Planning commissioners recommend denying Folsom rezoning, postpone two cases and approve Lacombe subdivision

The St. Tammany Parish Planning and Zoning Commission on an unspecified meeting date recommended denying a rezoning request for a 20.81-acre property near Highway 25 and Bridget Bennett Bridge Road in Folsom and took three additional formal actions: postponing a commercial excavation case and a Pearl River rezoning for 30 days and approving a minor subdivision in Lacombe.

The denial recommendation centers on case 20254241 ZC, filed by petitioner Paul Marone for Lake Hill Subdivision LLC and related owners. The property is currently zoned ML (low-multi-family/highway-commercial category per staff notation) and the applicant sought rezoning to S2 (suburban residential) to allow an eventual concept subdivision. Staff said the parcel could be developed under the current ML zoning for about 183 units; the applicant proposed about 73 single-family homes if rezoned. After a lengthy hearing with multiple public speakers, Commissioner Seager moved to end debate and then moved to deny; the motion to deny carried and will be forwarded as a recommendation to the parish council.

The commission heard concerns from neighbors about drainage, traffic and compatibility with surrounding rural lots. Paul Marone, speaking for the applicant, told commissioners the S2 rezoning would be less intense than current entitlements: "That is less traffic. That is better for the drainage in the area. That is better all around," he said, arguing the development would require a pressure vessel at the water well and that Tammany Utilities had confirmed available sewer and water capacity. Opponents said the property should remain rural or be rezoned to larger-lot residential. Carol Cowper, who identified herself as a real estate agent with property across the highway, said, "They're gonna fill in the ponds. They're gonna put 75 slabs, 75 driveways, streets, sidewalks. It already has drainage problems." Dean Deolman, a nearby resident, called the proposed change "all about greed" and warned it would worsen traffic and strain infrastructure.

Item 2 on the agenda, case 220254261 CPU (a commercial excavation request for a lake on a 71.17-acre Mossy Hill Plantation LLC parcel in Ward 6), had a petitioner request to postpone while engineers finish a site plan. The commission granted a one-month postponement at staff's request; staff noted the petitioner planned to submit final documents by the specified Friday deadline so the matter could return next month.

Item 4, case 20254352 ZC (Pearl River Village), involved a previously recorded plat of 38 residential lots averaging about 3.32 acres each on land cited as east of I-59 and west of the Pearl River. Staff said the PUD was recorded in 2022 but was not developed and that the development time limit had lapsed; the current request was to rezone the property to R2 (rural residential) to reflect three-acre minimum lot sizes. The property owner, represented in the hearing, said he had relied on existing zoning and asked the commission to consider postponement so the owner could prepare; commissioners agreed and voted to postpone the item for 30 days. Staff said there is no road access to the property and that the only practical access is by boat via the canal.

Item 5, case 20254363 ZC, was a minor subdivision and rezoning request in Lacombe. Petitioner Stephen Armstrong sought to split a roughly 4.995-acre parcel along Highway 190 into three lots, rezoning the front lot to HC-2 (Highway Commercial District 2) with a rural overlay and keeping the rear lots as L1 (large-lot residential) with a rural overlay. Armstrong said the split was intended to house his family and parents and that survey and servitude edits would follow planning review. Commissioners moved and seconded to approve the subdivision with staff review; the motion to approve carried.

All commission recommendations on rezonings and conditional uses are forwarded to the St. Tammany Parish Council for final action; staff and several commissioners reminded the public that approval or denial here is advisory and that appellants and opponents will have an opportunity to speak to the council when the items are scheduled.