BusinessReport.com

Posted on May 8 at 12:19 p.m.

fourx5

Bitterness rots the soul…get a life dude!! Your postings are consistently sickening!!

On Welcome, Albemarle headquarters

Posted on January 30 at 1:33 p.m.

This is one that I tread lightly….I lean towards a yes vote but I am open to changing my mind. In my flawed logic there seems to be basic questions (issues) that should be addressed.

1. Should this area be open to development?
From the downtown core the proposed location is approximately the same distance out as the Mall of Louisiana. Of all areas within a 7.5 mile perimeter from our core this area is the most undeveloped. The entire River Bend area appears to contain between 4000 and 5000 undeveloped acres (open to correction here). With it’s proximity to the river, LSU, and other desirable areas it would be unrealistic to assume that this area wouldn’t be developed.

2. Is a development containing a casino suitable for this area?
If this development didn’t contain the resort aspect I would most definitely be against it. When Biloxi’s casinos were developed there was much of the same talk in regards to the inevitable negatives. By in large it didn’t happen. Obviously, developments of this size are constructed in phases and certain aspects will be contingent on demand. But, is it possible to force the developer to stipulate and comply to more specific details to insure that this will indeed become a “Resort” and not just another boat?

3. Can the infrastructure as it stands support a development of this size?
As I mentioned in the first question this area will (and should) be developed. Infrastructural improvements should be made to accommodate future growth. Hopefully our city and Ascension Parish have identified Nicholson/Hwy30 as a (major future corridor) and have made expansion plans from LSU to Ascension Parish. Depending on the location of the southern portion of our future loop this highway will become our “Airline Hwy West”. By taking initiatives now we can manage the nature of future growth and avoid zoning nightmare scenarios (i.e. commercial, residential, LSU, open space, mixed and in what proportion and density of each). To alleviate the current and future burden on Bluebonnet both Essen/Staring and Siegen should be extended with four lanes from I-10 to Nicholson Drive/Hwy30. Where possible continuous flow intersections should be created (Siegen/Old Jefferson @ Airline is brilliant).

4. Can our city support another casino?
In every way I view the revitalization of our downtown as extremely important to our growth as a city. This question is one that I have a hard time addressing without a bias since I view two casinos in our downtown as plain tacky and counter productive to positive growth. I am aware that competition from an upscale development of this type may lead to the demise of one of our downtown casinos…but, let competition prevail.

Link to their corporate site: http://www.pnkinc.com/

On The payoff

Posted on December 15 at 11:22 a.m.

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.

On What now?

Posted on December 14 at 7:43 p.m.

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.

On What now?

Posted on December 13 at 7:11 p.m.

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.

On What now?

Posted on December 13 at 7:09 p.m.

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?”

On What now?

Posted on December 12 at 9:21 p.m.

Yes Concerned, when compromise and democracy prevail it’s always a sad day.

On More people, same result

Posted on December 12 at 2:07 p.m.

I agree JR. Although we may disagree on issues, this forum encouraged thought, debate, research, and most importantly participation. I’m ok w/ disagreement and I am most certainly aware that there are other valid schools of thought…but please people have an opinion. (and Dot, you’re a hoot!!)

I also agree that this is an issue of such extreme importance that for Commission/Council members not to express a well thought out, unambiguous position is shameful. Commission/Council members, regardless to whether Rouzan is in your district or not your decision indicates your approach (view) to the development of our city. We deserve to hear more than yes or no.

On More people, same result

Posted on December 11 at 6:29 p.m.

Excellent commentary Christopher.

JR’s editorials on this issue have been without any objectivity what so ever. Rather than make effort to consider the concerns of the opposition he simply insults and attacks. He has an obvious love for the city but on this issue he has spit out a bunch of garbage.

Having said that, it is an editorial and I appreciate the fact that the Business Report allows contribution (rebuttals). Along with JR’s editorials, it is a tremendous service to the city.

On More people, same result

Posted on December 8 at 1:16 p.m.

JR, I frankly thought I had you figured out…greatest apologies. Excellent editorial, not because I agreed with it but because it shows that there are other legitimate, progressive approaches to the development of a city.

While welcoming all people it is still very possible for us to maintain all that is good about our community. Even though I don’t fit into the typical Baton Rougeon mode (no children) I still recognize and appreciate the fact that we are a family oriented city. My hope for us is that as we grow we never lose sight of this as a core directive. I think that makes for a “Great City” as well.

On All in the family