thought further than the end of their noses (or driveways).
Posted by richyb on December 15, 2007 at 1:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What about Wampold's struggle for so many years with the NIMBY's and the Crescent condos at University Lake?? Look how nice that looks across from BR Beach! Why did they fight that?? What did they want there?? Many people in BR have a suburban mentalty; but just don't realize it. If it's multi-story that must mean it's a high-rise.
Only more of the same ole' boring Frech faux pas style will do; it's in characteristic with the area crap! I sure am glad Perkins Rowe was built. BR is really is taking it to another level, trying to become a legit mid-size city!
I understand your frustration fisheye. I wish a new TND would be built at the Fairwood CC on Millerville I-12. But instead another "single" entrance strip shopping center on one side; and a "single" entrance subdivision on the Old Hammond Hwy. side. At least Millerville is being 5-laned. Could Lee Drive possibly be 4-laned with narrow medians??
I know JR is a big fan of the single-entrance cookie-cutter subdivision, ha just kiddin'! Break out some more street grid please!
Posted by Jon_Deaux on December 15, 2007 at 11:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I read the postings (and listen to the interviews) and without exception proponents stick to the same mantra. If a person is against this particular development in its present form they are NIMBY and non-progressive. You then inevitably (1) take us down some sentimental journey back to the 50’s in a time when all things were supposable in harmony or (2) in complete contradiction of the sentimental journey heap baseless insults elevating yourselves and labeling us as non-progressive.
Not only am I not against progress (and development), as I read of proposed developments (loop, casino’s, overlay areas, Fairwood, etc., etc.) I research, map and weekly explore not only the immediate but the surrounding areas as well. Odd hobby, buy hey…I actually watch channel 21. But I view each area and each project specific to the area. Naturally, it should fit into the “greater good” of the city but depending of the specifics, “progress” is not necessarily progress. In an editorial JR paralleled our city to a perpetual post-graduate student…I could not agree more. As a city we are in this bubble of opportunity that if we don’t take advantage we will lose, big-time. Considering the real estate market of the country, Baton Rouge is a good place for a developer to be. Having said that, we need good developer like Mr. Spinosa and if we constantly place road blocks in their path we will lose them.
Rather than blaming each other why don’t we place the blame where it is deserved…with the Planning Commission. Mr. Spinosa provided what was required, a conceptual plan with conceptual studies. Obviously, I’m missing something here but why in the hell can’t a developer be held to something more concrete. We will have this situation over and over again if the requirements are not modified…better to get it straight on the front end than have all this on the back end.
My view of Rousan is not a view based on distain for progress. Plain and simple it doesn’t add up. Although the promo inspires deepest emotion, at the end of the day you will have gridlock. And if you think these folks will be abandoning their vehicles to catch the bus please think again. In every way, I think we should have a Mass Transit system that meets demand and encourages use. But emphatically, I feel that we should never force a situation where we become primarily a “Mass Transit City”…unless you want to force another exodus to the suburbs that will never be rectified.
Posted by BackFromLafayette on December 15, 2007 at 1 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Something really does need to be done about Lee Drive. Between Stanford and Kennilworth it is the only route from Highland to Perkins and it takes forever to travel. Turning left from the shopping center where New York Bagel and Hershey's are is a nightmare.
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 15, 2007 at 4:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hey Lafayette,
Just try and propose doing something and watch the Southside Civic Assoc. squeal like pigs!!
Posted by mdavis03 on December 17, 2007 at 7:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Here's another word du jour for Fisheye - puerile.
BackFromLafayette - what would you have them do with Lee Drive? It runs parallel to Kennilworth and Stanford!
And for those of you who find Wampold's development on Stanford attractive, you're probably the ones who also dress your kids in lace, plaid and ruffles. The Crescent condos are an eyesore - a monstrocity that looms over the skyline of the once beautiful lakes.
And lastly, to those who speak of the "shacks" in the Southside area and the "french faux pas style" of south Louisiana architecture, I now understand why you have this burning desire for Baton Rouge to be molded in the image of Atlanta, Nashville and Austin. You're those people who shop at the same stores and wear the same clothes and cut your hair the same as everyone else in your social circle. Individuality is something you've probably always feared since it would require you to think for yourselves. Here's a news flash - there's more to life than Ann Coulter, the University Club and Polo.
Louisiana IS different than anywhere else in the nation and if everything's so wrong with B.R., why don't YOU pack your bags and move instead of asking me to give up a home that I love? If you don't like the look of the Southside area, then stay in CCLA and shop at Town Centre! YOU won't be missed!
Posted by mdavis03 on December 17, 2007 at 7:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And really - it's more than laughable that proponents of Rouzan are asking for opponents to vote against the new Casino. Trust me, I have no interest in one being built - downtown or anywhere else for that matter - but we're to cry for "the loss of historic (and rarer by the day) rural space, traffic, crime, declining property values" when Rouzan will be guilty of the very same things?! If Rouzan is approved, I WILL VOTE IN FAVOR OF PINNACLE! If I should be driven out of my home in the name of growth and gentrification, then so should everyone else. In fact, Mr.Spinosa, what ideas can you come up with for Bocage? Maybe we can connect it to Town Centre with a walking bridge over Corporate?
Posted by silva on December 17, 2007 at 9:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow, I was out of town this past week and have finally read all the comments concerning Rouzan along with the ire, ad hominin attacks, let's see what else...casinos, four-laning Lee, among other things.
I do commend everyone's passion concerning Rouzan. I will say though, that JR Ball's assessment is accurate and factual. Baton Rouge is finally growing up, it's about time we have a TND. Unfortunately, the Southside Civic Association (SSCA) only stands for one or two things: A-1 zoning and compliance with the number of people who may live in a home. That's it. They don't care about anything else. Never have. To be on the board, you must think just like they do. You'd never be nominated, much less voted for, if you believed in anything else. The Southside Civic Association should be called the Don't Change Association. Change is bad as far as they're concerned. Thankfully there are intelligent, informed, educated, open-minded people who live in the Southdowns area that are willing to stick their necks out to counter SSCA. I am glad to see there are so many proponents of Rouzan. If you've visited River Ranch, traveled or lived in larger cities in the US and abroad, you'll see what a success TND's are. And Mayor Holden, please take your head out of the sand, this development is good for the city you govern. Don't worry about SSCA, there are alot more people who want Rouzan than those who oppose it.
Posted by Dot on December 18, 2007 at 11:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The neighbors who live in Southdowns have a true sense of place here. They don't simply reside in a home on a lot. They are part of a broad-minded community of diverse people who share a love of this community and it's tradition. Based on the commentary I've seen on the BRBR site, I'm not sure that the proponents themselves will want to reside in Rouzan. After all, Rouzan will be a part of Southside. I don't know what to expect when Rouzan is populated. Do you plan to isolate yourself with other "like minded" people within the confines of 118 acres? I can't speak to the plans of other Southside residents, but I fully intend to welcome and get to know my new neighbors. If Dez Crawford gets the ideal TND she and her husband envision right across the street from her house on Glasgow (eclectic housing and people, a pub, a butcher, a baker and a candle-stick maker) I'll be enjoying Rouzan on a regular basis. If the sewerage problem gets worse over here, I suppose I'll live with it. The overflows stink, but as long as we don't make mud pies – they won't kill us. I'll still miss the bull-frogs, and my healthy plants, though. Although it may not have come across in my written posts, when I ask for a good-humored hug I'm not being sarcastic. I really do mean it. (PS – 'FishEye shows up to the party, that offer may be off the table.) If the response to my request for a hug is met with a "hugs are reserved for the winners" response, I guess I'll have to get over it and understand that the neighborhood, the city, and it's people are changing. Que sera, sera.
"OrchidStreet" witnessed a vile comment by an opponent during the Metro meeting. Unfortunately, I think some people (and one with Alzheimer's) become caught up in this drama and forget they're not in just being asinine in their living rooms. I'm sorry you had to hear that. I'm sorry, also for the people who've had their "we love Southdowns" posters ripped up, their yards intentionally rutted, threatening notes thrown into their yards, cars and houses egged or painted, dogs pelted with bbs – and last, but not least, their young children subjected to grown men driving by to call them "nerds" and "losers" (expletives omitted). I trust that most of this activity came from a couple of guys with some specific interest in the developments' success, and is not representative of Rouzan proponents or future residents as a whole. There's at least one in every crowd, isn't there? I don't understand people who cannot differ on a subject respectfully. After all, we can both be right.
Posted by Dot on December 18, 2007 at 11:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Silva, thanks for your complimentary testament to the intellectual fortitude of our residents. It is true – Southdowns residents are "educated, informed, intelligent and open-minded." In fact, in Baton Rouge, Southside boasts the highest concentration of residents holding advanced degrees. In cultural study, the best-educated areas of town are considered to be the epicenters of progressive thought in the community. It is not surprising, then, that a well educated community produces an well organized inquiry into a community issue. I don't speak of the SSCA, either. I refer to the citizens – nearly seventy-five percent (by rough estimate) with concrete, relevant questions about this plan. Southside residents opposed to this development -- as it is currently proposed (high-density) -- are not a group of ill-informed dolts, plodding through life. A heavily-published professor at LSU's College of Business Administration, an accountant who oversees some of the top businesses in the state, a multitude of doctoral chairs, attorneys, a developer (yes, a developer), a world-renowned physicist, and a well-respected neurologist are just a handful of people from this neighborhood who've recognized the inherent difficulties that this conceptual project brings. If Boo Thomas (she really is a sweetheart) is a friend to these people, it might be that she was educated with or by them. If educated people utilize the governmental process (that should be) in place to demand answers from Mr. Spinosa, and Mr. Skyring – I'm not really surprised. By the way, Sascha Tessier, you rock!
Of the aforementioned, I'll pull the neurologist from the pack, as that's the "opponent" with whom you are most familiar. Have you ever asked yourself "why?" Why would an over-scheduled, over-taxed neurologist, father, (and Southdowns Flambeaux parade captain) like Will Gladney devote hours ... days ... weeks of his schedule to research, opinion-polling, information dissemination, and calls and meetings with residents, the developer and government officials in regard to the JTS plan? Is he really just some ill-informed dolt of a NIMBY plodding through life? It would be a stretch to label Dr. Gladney a "back-woods, anti-progressive redneck." Does it give cause to consider the possibility that maybe – just maybe – there could be some validity to the opposition?
All that said, if you'll scroll up, and click on the names of both "Jon_Deaux" and "rbanplanner" you'll get a fairly good summary of the logical arguments (pro & con) regarding this particular TND. Also, JR Ball is an astute observer of human behavior, and probably a better author than even he may know. It would be interesting to get a more balanced editorial – or a novel – from him, but that's just Dot and her stream of consciousness talkin'.
Posted by BackFromLafayette on December 18, 2007 at 8:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
mdavis03, it doesn't mean you don't love Baton Rouge if you see things in other cities that work and suggest that we try them here. It does not make us any less to learn from others. We also have things that others can learn from such as our great library system. Seeing things that can be improved and offering constructive crticism can be a labor of love.
mdavis03, you jump to a lot of conclusions. Last week you implied that I was one of those people who want to see Baton Rouge High torn down. That couldn't be further from the truth. I graduated from Baton Rouge High and want to see it restored. You mention that Rouzan will cause you to give up a home that you love. Perhaps this is another unfounded assumption. You might find you'll still be there long after Rouzan is built and that life is still pretty good. I hope so.
Posted by Dot on December 19, 2007 at 9:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I picked up this text from the "Du4jay" comment(on the "Battle Over Rouzan" story.) He/she makes reference to the "whatever is at the end of Stanford" arterial connection. That would be historic Highland Road. We hear a lot about 3 or 4 laning College Drive, but never Highland Road. Why not?
du4jay writes:
[The people directly on Lee probably 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 Northshore 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 Dot on December 19, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
In a half attempt to tie this into a broader "What's Next" theme, consider the following:
(1) Do you agree that some text to go with the diagram on (Rouzan's) website?" would be helpful?
(2) Do you believe a third or fourth lane on Highland Road should be a consideration? Why or why not?
(3) Do you believe Baton Rougeons would utilize a mass transit system? If not, why? (Ex: Heat index, fear of crime, loss of independence, etc.)
(4) It is often said that "residents must demand change" when seeking redress for infrastructural problems. How, specifically is this done? For this question, please consider the example of "demanding" that the City address the failing central sewerage lines in Southdowns. In your answer, please take into account that years of residential calls and letters to DPW, and votes based on campaign platforms have yielded no results.
This is not a test.
Have a hug. I wish you all a joyous New Year.
Posted by SDwnsMom on December 20, 2007 at 11:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
mdavis03,
You find The Crescent an "eyesore" and prefer the uninhabitable building that was there before. Is your taste really that bad, or are you just that envious?
Posted by mdavis03 on December 22, 2007 at 5:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Perhaps I do have questionable taste - I would actually prefer the building that was painted purple and gold, celebrating the National Championship. And many things might be true about me, but why would I be envious of an apartment complex? In reality, there is a continuum with an uninhabitable on one end and The Crescent on the other. As I remember, there were already apartments on the lot, was there really a need to build a larger apartment - sorry, I mean condo - complex? Did The Crescent really need to be as tall and as mammoth as it was built? Last time I heard, LSU is moving to requiring all freshman to live on campus. If that comes to fruition, are we really going to need all of this rental property in B.R.? I'll admit that I'm not tapped into that market, but I don't think Baton Rouge is at a loss when it comes to available apartments or "condos".
Posted by mdavis03 on December 22, 2007 at 5:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
BackfromLafayette, I actually ASKED if Rouzan proponents would be interested in the demolition of BRH. And to that end, we're all jumping to conclusions. You say that I MIGHT find that my life, home and neighborhood are still good after Rouzan comes along, but I might not. I would still like to know if you happen to live anywhere near the Southside area. Are you going to give up your home to move into Rouzan? If not, what is your stake in this (and please, don't go down the "better Baton Rouge road)? Why is it that this piece of land is the only location for Rouzan to magically make B.R. a "real" city? Pardon me if I'd like to err on the side of caution, but my home is my only major asset; I can't afford to gamble with it in the event you're wrong.
Posted by Tara on December 22, 2007 at 7:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Mdavis, I don't want to question your taste, however I will question your facts and give you a website to visit to become better informed about The Crescent since you're making comments that make you seem, well, silly.
www.crescent-condos.com
Posted by BackFromLafayette on December 27, 2007 at 9:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I live just a few minutes from Southdowns in a post World War II type subdivision with one way out. I drive on Perkins every day. You want to see some traffic? Come see us between 7 and 9 a.m., 11 a.m. and 1 p.m, or 3:30 and 6 p.m. I would love to live in Rouzan. I would love to have Rouzan built right next to me with lots of roads tied in giving alternate routes. I would love to see a lot of other crossroads built near my neighborhood. I think TND's are a lot better way to build than the way we've been building the last 60 years. I don't think the Ford property is the magic one and only place that Rouzan could be built. I hope there will be dozens of others. I do think that if a real TND gets stopped at the Ford property it sends a bad message to developers and hinders Baton Rouge in moving in a better direction. Because at the next location there will just be another group of people afraid of something new.
I think Southdowns’ property values will probably go up. I do feel bad for Southdowns folks with respect to the sewage problem. That would make it hard to live there. But property values in Southdowns have been going up even in spite of that. I think the addition of an attractive destination with a library and other amenities easily accessible from Southdowns will only increase the value more. That’s been the experience in Lafayette near River Ranch. And the people who live in the neighborhoods equivalent to Southdowns take advantage of the facilities as though they lived in River Ranch.
Posted by mdavis03 on January 10, 2008 at 4:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Tara - if you find me silly, then I must be saying something correct.
Posted by SDwnsMom on January 14, 2008 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
um, mdavis, you just made Tara's point.
Posted by cmac on January 15, 2008 at 12:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If you really want to be "informed" about The Crescent talk to some of the people who've purchased units and are now dealing with subpar construction issues.
Posted by cmac on January 15, 2008 at 1:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
An exercise in futility?
http://www.stop-rouzan.com/
Posted by Fred on January 17, 2008 at 12:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Or for some actual useful information...
http://www.for-rouzan.org
Posted by SDwnsMom on January 19, 2008 at 4:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
yeah cmac, I bet you talk to them often, lol!
Posted by cmac on January 19, 2008 at 7:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Fred, another JTS site.
SDM, I know contractors who are working with buyers to correct messes. You learn a lot and hear a lot when you go through an extended remodel/addition.
Posted by cmac on January 19, 2008 at 7:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by cmac (anonymous) on December 13, 2007 at 6:36 p.m.
Colonel, it's not just Mr. Ball. Seems his boss who referred to a contingent of Southdowns' owners as NIMBY's lives in one of those one-way-in one-way-out SDs and is moving to an even bigger one at the CCLA. How's that for irony!
____________________________________
Posted by SDwnsMom (anonymous) on December 13, 2007 at 6:47 p.m.
and everyone knows cmac has his facts straight, right?
__________________________________
Sweetie, check it out for yourself if you don't believe me. And FYI, I'm a she, not a he. I suggest you get YOUR facts straight before you open your mouth.
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)