Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Procedure Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends changes to proposed site-specific master-plan procedure to avoid costly pre-rezone studies
Summary
After hours of debate, the commission voted Sept. 4 to forward a proposed ordinance requiring site-specific development concepts with a modification: delete a provision that could have compelled developers to submit expensive studies before a rezoning decision.
The Planning Commission on Sept. 4 voted to recommend a proposed ordinance that would create a procedure for submitting site-specific development concepts with rezoning requests — but commissioners directed a key edit to avoid imposing costly pre-rezone study requirements on applicants.
Attorney and staff authors presented the proposed addition to Chapter 127, a procedure intended to require a concept-level development plan when a property owner requests certain rezoning classifications (initially focused on planned unit developments and multifamily). The plan would let the commission and council evaluate compatibility between the proposed development and the surrounding area.
Discussion stretched more than an hour as commissioners and staff weighed two competing priorities: preventing developers from rezoning a parcel and then building a different project than the one promised, versus imposing burdensome studies on smaller applicants early in the process. Commissioner Burns and others warned that requiring expensive drainage, traffic or school-impact studies up front would deter small landowners and be unfair if applied unevenly.
Multiple commissioners asked staff to change paragraph 5 of the draft ordinance. The paragraph had listed additional material the planning department could require, including “a more detailed preliminary site plan, drainage impact study, traffic impact study, school impact study, or fire protection review.” Commissioners asked that paragraph be limited so that additional submittals would be limited to a more detailed preliminary site plan (period), removing the list of potentially costly studies from the rezoning-stage requirement.
After an amendment to strike the long list of studies and leave the language focused on a more detailed preliminary site plan (and the department’s discretion to request additional information in later phases), the commission voted to forward the ordinance to council with that revision. The vote carried with one abstention.
Commissioners and staff said the change preserves the ordinance’s intent — accountability for rezoning applicants — while avoiding a requirement that could force applicants to expend large sums on engineering studies before receiving rezoning approval.
Outcome: Planning Commission recommended the ordinance to the parish council with edits to paragraph 5 limiting required pre‑rezoning submittals to a more detailed preliminary site plan; staff and council will consider the revised draft.
